General Election 2010

[Meenzer 14040]

There's been a lot of talk about this being the first "social networking election", the year the power started to shift away from the newspapers (and particularly the tabloids), etc. etc. And you just know the printed press will get more and more militant in their approach over the next week. It'll be really interesting to see which way things shift next Thursday.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

Has she signed her exclusive newspaper deal yet?

[Renton 17756]

Has she signed her exclusive newspaper deal yet?

 

The Sun backed out of that too apparently, presumably when they found they couldn't get the right angle out of it.

[Happy Face 29]

YouGov and Angus Reid are both calling the third debate for Cameron. YouGov have figures of Cameron 41%, Brown 25%, Clegg 32%.

 

Angus Reid’s live figures so far, are showing Cameron the victor of the third debate – Cameron 36%, Brown 22%, Clegg 31%.

 

UPDATE: ComRes also have Cameron winning but with a narrower margin – Cameron 35%, Clegg 33%, Brown 26%.

I must have had my rose tinted specs on.

[Meenzer 14040]

That's how it works.

[Craig 6302]

I'd never have said Brown was third

 

I thought Cameron edged it tbh.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

I'd never have said Brown was third

 

I thought Cameron edged it tbh.

Yeah, I thought Cameron one, Brown two and Clegg a distant third. And I'm planning on voting lib dem so no rose-tintyness here.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

I'd never have said Brown was third

I actually think people had made their minds up in advance after yesterdays fuck-up.

[Craig 6302]

I'd never have said Brown was third

I actually think people had made their minds up in advance after yesterdays fuck-up.

 

Agreed. I think what works in Brown's favour is that it was this week and not next. Be interesting to see how he plays it - needs to stop mentioning it IMO.

[luckyluke 1]

I've had to as my postal voting papers came yesterday. Sent them off about the same time Brown was calling some old bat a bigot.

[Happy Face 29]

That's how it works.

 

The rose tint was that I'll be voting Lib Dem, but I though he looked decidedly lightweight tonight compared to Brown. Cameron is was and always will be a shiny chinned twat of the largest magnitude who would come last if he was debating George Bush.

[ChezGiven 0]

[Craig 6302]

YouGov have figures of Cameron 41%, Brown 25%, Clegg 32%

 

If that was the share next week, the outcome would look quite scary...

 

Conservatives: 341 seats

Labour: 182 seats

Liberal Democrats: 101 seats

Others: 26 seats

 

Conservatives with a majority of 32 seats.

[sandman02uk 0]

Giving an amnesty to illegal immigrants is a horrendous idea.

 

Indeed. Clegg has lost the plot on that one.

It sends out the wrong message. It's a vote loser and not what Joe Public wants to hear (because they're bigots aren't they Gordon?)

 

Clegg floundering a bit tonight imo.

 

In principal offering all illegals amnesty is a good idea, they come forward, we now have a list of the number of people in the country, they can be given NI numbers and they can work and be taxed

 

however any government would fuck it up so

 

I'm voting Lib Dem

[ewerk 26312]

Are the general public fucking mental? Brown was never that far back in the debate, he won it imo.

[Phil 6]

Giving an amnesty to illegal immigrants is a horrendous idea.

 

Indeed. Clegg has lost the plot on that one.

It sends out the wrong message. It's a vote loser and not what Joe Public wants to hear (because they're bigots aren't they Gordon?)

 

Clegg floundering a bit tonight imo.

 

In principal offering all illegals amnesty is a good idea, they come forward, we now have a list of the number of people in the country, they can be given NI numbers and they can work and be taxed

 

however any government would fuck it up so

 

I'm voting Lib Dem

 

 

The issue is Labour abolished tracking people leaving, Lim Dem wants the amnesty so we can track them better. Personally I don't care if they know the figure as it's only a statistic, they are illegal so would come and stay regardless. Also I think the logistics of an amnesty wouldn't pan out as if 800k people come forward they will more than likely be in pockets of areas. So giving them the right to work will put a major strain on that area. Its a good suggest, but one that i dont think can work.

 

The real problem for me is we shouldn't have an open door policy for the EU. Espcially if we concider Greece and Spains downward spiral.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Phil

[Renton 17756]

Giving an amnesty to illegal immigrants is a horrendous idea.

 

Indeed. Clegg has lost the plot on that one.

It sends out the wrong message. It's a vote loser and not what Joe Public wants to hear (because they're bigots aren't they Gordon?)

 

Clegg floundering a bit tonight imo.

 

In principal offering all illegals amnesty is a good idea, they come forward, we now have a list of the number of people in the country, they can be given NI numbers and they can work and be taxed

 

however any government would fuck it up so

 

I'm voting Lib Dem

 

 

The issue is Labour abolished tracking people leaving, Lim Dem wants the amnesty so we can track them better. Personally I don't care if they know the figure as it's only a statistic, they are illegal so would come and stay regardless. Also I think the logistics of an amnesty wouldn't pan out as if 800k people come forward they will more than likely be in pockets of areas. So giving them the right to work will put a major strain on that area. Its a good suggest, but one that i dont think can work.

 

The real problem for me is we shouldn't have an open door policy for the EU. Espcially if we concider Greece and Spains downward spiral.

 

So you want us to withdraw from the EU then?

 

I actually thought it a bit ironic that, imo, Brown wiped the floor with Clegg and Cameron regarding immigration tonight.

 

Iirc it was the Conservatives that stopped 'counting people out' btw.

[Phil 6]

Giving an amnesty to illegal immigrants is a horrendous idea.

 

Indeed. Clegg has lost the plot on that one.

It sends out the wrong message. It's a vote loser and not what Joe Public wants to hear (because they're bigots aren't they Gordon?)

 

Clegg floundering a bit tonight imo.

 

In principal offering all illegals amnesty is a good idea, they come forward, we now have a list of the number of people in the country, they can be given NI numbers and they can work and be taxed

 

however any government would fuck it up so

 

I'm voting Lib Dem

 

 

The issue is Labour abolished tracking people leaving, Lim Dem wants the amnesty so we can track them better. Personally I don't care if they know the figure as it's only a statistic, they are illegal so would come and stay regardless. Also I think the logistics of an amnesty wouldn't pan out as if 800k people come forward they will more than likely be in pockets of areas. So giving them the right to work will put a major strain on that area. Its a good suggest, but one that i dont think can work.

 

The real problem for me is we shouldn't have an open door policy for the EU. Especially if we consider Greece and Spain's downward spiral.

 

So you want us to withdraw from the EU then?

 

I actually thought it a bit ironic that, imo, Brown wiped the floor with Clegg and Cameron regarding immigration tonight.

 

Iirc it was the Conservatives that stopped 'counting people out' btw.

 

 

I'm not the biggest fan of the EU, we pay 5.4bn into it every year and its rising. I see it as a bit of an old style Union - collective bargaining etc... if it wasn't for the language barrier I would be more in favour. In a Utopian world maybe it could work.

 

I thought Brown and Cameron had very similar immigration policies. I suspect Camerons cap is something of a vote tactic rather than an actual policy.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

I don't really understand what benefit we get from being in the EU.

 

Why can't we just sign up for the free trade bit?

 

Seems a whole lot of money in for very little out.

[Happy Face 29]

 

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower?

[Renton 17756]

 

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower?

 

That would be the median income which is probably around £20k I would guess? Interesting graph, lets look at it again in 5 years if the tories get in power.

[Renton 17756]

I don't really understand what benefit we get from being in the EU.

 

Why can't we just sign up for the free trade bit?

 

Seems a whole lot of money in for very little out.

 

So you'd want the benefits of Europe without actually contributing to the club. I see.

 

What has the EU ever done for us? - 50 things that are to our advantage - from the Independent. There's a reason even the tories don't want us out of the EU, the benefits far offset the costs.

[Renton 17756]

I thought Brown and Cameron had very similar immigration policies. I suspect Camerons cap is something of a vote tactic rather than an actual policy.

 

Yes, it was a complete gimmick, along with his tax cuts for married couples and parents running schools. The man has no substance whatsoever.

[spongebob toonpants 3602]

I was banned from watching the debate last night due to the apocolyptic rage watching Cameron sends me into. I find the opinion poll results very depressing. My constituency is the 10th most marginal, but I cant see it staying Labour, but I will still be voting for them without any hesitation. Overall the best I can hope for is some sort of lib lab coalition to keep the beast at bay.

 

I've agreed word for word with everything Renton has said in this thread btw

[Happy Face 29]

Economics thinktank the Institute for Fiscal Studies says that The IFS said that no party had gone "anywhere near identifying" the cuts they will need to meet their various deficit reduction timetables. In an attack on the "vague" plans sketched out by Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, the Institute for Fiscal Studies also claimed the Tories were planning the sharpest spending cuts since the second world war, while the Labour and Lib Dem spending slowdowns amounted to the biggest retrenchment since the IMF crisis in the mid-1970s.

 

We've extracted the data from the original IFS report for you here, so you can compare cuts by area of spending. Can you do anything with the data?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/20...ending-cuts-ifs

 

Conclusion

The voters in this election deserve to make an informed choice between the plans the parties have to repair our public finances. Unfortunately, all of them are vaguer than they could be or should be.

 

As far as we can tell, the parties all appear to be aiming for a fiscal tightening of the same size. The Conservatives want to start earlier and proceed more quickly, but not sufficiently so that this would make a dramatic difference to the outlook for government borrowing or debt. It is in the composition of the proposed tightening packages that the more significant differences lie.

 

On tax, the plans set out by the parties in their manifestos are dwarfed by the size of the tax increase that is already in the pipeline for the coming Parliament. Labour has set out no new proposals of significance, but would have to announce further tax increases in due course. The Conservatives are proposing a net tax cut, which makes the hole in the public finances that they would have to fill by other measures bigger. Indeed, they would probably have to reverse half the net tax cut they have just announced. The Liberal Democrats are proposing a modest net tax increase, which would do a little to begin filling the hole in. They need not announce further tax increases unless their plans raise less revenue than they hope or unless (as they have conceded might be the case) they discover that the squeeze on spending becomes unacceptably tight.

 

On spending, all the parties have a long way to go in identifying the substantial cuts they need to deliver. This is an inevitable consequence of the government’s decision not to carry out a Spending Review before the election for the next three years. Our estimates suggest that over the period to 2014–15, the squeeze on public services under Labour and the Liberal Democrats would be the largest seen since the mid-1970s and under the Conservatives would be the largest seen since (at least) the Second World War. But the Conservatives would need smaller cuts in 2015–16 and 2016–17 than the other parties since they plan to begin the fiscal repair job earlier and proceed at greater speed.

 

It is striking that the parties are all aiming to deliver at least two-thirds of their fiscal tightening through spending cuts rather than tax increases, and that they have not announced any measures that would make big savings in welfare spending over this period. Bear in mind that when the last Conservative government faced the need for a significant fiscal tightening in the early 1990s, we estimate that the then Chancellors Norman Lamont and Kenneth Clarke aimed to split the burden roughly 50:50 between tax increases and spending cuts. This might suggest that all the parties are overambitious in the amount they think they can squeeze out of public services. Whoever forms the next government, that points to greater reliance on tax increases and welfare cuts after the election than the parties are willing to admit to beforehand.

Edited April 30, 2010 by Happy Face