Labour On Target To Win Historic 4th General Election

[Catch22]

Who exactly is 'they'? Please tell.

If I told you I'd have to kill you

The Media are King Makers, look who owns the media and there's your answer, Italy is a prime example of the process.

[unamerican]

If I told you I'd have to kill you

The Media are King Makers, look who owns the media and there's your answer, Italy is a prime example of the process.

US is worse, here is getting like the US.

Do you know that the Labour Party agreed not to change their policy on the Euro without first consulting Murdoch,

but of course , we live in the best democracy in the world.

[Guest The Dude]

Not voted Labour since the "Winter of Discontent" always voted Conservative, apart from the last election when I voted LibDem [dispite them having a leader that makes them unelectable]And nodoubt I'll vote the same next time. Only thing I had against New Labour in 1997 was that I just knew Blaire was a two faced in sincere tw@t if ever I saw one. Of course back then I did not know that he would be the murdering b@st@rd that he turned out to be.

Ken Clark was the only candidate that would have tempted me back to vote Conservative. Davis and Fox are right wing establishment types ready to jump in bed with the control freaks running the asylum. And Cameron is just another Blaire like clone, no dout with the same tendencies to send us down the road to a "Totalitarian State" like Davies and Fox.

Like I keep saying "they" make sure you don't really have real choices.

I reckon Cameron will end up leading the Tories, and nodoubt they will get into power the same way Nu Labour did, not because they are particulary like but because the sitting government are dispised. Nothing in politics really changes no matter whatever silver tounged New Deal is promised by the establish two party fix.

Yup...I agree....Cameron will probably lead the Tories....a shame really...Clarke was the only one who had a scintilla of me ever voting Tory....and it's a slim one at that.....Why don't the Tories wake up...WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER BLAIR CLONE like Cameron. I have to say I actually despise Cameron even now....like I mentioned in a previous post , he is the David Beckham of politics.....BORING and STALE

[BoredTrainBuilder]

but of course , we live in the best democracy in the world.

Not the best. Just the least worst.

[Spoony]

Ken Clarke was the worst choice for leader. Yes hes a good speaker and debater. But mostly the only people he appeals to are traditional Conservative voters. The average voter or Labour voter would not vote tory if he was in charge simply because he harks back to the old days which tory fans loved but most Labour voters hated. He is old skool and thats a bad thing. They would have associated him with the poll tax and everything bad tory (as unfair as that is because it was before he was chancellor). Plus hes too old! - Same age as Michael Howard who is stepping down because hes too old! Ken Clarke would have lost them an election for sure, hes pro europe!

I don't think the next leader needs to be anything special anyway considering Labours record on crime and education and virtually no delivery of any of their pre-election manifesto. They are quite happily buggering it all up for themselves.

Edited October 18, 2005 by Spoony

[unamerican]

Not the best. Just the least worst.

Better than canada , holland , denmark . iceland , etc etc

you really believe that after all BLAIR has done to prove to you its a sham ?

[Guest growl]

I wonder if the next vote in two days times for the Tory leadership will generate such a hot thread as this.

I'm quite surprised actually...and its only Tuesday.

Who said us Tories were irrelevent

[Marina]

With the shock defeat of Ken Clarke and house prices again rising is it time to conceed that another election will be won by NuLabour? After all Ken was the big hitter, the rest are just wallys.

Total bolleaux.

Ken Clarke defeat was obvious and widely predicted. Ken a big hitter? Not big enough apparently.

Recent program shown within Newsnight showed the candidates for the Tory leadership on a screen to an audience selected to represent all groups - old, young, black, asian, white, middle-class, working class etc etc. The market researcher hosting it was an American chap. As they listened to the candidates making speeches and being questioned - the researcher asked questions and they answered them using a little pad - turn it clockwise to show approval - anti-clockwise for disapproval.

The results were astonishing. At the beginning the poll of the audience showed pretty much what the general perception was i.e. it was a battle between Davis and Clarke. By the end 98% were voting for Cameron. He seems to be able to touch people - all people regardless of whether they are natural Labour or Tory voters. If you are a supporter of the Tory party and you don't back Cameron, you have a death wish for your party.

Blair is youngish, normal and sounds reasonable. Everyone the Tories have put against him is slightly weird. Put Cameron against him and he will lose. So will fat boy.

House prices rising again? Not in this country they aren't.

[zuzuspetals]

Do you know that the Labour Party agreed not to change their policy on the Euro without first consulting Murdoch,

Give us a source for this please.

PR is a bad idea by the way unamerican, The difficulty in all proportional voting systems for those without a natural inclination to put their trust in politicians is the way they produce coalition governments that, once solidified, become very difficult to remove. PR virtually inoculates leading politicians against the decisions of the voters. This may seem a good thing when the economy is growing, unemployment is low and there is no great desire to rock the boat. But it is a disaster when things are going badly wrong to have a voting system that makes a straightforward change of government very difficult and a complete reversal of policy near impossible. I would gladly trade a little stability when things are good for the ability to make decisive and necessary changes when things are bad.

[RichM]

Labour got in because of house prices. Simple as that. Oh, and the handouts.

Take away the housing market, the cheap credit, the casual living beyond one's means, etc etc and the economy would nose-dive. Labour wouldn't get touched again for a few years.

We might try and justify our beliefs about who's the better party etc, but when people are comfortable they will vote for the party in power, especially if they think that that party has delivered the "prosperity".

[Marina]

Yup...I agree....Cameron will probably lead the Tories....a shame really...Clarke was the only one who had a scintilla of me ever voting Tory....and it's a slim one at that.....Why don't the Tories wake up...WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER BLAIR CLONE like Cameron. I have to say I actually despise Cameron even now....like I mentioned in a previous post , he is the David Beckham of politics.....BORING and STALE

Man, it's like being in a parallel universe. DON'T YOU GET IT? Blair has won 3 general elections. The Tories NEED and MUST HAVE a Blair clone. Put another weirdo up against him (or even Gordon) and they'll win again.

Blair Clone - absolutely essential.

[Guest The Dude]

Ken Clarke was the worst choice for leader. Yes hes a good speaker and debater. But mostly the only people he appeals to are traditional Conservative voters. The average voter or Labour voter would not vote tory if he was in charge simply because he harks back to the old days which tory fans loved but most Labour voters hated. He is old skool and thats a bad thing. They would have associated him with the poll tax and everything bad tory (as unfair as that is because it was before he was chancellor). Plus hes too old! - Same age as Michael Howard who is stepping down because hes too old! Ken Clarke would have lost them an election for sure, hes pro europe!

I don't think the next leader needs to be anything special anyway considering Labours record on crime and education and virtually no delivery of any of their pre-election manifesto. They are quite happily buggering it all up for themselves.

I agree with your last paragraph.....I still would like to see a REAL alternative to Blair....we won't get it with Cameron.....The Tories will shoot themselves in the foot again if they vote for Cameron...They think they're modernising with Cameron....to me, he is a robotic clone. Why don't we have a real opposition to Blair......Believe me... I will vote for him...

[MRMX9]

Ken Clarke would finally have given us a real opposition but as usual the Tories have bottled it.

David Cameron I can cope with - it's his slimy sidekick George (Osborne) Osborn I can't abide. I would rather have Gordon Brown as Chancellor any day than that overprivileged idiot!

Blair and Brown will eat the two of them alive.

[FaTB]

As a Tory and a member I shall be voting Cameron.

Edit:Thats if I get a chance.

Yep I think Cameron is the man, although I dont think he's PM material yet hopefully he will have matured by the next election.

A couple of weeks ago I would have gone for Davis, but I think he's thrown it away.

As for Ken Clarke he is the old "Fat cat" face of the tory party and was never gonna be PM, and as somebody else said he will probably be dead by then anyway.

[zuzuspetals]

65 % voted against the evil murderin war-mongerin neo-communists and yet they still won.

But were non labour voters voting against the war?

Several theoretical headlines for the last election would be

"Three Pro-War British parties take 67% of vote, push anti-war party to fourth place"; or

"British Voters Back War but Punish Blair over Europe"; or

"Liberal Democrats Play Anti-War Card with Meager Results; or

"Britain: Only European Country with Pro-War Government *and* opposition party, now sees rise of third pro-war party, eclipsing antiwar party." or

"Euroskeptic Parties Take Majority of Vote for First Time."

All of these are factually true and would seem interesting angles purely from a journalistic point of view. Did we see any of them? Ha!

[Guest The Dude]

Man, it's like being in a parallel universe. DON'T YOU GET IT? Blair has won 3 general elections. The Tories NEED and MUST HAVE a Blair clone. Put another weirdo up against him (or even Gordon) and they'll win again.

Blair Clone - absolutely essential.

marina...to be honest...I couldn't give a shite who the next Tory leader is.....I'm gonna vote Liberal anyway. Always was a Labour voter...but not at the last election...voted Lib Dems....Why?....because I'm sick of Blairs new Labour hypocrisy and also because I haven't forgotten Thatchers Tory Party. Yes it really could be described as still, a protest vote against the 2 party shite system that we have come to know and abhor. Never mind a parallel universe ,as you so succinctly put it...I just know my own mind..I MAY have voted TORY at the next election....but will never vote for a Bair Clone...****** to Cameron..

Edited October 18, 2005 by The Dude

[Marina]

Ken Clarke would finally have given us a real opposition but as usual the Tories have bottled it.

David Cameron I can cope with - it's his slimy sidekick George (Osborne) Osborn I can't abide. I would rather have Gordon Brown as Chancellor any day than that overprivileged idiot!

Blair and Brown will eat the two of them alive.

You are making the rash assumption that people think about things before they vote. Some do, you probably do. Most don't. They vote for the bloke they take to. Blair is normal looking, normal sounding and comes across as sincere. End of thinking - he has won 3 general elections - despite a pretty crappy record.

Major - odd looking, odd voice - beat Kinnock - even odder - even more irritating.

Major - odd looking etc - beaten by Blair

Hague - bald, norther accent, bit odd looking - ten times the intellect and debating ability of Blair - Blair won.

Howard - better intellect than Blair - but 'something of the night' label never left him - Blair won.

It's about looks.

[right_freds_dead]

the tories wont be able to find a candidate in time for the next election. theve been looking for 10 years. they dont have any, because being such a fuddy duddy party, they only attract old money and old notions fo the past.

liberal maybe, but the leaders is wet and probably a drunk.

nope - like it or lump it, i can see new labour getting a fourth.

[Marina]

marina...to be honest...I couldn't give a shite who the next Tory leader is.....I'm gonna vote Liberal anyway. Always was a Labour voter...but not at the last election...voted Lib Dems....Why?....because I'm sick of Blairs new Labour hypocrisy and also because I haven't forgotten Thatchers Tory Party. Yes it really could be described as still, a protest vote against the 2 party shite system that we have come to know and abhor. Never mind a parallel universe ,as you so succinctly put it...I just know my own mind..I MAY have voted TORY at the next election....but will never vote for a Bair Clone...****** to Cameron..

In your comments about Clarke I just thought you were making the same mistake that all the Tory MPs are making. They are rattling on about 'we'll have to see what his policy is on this' and 'I believe the country wants that' etc etc. It's all utterly irrelevant.

Tony Blair has won three elections because he is better looking than the people put up against him - and has not had to fight an election when the economy is down the pan.

If the Tories want to win power - they need someone who looks and sounds normal.

[Guest growl]

Recent program shown within Newsnight showed the candidates for the Tory leadership on a screen to an audience selected to represent all groups - old, young, black, asian, white, middle-class, working class etc etc. The market researcher hosting it was an American chap...

The results were astonishing. At the beginning the poll of the audience showed pretty much what the general perception was i.e. it was a battle between Davis and Clarke. By the end 98% were voting for Cameron. He seems to be able to touch people - all people regardless of whether they are natural Labour or Tory voters. If you are a supporter of the Tory party and you don't back Cameron, you have a death wish for your party.

We know we're going to win the election next time. We can the smell the blood of the Labour Party. They wanted us to have old Ken as Leader. They're scared to death of Cameron, which is why the BBC have been puting Ken in the lead, when he had no chance.

Ever since the party conference, which was unlike any I have witnessed before. Our man Cameron has swept all disent before him. I predict him to be our next leader. He is a born leader. Not because of his looks. To be honest I thought he was bland. He has bland looks...as in no charcter. But when he opens he mouth, you feel as if he is talking to you directly. He offers hope. Suddenly he's got something to say, suddenly he's not so boring.

If he is not elected leader, well we may still win but only if the economy turns really bad. I would prefer it to be because the general electorate was inspired to get off their bums and vote.

On another point.

People are saying that the MP's are not listening to the ordinary party members. On the contrary I believe they are. I say this because, when the MP's were deciding whether to take away our vote or not. We were contacted by our local party offices and given the chance to reply with what we thought conservatism meant for the future and what we thought of keeping the vote. I got my wish regarding the vote, though the press were saying we would lose it.

I also spoke about my feelings regarding Ken Clark. Some of you are saying that he had traditional support. But many of us did not trust his sudden turn around on the European question. Many of us feel that he should have served on the shadow front bench and lent his experience to it. He did not. So he was not in our opinion supported. I spoke also about bringing younger MP's to the fore.

So I know that I have been listened to.

I posted the link earlier. Since many people have misconceptions about the Tories. I like to be informed so during the conferences I listened to the Labour and Liberal one as well as my own. Its a site I lurk around just to see what other Tories are thinking and for info. I think I've only ever posted there twice months ago.

Nu Labour are in many ways like Old Labour. But in many ways they are not.

Wouldn't it be a surprise if the Tories got rid of some of their old baggage too.

I prefer to judge on the present.

[zuzuspetals]

Who cares about Thatcher anymore, apart from lefty BBC comedians who cannot move on from their 80's student days? It is now 2005, Thatch was forced out in 1990. Or put another way, the length of time between Thatch and now is the same length of time between Hitler's suicide and the Beatles performing in strip clubs on the Reeperbahn in Hamburg, Germany.

[right_freds_dead]

the whole conservative movement is still stuck in the thatcher years - not the british public.

they moved on. hence the cons are still a mile away from actual british life.

if she attends - they clap her and start flag waving.

Edited October 18, 2005 by right_freds_dead

[Guest growl]

David Cameron I can cope with - it's his slimy sidekick George (Osborne) Osborn I can't abide. I would rather have Gordon Brown as Chancellor any day than that overprivileged idiot!

So you would rather have the economy Brown has given you rather than the alternative?

[Mushroom]

I hope not.

Because ID Bill on way to Lords now.

The grip tightens.

If this is near implementation by the next GE the only party I will vote for will be one that promises to repeal it.

Policians promises though?

If all goes to plan though, we'll be long gone anyway.

I still can't believe this ID thing is happening. It's so, well, Orwellian.

Edited October 18, 2005 by Mushroom

[zuzuspetals]

the whole conservative movement is still stuck in the thatcher years - not the british public.

they moved on. hence the cons are still a mile away from actual british life.

You could say that the problem is we need another Thatch, humble roots and so on, unlike silver spoon Blair.