[Mike5055]

That top... thing... looks like a real winner!

[Roosh]

Are Liberal Democrats more left than Labour?

[Novatore]

(05-08-2015 09:06 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Are Liberal Democrats more left than Labour?

No, they position as an economically centrist party between the Conservatives and Labour but with more emphasis on civil liberties and social liberalism.


This campaign they were gunning for a coalition telling voters not to lurch left or right and that the Lib Dems would "add a heart to the Conservatives or a brain to the Labour party". The electorate told them to fuck off.

[Blobert]

(05-08-2015 04:02 AM)Akula Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 03:50 AM)roberto Wrote:  

Holy crap, have you fellas seen this?



This horse faced, man jawed thing is apparently just 20 years of age. Standing for the SNP, she's just become the youngest MP ever, taking the seat of Paisley and Renfrewshire South from Labour.

20 year olds shouldn't allowed to vote, let alone stand for an MP. The best bit? She's a student. Absolutely, completely, 100% fuck all real world experience. Unbelievable.

This is the main route that the Left have back into power- the student vote. Idealistic, silly, and childish.

I loose count of the number of times I lost 'friends' back at school due to my less than socialist views.

Get ready for more Year Zero candidates like this. Sorta like the Pol Pot Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia. These far leftists/idealist get their playbook from the same old sources.

BTW the liberals just took over the Alberta government in Canada and one of their new "representatives" is some 26-year old snarky fatty who flipped off the Canadian flag and has a whole host of Feminist characteristics (issues). But she's repping the province and making $127,000 per year supporting "progressive" rights so you go girl!

Not all young politicians are bad, still.

[Haig]

(05-08-2015 09:06 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Are Liberal Democrats more left than Labour?

Hey,

No they aren't, they were normally the party sandwiched between Labour and the Conservatives. They attracted young middle class voters
whose parents were normally Torie voters.

The Green Party/SNP are the new Left wing group

[space]

Im calling it now: Scotland will leave the UK within 10 years, if not 5.

Labour was a breath of fresh air in '97. But the legacy of the Iraq war - a conflict opposed by pretty much the whole nation - has haunted them since 2003.

For them to win again, they need to apologize for two things:
1 - The Iraq War
2 - The financial crash of '08 and all that wasted money.

Im happy today as even though Im not a natural Conservative voter I reckon a move to the Right is necessary as a bullwark to the rampant leftwing, idealist, nonsensical doctrine that dominates UK policy.

[H1N1]

Peter Hitchens nails it again - if you don't read his blog, you should consider it, as he's one of the most astute commentators around ( http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/ ). I don't understand the rejoicing over Tory victory, here or elsewhere. This is still amongst the worst possible outcomes.

Also, if you follow the link, for all those who believe proportional representation is a good think, Hitchens gives an excellent rebuttal in the article immediately following the one quoted below.

Quote:

Groundhog Day Comes Round Again

Let me start by saying without equivocation that I was wrong. I am genuinely grateful to the many persons on Twitter who were quick to point this out to me this morning. I believed, in my heart, that the Tory Party could never again win a Westminster majority. They have done so. You couldn’t be much wronger than that.



I never for a moment imagined that Big Money and Big Lies could so successfully scare, cajole and diddle the electorate of this country. I grew up in a Britain both better-educated and more honest than the one we have today. Perhaps that is why I could not see this possibility. I have not seen, in my lifetime, a campaign so dishonest, so crude, so based in fear and so redolent of third-world and banana republic political tactics.



Actually, I think Mr Cameron is even more surprised than I am. I do not think he ever thought that he would achieve such a result. I’m not even certain he wanted it, as the Liberal Democrats were a very useful alibi for not doing all kinds of conservative things he himself secretly didn’t want to do, and for doing all kinds of left-liberal things he secretly did want to do.



How and why did this happen?



Most of you will know the witty and rather profound film ‘Groundhog Day’, in which an obnoxious TV presenter is forced to live the same day over and over again, until he understands that he himself is required to change for the better. When he does (and the moment of realisation, involving a joyous quotation from Chekhov, is surprisingly moving), the calendar at last begins to move again.







This morning I felt as if I were stuck in such a film, and that I had woken up once more to the same unappealing day, indeed to the same unappealing decade, but also that there was nothing I could ever do to release myself from it. No doubt I have done many things in this life for which I thoroughly deserve to be punished but millions of other people are trapped with me in a political calendar which never, ever turns.



The problem with Britain’s political Groundhog day is this. Every five years or so, the conservative patriotic people of Britain are somehow dragooned into a ceremony in which they vote for a party which pretends to sympathise with them.

It then turns out that it doesn’t actually do so, that in fact it believes in a series of left-wing and radical policies which are the near-exact opposite of what those voters want.



Five years of growing disenchantment pass, featuring new concessions to the EU, more political correctness, more education gimmicks designed to avoid the reintroduction of academic selection, a continuing failure to cope with or even acknowledge the levels of disorder and dishonesty, and a quiet debauching of the currency.



Somehow, at the next election, those voters are persuaded, frightened or otherwise bamboozled into voting once again for the Tory Groundhog.



And the next morning they awake and find themselves in the same five-year-long gap between promise and reality.



The crudest and cheapest methods seem sufficient to rob them of any memory that they have been fooled before. The crudest and cheapest of these is the supposed danger of rule by a Labour Party all of whose policies were long ago adopted in detail by the Tory Party. The difference between the two is that Labour is at least open about its passion for foreign rule, equality and diversity, confiscatory taxation, unsound public finances, mass immigration, terrible schools and lax criminal justice.



Labour , by the way, has to promise its own fake programme of social transformation to its own deluded electorate, who harbour the same lingering illusion that their party possesses actual principles, and will pursue them in office. Indeed, I imagine that for Labour supporters a matching Groundhog Day is constantly unreeling. That is a matter for them.



The truth is that both major parties are now just commercial organisations, who raise money wherever they can get it to buy their way into office through unscrupulous election campaigns. They then presumably reward their donors once they are in office. The electorate are a constitutional necessity for this process, but otherwise their fears, hopes and desires are largely irrelevant. They are to be fooled and distracted with scares (‘The other lot will privatise the NHS!’ ‘The other lot will nationalise your children’s toys and then wreck the economy!’ ) or with loss-leader cut-rate offers, like supermarkets (‘Vote for us and get a cheap mortgage!!’ ‘Vote for us and have your rent frozen!’) . Even if these wild pledges are implemented, the customer will pay for them through higher taxes elsewhere, just as with supermarket loss-leaders.



By playing our part in this ludicrous pantomime, we license it to continue forever. I have thought for years that the key to ending it was simple and obvious. We could revenge ourselves on these fakes by refusing to vote for them. The arrival of new parties, UKIP on one side, the Greens on the other, made such a revolt and redemption even easier.



But I must now admit that the people of this country actually seem to prefer to live the same experience over and over again, and seem astonishingly ready to believe the crudest propaganda. I seethe with frustrated amazement at the Tory claim to have fixed the economy, so blazingly untrue that in commercial advertising it would get them into serious trouble with the authorities.



Ailing GDP figures just before the election were barely mentioned in the media, but easily-obtained statistics on productivity, trade, manufacturing and construction, are all bad and the Tories have missed their own target (whether wise or not)on deficit reduction. In any case, the Tory record on the economy is dreadful.



The idea that they are economically competent in general simply doesn’t stand up to examination. Leave aside Winston Churchill’s disastrous decision to force us back on the Gold Standard , have we all forgotten the ERM catastrophe, in which a Tory government threw £27 Billion into the sea for nothing, because their best brains had mistakenly lashed sterling to the EU’s exchange rate ? What about the irresponsible Reggie Maudling boom of the early 1960s (Maudling left a note for his Labour successor , Jim Callaghan, saying ‘Sorry to leave it in such a mess, old cock’ which was almost certainly what Liam Byrne had in mind when he left his famous note saying ‘Sorry there’s no money’. What of Harold Macmillan’s decision to spend wildly in 1958 which caused his entire Treasury team to resign in protest , the irresponsible Tony Barber boom of the early 1970s, and of course the devastation of manufacturing industry in the early years of the Thatcher government? Now we have a dangerous housing bubble, official money-printing and the organised theft from savers by the abolition of interest on deposits. I’m not actually saying Labour are much better, or any better, but to vote Tory because you think the economy is safe in their hands is actually daft.



As for the Scottish scare, this is if anything even more shocking. Mr Cameron’s macho mishandling of the referendum, refusing an option for Devo Max, came close to bringing about a pro-secession vote. So did his generally cack-handed management of the campaign. Then, his partisan and petty pursuit of ‘English votes for English laws’ (plus his discourteous gloating about the Queen allegedly ‘purring’ at the result) infuriated Scottish voters who had until then taken the ‘vow’ of maximum concessions seriously. It probably precipitated the landslide to the SNP (one of the few occasions when this expression ‘landslide’has been justified). I have written here about Michael Portillo’s interesting admission that he no longer clung to traditional Unionism. I think we have every reason to suspect that many others in the Tory Party would privately be quite happy to say goodbye to Scotland.



A Tory Party really concerned about the loss of Scotland would have done as Norman Tebbit suggested, and urged its supporters to vote Labour to stop the SNP. Instead, to the dismay of elder statesmen and experts such as Michael Forsyth, it talked up the SNP, paying elaborate compliments to Nicola Sturgeon after the leaders’ debate (George Osborne and Michael Gove were observed doing this) . To claim, while behaving in this fashion, that the Tory Party is a bulwark against the SNP and Labour is in their clutches is absurd. The SNP are delighted by the Tory victory, which makes it all but certain that they will get a repeat landslide in next year’s Scottish general election, with a manifesto commitment to a second referendum, which I think they will then win. Let us see how Mr Cameron now copes with the SNP’s sweeping victory, for which he must take so much of the blame.



At least the Sun newspaper was brazenly open about its ludicrous inconsistency, campaigning for a Tory (and supposedly Unionist) victory south of the border, and for the unquestionably separatist SNP north of it.



As for the famous EU referendum, who really thinks that the propaganda forces which got Mr Cameron his unexpected majority won’t also be activated to achieve a huge vote to stay in the EU? And then the issue will be closed forever.



What is the point of saying all this now, when it’s all over? Because it is true, and because to speak the truth is valuable in itself, at all times.

[RedPillUK]

Great article. I feel pretty disappointed today, even though I believe it would be worse under labour.
The reason why, is because UKIP lost seats and now only have 1 MP, even though they finished third overall with 12.6% and finished second in 120 constituencies! 120! yet only won in 1 place, clacton, which isn't that far from me.

So I'm disappointed and hope that UKIP supporters keep faith, and we get more voters next time to turn some of those places into UKIP territory. That way maybe this system isn't too bad, maybe we just have to be patient and we could suddenly gain a huge amount of MPs in the next election.

[Novatore]

I think we can all agree that we're happy Ed Balls is gone.

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com.es...abour.html

Quote:

One of the great joys of election night is watching particularly despised politicians getting their comeuppance. These occurrences have become known as "Portillo moments" in homage to the unseating of the the Tory Defence Secretary Michael Portillo in 1997.

Thanks to the SNP landslide in Scotland and the implosion of the Lib-Dem party, General Election night 2015 was full of "Portillo moments" including Danny Alexander (George Osborne's Lib-Dem sidekick for the last 5 years), Jim Murphy (the Blairite Scottish Labour leader), Vince Cable (the Lib-Dem who flogged off the Royal Mail on the cheap), Steve Webb (the Lib-Dem DWP minister who defended "Bedroom Tax" to the hilt), Douglas Alexander (A key Ed Miliband ally and adviser) and Ed Davey (the Lib-Dem energy minister with the incredibly flexible principles).

Despite all of these high profile oustings the biggest "Portillo moment" of the night belonged to the Labour Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Ed Balls, who lost his Morley and Outwood seat to a Tory.

I never liked Ed Balls. He always struck me as a pompous and patronising buffoon who would surely have been more at home in the Tory party. A "Tory in a red tie" of the kind that have become all too common since the Labour Party was usurped in the mid-90s by Tony Blair and converted from a social democratic party to a Thatcherism-lite one.

In my view, one of Ed Miliband's very biggest mistakes (of which there were many) was his decision to appoint Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor and hand him control over the economic message that the Labour party conveyed to the electorate.

To be fair to Ed Balls he did start out with a fairly decent and coherent message. His oft repeated assertions that the Tories were cutting spending "too hard, too deep and too fast" was completely vindicated by the way that Tory ideological austerity completely killed off Labour's nascent post-crisis mini-recovery and plunged the whole UK economy into a prolonged economic stagnation between late 2010 and early 2013.

The problem is that instead of sticking to his story, or even strengthening his position with slogans like "Austerity is a con", "Osborne's economic incompetence" or "They've created more new public debt than every Labour government in history combined" he decided to backtrack and start mimicking George Osborne's failing austerity agenda with an austerity-lite agenda of his own.

The absolute nadir of this ludicrous austerity-lite strategy came in January 2015 when the Labour leadership whipped their MPs into actually endorsing Osborne's ideological austerity agenda in a parliamentary vote (just five Labour rebels defied this suicidal order from their leaders - see footnote).

This decision to begin copying the demonstrably failing economic policies of the Tories left the Labour Party in a serious bind. How on earth could the point out how badly Tory austerity has failed without looking like complete idiots when people point out that Labour voted in favour of continuing ideological austerity and promised to stick to George Osborne's spending plans?

The astonishing success of the SNP is a demonstration that it is possible to win an unprecedented electoral landslide with a coherently explained and passionately expressed of opposing ideological austerity. Ed Balls' ridiculous decision to adopt the language of austerity-lite robbed the Labour Party of their ability to set themselves up as a "real alternative" and ensured their electoral defeat.

I mean who on earth could ever get passionate about a political agenda defined by its advocates as "austerity-lite"? How is it even possible to to convince people to get passionate about defeating the other side when you're offering the same thing as them, just not quite as bad?

When Balls was appointed Shadow Chancellor I swore to myself that I would never support the Labour Party as long as he was in their cabinet. Now that he has been ousted I hope that they turn to someone from the left of the party who had the sense to oppose austerity, rather than going for someone from the right of the party in the hope of appeasing Rupert Murdoch. Judging by their track record of strategic incompetence it wouldn't surprise me at all if they demanded an unelected seat in the House of Lords for Ed Balls and brought him back into their shadow cabinet as an unelected peer.

As I said before, Ed Balls always struck me as a "Tory in a red tie", so I can't help thinking that a Tory inside agent within the Labour Party probably couldn't have come up with a better election losing strategy than Ed Ball's ludicrous "austerity-lite" narrative.

[SteveMcMahon]

Not surprising that Miliband lost.

Why? Forget economics, the SNP, UKIP, psephology and whatnot.

He was bound to lose because he's a gamma male.

Quote:

Gamma: The introspective, the unusual, the unattractive, and all too often the bitter. Gammas are often intelligent, usually unsuccessful with women, and not uncommonly all but invisible to them, the gamma alternates between placing women on pedestals and hating the entire sex. This mostly depends upon whether an attractive woman happened to notice his existence or not that day. Too introspective for their own good, gammas are the men who obsess over individual women for extended periods of time and supply the ranks of stalkers, psycho-jealous ex-boyfriends, and the authors of excruciatingly romantic rhyming doggerel. In the unlikely event they are at the party, they are probably in the corner muttering darkly about the behavior of everyone else there... sometimes to themselves. Gammas tend to have have a worship/hate relationship with women, the current direction of which is directly tied to their present situation. However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.

http://alphagameplan.blogspot.co.uk/2011...y.html?m=1

Doesn't matter what you think of Cameron, Obama, Putin, Tony Abbott, Merkel or other well known heads of government. They're alphas. They look poised and natural in a leadership role. Even people who hate them still see them as leaders. They command respect.







Miliband is clearly uncomfortable in his own skin. He looks and acts like an Aspergery dork. Even his own party didn't really see him as a Prime Minister in waiting. He was chosen because the unions wanted somebody tractable.



Miliband doesn't look or sound like a leader because he isn't one. And he isn't a leader because he doesn't look or sound like one.

This may seem horribly shallow. But it isn't. We are a social species, and the sociosexual hierarchy exists for good evolutionary reasons.

Women want to be fucked by strong, confident, dominant men. Voters want to be led by strong, confident, dominant men (and sometimes exceptional women, like Thatcher or Merkel).

Most men, if they're willing to change, can improve themselves. Lift, dress better, practice maintaining an assertive masculine frame, work on your speech and body language, improve your attitude. If you act a certain way long enough, it will no longer be an act, it'll become habit. It'll become you. And other people will respond to that.

But some men seem unwilling or incapable of self-improvement. Ed Miliband is one of those people. Every public appearance just made him look more like a twat.



Just goes to show that game isn't just about banging more and better bitches.

[Midlands Man]

Cameron is one of the most underated prime ministers in modern British history.

He gambled with the breakup of the union with the Scottish referendum and won and now he has achieved a majority government, when no one said he had a chance.

The truth is that the UK is not a third world country, with an NHS in crisis and a country with no jobs - the reality is that living standard here have never been higher.

Joe public knows this buts it's just not fashionable to say that you support the conservatives, that's why the pollsters got it wrong with the prediction of a hung parliament.

Sure the UK has problems with low pay and expensive housing, but the English are an aspirational people who see the conservatives as the best party for raising living standards.

Congratulations to the SNP who now dominate Scotland.

These proceedings are now closed - God save the Queen.

[britchard]

Find it incredibly hypocritical of the Left to accuse UKIP of 'scaremongering' on immigration, but then they make claims such as 'we won't have an NHS in 5 years', or something along those lines.