Cogs Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Sadly it's not that unlikely. It seems to me that the Labour voters just stayed at home last week, rather than switching to another party. If, by the time of the GE, they think that things are getting better (whether or not they actually are), they will vote Labour again. They could well win, even if it's with a smaller majority. It depends how scary the Tories are really. Considering they are ahead in the polls they actually aren't very popular and Cameron is not widely liked. A hint of them reverting to their old ways could frighten the horses. Probably not enough for them to win though...but a smaller majority than they are expecting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone_Twin Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Brown's "scorched earth" policy makes about as much sense as 9/11 conspiracy theories and the widespread view (here) that the Tories were deliberately trying to lose elections.Its pretty childish to say every decision you disagree with is more "scorched earth". A more appropriate example of that would have been Maggie's "strong pound" approach to controlling inflation that burned through 10% of British industry a year for three years and left us with our spiv-estate agent-double glazing salesman economy today. In any case, Brown thinks he is going to win the next election. Just to be clear I'm not saying that there is a deliberate policy of "scorched earth" only that brown will do ANYTHING to stay in power or at least protect some kind of historical legacy for himself and if possible the labour party if that meansaking terrible choices now and leaving future govts to clear up thats fine. Browns mind has been so warped by years of politics his priorities are 1)Himself 2)PLP 3)The UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 Brown's "scorched earth" policy makes about as much sense as 9/11 conspiracy theories and the widespread view (here) that the Tories were deliberately trying to lose elections.Its pretty childish to say every decision you disagree with is more "scorched earth". A more appropriate example of that would have been Maggie's "strong pound" approach to controlling inflation that burned through 10% of British industry a year for three years and left us with our spiv-estate agent-double glazing salesman economy today. In any case, Brown thinks he is going to win the next election. IS BROWN INTENT ON A 'SCORCHED EARTH' ECONOMIC POLICY? PM plans scorched earth - Tories Clearly it's only the nutters on here who think it's a scorched earth policy. I have no love for Thatcher she was useless who got lucky with oil and wasted all the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazuya Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Browns mind has been so warped by years of politics his priorities are 1)Himself 2)PLP 3)The UK. He always was a retard but being in Blairs shadow for 10 years has had a profound affect on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 IS BROWN INTENT ON A 'SCORCHED EARTH' ECONOMIC POLICY? PM plans scorched earth - Tories Clearly it's only the nutters on here who think it's a scorched earth policy. I have no love for Thatcher she was useless who got lucky with oil and wasted all the money. Oh, you found a comment article in The Daily Express and a quote from Alan Duncan! I consider myself rebuked. GLOOM LIFTS AS HOUSE PRICES SURGE AT THEIR HIGHEST RATE IN 7 YEARS. Maybe you should try thinking for yourself instead of swallowing talking points spewed out by politicians? You could end up being Hazel Blears if you aren't careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Just to be clear I'm not saying that there is a deliberate policy of "scorched earth" only that brown will do ANYTHING to stay in power or at least protect some kind of historical legacy for himself and if possible the labour party if that meansaking terrible choices now and leaving future govts to clear up thats fine.Browns mind has been so warped by years of politics his priorities are 1)Himself 2)PLP 3)The UK. Well thats a slightly different thing. I still think it is intended as rhetoric for "stuff we don't agree with" from the Tories. I think some people are taking it a bit too seriously. From their point of view it may not (although we don't know for sure) be what they would rather was happening in mid-2009 prior to the implementation of their policies (whatever they are) in 2010. But if I was going to take over managing the England football team I'd say Capello's obsession with man-to-man marking was "scorched earth" as well but thats really another way of saying I prefer the zonal system and I think he is wrong and it would be a pain to unpick. I dunno, I just dislike the increasing Americanisation of our politics where anything we disagree with (and I do disagree with Gordon at the moment and have done for quite a while) is "evil", "scorched earth", under malign orders from the Soviet Union/Israel (delete as applicable) and so on. Just wish we could have a grown up discussion occasionally without "Zanu Labour" et al making an appearance. Venting is good but this forum is turning into a veritable heat sink. When did it become the thing for British people to be incontinent with their emotions like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE BALD MAN Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Well thats a slightly different thing. I still think it is intended as rhetoric for "stuff we don't agree with" from the Tories. From their point of view it may not (although we don't know for sure) be what they would rather was happening in mid-2009 prior to the implementation of their policies (whatever they are) in 2010.But if I was going to take over managing the England football team I'd say Capello's obsession with man-to-man marking was "scorched earth" as well but thats really another way of saying I prefer the zonal system and I think he is wrong and it would be a pain to unpick. I dunno, I just dislike the increasing Americanisation of our politics where anything we disagree with (and I do disagree with Gordon at the moment and have done for quite a while) is "evil", "scorched earth", under malign orders from the Soviet Union/Israel (delete as applicable) and so on. Just wish we could have a grown up discussion occasionally without "Zanu Labour" et al making an appearance. Venting is good but this forum is turning into a veritable heat sink. Could it be that our totally unelected leader who by his insistence on carry on as prime minister for personal gain and gains for his spineless money grabbing MPs is single handedly destryoying democracy in this country? There is no grown up discussions because Gordon and Zanu Labour refuse to listen to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone_Twin Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Well thats a slightly different thing. I still think it is intended as rhetoric for "stuff we don't agree with" from the Tories. From their point of view it may not (although we don't know for sure) be what they would rather was happening in mid-2009 prior to the implementation of their policies (whatever they are) in 2010.But if I was going to take over managing the England football team I'd say Capello's obsession with man-to-man marking was "scorched earth" as well but thats really another way of saying I prefer the zonal system and I think he is wrong and it would be a pain to unpick. I dunno, I just dislike the increasing Americanisation of our politics where anything we disagree with (and I do disagree with Gordon at the moment and have done for quite a while) is "evil", "scorched earth", under malign orders from the Soviet Union/Israel (delete as applicable) and so on. Just wish we could have a grown up discussion occasionally without "Zanu Labour" et al making an appearance. Venting is good but this forum is turning into a veritable heat sink. I agree with much of what you say but truly malign leaders are not unheard of and all of them had their motives sometimes what they genunely beleived was "good". For brown he may genuinely believe all that "hardworking families" rhetoric but if you combine it with what seems to me (and I have met the man) to be an already flawed personality hideously warped by a life in politics and a decade in blair's shadow I think you have recipe for something truly dangerous. Scorched earth is an emotive term but politics has always been an emotive topic and its hardly a new trend to use emotive language. (cap in hand to the IMF, do nothing party, party of sleaze). In my opinion S.E it is what we are going to end up with regardless of whether that is a deliberate action or as a by product of browns desperate grab for power/legacy. Perhaps I am just colatoral damage in brown's war and should just put up with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jister1 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 How about this for a nightmare scenario?The economy picks up slightly in August/September due to all the QE and other policies and right there Gordon decides to have a GE. Remember, all he needs is a couple of months of good data and a HUGE PR team on the BBC to spin it all. The sheeple think he's saved everyone and they vote for him, then a few weeks after the economy crashes all to hell and we're stuck with him for another 4-5 years. That scares the hell out me. Yes....quite! A great time to sell an unwanted property though...Nice get out clause for those of us who have a little something to give back Lets hope it happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagsos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Do you really think Brown is in charge of decision making now? Mandelson and his masters control the country; Brown is his glove puppet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LazyPeon Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 So maybe 'Scorched Earth Policies' isn't the most pertinent phrase to use. Something more like 'Stuffing A Dead Fish Behind The Radiator as You Leave Policies'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggggy Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 So maybe 'Scorched Earth Policies' isn't the most pertinent phrase to use.Something more like 'Stuffing A Dead Fish Behind The Radiator as You Leave Policies'? frozen thin slices of turd under the carpet ..................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Could it be that our totally unelected leader who by his insistence on carry on as prime minister for personal gain and gains for his spineless money grabbing MPs is single handedly destryoying democracy in this country? There is no grown up discussions because Gordon and Zanu Labour refuse to listen to anyone. Its happened 13 times in 105 years. As Tom Jones would say, its not unusual. 2007 Gordon Brown Labour 1990 John Major Conservative 1976 James Callaghan Labour 1963 Sir Alec Douglas-Home Conservative 1957 Harold Macmillan Conservative 1955 Sir Anthony Eden Conservative 1940 Winston Churchill Conservative 1937 Neville Chamberlain Conservative 1923 Stanley Baldwin Conservative 1916 David Lloyd George Liberal 1908 Herbert H. Asquith Liberal 1905 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal 1902 Arthur Balfour Conservative Can we stop pretending this isn't a recognised part of our system? I think it should be reformed by this is hardly unprecedented. Do you think we should have had a General Election in 1940? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warwick-Watcher Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Long-term, the self-destruction of the Labour party might or might not be a good thing. But the destruction of the Labour party that we see before us now would be a very good thing.Nick Clegg should be setting up an 'assylum centre' to cope with a possible flood of defections by Labour MPs... Perhaps what may happen is a re-shaping of British politics, where we do indeed get a stronger centre left group (Lib Dem/Social Democrat) comprising middle ground Labour plus the Lib Dems. Then there'll be the rump of the old socialists (like Prescott, Brown, Michael Martin type characters) and the Scots Nats (really Socialists with even bigger egos) who'll be forever out of power (hopefully). On the right there'll be the Tories and the odd moderate Nationalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skinty Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Long-term, the self-destruction of the Labour party might or might not be a good thing. But the destruction of the Labour party that we see before us now would be a very good thing. You need a strong opposition if you want a strong government. There must have been a time when Labour were a strong party but not for several decades now. They are weak willed, whether it's to the unions, the banks or the focus groups. The problem with UK politics is that it has been dominated by two parties who take it for granted that they will be elected when the other loses power. We need to see Labour destroyed, allowing other parties to get a chance of being the main opposition and for the Tory party to realise that the destruction of Labour does not give them a free-ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Spart Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 What prog was this? This one . . . Link Its available to watch on 4oD if you missed it and will broadcast on C4 again later this week: Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadtoruin Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Its happened 13 times in 105 years.As Tom Jones would say, its not unusual. 2007 Gordon Brown Labour 1990 John Major Conservative 1976 James Callaghan Labour 1963 Sir Alec Douglas-Home Conservative 1957 Harold Macmillan Conservative 1955 Sir Anthony Eden Conservative 1940 Winston Churchill Conservative 1937 Neville Chamberlain Conservative 1923 Stanley Baldwin Conservative 1916 David Lloyd George Liberal 1908 Herbert H. Asquith Liberal 1905 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal 1902 Arthur Balfour Conservative Can we stop pretending this isn't a recognised part of our system? I think it should be reformed by this is hardly unprecedented. Do you think we should have had a General Election in 1940? +1 Yup, last time I looked Brown was an elected MP and that's all he needed. And EVERY person who voted labour last time knew full well they were getting Brown (the tories even electioneered on the fact). I don't support Brown and think he's been crap as PM, but he's not unelected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.