The 2005 general election is nearly upon us. Which way will you vote, and you reasons why. Here is a brief list of the potential contestants, please add your own.


More tax!
Less tax!
Dont know!
Death to all infidels!
Who gives a shit?

The great pretender.

STILL people say I've voted Labour all my life--I'm not going to change!! What do you think of the BNP manifesto?? Only about 6 people there to hear them say it will be compulsory to keep an assault rifle under the bed to use on anyone who seems a threat and politicians if they deserve it!! lock yourself in if they get in.

Is it all starting to go pear shaped for fony? This article is from the guardian, so it must be true!

Private poll reveals Labour fears

Neck and neck in key marginals

Patrick Wintour and Michael White
Wednesday April 27, 2005
The Guardian
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1471113,00.html

Tony Blair speaks to journalists at a technology school in London. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty

Labour is under mounting pressure in marginal seats in the face of strong voter scepticism and a disciplined Conservative attack which has reduced Labour's lead to 2% or less in key constituencies.

A private report presented to Labour's London HQ has revealed that the overall Labour national lead is lagging in the marginals with up to 100 seats showing their candidates at most 2% ahead of Tory or Lib Dem challengers. In the most serious cases Labour lags 2% behind its rivals.



The internal report delivered to Alan Milburn, the campaign coordinator, at a so-called field operations meeting, suggested that the number certain to vote is still only about 56% overall - 3% down on 2001 - in a campaign which will be decided on turnout. Independent polls point the same way.
"None of the polls are showing the steady rise in the definite-to-vote [group] as there was four years ago," the report warned. "Labour no longer has the wind in its sails as it did in 1997. No government that has been in power for eight years does."

Based on analysis, feedback and canvass returns, the report cites four marginals -only one of them in the Tories' top 20 target seats - where the vote is admitted to be "neck and neck".

They are Shipley, held by junior minister, Chris Leslie, with a majority of 1,428; Hammersmith and Fulham (2,015); Forest of Dean (2,049); and Hove (3,171). They would fall on swings between 1.6% and 3.8%.

Labour admits its campaign is also "very difficult" in outer London's Enfield North (2,291), Croydon Central (3,984) and Harrow West (6,156) - even though Harrow, an unexpected gain in 1997, is the Tories' 115th target seat, well above Michael Howard's expectations.

The Milburn team has told Tony Blair this underlines the volatility of the immigration and asylum issue which Mr Howard, urged on by his Australian campaign advisers, is pushing into centre stage.

The Labour analysis is not picking up strong regional variations in voting intentions - as widely predicted by polling experts - but "loads of local factors".

Mr Milburn admitted last night: "Our research is showing that, in particular, women feel the election coverage is not focusing on the issues that concern them most. The truth is the [media] debate never settles long enough on one issue."

With barely a week left to sway votes in the becalmed 2005 campaign such remarks reflect dismay and frustration that disaffected Labour voters could go for other parties with dramatic consequences for the Labour majority.

Last night the Labour analysis appeared to find independent corroboration from a Mori poll for the Financial Times. On the day when Labour defector to the Lib Dems, retiring MP Brian Sedgemore, made headline news, the FT reported that among those certain to vote, Labour's lead is just two points - 36:34:23 - over the Tories and Lib Dems. That compared with 39:32:22 a week ago.

According to Mori, 80% of Tory voters are now certain to vote, compared with 71% a week ago. Labour's comparable figure is 64%, against 66% last week. Both figures suggest that Mr Howard's negative tactics are undermining Labour cohesion.

"It is the number of definite-to-votes who will make or break this election," Mr Milburn concedes.

At yesterday's campaign press conference Mr Blair was even more candid as he explained what aides call Mr Howard's "2-0 strategy" - Monday's admission that the Tories are trailing. "It's a classic strategy to say you cannot really win... Why do they keep using the phrase 'send a message'? It's as if there was not an election happening. That strategy deployed in Australia delivered a conservative government when people thought there would be a Labour government," Mr Blair said.

Mr Milburn said: "The idea is to garner the protest vote, to suggest [voters]... can take a cost-free kick at an incumbent government."

What does does it feel like voting for Labour. A party which it led by what some of those voters and the probably the majority of the country "believes" (one of Tony's favourite word) to be a perpetual liar. How many of those voters are voting to cripple the next generation with debts if that generation attempt to go for university education. (While a large number of the MPs benefitted from the grant system to higher education and then achieved professional status. Their kids will not have the incomes of Cherry and B Liar to bail them out.) What a rotten country is emerging at the effect of this misled "New Labour".

Vote Monster Raving Loonies.

Not really one to get drawn into political discussions, but I couldn't resist. Labour are getting slammed for being liars etc. They have told half truths to an extent, but do you honestly believe the Tories or Lib Dems would do any better? Shocking grasp of politics if you do, and you clearly didn't live through the Tories last time in power. I think people are missing the bigger picture here. Labour have done amazing things for the economy, however I accept they aren't prone to mistakes - but isn't anyone? The polls suggest most people agree they are the right party for the job, so most people think they are the best. They will on election day.

The contentious issue of the war is in my opinion ultimately irrelavant as it would have happened regardless of UK input, something does need to be done to knock out a murdering tyrant like Saddam, it was the right thing to do, whether the reasons for arriving at that conclusion were cloudy or not. Saddam still killed people by the thousand, left the rest of his country in abject poverty, harboured other murdering terrorists like Osama. Don't forget 9/11, Kuwait etc.

I see the arguments for paying more attention to this countries problems as oppose to the worlds, but does that mean its right to forget the rest of the world? Are we to just leave it to someone else to deal with 'cos its not our business'?

In my opinion Blairs integrity remains intact, and in my view there is no real opposition to speak of. Labour for me, until I see a viable alternative.

Chiva, agreed

fredInew////////get real get a life oh change your NEWSPAPER///

Bristles,KS and Chiv

Blair refused to show independency of a true leader, by kowtowing to Bush and appearing on the platform of his master.

He should have respected the United Nations, which for all its weaknesses and faults is still the best chance for world development and peace.

By rejecting the chance for the weapons of war inspectors under Blick to complete their inspection he showed a complete disregard for the United nations and the rest of sovereign countries.

With support of the United Nations I would have accepted action against IRAQ.

But it appears that the major breakers of the Iraqi sanctions were America, and Britain who supplied Saddam with military weaponry when it suited them. But were looking for excuses to invade for American control in the Middle East. Check how many based America has on other countries soil.

If the United Nations had been involved they would have had a post war plan and not have the cock up that is no the state of Iraq.

Although Brown seems to have managed the economy relatively successfully for the last seven years, this was basically by given the responsibility to the Bank of England and leaving well alone, this period was built on the backs of a future looking episode in a Major government. (I have no truck for Tories, but do recognise those actions.)

The criticism I have of the B Liar and his period in office is the short-termisn and pandering to the public whim by the socialist government which had such a mandate for change.

He has not faced up to the responsibility for changes in pension policies, the changes in organisation which the social services, Health services, and Education preferring to decentralise the responsibilities to a local area management in order not to be held accountable.

As far as I am concerned I think Blair is self-deceiving, self advancing, acting with the ability of an old ham or a political spiv.

I wonder how much the ongoing economical problems in Britain and America has or will be effected by the costs of bombing another country into submission. Usually aggressors are generally defeated, unfortunately it sometimes takes to long for this to happen.

Bristles, Educate me, which papers do you read beside the Sun and Mirror? Perhaps Private Eye.

Done wonders for the economy on the back of the Tories.
50 quarters without a setback, but 20 of those quarters were when the Tories were in power.
Can blame the bank of England now when it all goes pearshape.
He`s not done my pension a lot of good though.
He`s not done my council tax a lot of good.
He`s not done my tax allowance a lot of good.

Labours Pension is safe because they topped the shortfall up from the Public Purse whilst they just left ours in a MESS.(Tax anyone)
When the Tories where in the Pensions had so much money they gave the Companies a Pension Holiday for a year.
I lived through the previous Labour Government, you know the one that when it fell they said Labour was finished.When they left a mountain of debt with the IMF.Inflation above 25% and interest rates for a saver to savour.
The Tories got rid of debt and the Unions grasping Power and created a fab economy but they had a bit of sleaze so Tony said and were booted out. But I would say their sleaze is nothing to what Labour have been upto, at least we did not have men dying for a Tony Blair WAR.
Well guess what we owe the IMF another Mountain of Debt, our Gold reserves have been flogged at a knockdown price.
Since Labour took power Industrial output has FALLEN and we have the biggest trade deficit ever.
So whats he improved we live in a nanny state everything is governed by red tape and everything that should be neutral has been infiltrated by Labour Men.
If you speak the truth like Dr Kelly you will be FINGERED and your reputation and Job finished.

Blairs Plane hit by LIGHTNING, IS THIS A MESSAGE FROM THE GODS.

Pity it didn't hit him on the ground. I wouldn't have like the crew to suffer his "god's wrath" or "pleasure".

Porky --Cavman--AGREE with all you say. I'm in despair when I read people think they've got a strong economy-it's all built on billions of debt and robbery by stealth pensions etc. like a house of cards its beginning to fall apart--whoever wins they've got a hell of a mess to sort out!

Tories did it before and I hope they can do it again, I have to say i'm amazed that any person who has any financial capability can think that Labour has done any good.
Last time we were even deeper in debt to the IMF to the extent they controlled our economy.

Good news for the tories.


Safe seat ensures return of Rifkind

Ex-minister to end 7-year absence

James Meek
Thursday April 28, 2005
The Guardian http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1471788,00.html

Bring back Maggie !!!

FREDInew day today tmes/telegragh also weekends F.T. OK/YOU HAVE LET THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG///MAGGIE WHO CAUSE ? THE PENSION/EDUCATION/TRANSPORT/HOUSING PRODLEMS////????WHO ///

I never called Maggie a cat. I have used some others words though!

Interesting thought though. If you put B Liar, Howard and Maggie in a bag, who do you think would get out first?