The General Election

[Dancing Queen]

Unbelievable - or maybe not

A few years ago we had one of the local candidates round ( can't remember which party ) when I asked the question 'what are you going to do about ********** ' I was asked if I had access to a computer, upon saying yes I was told to look at his web site as it was all there, I asked several more questions and got the same reply

Now I just say 'yes' to them all rather than standing on the doorstep wasting my time knowing I won't get an answer to anything I ask.

[oldbluefox]

She was the Labour Party Constituency Candidate. May the good Lord help us!!!! How many more will now be sitting in Westminster who are just like her?And I wonder how many muppets actually voted for her?

[gfwgfw]

Mr Ed Balls is entitled to circa £88000 for being a loser

[Onelife]

[quote="Stephen"]I thought this was excellent. And they wonder why they done so bad in the elections.

[/quote'

Just thought it would be quite a laugh' ???

I also wouldn't have given the two plonkers the time of day.

[oldbluefox]

Mr Ed Balls is entitled to circa £88000 for being a loser

Nice work if you can get it. How long before he joins Lord Prescott in the Upper House or finds himself a nice little number in the EU á la (or should that be aux?) Kinnocks? There's no shortage of work for ousted politicians.

[Stephen]

I thought this was excellent. And they wonder why they done so bad in the elections.

[/quote'

Just thought it would be quite a laugh' ???

I also wouldn't have given the two plonkers the time of day.

Disagree Keith. Yes, the reply to why they were videoing could have been better put, but I'm sure it was a spur of the moment remark and not intentional. Their questions were valid and what I would have asked any party campaigning had they bothered to come and knock on my door.

[david63]

I that Lord Sugar has resigned from the Labour Party - is there anyone still in it?

[Dark Knight]

Not to be blunt
but it is over and all the post match discussion won't change anything, the Tories won and the rest were decimated, with the exception of the SNP and lots of overpaid, blowhards are out of a job.
The 66% that bothered to vote made it very clear which way they wanted the country to go and it wasn't Labour. UKIP or Lib Dems
so for the next 5 years or possibly more, it is Tory, Tory, Tory
so sadly, if your favourite colour didn't get elected , its because they weren't wanted

[david63]

And the circus goes on - UKIP have rejected Farage's resignation as leader. If I was a cynic (and you know me better than that) I would say that it was all for "show"

[qbman1]

Politics? All for show? Never !!

[Onelife]

Not to be blunt
but it is over and all the post match discussion won't change anything, the Tories won and the rest were decimated, with the exception of the SNP and lots of overpaid, blowhards are out of a job.
The 66% that bothered to vote made it very clear which way they wanted the country to go and it wasn't Labour. UKIP or Lib Dems
so for the next 5 years or possibly more, it is Tory, Tory, Tory
so sadly, if your favourite colour didn't get elected , its because they weren't wanted

Not so sure about that droopydraws....the 66% that bothered to vote did so in a way that kept SNP and LABOUR from jumping into bed together which, when all things considered isn't the greatest endorsment for this dispicable conservatie party which now have a mandate to cut, cut ,cut for another five years.

Regards

lardyarse

[Stephen]

Anyone want to buy a brace of converted coaches with all the plush trimmings.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Not to be blunt
but it is over and all the post match discussion won't change anything, the Tories won and the rest were decimated, with the exception of the SNP and lots of overpaid, blowhards are out of a job.
The 66% that bothered to vote made it very clear which way they wanted the country to go and it wasn't Labour. UKIP or Lib Dems
so for the next 5 years or possibly more, it is Tory, Tory, Tory
so sadly, if your favourite colour didn't get elected , its because they weren't wanted

Not so sure about that droopydraws....the 66% that bothered to vote did so in a way that kept SNP and LABOUR from jumping into bed together which, when all things considered isn't the greatest endorsment for this dispicable conservatie party which now have a mandate to cut, cut ,cut for another five years.

Regards

lardyarse

But if the 34% who couldn't be ar**d to vote don't like the result they know what to do next time.

[oldbluefox]

After 13 years of Labour's spend, spend, spend it was inevitable we could not sustain those levels so cuts had to be made. My concerns are when cuts are applied in the wrong areas. Some cuts needed to be made considering you could be better off on benefits rather than working for a living. That cannot be right and just encouraged a benefits by choice culture. Hopefully this government will get more people into work on jobs which pay proper wages with a tax system which works for them rather than penalising them so they are better off working.
There will be those who have genuinely hit on hard times and the safety net should be there, but it should not be a prop for those who spend their money on takeaways, tattoos, booze and cigarettes and then rely on foodbanks to support their families.
Perhaps we need a clear definition for 'vulnerable', something no politician has been able to give even though the word has been bandied around plenty by Labour, SNP, PC and the Greens.

[oldbluefox]

Anyone want to buy a brace of converted coaches with all the plush trimmings.

I wonder who bought Harriet's girlie pink one?
Anyone got use for Ed's totem pole? I presume the hole they dug in the garden at No 10 has now been filled in.

[towny44]

The vulnerable are those that are finding it difficult to keep up their Sky payments and buy the latest 55" smart TV, AND buy all the cigs and booze they desire on the new only slightly lower benefits.

[oldbluefox]

As somebody once said, 'If you are going to take away some people's benefits of course they are going to play up. Wouldn't you?' And I suppose I would.
Unfortunately towny, in many cases I think that is so close to the truth to be funny.

[Manoverboard]

Like I posted earlier-ish ....

It seems to be true that the highest outlay for benefit payments is in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland rather than in the English Counties. This being so then let those Regions of the UK raise their own taxation locally through the Local Government umbrella and then use the proceeds to supplement whoever they like at whatever rate they can afford.

Meanwhile the English need to move some of the London / Home Counties based employment oop Norf.

[Stephen]

The vulnerable are those that are finding it difficult to keep up their Sky payments and buy the latest 55" smart TV, AND buy all the cigs and booze they desire on the new only slightly lower benefits.

Bang & Olufsen on Towny

[Onelife]

After 13 years of Labour's spend, spend, spend it was inevitable we could not sustain those levels so cuts had to be made. My concerns are when cuts are applied in the wrong areas. Some cuts needed to be made considering you could be better off on benefits rather than working for a living. That cannot be right and just encouraged a benefits by choice culture. Hopefully this government will get more people into work on jobs which pay proper wages with a tax system which works for them rather than penalising them so they are better off working.
There will be those who have genuinely hit on hard times and the safety net should be there, but it should not be a prop for those who spend their money on takeaways, tattoos, booze and cigarettes and then rely on foodbanks to support their families.
Perhaps we need a clear definition for 'vulnerable', something no politician has been able to give even though the word has been bandied around plenty by Labour, SNP, PC and the Greens.

Hi OBF

Here are a few that didn't quite make it back into work...

http://www.welfareweekly.com/iain-dunca ... ory-death/

Regards

Keith

[oldbluefox]

Hi Keith

......................... which is the point I was trying to make. The clever bit is in sorting out the malingerers from the genuinely ill. Were it not for those who swing the lead there would be more in the welfare pot for those who genuinely need it and nobody would deny those for whom welfare benefit is intended.

[Onelife]

Hi Keith

......................... which is the point I was trying to make. The clever bit is in sorting out the malingerers from the genuinely ill. Were it not for those who swing the lead there would be more in the welfare pot for those who genuinely need it and nobody would deny those for whom welfare benefit is intended.

Hi Foxy

You've made your points very well but reducing the deficit by way of making the most vulnerable perform work capability tests that are designed in a way that very few have any chance of passing isn't something this government can be proud of. I actually think what they are doing to the disabled is illegal and the sooner it is challenged the better.

There is no doubt the benefits system needs sorting but taking claimants off benefits in areas where there are no jobs will only lead to other problems such as an increase in crime.The benefits culture is a result of lack of investment in the towns in which these claimants have to live.

Sort out the root problem and you will sort out the benefits problem.

I want a recount

Regards

Keith

[oldbluefox]

.
There is no doubt the benefits system needs sorting but taking claimants off benefits in areas where there are no jobs will only lead to other problems such as an increase in crime.The benefits culture is a result of lack of investment in the towns in which these claimants have to live.

Sort out the root problem and you will sort out the benefits problem.

I want a recount

I couldn't agree more OL. The same applies to the so called 'bedroom tax'. You can't charge people for living in larger properties if there are no smaller ones for them to move into. If they turn the smaller property down that's a different matter. The principle is right, it's the execution which is wrong.
As for a recount we have seen your counting!!!

[poole boy]

onelife
keep thinking like that and please keep the labour masters thinking the same way and the conservatives will be in power for at least the next ten years no problem.

[towny44]

Watching Nicola and her tartan army of MPs yesterday I got to wondering about the intelligence of the Scottish electorate.
After voting No to independence and narrowly avoiding a financial meltdown when the oil price plummeted, you would have expected them to be a bit more circumspect when it came to the GE, but no lemming like 50% of them voted SNP, double the labour vote. Maybe they expected a hung parliament and the SNP to be able to wiggle Ed's strings and get a better deal for Scotland as a result.
Whatever the reason I now think we will be back to a 2 party system in the future and Nicola and her yellow hordes will melt away like spring snow.