You just summed it up in one sentence - I'm pretty sure Clegg could have got most of it across if he'd tried.
I'm with the Conservatives on most of that, although it's really not an issue I consider important (certainly there are other issues which demand more urgent attention).
Unfortunately, where I live, most people are very old (young people must leave to find work, and old people come here when they retire). All I ever here about from any of the parties is care for elderly, the NHS, OAP heating allowances/tv licenses/bus passes etc - none of which I care about in the slightest.
Just thought I would pop in, I guessed a discussion like this would be going on! (Hi to everyone - especially Hayo, Muz, Adam and Matt B)
One person a long time ago did mention current Labour is not real Labour, as well as mentioning the fragility of the economy . I have since worked in industry before returning to academia (hopefully I should be a Dr [engineering] in two years) and it is in a grim state.
UK Politics is in an odd state. Labour is not labour and the tories are not the tories. I could never bring myself to vote for the greens (one offered to refute any questions I have on AGW before I even mentioned any, closed minded or what?) and I could never ever vote for BNP, its against everything I stand for. I also find myself distrusting the Lib dems, in the past I have always had the impression that they sway to whatever is fashionable, cherry picking lab/con ideas that people like. Perhaps they are different now; I shall have a nose around their website.
So for me currently it's a UKIP/Tory decision. Vote Tory to get Gordon 'Cretin' Brown out or vote UKIP, a spare 50 ish million a day could build new hospitals, get us more cops etc, but they will never get in - plus would they spend it as I envisage?
Nick Clegg's current popularity (in my view a very fickle popularity) has really riled the right wing press (which is most of the press here). They're starting to fling shit everywhere, four different 'stories' have apparently appeared discrediting Clegg in the Mail, the Telegraph, the Sun and the Express on the same morning, oh what a coincidence. All four papers have very close Conservative links. I'm all for political scrutiny, and I personally think a few of the LD policies are weak and up for challenging, but this level of petty, offensive, false mud-slinging is absolutely shameful.
As for the election, I'm afraid the current surge in support for Lib Dem will slip, but not for the right reasons. I'm scared that most of England is too ignorant and too stupid to make their own minds up, and instead they'll read the paper and be told who to vote for. I hope I'm proved wrong but I won't bet against it. Tory majority come 7th May I think.
The media just pick on whoever's doing well at any given moment. They never have anything positive to say about anyone.
Up until the first live debate, noone was interested in Clegg, so a story about him wouldn't sell papers - now it does.
I wouldn't describe the article you linked to as a slur. If all you read was the headline, then yes, it sounds bad - if you read the full article though, it's not critical of him at all.
I agree that the public are very fickle. So far, they liked what they saw in one debate, which covered just one small section of relatively un-contraversial policy. Come May 6th, he will not be a serious contender.
Obviously the Conservatives are going to get the most donations - they represent the groups who have the most money to spend. I don't think you can just buy your way into power though.
If you read the article, it clearly is critical of Clegg. And let's not be naive, the actual quote from Clegg was made years ago and regurgitated to smear Clegg as both anti-British and pro-German (and in the Daily Mail readership's eyes, Nazi = German) at a time suitable for the Conservatives. The media don't simply pick on whoever's doing well at a given moment, they pick on whoever is doing well as long as it's not the Conservatives. 80% of the papers are owned by Tories (with the only exceptions being the crap rag Daily Mirror and the achingly liberal Guardian) and they each have an agenda to get people to vote Tory - that being that the Tories are typically low-taxing, free marketeer, money men; who would allow Rupert Murdoch et al to make the maximum amount of money possible. Americans can vouch for this, with the Murdoch-owned Fox News not even trying any more to hide its right-wing agenda.
All of this somewhat detracts from the politics itself. Come 6th May, I think he (Clegg) will be a serious contender, but the Liberals will probably only end up splitting the centre-left vote and allowing the Tory majority.
PS - The article linked to has in fact changed now, there was no "Clegg defends Nazi slur" angle, just "Nick Clegg in Nazi slur".
I had hoped you had become somewhat more cynical over the 5 years
The biggest media empire, run by Rupert Murdoch openly supported the labour party until 2009 (for 12 years). Are the people that consecutively voted labour back in during this time also "ignorant and too stupid to make their own minds up" ?
I know what you are trying to put across and Sketchy has already made this point - but it happens all the time. The media has a lot more power than they should have, and they are always prone to becoming cronies with whom they think will get into power, and I think they can see the times up for Gordon. I read what the LB manifesto before this media storm brewed and they had already lost my vote. If there is a hint of truth in that article (i.e. does he really hold these opinions), would he like it if we was speaking German ? I have no respect for anyone that says bad things against our WW2 vets, and people of that generation - they went through a lot for our freedom (what little we have), and the effects upon some of them will last (or have lasted) for their lifetimes.
Labour has crippled the economy 3 times in recent history, Wilson (60s), Callahan (70s) and finally good old Gordon Brown. To be quite frank I personally think none of the three main parties are competent enough to run and repair our country.
On a more proactive note, what do people think needs changing? (I'll start with my views on education )
I was speaking to a Labour member (a Dr) I know from Uni, and oddly enough me and him agreed on a lot of points. The biggest one was that of University Education, and the need for more funding whilst having it more wisely spent. We both agreed on assisting (Scholarships) more people to do Maths, Physics and Engineering degrees (as well as engineering apprenticeships) as the people that do such courses usually come out with a modicum of common sense, logic and the ability to add up which will in turn help the country in terms of industry and hopefully some of these people will eventually wind up in the houses of parliament.
This comes from that statistics of more and more people doing higher education, yet we both know that numbers of students within our own discipline are falling (same with Physics & Maths faculties of which we have close ties). I have seen some truly bizarre degrees on offer at some unis. I am all for a pure meritocracy, not "My name is Rupert, and Daddy has a lot of money rah rah rah!".
I am also convinced that something needs to be done with the schools - I was in a restaurant the other day and I showed my Student card to get a 10% discount. The young lady required a CALCULATOR to work out how much we had to pay with the discount - she seemed quite impressed I got it right.
Yes, I would say if anyone voted Labour purely because of reading a paper, then yes, they are "ignorant and too stupid to make their own minds up". If anybody votes without actually understanding the policies and how they may affect you, then they also are ignorant and stupid. By the way, the reason Murdoch switched from Conservative to Labour in 1997 was because Major had no chance of winning, and Murdoch's continued support would be seen as a massive slap in the face for him - as his American interests show, Murdoch is very clearly conservative (with a small C).
The Daily Mail does seem to have swayed you, Hagar. Nick Clegg doesn't hold Nazi views. He does not wish we were speaking German. Your comments that "I have no respect for anyone that says bad things against our WW2 vets" blah blah blah are irrelevant because Nick Clegg did not say anything against out veterans. It's this kind of assumed link which is a 'smear'. And you - despite the article being a complete farce - have had your own view of Clegg altered negatively. Not because of his policies (I don't have any argument with people not liking a party for its policies), but because of a made-up newspaper article.
I do agree that universities need massive change. I am dead against top-up fees, but I am also dead against universities letting so many people in on frankly stupid courses (and without being clever). A friend of mine got to uni having 'earnt' a D and an E at A Level; I think university should be for the top 5% maybe of achieiving students, with no top-up fees. Labour's idea of half of all people going to uni is absurd and counter-productive. We should also be pushing for 'traditional' courses, such as the ones you said, to get extra funding - in the future these are the courses which produce the most productive (in terms of wealth) graduates.
The media are going to have some amount of political bias, the same as anyone else. Make no mistake though, if they have a story that's going to sell papers, they will print it, regardless which party it concerns.
We saw that with the "expenses scandal", in which the conservatives were as heavily criticized as any party (remember the moat?).
Generally speaking though, a story about a member of the governing party, is going to sell more papers - the public are simply more interested in hearing about the people who make decisions affecting their daily lives. If the conservatives appear to be less heavily criticized, then it's because they haven't been in power for 13 years.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds to me like you're probably university age (18-21) or slightly older, in which case you would be too young to really remember headlines from a time when labour weren't in power.
With Nick Clegg, it's basically the case that he surprised everyone (including th media) in the first live debate, and the public started asking "Who is this guy?". When that happens, the media are going to print anything they can dig up on him - even if it's 3 years old.
A lot of people do get swayed via reading a paper unfortunately!. Murdoch still switched, and they always will do, it is in their best (fiscal) interests to back whoever may come into power. Creating sensationalist or fashionable bull also sells papers, so I think anything Clegg/Brown/Cameron do is liable to be blown out of all proportion (with negative or positive spins dependant upon the paper).
Cancelling Trident, EU, and their green attitudes are what is putting me off voting LD, UKIP is becoming more my preferred choice.
The daily mail has not swayed me at all (for me its still a decision between UKIP and a Tory vote as it was before I looked at that article) and I also question the legitimacy of the article in the previous post. Saying anything bad about a generation that fought (the people that suffered and the people that did the fighting, not the politicians from that era) from any individual will make me very hostile, it's a pet peeve and I was making that opinion clear.
I know the article is a witch hunt digging up anything but Clegg must have writ those lines (or something along those lines) or there would have been a public retraction of the article, or a court case brewing by now. But I do believe the article is probably (most likely) cherry picked comments with some fabrications around the side (I shall I have to try and find a copy of original paper article to see its full context).
Unfortunately Clegg is correct on some things in that article. I have been to Germany, and the cities were clean and not once did I fear my own safety travelling around. Public transport is a LOT better than over here (no urine smell and on time/reasonably fast), with buses, surface rail, underground rail and trams, not to mention a very large road infrastructure. Until last month I worked with a German (he has now returned home) and we used to have good chats about things like this, he was a pleasure to work with.
What does worry is me is the possibility of some BNP getting in (any level, council or MP). I agree entirely on education (perhaps a bit more on the % ), but I would also bring back Polytechnics. Sketchy I can remember back to 88 or 89, but I was more interested in Ghostbusters back then .
Look what you have done Boothman! LD adverts are appearing on the bottom of the page .
The Daily Mail, the Telegraph etc do not publish stories on the Lib Dems to sell papers; they do it to push their own agendas. The fact that the comment issued by Nick Clegg was years old attests to this fact. It is not just coincidence that four Tory papers published damaging articles on the same day, especially when you consider that none of the articles were 'news'; they were all reporting events that had happened at the least two weeks ago and at the most two years ago.
And yes - I do remember stories from when the Tories were in power (it was only in 1996). But we get the Daily Mirror (which is staunchly Labour) in our house, even though I've grown to hate it, so those stories have never gone away. The difference I believe is that the Conservatives have at least 4 or 5 nationals in their pocket (or should that be the other way around?) whilst Labour have only the 1. I just wish the media had less personal interest and didn't display their partisan views so openly. But then again, it's the public's fault for reading such obvious fabrications.
Ironically, the Daily Mail's publication of Clegg's comments has only justified them. He said that we were obsessed with the War in Britain - and if the Daily Mail can justify calling that 'a Nazi slur' then it looks like we still are.
And Hagar, I have no problem with you not supporting Lib Dem because of their stance on things like Trident and the EU, and I wish a lot more people supported parties for what they actually stand for. I don't know why you would worry about the BNP though, 99% of the country think they are total cretins. And Germany is a fantastic place, for the most part, and there's a lot we can learn from them. Unfortunately, the Conservatives would have us allied against (in the EU) the current ruling party in Germany and instead with a bunch of hard-right-wing idiots... food for thought?
I explained all that if you actually read my comment.
I think I'm done here - your dedication to the Lib Dems (or dislike of the other parties?) seems to be clouding your judgement too much for you to engage in a sensible discussion.
Ey, come off it Sketchy, like I said at the very top of the thread, I'm not a die-hard Lib Dem, and I don't believe in all their policies. I am much more left-wing than that, but find the current incarnation of Labour awful; Lib Dem are the only political party standing where I live that is remotely near to what my own values are. I wouldn't call my posts unsensible. I did read your comment, but I didn't agree with all of it. That's what discussion is made of. You say the articles about Clegg are natural scrutiny, the media reacting normally to current LibDem popularity; I say they went too far and in fact were unjustified attacks without the merest hint of journalistic integrity. That's all.
Incidentally, there was an article today in the Spectator scrutinising the Lib Dem moral high ground over expenses, it actually involves the MP in Rochdale, where I live; http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5933688/paul-rowen-and-the-anatomy-of-a-lib-dem-expenses-scam.thtml . The article is well researched and doesn't jump to unfounded conclusions. It is real journalism, to put it simply. I don't know why one of the Tory papers could have researched something like this. If you cannot see the difference between an article like this and the completely ridiculous "Clegg in Nazi slur" and "Clegg paid money into private account, which was declared correctly and was used for what it was supposed to be used for" articles, then that's your own prerogative.
On the EU stance I cannot see why England can't match say for example Germany but under more of our own rule and less expense.
In regard to BNP in the last local election around here (West Mids) they almost got in one ward (it was very close!) and came 2 nd (although the winner did have a large majority). A lot of people are disillusioned and misinformed.
The expenses thing is a bit naughty (against protocol even if it was ok, it should have been placed straight into their fighting fund pot) but I think all of them are at it.
You have probably classified me as some "right winger" but I do have some left wing ideals like nationalisation of certain things and even though I am against the scrapping of Trident, I am against the use of Nuclear weapons (which I think everyone is!). I still find it hard to believe that Labour has let so many of our companies collapse. I am also in favour of alternative energy (hate using that phrase, I envisage hippies with sandles & socks on) but of a different route than is currently being pushed.
Polls recently suggest the Tories have slightly recovered, whilst Labour have dropped into third behind a hardening LibDem vote. The average at the minute seems to be around 34% Con, 27% Lab, 29% LD - there really is nothing in it. The only bad thing I'd suggest is that (applying a Uniform National Swing), this would give 267 seats to Con, 259 to Lab and 91 to LD. So even when LD have more percentage of the vote, they would have considerable less than half of Labour's seats.
I'm still voting Tories - we need to get Gordon the cretin out and the Lib Dems are still too useless for me to vote for in my opinion.
I think alot of people vote Lib Dems because they are the plucky underdogs - Brits like the underdogs! Brits also hate the big 2 parties because they have been in power so long and are to blame for every failing that politicians have made in this country since before WW2 - the Lib Dems therefore seem like a good alternative to them.
On the whole i don't like left-wing politics much.
Advertisement
Post Reply
. I have since worked in industry before returning to academia (hopefully I should be a Dr [engineering] in two years) and it is in a grim state.
)
- she seemed quite impressed I got it right.
