General Election 2015 - Thoughts/Predictions/Results

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Ed Miliband felt he wanted to move on and look at the future, which implied not worrying too much about the past, and for that reason he didn't want to devote much time to defending Labour's record. Obviously, that was tactically a disastrous mistake (easy to say with hindsight, but I myself remember that a year ago, long before the 2015 election, many people in my local Labour party were expressing concern about it).

The Labour Party, in the period that led up to that last General Election, surely would have employed strategists to work with those within the Labour Part to plan the campaign that would best portray them as the next party to govern Britain.

Would the Miliband view that you state above be one that would have over-ridden the consensual views of their own electoral policy committee?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The crash happened in the USA and then quickly spread to most other countries.

Interestingly enough, while there has been much talk of how the large banks were "too big to fail"in the 2008 crash and needed Governmental protection for those whose assets were so included, whilst no British bank was allowed to fail, the USA with its enormous financial organisational structure did nothing to prevent the subsequent bankruptcy of one of their top five of these, Lehman Brothers.

 

[Dave1987]

As I'm one of the few centre right thinking people on this forum I know most of you wont agree with me. In 2010 if Labour had won the election they definitely would not have taken the unpopular steps that needed to taken to sort the economy out. The huge tax revenues from the banks were gone, but it still seemed that they wanted to continue with the massive public expenditure. It wasn't until the later stages of the election campaign that Mr Milliband realised that the majority of the country didn't trust him or Mr Balls to be responsible with the countries finances. The only problem now I foresee is the current Tory Govt sorting out the economy and start to pay off our massive debts, for Labour to get in in 2020 and wreck it all again.

 

[BlythPower]

The last Labour Govt... Continually raised the duty on beer until pubs were shutting down at the rate of two a week.

hock: Really? So those pub closures had nothing to do with the beer tie, then?

CAMRA research found that large Pub Companies (Pubco) have been making huge excess profits at the expense of pub-goers by forcing licensees to buy their beer only from them rather than on the open market. This has led to licensees paying at least 50% more for beer and often paying above market value for rents.

Source

 

[pemma]

As I'm one of the few centre right thinking people on this forum I know most of you wont agree with me. In 2010 if Labour had won the election they definitely would not have taken the unpopular steps that needed to taken to sort the economy out. The huge tax revenues from the banks were gone, but it still seemed that they wanted to continue with the massive public expenditure. It wasn't until the later stages of the election campaign that Mr Milliband realised that the majority of the country didn't trust him or Mr Balls to be responsible with the countries finances. The only problem now I foresee is the current Tory Govt sorting out the economy and start to pay off our massive debts, for Labour to get in in 2020 and wreck it all again.

The chance of any party winning an overall majority outright in 2010 was very small. Nick Clegg made it clear the Lib Dems were willing to talk to Labour in the event of a hung parliament but only if Brown stood down as leader. However, the decision to appoint the inexperienced Osborne as Chancellor in 2010 wasn't popular, many people would have preferred the experience of either Vince Cable or Kenneth Clarke.

Given we don't know who will be leader of either party when the new election occurs or what they plan to offer any claim that one party will be better than the other is unfounded.

 

[Aldaniti]

As I'm one of the few centre right thinking people on this forum I know most of you wont agree with me. In 2010 if Labour had won the election they definitely would not have taken the unpopular steps that needed to taken to sort the economy out. The huge tax revenues from the banks were gone, but it still seemed that they wanted to continue with the massive public expenditure. It wasn't until the later stages of the election campaign that Mr Milliband realised that the majority of the country didn't trust him or Mr Balls to be responsible with the countries finances. The only problem now I foresee is the current Tory Govt sorting out the economy and start to pay off our massive debts, for Labour to get in in 2020 and wreck it all again.

Don't worry, there's a few sensible people left. And the way Labour are going they'll be out for another 20 years -with a bit of luck. I couldn't stop laughing the other day when Andy Burnham thought that a litre of petrol cost £1.60. Most politicians are out of touch on all sides, and I don't really have a great deal of time for the Tories, but a prospective Labour party leader (the supposed party of the working man ) doesn't have a clue of the cost of one of the most commonly purchased commodities in this country, the price of which has a significant proportion of taxation applied, and thus forms an important part of economic policy. I'd rather vote for Del Boy or Arthur Daley.

 

[Dave1987]

hock: Really? So those pub closures had nothing to do with the beer tie, then?



Source

As a member of CAMRA myself I think you will find the beer duty escalator that Mr Brown introduced was one of CAMRA's main campaigns to get it stopped, which of course Osbourne has done. The beer tie agreement is not as simple as you make out. Some PubCo's will give money to Landlords to renovate pubs in return that the Landlord buys a certain amount of barrels from said PubCo. Mr Brown's beer duty escalator arguably had a massive detrimental effect of the Beer & Pub industry. One of the reasons CAMRA has fought to get it scrapped.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Don't worry, there's a few sensible people left. And the way Labour are going they'll be out for another 20 years -with a bit of luck. I couldn't stop laughing the other day when Andy Burnham thought that a litre of petrol cost £1.60. Most politicians are out of touch on all sides, and I don't really have a great deal of time for the Tories, but a prospective Labour party leader (the supposed party of the working man ) doesn't have a clue of the cost of one of the most commonly purchased commodities in this country, the price of which has a significant proportion of taxation applied, and thus forms an important part of economic policy. I'd rather vote for Del Boy or Arthur Daley.

Nice to know! Even I'm not mega keen on the Tories but they seem to be the best centre party of the lot.

 

[Manchester77]

Nice to know! Even I'm not mega keen on the Tories but they seem to be the best centre party of the lot.

Surely if you're a centre right chap the Liberal Democrats would be a more optimum party for you since they want to make cuts to public expenditure and eliminate the deficit and yet they don't come with the attached 'conservatisms' the Tories have like the abolition of the HRA and fox hunting again. It just seems odd to me was just wondering.

 

[jon0844]

The LibDems clearly found that when not in power you can be everyone's friend, which changes somewhat when you are now in power (if only partly) and having to actually go through with unpopular decisions.

To be fair, I like the LibDems and do think the party helped keep the Tories in check. Now we've got an outright majority, I can see interesting times ahead.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed. I think the Lib Dems seem to have gotten a very raw deal in that the Tories have forced as many unpopular decisions and come up smelling of roses.

Reminds me of the rubbish "if it doesn't hurt, it ain't working " campaign of a few years ago, although a fairly large chunk of the public seem to have fallen for the sentiment this time around.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

To be fair, I like the LibDems and do think the party helped keep the Tories in check. Now we've got an outright majority, I can see interesting times ahead.

Indeed, quite a few people on my Twitter in the days after the GE said you would notice a lot of freedom disappear by 2020 now that the Lib Dems had vanished. I've got a horrible feeling they're correct.

 

[muddythefish]

As I'm one of the few centre right thinking people on this forum I know most of you wont agree with me. In 2010 if Labour had won the election they definitely would not have taken the unpopular steps that needed to taken to sort the economy out. The huge tax revenues from the banks were gone, but it still seemed that they wanted to continue with the massive public expenditure. It wasn't until the later stages of the election campaign that Mr Milliband realised that the majority of the country didn't trust him or Mr Balls to be responsible with the countries finances. The only problem now I foresee is the current Tory Govt sorting out the economy and start to pay off our massive debts, for Labour to get in in 2020 and wreck it all again.

Alastair Darling had a deficit reduction plan in place if Labour had won in 2010. Public spending was to be cut back significantly.

Labour have never "wrecked the economy" at any time in its history.

This is all verifiable with just a little research.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Nice to know! Even I'm not mega keen on the Tories but they seem to be the best centre party of the lot.

The Tory party under Cameron and Osborne is not a centre party - far from it. Its drive to reduce the size of the state, the austerity spending cuts, the slashing of welfare benefits, the focus on cutting immigration, are all pure right wing ideology.

 

[pemma]

Indeed, quite a few people on my Twitter in the days after the GE said you would notice a lot of freedom disappear by 2020 now that the Lib Dems had vanished. I've got a horrible feeling they're correct.

When I saw the exit poll result on election night I thought "Oh no things are going to get worse." The exit poll shows the Conservatives 10 seats sort of a majority with the Lib Dems having 10 seats, DUP having 8 and UKIP having 2. I thought at the time if the Lib Dems form a Coalition again they'll have a lot less influence with the numbers being smaller, while a Conservative + DUP + possibly UKIP Coalition would probably have been worse than a Conservative majority.

The next morning when it was looking like the Conservatives would get a majority Thersea May was on the TV talking about trying to get the snooping charter through, which had previously been blocked by the Lib Dems.

Labour have never "wrecked the economy" at any time in its history.

With the poster being called Dave1987 I wonder if 87 was his year of birth meaning he's too young to remember the recession that happened the last time the Conservatives were in government with a majority. Or that their introduction of a poll tax resulted in widespread riots with the Conservative leader having to stand down and the new leader having to commit to reversing the change.

The Tory party under Cameron and Osborne is not a centre party - far from it.

Indeed. The Lib Dems currently or Labour under Tony Blair are better examples of centre ground than the Conservatives now.

 

[Dave1987]

Like I said previously I know most of you are left leaning Labour supporter or out right left wingers so are not likely to agree with me at all. Pre 2008 Labour created an economy and public expenditure based on the huge tax receipts of the banks, when it all went wrong they went straight away and blamed the enormous deficit on the industry they had been so reliant on. In the 2010 election Mr Brown and Mr Darling were not prepared to make the cuts needed even though the tax receipts from the banks were gone. The economy they had created was reliant on something that was no longer there. The only solution to maintaining the level on spending was to dramatically increases taxes on everyone else. Greece was one of those countries who refused to curtail its spending post 2008 and look what state it is in now. You can argue all you want that "the economy was growing in 2010" etc etc, Greece has shown what would have happened in the UK had the spending cuts not been made. There would have been no welfare state at all if the UK went bankrupt. Labour and the left in general need to realise you cannot just keep spending spending spending on the never never in a vain hope that one day our children or our children's children might just be able to pay it back someday.

 

[EM2]

Dave - if the Conservatives are so financially prudent, why is the debt so much higher as a percentage of GDP, and risen sharply since 2010?
Why is net borrowing only now coming back to pre-Coalition levels?
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

 

[TheKnightWho]

Like I said previously I know most of you are left leaning Labour supporter or out right left wingers so are not likely to agree with me at all. Pre 2008 Labour created an economy and public expenditure based on the huge tax receipts of the banks, when it all went wrong they went straight away and blamed the enormous deficit on the industry they had been so reliant on. In the 2010 election Mr Brown and Mr Darling were not prepared to make the cuts needed even though the tax receipts from the banks were gone. The economy they had created was reliant on something that was no longer there. The only solution to maintaining the level on spending was to dramatically increases taxes on everyone else. Greece was one of those countries who refused to curtail its spending post 2008 and look what state it is in now. You can argue all you want that "the economy was growing in 2010" etc etc, Greece has shown what would have happened in the UK had the spending cuts not been made. There would have been no welfare state at all if the UK went bankrupt. Labour and the left in general need to realise you cannot just keep spending spending spending on the never never in a vain hope that one day our children or our children's children might just be able to pay it back someday.

Well for a start, Greece's problems are related to them being in the Eurozone. If you want to look at a country that didn't deal with things the way we did and isn't in the Eurozone, look at Iceland - the only Western European country that's managed to expand its economy above its 2007 size and had maintained its social welfare at constant levels.

So no, this Tory line that seems to think a country is a household doesn't stand up to scrutiny at all. There isn't the evidence at home, when you consider austerity has been reversed in areas where it actually counts and only retained in negligible but high profile areas like unemployment benefits, or abroad, where countries that have rejected austerity whilst not being in the Eurozone (such as the U.S. and Iceland) have done very well - as well as Britain post-2013 - i.e. when impactful austerity went out the window.

That's not looking at it from a centre-left, centre-right or whatever perspective either - it's simply reporting what has happened.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Like I said previously I know most of you are left leaning Labour supporter or out right left wingers so are not likely to agree with me at all.

I think you're missing the point of a debate. If you want to get people to agree with you, then explain your reasoning. It doesn't matter whether the other people are left or right-leaning. If you present your arguments in a logical, coherent manner, giving evidence where appropriate, then people are likely to respect you, and some may be convinced by your arguments. If you simply make wild, implausible assertions, ignore the evidence that other people present, or state things that are not true then you will lose respect and are less likely to convince others of your arguments.

In this regard, you have failed several times to make any adequate response to the points that I and other have made that
(a) Under the post-1997 Labour Govt, the Government debt/GDP ratio had in fact gone down (albeit not by a huge amount), until the international recession blew threw everything off course
(b) Mainstream economic thought at the time appeared to be that there was nothing significantly wrong with levels of expenditure under Labour.

Maybe if you responded to those points instead of continually ignoring them, you might stand a better chance of convincing others of your opinions?

 

[pemma]

Like I said previously I know most of you are left leaning Labour supporter or out right left wingers so are not likely to agree with me at all. Pre 2008 Labour created an economy and public expenditure based on the huge tax receipts of the banks, when it all went wrong they went straight away and blamed the enormous deficit on the industry they had been so reliant on.

You were previously claiming if Labour win the next election then they'll wreck the economy using the 2008 recession as evidence.

However, what happened the last time the Conservatives had a majority for at least two consecutive terms? There was a recession and a number of industries were effectively ended in this country. Why do we currently import so many clothes from Asia? Answer is because a Conservative government in the 1980s made it impossible for most textile businesses based in the North of England to survive and yet the Conservatives supposedly support business.

By the same reasoning the Conservatives must be out of Downing Street in 2020 to prevent the economy being wrecked.

As for my political views when I posted some comments in a thread about Trade Unions someone accused me of being a Conservative Party advisor. I've voted in every General Election since I turned 18 and have never voted Conservative or Labour in one and I've certainly not voted for a party like the TUSC either.

I think the problem is you think of the Conservatives as the neutral middle party when really that's the Lib Dems and now the Conservatives aren't in Coalition with the Lib Dems we'll see government policy move more to the right.

 

[overthewater]

(a) Under the post-1997 Labour Govt, the Government debt/GDP ratio had in fact gone down (albeit not by a huge amount), until the international recession blew threw everything off course

Labour got debt down to its lowest levels in a very long time around 2001, Remember the 3G sale? all the money £22.47bn went on the debt.

It would have been this low in the first place if the Tories had not increased debt in the early 90s to be for tax cuts.

 

[Bodiddly]

I'm sure this lengthy debate will roll on and on with each and every new awful decision the Tories will produce. Let us not forget here that the Tories have the power to push through some very disturbing policies unhindered. Still nobody can answer where the 12 billion pounds of welfare cuts are to come from but wherever they conjure the magic figure from, millions of deserving people are going to be screwed over. I'm not talking about the very small minority workshy job dodgers who I have very little time and respect for but decent honest people down on their luck and desperately needing that helping hand to get them through the most difficult times of their lives. I'm talking about horrendous cases where people who are so obviously unfit for work being passed fit. It is truly sickening.
As a majority of benefits paid out are supplementing working income, more needs to be done to tackle the problem of why someone working doesn't get paid enough to survive without government help. This is all part of Cameron's 'Big Society' concept. A concept by the way, which has already failed miserably and will only get worse if the super incompetent Ian Duncan Smith is not removed from his job. A glib and shameless liar of a man who is single handedly setting out to wreck the welfare state in some kind of personal mission.
As always in the big welfare debate some people like to judge benefit scroungers on the basis of Channel 5 documentaries. We need to actually read some proper facts to get the true story on how Britain relies on benefits. The facts are out there, you just have to find them and we as a nation, need to stop vilifying our own people who are asking for a bit of help. I have never needed to rely on the state up to now but nobody knows what will happen in the future and would like to think that If I had to rely on my governments help, after all I've contributed over the years, I could get the help I needed without having to prove myself to them.

 

[pemma]

So Labour's problem was apparently they didn't have the support of the 65+ age group