Party, party, party, party, party.

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by Gob »

Britain politics faces being plunged into chaos after the election, as a detailed study of seats across the country shows at least three parties would be needed to form a coalition.

Image


Political commentator Iain Dale predicts Labour will win 300 seats and the Tories 279, but both would need at least two other parties to secure a majority of the 650 MPs in the Commons. Today Nick Clegg ruled out ever sitting in a Cabinet with Ukip while Green party leader Natalie Bennett said her party would not join a power-sharing deal with anyone.

Mr Dale argues that national opinion polls offer no help in predicting what will happen at the election, because they cannot reflect what will happen in seats where four, five or even six parties are standing. Instead he has spent recent weeks looking at every seat in the country, and using polling, local knowledge and 'sniffing the political wind' to predict what will happen in each constituency. Writing in the Independent on Sunday, Mr Dale said: 'The truth is that this is the most unpredictable election in recent memory and for one very simple reason – for the first time in British political history, we're now in five party politics.

Image

'For the first time ever it's conceivable that the joint vote share of the two main parties might be under 60 per cent.' He predicts that the Tories will 'pile up votes in seats where they don't need them', suggesting Labour could get more seats but fewer votes. The study confidently predicts that the Lib Dems 'will lose more than half of their seats', taking them to just 24. 'It could get even worse, although I reckon Nick Clegg will be safe in Sheffield Hallam,' he adds. It means that even with the support of the Lib Dems, neither Labour nor the Tories would be able to form an overall majority.

A so-called 'Rainbow Coalition' would then need to be agreed involving three or more parties, which all leaders acknowledge will be incredibly unstable. Mr Clegg today flatly ruled out at the idea of serving in a government with Nigel Farage which also included Ukip MPs. Asked if he could imagine a power-sharing deal with Ukip, he told BBC One's Andrew Marr show: 'No. I just really cannot see how Nigel Farage and I could ever…' It has been suggested that Labour could be forced to rely on SNP support to form a government.

But Mr Clegg also cast doubt on the Lib Dems entering power with the Scottish nationalists. 'I find it very difficult to imagine the circumstances in which I would do that,' he added. Mr Clegg also ridiculed Mr Dale's prediction that the Lib Dems would lose half of their seats. 'Iain Dale will have to eat his words, because I really don't think that's going to happen. He's a good man but some of his predictions are getting a bit silly,' he said.

“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11657
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by Crackpot »

Thier math is off I see at least one possible two party majority
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

"Britain politics"

Ignorant twats.

Yeah CP - a Lab/Con coalition would fry 'em all!
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11657
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by Crackpot »

People of opposing political beliefs working together for the good of all. If only john Lennon could imagine that.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by wesw »

um, one question. does twat in britian mean the same as it does in American?

(grammar and spelling errors intentional)

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Something Wiki this way comes...
The word twat is vulgar slang for the human vulva, but is more widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English, referring to a person considered obnoxious or stupid
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Party, party, party, party, party.

Post by wesw »

I thought it translated to twit, thanks for the verification.

norman clegg sometimes calls people twats and I didn t think that he say such a thing if it meant the same as is does here....

Post Reply