»

[smithy]

Doesn't time fly? Today, Tony Blair asked the Queen to dissolve Parliament and announced a general election for May 5th.

With Labour's popularity dropping, he's gone for an election now, rather than a usual 5-year term. Polls for this month show, on average, a 5-point Labour lead over the Conservative party.

This contest, unlike the previous 2, is not so certain a result. Tory leader Michael Howard has taken on the campaign chief of the ruling Australian Liberal party and if their performance over past few months are anything to go by, then it looks like it could be an interesting campaign.

[Wilse]

Labour, Conservative?
My conscience wouldn't allow me to vote for either of them. Scumbags, one and all.

Having said that, I'd rather see the Tories win than Labour, (even though I think their policies are a joke) simply on a point of principle; Labour lied the country to war, the Tories didn't.

The Liberal Democrats are the only mainstream party with any credibility left but I won't be voting for them either, despite voting for them in the local elections.

I'll be 'pointlessly' voting Scottish Nationalist again, which I've done on all but one occassion. (see above.)

[smithy]

Being a neo-conservative/libertarian (i.e. small state/freedom), I can't vote Labour because they're the most right wing/authoritarian Government I've ever seen in this country (and I was alive during Thatcher). The war doesn't bother me though - I thought that was one of Blair's better moves.

The "Liberal" Democrat party is a joke - I can't even think of any policies that they have that aren't bordering on extremities. Their economic policies don't hold water either - "1p income tax rise to solve all our problems"? Opportunistic, sanctimonious, forever whining about the other two parties. The "Liberal" party is an abuse of the word Liberal IMO. They should rename themselves the Social Democrat Party.

The Tories have made some good moves this year - I've been impressed. They've got some good policies on Europe, the economy, and the enormous yet growing size and cost of the public sector. However, being tough on the EU is particularly important to me, and this will outweigh just about anything else in deciding who to vote for.

Not bothering with UKIP this time. They were an amusing sideshow in the European elections then they kicked the useless "Liberals" into 4th place. But my vote for them at EU elections is almost guarenteed forever after the disruptions they've caused from within the Beast of Brussels.

[Wilse]

> The "Liberal" Democrat party is a joke

Precisely what I think of UKIP.
In fact I'd go further, they're a complete embarrassment.

Robert Suntan Silk will be hanging over them for years to come.

> The war doesn't bother me though -
> I thought that was one of Blair's better moves.

Well, I just have a problem with a government blatantly lying over *the* most serious issue there is.
Obviously your conscience has no problem with such trifling issues. More power to you.

Wilse wrote:
> The "Liberal" Democrat party is a joke

Precisely what I think of UKIP.
In fact I'd go further, they're a complete embarrassment.

Robert Suntan Silk will be hanging over them for years to come.

> The war doesn't bother me though -
> I thought that was one of Blair's better moves.

Well, I just have a problem with a government blatantly lying over *the* most serious issue there is.
Obviously your conscience has no problem with such trifling issues. More power to you.

Kilroy parted company with UKIP a long time ago. He has his own party now, "Veritas". They are the perfect party for the golf course type {bleep}s. Hangem ang flogem types.

I have always been a labour voter, but I can't bring myself to vote for them thiss time. If Blair dropped dead tommorrow and Gordon Brown took over. I'd happily vote for them, but I can't vote for that lying "Catholic (my arse he is)" scumbag Blair.

If there was a communist candidate locally, then they would have my vote out of protest, but there isn't so I won't vote, again. :-(

[PMC]

I once swore an oath to my conscience that I'd never vote Tory after they proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that they were as trustworthy as Lord Archer at a bull {bleep} competition. However I'm faced with the unpallatable truth that I'd rather Howard was PM than Blair. How could this be?

As for the Liberals, I believe that they're even worse than Labour at stinging the middle classes in order to fund their more grandiose schemes. Last time they were in office, trenches and mustard gas were en vogue.

It's like being served three particularly unpleasant and pungent piles of dung on a silver platter and being asked which one is the least offensive.

[Wilse]

It's like being served three particularly unpleasant and pungent piles of dung on a silver platter and being asked which one is the least offensive.

Indeed.
In my case there are a couple more piles of dung to choose from but the sentiment is the same.

[Damion]

If I lived in the UK, I'd probably vote for Ringo...

[smithy]

Wilse wrote:
Well, I just have a problem with a government blatantly lying over *the* most serious issue there is.
Obviously your conscience has no problem with such trifling issues. More power to you.

It's hardly the most serious issue. The UK and its allies are involved with overthrowing a crazy despot at least every year.

Nevertheless, the Government has been lying on far more important issues especially regarding erosion of our civil liberties and the EU constitution.

[PMC]

I cannot - will not - vote Labour.

This is because Blair has habitually paid lip service to the massed will of public opinion and has attempted to distort facts by relying upon "spin" to defy the moral views of the vast majority of Britons.

The first time it happened was during the fuel protests of 2000. Had there been a General Election in September of that year, Labour would have been mauled in the polls as an estimated 90% of the voting public supported the protesters. In the face of such vehement public opinion, our so called "caring" leader first tries to spin his way out of trouble by blaming the oil companies and then attempts to discredit the protest leaders.

Three years later, 90% of Britons expressed opposition to the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it was "45 minutes from deploying WMD". Despite this and allegations that intelligence was "sexed up" (ie spun out of proportion) Blair sent the troops into Iraq.

Ironically, had he been truthful and said "We can't confirm WMD but intend to go in and liberate the Iraqi people" then I'd have supported the invasion. The very hint that there was some deceit involved has turned me against voting Blair and his government into a position of trust.

If they'll lie to you about fuel taxation and the reasons for invading a sovereign state then how can you possibly trust them with your civil liberties and taxes?

Anyway, I'm in a quandry. I am by no means a Tory as I have fundamental moral problems with a good proportion of their policy decisions, not to mention their former conduct in office. I also have moral issues with the Lib Dems, and have seen how they're wasting the Council Taxes recovered in my local borough.

PMC wrote:
I cannot - will not - vote Labour.

This is because Blair has habitually paid lip service to the massed will of public opinion and has attempted to distort facts by relying upon "spin" to defy the moral views of the vast majority of Britons.

The first time it happened was during the fuel protests of 2000. Had there been a General Election in September of that year, Labour would have been mauled in the polls as an estimated 90% of the voting public supported the protesters. In the face of such vehement public opinion, our so called "caring" leader first tries to spin his way out of trouble by blaming the oil companies and then attempts to discredit the protest leaders.

Three years later, 90% of Britons expressed opposition to the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it was "45 minutes from deploying WMD". Despite this and allegations that intelligence was "sexed up" (ie spun out of proportion) Blair sent the troops into Iraq.

Ironically, had he been truthful and said "We can't confirm WMD but intend to go in and liberate the Iraqi people" then I'd have supported the invasion. The very hint that there was some deceit involved has turned me against voting Blair and his government into a position of trust.

If they'll lie to you about fuel taxation and the reasons for invading a sovereign state then how can you possibly trust them with your civil liberties and taxes?

Anyway, I'm in a quandry. I am by no means a Tory as I have fundamental moral problems with a good proportion of their policy decisions, not to mention their former conduct in office. I also have moral issues with the Lib Dems, and have seen how they're wasting the Council Taxes recovered in my local borough.

Don't vote then.

Just do as I am going to do.

Walk into the polling booth, write "**** off, you are all a bunch of "****s" on the voting slip, fold it up and put it in the ballot box! :-D

[PMC]

mdma wrote:
Walk into the polling booth, write "#### off, you are all a bunch of #####" on the voting slip, fold it up and put it in the ballot box! :-D

You have no idea how many times I've dreamed of doing that!

In all seriousness I would like to see an extra box on the ballot slip which simply says "None of the above". Only then will politics become truly representitive of public opinion. Imagine if there was a ballot and the biggest share of votes went to "none of the above"?

PMC wrote:

You have no idea how many times I've dreamed of doing that!

In all seriousness I would like to see an extra box on the ballot slip which simply says "None of the above". Only then will politics become truly representitive of public opinion. Imagine if there was a ballot and the biggest share of votes went to "none of the above"?

Don't just dream of doing it, do it! They keep a record of the number of "spoiled" papers, so they have an idea of just how much we hate them.

[Wilse]

@Smithy:

It's hardly the most serious issue.

Obviously not to you but lying in order to start a war is about as serious as it gets for me.

The UK and its allies are involved with overthrowing a crazy despot at least every year.

Even if that were true, it would not be an excuse.

Nevertheless, the Government has been lying on far more important issues especially regarding erosion of our civil liberties and the EU constitution.

I'm happy for you that you find the EU constitution far more important than the needless slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent people.
My conscience doesn't allow me to have that luxury.

[mdwh2]

smithy wrote:
The "Liberal" Democrat party is a joke - I can't even think of any policies that they have that aren't bordering on extremities. Their economic policies don't hold water either - "1p income tax rise to solve all our problems"? Opportunistic, sanctimonious, forever whining about the other two parties. The "Liberal" party is an abuse of the word Liberal IMO. They should rename themselves the Social Democrat Party.

I can't think of any of their policies which are particularly extreme. Unlike the extremes Labour have been up to (scrapping University grants and introducing tuition fees; waging wars on false information; getting rid of things like right to a fair trial; wanting to introduce ID cards). On Europe, they take the middle ground between the two extremes of the other parties by saying they'll hold a referundum. Both the main two parties do nothing but whine about each other. If the two main parties aren't going to be raising taxes, how will they fund the money to "solve all our problems"?

Not bothering with UKIP this time. They were an amusing sideshow in the European elections then they kicked the useless "Liberals" into 4th place.

Though note in the Local elections, the share of the vote was projected to have Liberal Democrats in 2nd place, with Labour 3rd ( http://politics.guardian.co.uk/elections2004/story/0,14549,1236480,00.html ).