UK election results.

C

csirl

Registered User
Messages
2,162
Looks like a hung parliament.

My view is that the UK electorate have voted for Conservative economic policies tempered by Liberal fairness. Will they get this?

A lot of the news reports suggest that the Queen may have a big part to play in the formation of the new Government - instigating shot-gun marriages between parties. Anyone any views on an unelected monarch having such influence?
 
csirl said:
Looks like a hung parliament.

My view is that the UK electorate have voted for Conservative economic policies tempered by Liberal fairness. Will they get this?

A lot of the news reports suggest that the Queen may have a big part to play in the formation of the new Government - instigating shot-gun marriages between parties. Anyone any views on an unelected monarch having such influence?
Click to expand...

I think it's a massive loss for Cameron more than anyone else. Given the apathy to the current government in the UK, Gerry Adams could have won that election. The fact that Cameron and the Tories couldn't muster an overall majority with an "open goal" is a very bad reflection.

And I'd say that's also a reflection on the Tory economic policies, they didn't particualry convince the electorate. From what I saw, there was a bit of a reality check in the last few days as to exactly what the substance of the Conservative Party's policies were and people got a bit nervous.

The formation of the government in this case is all a bit complicated AFAIK. The Queen may exhert some pressure for it to be sorted, but she can't get too involved in terms of the actual coalition that is formed. It's all in Brown's hands to start with and then the Parliaments.
 
I think it's a case of the curse of the last few decades - personality politics. Blair's labour managed a victory at the expense of policy - a terrible lie and disappointment to genuine left wing voters. A happy smiley slick funky leader is what they wanted and what they got. We got Bertie.

People have wised up a bit now but it looks to me that the tories and lib dems jumped on the image band wagon a little too late - meanwhile labour have put on their serious face.

The tories had a great chance and blew it but the real winners here could and should be the lib dems.

Not all bad news - looks like Peter Robinson will be no more in NI.
 
One thing I can't understand is why didn't the Afghanistan war become an election issue. The body bags are still coming home and it is not a very popular war.
 
Caveat said:
The tories had a great chance and blew it but the real winners here could and should be the lib dems.

Not all bad news - looks like Peter Robinson will be no more in NI.
Click to expand...

+1 on the last point, might be some hope up there after all.

It's a Pyrrhic win for the Lib Dems though. They have the power now in terms of just who is the next government, but they can't be happy with the fact that with complete apathy to Cameron and Brown, they're down 5 seats, especially with such a high turn out from voters.

And I suppose a war being faught hundreds of miles away isn't so much an issue when the immediate economic is the concern.
 
Considering the hard decisions that have to be made in the UK over the next 4 years they need a government with a 20-30 seat majority. In that context anything other than a Conservative-Lib.Dem government will be a disaster.
 
Given the apathy to the current government in the UK, Gerry Adams could have won that election.
Click to expand...
There's still a chance he might win!
They could form a rainbow coalition with Labour, Liberal Democrat, Democratic Unionist Party, Scottish National Party, Sinn Fein and Plaid Cymru to get an overall majority.
(Never again will a decision be made)
 
Dont see why Robinson out is such good news - a lot more hawkish figures about and Robinson was rather neutered by family issues, so a fairly weak DUP leader was more or less ideal as far as I could see (from a nationalist perspective).

I dont think the Westminster Elections mean that much to Norn Iron tbh.
 
On BBC News this morning, the various regional specific parties (Scotland, Wales, NI) were essentially doing a Jacky Healy Rae i.e. it will cost the Conservatives loads of ££££££ if they want support.
 
Purple said:
Considering the hard decisions that have to be made in the UK over the next 4 years they need a government with a 20-30 seat majority. In that context anything other than a Conservative-Lib.Dem government will be a disaster.
Click to expand...

Yes if Labour stay in power then total collapse of the bond market, currency and stocks guaranteed.

Brown was an economic disaster.

The UK's debt at 70-80% of GDP is close to double what it was when the IMF came knocking on the door in the mid 70s (why does every Labour term end in economic disaster?).

Add in the 'unfunded' public sector liabilies of close to 350% which did not exist anywhere near this level in the 70s and Brown goes down in history as the worst Prime Minister ever.

Add in the 'Keynesian' policies he kept going on about to the electorate without once explaining that it wasn't Keynesianism at all. Keynes said you save in the good times and spend that in the bad. He merely invented and printed fake money in the downturn as a substitute.

Borrowing from the future generation to try and pay for his re-election in the present. In the private sector you would get locked up for this type of activity.

The electorate is not economically educate enough to realise the difference between the deficit and debt. When Brown talked of halving the deficit over the next parliamentary term they actually thought he had a plan to tackle the debt problem. How far from the truth.

The electorate want their bloated public service and think they can afford it. Pure lies by Labour and the incompetent Brown.

When the tories started talking honestly about the tough measures required back in October their support fell.

There is only one party in the UK that has ever managed to run the economy successfully and that is the tories. Labour have always ran large deficits and screwed the country eventually.

Clegg knows the score. A dignified leader. Con-Lib the only economically viable solution to prevent a total collapase of the system.
 
Latrade said:
I think it's a massive loss for Cameron more than anyone else.
Click to expand...

What winning back the most seats of any conservative government since the 1930s?

Brown is the biggest loser. The history books will write a very sorry picture of his unelected term in office and his disasterous economic policies.

A public sector that went from 35% of GDP to 60% of GDP. Part of the North and Wales are 70% run from the public purse. How sad for these mostly Labour regions when the government finally runs out of money to support these societies. Then it will be all blamed on the 'nasty' tory party.

What a sad party Labour are, full of lies and false promises.
 
Hopefully the tories won't be dependant on the unionist support. Remember the last time the Tory party was dependent on the unionists. The 1980's wasn't a fun time in Ireland or the uk.
 
the lib dems will be part of the next govt but i cant understand how poorly theyve done on overall seats. In view of the fact that the genral public are so angry with govts everywhere it seems it at the end of the day the public will stick with the devil they know and will not opt for an alternative. Switching from labour to tory being the norm anyway
 
dockingtrade said:
the lib dems will be part of the next govt but i cant understand how poorly theyve done on overall seats. In view of the fact that the genral public are so angry with govts everywhere it seems it at the end of the day the public will stick with the devil they know and will not opt for an alternative. Switching from labour to tory being the norm anyway
Click to expand...

Under first past the post they got 10% of the seats. under Proportional representation they would have got 25%.

This is why the Lib Dems want PR introduced.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yorrick http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=1037828#post1037828
One thing I can't understand is why didn't the Afghanistan war become an election issue. The body bags are still coming home and it is not a very popular war.

Because mostly poor people join the army.
Click to expand...

And also because a lot more people die due to violent crime, drugs, poor medical care, traffic accidents etc. In a population as big as the UK, a few dozen deaths a year, happening in 1s and 2s, hardly registers.​
 
Yorrick said:
One thing I can't understand is why didn't the Afghanistan war become an election issue. The body bags are still coming home and it is not a very popular war.
Click to expand...

It's not a popular war but there is a pride in Britain in what their "boys" are doing. It's also not necessarily that unpopular a war, bear in mind that Britain has been hit by Islamic terrorists so there is a feeling that "something" needs to be done.

What I found interesting is how immigration was a major issue. There's been few comments in Ireland on Eastern Europeans coming in "taking our jobs" yet it is a near obsession amongst much of the poorer parts of the UK. Scary that UKIP and the BNP between them got 5% of the vote, that is one in 20 people supported their little Englander policies,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top