 |
| |
|
|
Drogue
|
 |
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheStinger
You have every right to diagree with it but really the issues should be debated rather than the labelling that is going on. |
Very true. My problem with the UKIP is that the Euro elections do not decide if we stay in Europe. We are in Europe, and to move out would be a Westminster decision. I agree with their position, but while we're still in Europe, I'll vote for a party that will do well for Britain in Europe. The UKIP candidates don't vote on important, hardly speak or question policy, and are generally inactive. If you want to get out of Europe, vote for them in an election that will decide it. They have one manifesto pledge - to get out of Europe, which is something they cannot fulfill. In other words, they have no policies that relate to the Euro elections. If sending a message is more important than having a candidate that actually does their job, then vote UKIP. I'll send a message when it comes to the consitution, the Euro, and the national elections. Elections that can actually change how the UK relates to Europe.
It's not a respectable policy for this election, even though I agree with it, because it's unfulfillable. It's something these elections don't decide at all. If they get 100% of the vote, we'll still be just as in Europe as we were before, but with MEPs that don't vote or care.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
|
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
Ozzy:
Depends how you define the axis. The political compass put them a little right, and a little liberal. I think they're pretty centrist economically, but that's about the size of it.
They want more civil liberties, like decriminalizing cannabis. They want more state accountability and proportional voting. I'd say that makes the pretty liberal, certainly more so than the largely anti-gay Tories (against section 28 and gay marriage) and the 'father-knows-best' Labour.
They want better environmental regulation, better public services, and possibly a little more tax to pay for them, but they also want deregulation, privitisation, and a simplification of tax and benefit structures. In the end, an individual would probably end up paying a little more in tax, but most of the public service benefits would come in efficiency and deregulation.
Economically you can either vote for:
Labour - Burocratic, inefficienct and filled with self-set targets, though good with the economy. Tax and spend.
Tory - Want efficiency gains, market forces and less welfare, but higher pensions. Would remove targets, improve choice, and lower tax, but probably at the detriment of some public services. Any gains would result in lower tax, not better services. Would remove uni fees by making fewer places available. Don't tax (ish) and sort-of spend.
Lib Dem - Like Tories, want efficiency gains, but would use them to improve services. Want to simplify tax system (raise income tax, lower 'stealth' taxes) to help pay. Would remove uni fees by more funding. Tax and spend.
quote:
Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
It depends which Liberal Democrats you talk to, Ozzy. In inner cities, they'll portray themselves as a social democratic alternative to Labour. In the shires and the south-west, they're "Tories-with-a-smile". |
And both would be socially left, economically centrist, mainly. It's hard to put them left or right, economically, since they want better services, environmental regulations and possibly more tax, though they want to deregulate, privitise and use market forces more.
In the city, they'll campaign on better services, in the south, on deregulations and efficiency. Probably best described to an American as as close to the Democrats as the UK gets, but strong on environment and weaker on workers' rights.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
|
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
So now we take part of a post by someone who happens to be posting on a Lib Dem forum, call them an 'activist', and try to smear a party of millions with it. If I find a Tory voter who asks the same question, as most people do at some point in their lives, would that be a reasonable Tory smear? No. Also, it was a question, not a statement of support. I've asked what's wrong with communism before. The answer being a lot, but it's still a question. Moreover, communism is an economic doctorate. You can have anarcho-communism, and you can have authoritarian communism. Hence the "I thought you guys were supposed to be "Liberal"?" comment is also wrong, even were it a statement of support for communism, which it wasn't.
Who cares that a person, who may or may not support the Lib Dems, asks a question about communism? It shows naivity, possibly, but it's a a question many ask.
Smear campaigning 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
Not entirely related to the topic, but a question for the Americans here(well and any i guess).
But if it was your President being called a 'poodle' in comparison to the British Prime Minister, ie the relationship balance was reversed, would you still want to vote for him next time around?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2004 19:32
) or the raving looney party if i'm not feeling concerend about the enviroment at the time 
|