Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

OK, so you vote mainstream, and get more of the same.

The same meaning more debt and worsening outcomes.


Sounds like a winner!

It is not ideal, but other parties stand no chance of being elected. Only one of the two main parties can get elected. It is inevitable that politics becomes polarised. We have two parties and they have to be very different just to give something for people to vote for. Both the main parties have sincere views about their policies. You just have to decide which set of policies will be good for people in the long run.

Have you lot considered a lobotomy?... As most of you would "assuredly" benefit -):

Stan - i have considered carefully and decided that without question you have evaded (as in tax) answering the question raised by 2/3 of us

And who do you think you are Alf?... Jeremy Paxman.

i wish i were half as bright
meanwhile, why do you continue to evade answering the question?
it wasn't very tricky or are you obliged to await instruction from "the party" as to how you should parrot a response?

Talking of exotic birds... Parrot is a Alf... rearrange or leave as is, I will have to leave you for now as I have a previous standing engagement, so see you later - Toodle-pip for now -):

surprise surprise

cynic,

Your post 32186

"psst! he hasn't been told the party line and can't answer for himself"



It would seem to me that you were making an statement of self-incrimination.

what seems to you and what is fact are frequently at variance

Has i was saying in my last post ......... why bother replying

India's space agency is sending a probe to Mars in a bid to become the fourth nation or group to reach the red planet.
Nice to see British tax payers money going to help the poor in India

MK - have you chosen to forget that your buddies on the other side of the house also support HS2?

for myself, i remain to be convinced of its value, not least because it seems impossible to read a balanced view on the subject

HS2 is not even a Conservative policy. It was started in 2009 by Labour. The coalition reviewed the Labour report on HS2. The company HS2 Ltd was formed by Labour in 2009.

cynic.

Just for the record: I am not a nu/old labour supporter, nor a liberal (clegg)

I was a tory supporter until call me dave took over.

and now, purely out of curiosity?

Probably ukip. There is little choice.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10426604/Taxpayers-foot-10000-bill-for-failed-asylum-seekers-flying-lessons.html

Minor parties.

One of the major problems a "minor political" party has in the UK is that the "major" parties are either in the “control” of major parts of the media, or beholding to the adherents of major parts of the “media”. The outlets are often subservient to the “ownership” and present the views of a small number of individuals.

In some cases the outlets falsify the data and falsify the arguments presented, in order to support or maintain their own advantaged positions. (Similar can be seen in some of the postings on this thread.)

These outlets of “information” to the public, are often perverted by their ownership to benefit their own structures, or concepts or “political ideology” of a “fitting” society.

Also, the major parties have the advantage, because of it number of adherents, not necessarily intellect, to more forceful presentations of “ideology”, without being subject to similar amount of objective criticism even if it is deserved.

Often the members of “minor parties” are smeared, vilified, or maligned by those who see themselves as political proponents of the major parties, who see this as a method of distracting attention from the argument presented. This however points to the inadequacies of the propositions, or the arguments of the distracters, who do not like their often prejudiced ideas, or discriminatory positions challenged. This seems to be a characteristic of the many members of the present Tory party and its leadership.

But, there is an obvious difficulty for a “minor” party to cover all the complexities of “governing” of a “society”, due to the insufficient number to cover all the aspects of government in the required depth. That is one of their weaknesses, as well as in general the important funding of their “propaganda” or “self advertisement” organisations and machinery.

But the major parties can hardly be seen as made up of “clones” and they may have a “strength” as an amalgam of those who in general have similarly commonly based “ideologies” and appears to be a reasonably “coherent” political stance.

But, as can be seen in present con party there are huge divergences of opinion, not the least being relationship to Europe, or immigration, which can be see dividing it. Looking at the coalition it could be viewed as consisting of three dissimilar parties clinging together out of necessity in order to have any hoping of surviving.

There is also the fraction of the old Tory “wets”, from the ardent tory right wingers, that is the remnants who haven’t already joined the UKIP and taked their financing with them

There is already a flow of “cash” from the “major” parties and this may enable the fractions to be seen more clearly and the “minor” parties may attract more voters.

How many minor parties are there really?

It may be Interesting to watch, from a comfortable arm chair.

What is the betting on Britain having another coalition government? Perhaps, made up of the leading lights of the minor parties.