It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

General Election 2010

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
There is no need for any "coalition" with the result as it stands. Nick Clegg has stated that the Conservatives have the mandate, hence he is unlikely to back Labour, even more so with Brown at the helm.

It appears, at this time, that the Conservatives will be forming the next Government probably with backing from the Lib Dems (not a formal coalition) in return for electoral/constitutional reform, which the Tories are open to anyway.

Plaid Cymru seem to leaning towards the Tories too as well as some NI parties, so they could form a workable majority alot easier than Brown ever could.




posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   
as a thought, most of the constituencies have had rejected ballot papers for reasons like

2 votes
an identifying mark
no vote
etc
each constituency has had between 200 - 600+ rejected ballots add that up for the total number of constituencies (650) plus the number of people who couldnt get to vote....

thats a lot of "missing" votes

what difference could those votes have made ?

just a thought



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by warsawprice
 


Don't try to claim some sort of rigging was going on.

Some people are idots and don't do it properly and some do it delibarately to spoil the ballot and have a protest.

The counters are people like you and me (I was invited to be one in lasts year EU election) independantly scrutinised and watched by ALL candidates, of which any can demand a recount if they feel it was unfair.

Spoilt ballots are spoilt ballots.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
The Tories are NOT open to election reform. They have said it would not be on the table in any deal with the Lib Dems.

If that is the case, the Lib Dems likely will form a coalition with Labour. It is also thought that the Conservatives might quietly want this so that the cuts that have to be made don't have to be done by them, and then they can take the next election, whenever that might be.

The Lib Dems have made it clear they will only work with the Conservatives if the Conservatives will work in the interests of the country, and not the party. They are just reporting that as far as the finances go, the Lib Dems are much more aligned with Labour.

Any way you look at it, the Conservatives are bad news. They don't really want change, they don't want electoral reform. So much for leaving behind "the old politics"!!


[edit on 7-5-2010 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


maybe ive put across what i mean in the wrong way
i didnt mean to infer a fix or rigged ballots i was merely contemplating the difference those votes may have made

i agree, spoilt ballots are just that , and that people get it wrong intentionally or not but were looking at 120000 to 360000 + unregistered votes, all im saying is thats a LOT
then add that to the number who wanted to vote but couldnt and you get where im coming from,

peace



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by warsawprice
 


Ah, ok. Sorry!

I agree, the amount of registered voters compared to the population is low, but that isn't the systems fault. People have a responsibility to register themselves. If they be too lazy or stupid to do so, then maybe it is better they don't vote


As for the spolit ballots, its a long standing British tradition as some sort of protest to do so, due to the lack of "none of the above".



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


none of the above would have got my vote !!!!

lol

"majority victory goes to ....none of the above"
now theres a thought haha



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Indeed it is a shame that so few vote. People should take more interest in the running of their country, just think how different the last few elections would have been if all those who were apathetic had taken an interest and voted. This country could have gotten rid of Labour so much sooner.

-Cauch1



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Cauch1
 


I think the tories never put someone against the blair and thats the reason. Labour is a real nightmare party of nanny state puke.

I just wonder will the tories be the same, or let people live there lifes.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Well that is why I support the conservatives, because they are less interfering. With Labour it has reached the point that they are trying to think and decide for the people as much as possible. That is part of what has caused society and this country, because noone is allowed to think for themselves or trust others anymore.

-Cauch1



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Well I hope Cameron is a man of his word, as he's already promised to scrap ID cards and get rid of New Labours obsession with survelliance. But unfortunately it might not be as easy as he claims and it will no doubt be very costly.



Although the Tories have said before that they would scrap the cards and the National Identity Register if they came to power, to repeal the Act would imply a much wider dismantling of the entire system of linked government databases currently being built in Britain by largely overseas computer companies such as US giant IBM.


He's already failed on his promise of a referendum on the EU treaty, so I wouldn't be surprised if he goes back on his word. I guess we'll just have to hope & wait & see.

www.bristol247.com...

ID Cards - Why Cameron won't deliver on his promise to scrap them.
pjcjournal.wordpress.com...

www.sott.net...


[edit on 7-5-2010 by kindred]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 


This is really interesting, but I was a little surprised by Clegg's statement this morning. Given Mervyn King's now infamous statement about how the next government is likely to be forced to impose such unpopular austerity measures that they will lose the subsequent election(s), and given that the Lib Dem's holy grail is Proportional Representation/Electoral Reform, why didn't he simply challenge both parties to join him on that - it would have been win/win for the Lib/Dems - especially come the next election if it were in a PR format, whoever they allied themselves with for a year or two. As it is now, he's made it very difficult to turn down opposition to PR from the tories and attempt to assist Labour, and indeed arguably made it easier for the (many) anti-PR tories to oppose a Lib/Dem coallition - no?

Also, can anybody explain exactly why the tories fear PR, as a). The 'First Past The Post' system is clearly now failing to deliver what it was meant to guarantee - a decisive victor, b). They gained a solid PR vote share (Tory 36%, Labour 29%, Lib/Dem 23% - correct at time of writing - some election results not yet in), and c). The big Lib/Dem gains that corroded the Tory electoral campaign were arguably boosted by the Tory opposition to electoral reform supported by Lib/Dems - votes they [edit: the 'tories] may have kept/gained otherwise, and another raison-d'etre removed for the Lib/Dems - no?





[edit on 7-5-2010 by curioustype]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 


Seems, from Camerons statement earlier, that your assertion they aren't open to reform is somewhat off the mark.

I'll stick to my guns, a Con Government with Lib support in return for this and other concessions. A deal is a do-able and much more likely than a Lab-Lib pact forming.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Cauch1
 


Not sure it's fair to say "so few vote". We had a 71% turnout in my area.

If people aren't registered than thats their own fault. Do remember that the total UK population of 60 odd million isn't the population elligible to vote. It is quite a bit lower.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
The Libs and The Cons are going to have a chat later.

Also, Clegg has a meeting with his party tommorow, they'll probably come to a collective decision.

Also Jhon Major has said how The Torries giving in a-touch to the Lib's, was 'worth the sacrifice.'

we'll see.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
The Lib-Dems are Left-Wing and Pro-Europe. As such, it seems unlikely the Lib-Dems will work with the Tories. The Lib-Dems are much closer ideologically to Labour.

Also Labour has previously flirted with the possibility of PR. As such, they are more likely to concede PR to the Lib-Dems, which is the only hope for the country. The FPTP system is a disaster.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I'm expecting a deal by Sunday evening in order to kick start the FTSE on Monday.

Not sure about the electoral reform, but I expect a concession on the economy and a couple of other areas - possibly a cabinet seat for Clegg as some kind of Minister without portfolio.

I would love for Vince Cable to have a joint hand in the treasury as well - the man is a genius and Jack Osbourne comes across as an arrogant git.

Time will tell.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


For me the one good thing that may come out of this complete and utter farce is that hopefully the LibDems can persuade Cameron to accept Vince Cable as some sort of economic advisor possibly with a cabinet role.
The man is indeed a genius and is one of the few current politicians that has gone though all the recent controversy and come out of it with his integrity intact.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Oops, double post.

[edit on 7/5/10 by Freeborn]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Well... Seems that the Lib - Con talks are over for today, and shall commence again tommorow.

I heard that they have up to MAY 25th to form a Goverment.

Currently, my guess they will form a coalition and are working on the economic policy so that they can stabalise the Stock Market on Monday.

But who can tell... Their tight lipped for now.

[edit on 7/5/10 by Esrom Escutcheon Esquire]




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join