Heres what a hung Parliament will do

[lincstash]

WE have been there before, with both Wilson and Heath.

No one can rule with a minority government. Its an abortion. Nothing radical, nothing decisive can get passed into law. Nothing gets decided, no real advancement can be made, everything is fudge and a compromise.

IF we get a hung parliament, Labour will retain power (as the incumbent governments right to), completely unable to do anything decisive about the economy, and eventually, after being defeated in multiple votes government will collapse with a year, and another election will ensue. You only need a major bill such as the Finance Bill to get destroyed by the opposition, and thats thats.

Meanwhile, the militant left wing unions (UNITE and GMB) will set about ejecting Labours Blairites and Brownites from the party , (as they have promised they can and will), and whilst labour struggles along in the minority in westminster, civil war will rip the party apart as the unions seize control and force the party back to socialist far left. Policy making and decision making will cease within the government

Meanwhile, the worlds financial markets will see the political chaos, pull the plug on our credit rating and that will be it, game set an match. The economy will collapse, and the World Bank will be forced to step in, as it did with the Wilson Government. We will then be a prime target for the EU vultures to take further control of us.

THis is not speculation, this is based on previous times in our history when we have been in this position. We are the 5th largest economy because we always have had majority governments. If you want examples of what happens to countries with minority rules, look at places like Italy, Argentina, Brazil. 3rd rate counties because they cant be ruled decisively.

Asylum seekers get free NHS treatment and we have to provide education for their children, that all costs millions....illegal immigrants shouldn't even be in the country...the word "illegal" is the clue...

och, you know fuck all dp. fuck all.

Can someone clear something up for me please as not very clued up on politics and need to make sure I have understood our political system correctly.

When I vote am I supposed to be voting for the person standing in my constituency that I feel will do the best to represent my ward in parliament and not for the party (and party leader) I think will do the best job for the country ?

If so that is without doubt the Lib Dem candidate as she is our current MP and I'm impressed with her and the Conservative candidate in my opinion is a much weaker option.

I have got the impression from this
campaign that the Conservatives are
against PR so if I have understood the
system correctly then they want me to vote
according to the current system, which
means I would be voting Lib Dem. Is this how it works ? Many thanks to anyone who can explain this to me.

Lincstash appears to have a sound understanding of the economy and how the machine actually works.

Which is very different to the the me,me,me postings from people who are terrified that they will lose their handouts.

Lincstash clarifies the points that are not fluffy enough for some mn posters and looks at the real basic issues that underpin the country. The one issue that will effect everything is the economy, without clever handling and understanding of that there will be no education, no health service, no maternity/paternity leave.

I want a leader who can understand incredibly complex financial transactions, because they will be the one to lead us into recovery. Any Government that causes Sterling to be downgraded will immediately have to find more money to reduce the record breaking debt that TB, GB and co have saddled us with because our interest payments will automatically go up overnight.

'Which is very different to the the me,me,me postings from people who are terrified that they will lose their handouts.'

Who are you referring to there Louise?

Wyn;

Who do you want to run the country..?

I know alot more than you think aitch...

Louise - he thinks there are secret powers working with the masons towards a One Government world. That the EU is part of a plot to make this happen. He is entitled to hold this view. I'm not sure though that it is one that would make me consider him either well-informed or indeed, sane.

re voting:

Yes. You vote for your local constituency MP. When you go in the booth the ballot paper, it will be their names on the paper, along with the party they represent. Not the leader's names.

It's fair to say, that a lot of people do vote for the 'wider picture' too though. They might vote Conservative, because they like the Conservative party, not just because of the local candidate. If that makes sense.

Not sure I understand the second bit about PR? Can you explain what you mean?

You vote for who you would like to represent you as parliament. Some parties would like to change the way the votes are counted though.

I think that lincstash has started a debate on this thread. As daftpunk says, lincstash is passionate about politics and that is why he starts these threads and tries to get his views across about what he sees as the dangers of Labour for the country. I don't think that that is a bad thing, this thread has had more posts than most of the other threads in the politics topic. If lincstash and others like him didn't start threads like this, then we would have nothing to discuss.

Fliight says about lincstash
"I do wonder where a mindset like that comes from, how it is engendered, because it's so completely bizarre".
His views sound bizarre because they are rarely heard or discussed, but that doesn't mean that all of his views are wrong. He adds a different perspective which is worth considering, such as what is the influence of the unions on Labour. He is entitled to be wrong in his opinions, we shouldn't try to stop him expressing them. I think it is good to hear views from all perspectives from both left and right. I think if people start attacking others and asking them to leave the site etc., this will obviously descend into mud-slinging. Let's discuss political opinions instead of name-calling.

Fliight says
"And then the stupid, stupid stereotypes start flying out, 'you loony lefties' etc etc"
I think phrases such as 'loony lefties' are just the knockabout phrases of political argy-bargy. This phrase is in the dictionary and newspapers use it, so it is not really a big deal. I don't see it as any different to TheHeathenOfSuburbia's use of the term 'barking' when applied to right-wing thinking i.e.
"ultra-right-wing anti-Europe barking".
I don't think we should get too upset by this type of political knockabout, it's often used to get the other side to join in the debate.

bnpfacts.wordpress.com/

There was a great documentary about the 60th anniversary of the Dunkrik evacuation a few years back. The guys who ran the boats across the channel, ordinary people, spoke about how right wing Tories and Moseleyites came to the harbours to plead with them not to go. Because they wanted Germany to invade and sort out immigration (the Jewish problem), socialism and so on.

But the left prevailed, kicked out Churchill after the war and created the NHS (despite physical attacks, threats and abuse from the right wing elite who run the media), created free education for all (despite physical attacks, threats and abuse from the right wing media) and we still face the same problems today. The façades about free markets, wealth creation and we are all middle class now are illusions.

Are you a socialist or a fascist?

It's a very commonly held view, apparently "the illuminati" is a hierarchical structure which starts with groups such as the Masons because it encompasses all professions.

You probably wouldn't have to look much further than your local police/fire service before you would hear a bit more about it.

I don't think it's been a debate, I think it's been a farce. Not many of us can be bothered to engage with such radical and tightly clasped views

there are huge self contradictions

there is mud slinging from both sides

the whole thing makes me feel a bit ill.

Why do you think that the 1992 election was never won by labour as was commonly predicted. Who do you think was behind that?

It was much more to do with the powers that be fearing that Neil Kinnock wouldn't have the necessary balls to keep Russia behaving.

ahundredtimes thanks for describing me in the following way
"His - and I think Claig's too actually - viewpoints appear to be calm and reasoned, but they're not. They seethe with fear and fury, it's volatile and highly charged"

I think you are getting over emotional as you say that you think that way
"It's an incredibly emotional argument. And that is VERY difficult to debate with. I think much more that way, than the other."
I think you need to calm down and stop thinking that different viewpoints to your own mean that they are "seething with fear and fury". The fact that you have described my posts in that manner, leads me to conclude that you can only be projecting your own fury.

Oh another thread telling me my potential choices are bad ones

If you don't want a ung government vote for the aprty I want tehn becuase I am not changing my vote to soemthing I disagree with to allow others their own choices

Flight;

If you don't think there's been a debate on a thread with Linctash, Claig, & Alouiseg...( 3 of the best posters on MN atm) then you need to give up....

give up what?

lololol omg.....you don't even understand what I'm saying, and I'm nowhere near as good as them....

I'm sorry about that conclusion you have been forced to leap to Claig. I can only tell you I'm not projecting, and I don't feel furious. Telling people to 'calm down' is always daft, and is an attempt to wind them up further! I'm sure you know this, but it isn't working! Sorry.

During the course of this thread I came to understand what yours and Lincs terms of reference were. It helped me to understand where you were both coming from.

What you are calling debate - was actually ranting. He disliked being challenged, and when he was became increasingly vitriolic.

He is entitled to these views, as are you. But it's v wrong - and slightly insidious - to pretend this was JUST a reasonable, passionate conversation about the effects of a hung parliament.

It wasn't. It seethed with a different agenda which slowly became clearer the more it went on.

And it's fine for anyone to acknowledge that.

Sorry what? DP you're not making any sense.

and since when did you ever say

'lololol omg'?

has your account been hijacked?

I think the fash supporters on this thread do a better job of convincing the majority of people to stay on the left than the left do most of the time...give 'em enough rope etc...

The Illuminati, the secret Masons heheheheh! Aren't they the ones controlled by shape shifting Alien lizards? Or is that the Matrix?

Mind you i've had enough of arguing with right wing twats this week, sustained contact with news international has given me my fill.

Wynkenblynkennod - I didn't understand all of the last bit of your post but I think one part of an answer is this:

If there is a hung parliament, it is likely that there will be alliances between parties, in order to ensure legislation goes through. The most likely alliance would be between Lib Dems and Labour. Though that isn't a foregone conclusion.

It had looked, until quite recently, as though the Conservatives would achieve a majority, though perhaps quite tight. Because of the Liberal swing, that is looking, perhaps, a little less, certain.

The Lib Dems would almost certainly insist that any alliance would be bought at the price of some kind of electoral, reform involving some kind of Proportional Represenation.

There are lots of different forms of Proportional Representation. i have to say I am now weak on the different forms of PR - I'd come to the conclusion it was most unlikely to happen. But there we go. Perhaps some research is in order. Or we could try asking Policywonk!

' sustained contact with news international has given me my fill.'

Oh tell me about it fllight! Dh'scontract at his last place of employment was for them . He does not miss them. Thank goodness for self employment.