General Election 2015 - Thoughts/Predictions/Results

[EM2]

You seem to know a lot about the Bullindon Club. If it was as bad as all that, perhaps you can explain why the restaurants accepted the bookings? Why a group of easily identifiable students in fancy dress weren't perused back to their colleges and brought to justice by the police?

https://web.archive.org/web/20090806051215/http://www.oxfordstudent.com/ht2006wk0/Features/smashing_job_chaps:_exclusive_inside_look_at_bullingdon_club

Some edited highlights for you:

Last December, images of snivelling Bullingdon members were splashed all over the tabloids after all 17 members were arrested for wrecking the cellar of the 15th century pub, the White Hart, in Fyfi eld.

17 bottles of wine were smashed into the walls of the pub after the civility of a gourmet meal descended into a brawl, leaving a trail of debris that was compared by eye-witnesses to a scene from the blitz. The inebriated members started fi ghting, leaving one with a deep cut to the cheek, and the landlord recalls attempting to pull apart the fi ghting parties, only to have them set on each other once more, exclaiming, “Sorry old chap, just a bit of high spirits.

Four members, including the ringleader, Alexander Fellowes • Princess Diana’s nephew • spent the night in jail.

Any member would no doubt be horrifi ed by such a comparison; the Bullingdon is a ‘dining club’ not a ‘drinking society’, regardless of the fact that our source openly admits that they regularly get kicked out of restaurants for rowdiness before the main course arrives.

That’s why Alexander Fellowes, at the White Hart, tipped the waitress £200, on top of all of the members paying for the damage infl icted. Our source described the White Hart landowner as “unfair” for reporting the matter to the police and as having “no sense of humour”. Most people, he adds, are willing to let such matters slide in exchange for the remuneration on offer.

Although the eyewitnesses at the White Hart described the diners’ degeneration as appearing highly ritualised, our source denies that the Bullingdon’s outbursts are intended. He claims that, hard done by members always “intend to have a civilised meal”, but the historical precedent set by former Bullingdon generations means that somehow, after a couple of bottles of Dom Perignon, their expensive primal instincts are released.

That is not to say though that they wake up after a night of debauchery, in their vomit stained tailcoats, with intense feelings of regret - according to our source, the night at the White Hart was “objectively funny”. The Bullingdon seems to be guided by various strangely distorted moral ideas. Along with rule number one - ‘it’s quite fine to wreak havoc, provided you can pay for it’ - it seems to currently have a slightly peculiar drugs policy.

 

[table38]

So either you know you were wrong in this situation or your posting that picture was irrelevant. Good to know.

Ah, a lovely false dichotomy The real answer is neither.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Ah, a lovely false dichotomy The real answer is neither.

Either you posted the picture thinking he wasn't a hypocrite so it was irrelevant, or you posted it thinking he was and are wrong about it. There's no middle-ground.

Anyway, I'm done with this.

 

[47802]

exactly - anyone who says they can predict the result is making it up. It is really very close and very exciting.

There will be one more push tomorrow by the Tory propaganda sheets to win it for their placemen. The papers today were scandalous and a disgrace to journalism.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


:

Well except the Express has gone very UKIP, which of course used to be Tory until the owner went mental (sorry I mean UKIP)

On a constituency basis I would love to see Balls loose his seat, unfortunately I live about a mile from his constituency so cannot help with that but have some friends who can, and for Farage and Salmond not be successful.

 

[table38]

https://web.archive.org/web/20090806051215/http://www.oxfordstudent.com/ht2006wk0/Features/smashing_job_chaps:_exclusive_inside_look_at_bullingdon_club

Some edited highlights for you:

Great exposé. Pity this all happened 21 years after Cameron graduated.

 

[DarloRich]

Well except the Express has gone very UKIP, which of course used to be Tory until the owner went mental (sorry I mean UKIP)

On a constituency basis I would love to see Balls loose his seat, unfortunately I live about a mile from his constituency so cannot help with that but have some friends who can, and for Farage and Salmond not be successful.

I dont even class the express as a newspaper! The lack of objective coverage in the majority of the daily press was shameful.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Great exposé. Pity this all happened 21 years after Cameron graduated.

Quote from in that Tab article notes that the club was banned in 1927 after a member smashed all the windows in a quad when drunk.

It has precedent.

 

[EM2]

Great exposé. Pity this all happened 21 years after Cameron graduated.

And?
The Bullingdon Club has been in existence for 150 years. They have a tradition of this kind of behaviour. Are you suggesting that they didn't, for the brief period that Cameron, Osborne and Johnson were members?

 

[table38]

And?
The Bullingdon Club has been in existence for 150 years. They have a tradition of this kind of behaviour. Are you suggesting that they didn't, for the brief period that Cameron, Osborne and Johnson were members?

I've no idea. I know someone got arrested 21 years after Cameron left, because you just told me. Did Cameron, Osborne or Johnson get arrested? Why not - it'd be a cinch to trace them through their college.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I've no idea. I know someone got arrested 21 years after Cameron left, because you just told me. Did Cameron, Osborne or Johnson get arrested? Why not - it'd be a cinch to trace them through their college.

Did you read the piece? A quote from a member says the vast majority don't press charges or even call the police because of pay-offs.

The only reason that piece was written was because that time they got unlucky.

 

[TheNewNo2]

Given the desire to reform the Lords, perhaps it's time to alter the way things are done quite radically.

1) Change voting for the Commons to be Single Transferrable Vote in each constituency. That way every constituency is guaranteed an MP who is at least palatable to half the electorate.
2) Make the Lords be appointed by the parties in proportion to the first choice votes throughout the entire country.

Totally pie in the sky, but it preserves the "local representative" requirement while also allowing for proportional representation.



On a sidenote, twelve hours until I cast my ballot and I actually don't know who I want to vote for. Labour are likely to hold the seat easily, so I'm inclined to vote either Green or for a local candidate.

 

[EM2]

I know someone got arrested 21 years after Cameron left, because you just told me. Did Cameron, Osborne or Johnson get arrested? Why not - it'd be a cinch to trace them through their college.

So you can do whatever like as long as you don't get arrested?
Whatever you get up to is OK, because someone decides not to pursue the matter or press charges against you?

 

[table38]

Did you read the piece? A quote from a member says the vast majority don't press charges or even call the police because of pay-offs.

The only reason that piece was written was because that time they got unlucky.

Ah, so they are guilty by association, even though you have no evidence of anything Cameron, Osborne or Johnson did.

More of Labour's "sterile rhetoric of class warfare"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So you can do whatever like as long as you don't get arrested?
Whatever you get up to is OK, because someone decides not to pursue the matter or press charges against you?

So what specifically did Cameron, Osborne and Johnson actually do?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Ah, so they are guilty by association, even though you have no evidence of anything Cameron, Osborne or Johnson did.

More of Labour's "sterile rhetoric of class warfare"

I am not a Labour supporter.

And alright, here's an equivalent for you: someone runs away to join ISIS, but we have no evidence of any wrongdoing at all. Clearly we should totally ignore that and not think anything of it, right? It's not like it's indicative of:

Temperament
Belief
Ideology
Likely behaviour that group engages in
etc.

This "innocent until proven guilty" that the right selectively engages in when it suits them but not when it doesn't is disingenuous at best, and downright hypocritical at worst. This is not a court of law; this is looking at someone who is the PM and looking at what sort of person they are or likely are.

 

[DarloRich]

So what specifically did Cameron, Osborne and Johnson actually do?

Even if they did nothing and sat reading the bible throughout any dinners it is a good opportunity to show how unlike real people they actually are.

I dont know anyone who joined some kind of proto masons posho group at university. I know a few who had to dress up in white tails. I know plenty more who just went to university, drank a bit, got a degree and then a real job.

 

[EM2]

Ah, so they are guilty by association, even though you have no evidence of anything Cameron, Osborne or Johnson did.

More of Labour's "sterile rhetoric of class warfare"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So what specifically did Cameron, Osborne and Johnson actually do?

How's this for starters?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/camerons-cronies-the-bullingdon-clubs-class-of-87-436192.html

Yet the "high jinks" that took place on the night the photo was taken (at Canterbury Quad, Christchurch) are up there with the best of them. At some point after the dinner, the group walked through Oxford when one (thought to be Fergusson, though exact recollections differ) threw a plant pot through the window of a restaurant.

The burglar alarm was activated and police descended with sniffer dogs. Six of the group were collared and spent the night at Cowley police station before being released without charge.

"David Cameron was one of the four people who escaped," a witness says. "If it wasn't for his foresight, he'd have spent a night in the clink.

 

[table38]

I am not a Labour supporter.

And alright, here's an equivalent for you: someone runs away to join ISIS, but we have no evidence of any wrongdoing at all. Clearly we should totally ignore that and not think anything of it. It's not like it's indicative of:

Temperament
Belief
Ideology
Likely behaviour that group engages in
etc.

So as I said, guilt by association. Very enlightened!

This "innocent until proven guilty" that the right selectively engages in when it suits them is disingenuous at best, and downright hypocritical at worst.

It's a basic human right.

 

[TheKnightWho]

So as I said, guilt by association. Very enlightened!


It's a basic human right.

This is not a court of law. Try again. I have explained why we have to make do with what we have. Plus I can say without doubt that anyone willing to join a banned society known for that sort of behaviour knows full-well the implications of doing so, and that they're clearly willing to accept that's part of the deal.

And I'd love to see your irrefutable evidence of Miliband's toffishness. It's a basic human right that you can't insinuate it until it's proven, after all, right?

 

[table38]

How's this for starters?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/camerons-cronies-the-bullingdon-clubs-class-of-87-436192.html

That just sounds like what the rugby club did when I was at Uni. If the witness was so sure they could identify Cameron, why wasn't he at least arrested?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This is not a court of law. Try again.

Yes it's a Railway Forum... not sure what point you are trying to make!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And I'd love to see your irrefutable evidence of Miliband's toffishness. It's a basic human right that you can't insinuate it until it's proven, after all, right?

Never said he was.

 

[TheKnightWho]

That just sounds like what the rugby club did when I was at Uni. If the witness was so sure they could identify Cameron, why wasn't he at least arrested?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes it's a Railway Forum... not sure what point you are trying to make!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Never said he was.

The point I'm trying to make is that the standards are different. Innocent until proven guilty would apply if he was standing trial, but he isn't: we have to make do with what we have and that's the evidence provided. He's quite clearly someone happy to adopt the image of a group that does that sort of thing, and the chances of that behaviour stopping for 3 years is near-nil. Especially when Boris, a contemporary, has practically admitted they did it.

And yes, you have, but I'm bored of that argument.

 

[Johnuk123]

Today they said on Sky that one of Milibands first jobs will be to deal with Putin.

I imagine the Kremlin will be quite worried about the prospect of Miliband pinning Putin up against the wall by his shirt collar and dealing with him.

This country hasn't got a lot of standing in the world anymore compared to what we once had, Miliband will reinforce that view.

 

[Darandio]

Miliband will reinforce that view.

Just like Cameron has for the past few years. So what is the solution?

 

[table38]

Just like Cameron has for the past few years. So what is the solution?

Farage!

Only kidding. or am I?

 

[Johnuk123]

Just like Cameron has for the past few years. So what is the solution?

This country simply doesn't have one politician that could go on a world stage and shake things up, we just don't produce people like that any more.

 

[TheKnightWho]

This country simply doesn't have one politician that could go on a world stage and shake things up, we just don't produce people like that any more.

We've had 2 that really stood out in the last century. We're not due another for about 10 years at that rate.

Honestly, "we just don't produce people like that any more". You couldn't make it up.

 

[EM2]

That just sounds like what the rugby club did when I was at Uni. If the witness was so sure they could identify Cameron, why wasn't he at least arrested?

Who knows? My guess it's because in those sort of societies, you don't 'grass'.

 

[me123]

Quite right please clear some room in the Scottish parliament so the MP's from the rest of the UK can come up and vote on Scottish matters.

The proposed reduction in voting rights for Scottish MP's at Westminster is or should be where the vote is about something that if it involved Scotland would be a matter for the Scottish parliament. It is not so much excluding the Scottish MP's as that part of their role being carried out by their Scottish parliament equivalent.

The problem is that a lot of what happens in Westminster does in some way affect the devolved parliament in Holyrood, even on devolved issues. For example, it's too simplistic to say that Scottish MPs can't vote on NHS funding issues, because that impacts on the Barnett formula.

Let's assume, for example, a government wanted to cut the NHS budget and use the money to increase defence spending. Potentially, EVEL would not allow Scottish MPs to vote on the health funding. But because defence is a reserved issue, the money cut from the NHS budget would mean that the devolved assembly in Holyrood would have a cut in Barnett consequentials, although we'd seemingly be getting the same money overall (in return for decreased health spending we would benefit from increased defence expenditure). In this scenario, Scottish MPs have been denied a right to prevent/support the cuts, and the MSPs are powerless. They can, of course, choose to protect the NHS, but would have to cut elsewhere in their own budget in order to do so. No Scottish elected officials would have their say in this hypothetical cut to Holyrood's budget.

I agree that the current system is silly, but EVEL needs to be carefully considered. Apart from the fact that it (unfortunately) sounds a bit like a BNP slogan, it doesn't necessarily make things fairer. I fully agree that Scottish MPs should not be voting on matter that truly do not affect Scotland (I'd rather my MP was working for my interests), but a blanket ban on devolved issues is perhaps going to cause more problems than people immediately realise. I'm sure we all have our own opinions as to how to answer the West Lothian question.

Of course, with the SNP in play, EVEL could take an interesting turn. If I take the current prediction on May2015.com as an example, we're looking at:
Con: 273
Lab: 268
SNP: 56
Lib: 28
DUP: 8
Sinn Fein: 5
PC: 3
SDLP: 3
UKIP: 2
Green: 1
Respect: 1

Theoretically, SNP could support a Labour government here, but it's a narrow majority (and would likely need the help of broader support to work).

Now, let's look at England alone, and see what we get.

Con: 265 (=273-1 Scottish seat-7 Welsh seats)
Lab: 239 (=268-1 Scottish seat-28 Welsh seats)
Lib: 25 (=28-1 Scottish seat-2 Welsh seats)
UKIP: 2
Green: 1
Respect: 1
(also removed 56 SNP and 3 PC seats).

With 267 required for a majority in England alone, the Tories almost have it under their control. Working with UKIP on "devolved" issues (where I suspect there would be a great deal of agreement) would have them sorted by, once again, a narrow majority. Alternatively, Con/Dems have proven their ability to work together, could they push a bit more out of it on a few issues?

What would happen if EVEL passed then? Would we see in effect two parliaments in a parliament? Lab/SNP governing, but the majority of votes on English issues lying squarely with the Con/Dem former coalition government. Could be interesting, certainly would be unchartered territory.

 

[DarloRich]

Today they said on Sky that one of Milibands first jobs will be to deal with Putin.

I imagine the Kremlin will be quite worried about the prospect of Miliband pinning Putin up against the wall by his shirt collar and dealing with him.

This country hasn't got a lot of standing in the world anymore compared to what we once had, Miliband will reinforce that view.

But what do you think happens when Dave goes to a meeting with, say, the Eu? They just ignore him. What do you think Putin does? He ignores him. The Americans humour us and the rest laugh behind their hands at us.

We aren't a powerful country. Nothing is going to change that, regardless of who gets into number 10

 

[Johnuk123]

But what do you think happens when Dave goes to a meeting with, say, the Eu? They just ignore him. What do you think Putin does? He ignores him. The Americans humour us and the rest laugh behind their hands at us.

We aren't a powerful country. Nothing is going to change that, regardless of who gets into number 10

I agree with that, we aren't a powerful country, we're living on past glories, but Miliband is even worse than call me Dave when it comes to statesmanship.

 

[DarloRich]

I agree with that, we aren't a powerful country, we're living on past glories, but Miliband is even worse than call me Dave when it comes to statesmanship.

but he has less experience on the direct handling of world affairs. I am sure Dave was just as bad when he started out! He is little better now!