Winter of Discontent --- Part Two

[Renton 22008]

How old is Danny Alexander as well? Have his balls actually dropped yet?

[Meenzer 15737]

Fits the George Osborne model of government by undeveloped foetus, I suppose.

[ewerk 31225]

Yup, the Lib Dems can't really cause too many problems, otherwise it would be a sign that coalition governments don't work in the UK and probably the death knell for any alternative voting system.

 

So for now they just have to play along with the Tories game and shed support in doing so.

[Guest alex]

The unions might as well go for the full-on socialist class war approach as that's how it'll be portrayed in The Sun, etc. regardless.

[AgentAxeman 189]

Oh CT, Labour may have lost the election but have you forgotten so did the tories?

 

 

no they didnt, they got the majority of the votes. hence they won.

 

(admitedly not by a sufficient margin to govern independently)

 

No they didn't, if you don't know the definition of the word 'majority' then maybe you shouldn't be talking with the big boys.

 

fair enough ewerk, however the tories did win the most seats which is what i, of course, meant all along.

[Guest alex]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

[AgentAxeman 189]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

[Guest alex]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

[AgentAxeman 189]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

 

 

youre making it harder than needs be bud, i said the tories won the most seats. 306? to labours 250 something. tell me whats hard about that.

[Renton 22008]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

 

 

youre making it harder than needs be bud, i said the tories won the most seats. 306? to labours 250 something. tell me whats hard about that.

 

So if Labour had formed a coalition instead, would they have won?

 

You can just admit you were wrong if you like.

[Guest alex]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

 

 

youre making it harder than needs be bud, i said the tories won the most seats. 306? to labours 250 something. tell me whats hard about that.

The joke was based on your not knowing what majority means though.

[AgentAxeman 189]

So if Labour had formed a coalition instead, would they have won?

 

of course. tell me Renton, if labour had formed a coalition with the lib dems instead of the tories, which party in this hypothetical coalition would have the main say in policy?

[AgentAxeman 189]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

 

 

youre making it harder than needs be bud, i said the tories won the most seats. 306? to labours 250 something. tell me whats hard about that.

The joke was based on your not knowing what majority means though.

 

i fell into the trap of lazy language. for that, i apologise. i shall endeavour to be clearer with my definitions from this time forward.

[Renton 22008]

So if Labour had formed a coalition instead, would they have won?

 

of course. tell me Renton, if labour had formed a coalition with the lib dems instead of the tories, which party in this hypothetical coalition would have the main say in policy?

 

So Labour would have won despite getting less seats than the oppositon? Is that how you see it? It could have easliy happened as well were it not for the relationship between Brown and Clegg.

 

A coalition is what it is, the Conservatives did not win an outright majority and do not have a majority government. They did not 'win' and require the continued support of the Lib Dems to function. How long this will go on for is will be interesting.

 

Admitting you were wrong would have been easier btw.

[Guest alex]

Didn't even get the majority of the seats tbh

 

very true , your post would have been funnier however if i hadnt just explained that.

It didn't though. You could have the most seats and the majority, unlike your beloved Tories. Hard work this like

 

 

youre making it harder than needs be bud, i said the tories won the most seats. 306? to labours 250 something. tell me whats hard about that.

The joke was based on your not knowing what majority means though.

 

i fell into the trap of lazy language. for that, i apologise. i shall endeavour to be clearer with my definitions from this time forward.

Just stick to words you know the meaning of. Especially when you're trying to be clever.

[Meenzer 15737]

This is where the "rock and a hard place" logic kicks in though - whatever the electoral mechanics of the situation may have allowed, the Lib Dems would have been just have fucked if they (and the necessary others) had propped up a Brown government for x years. And they could hardly say "we'll support a minority coalition government with Labour as long as the PM isn't Brown" as 97% of the voting public would cry foul because they think they're voting on Brown/Cameron/Clegg etc. and not their local MP.

[AgentAxeman 189]

So if Labour had formed a coalition instead, would they have won?

 

of course. tell me Renton, if labour had formed a coalition with the lib dems instead of the tories, which party in this hypothetical coalition would have the main say in policy?

 

So Labour would have won despite getting less seats than the oppositon? Is that how you see it? It could have easliy happened as well were it not for the relationship between Brown and Clegg.

 

A coalition is what it is, the Conservatives did not win an outright majority and do not have a majority government. They did not 'win' and require the continued support of the Lib Dems to function. How long this will go on for is will be interesting.

 

Admitting you were wrong would have been easier btw.

 

of course. it doesnt matter how who climb the slippery pole as long as you get to the top. and in this case, the top is the people who dictate policy ie. the big winner. if labour had formed this unholy abomination of a coalition i would probably look on it as you look on the current coalition, with extreme distaste and mistrust but in the big scheme of things, labour would still be the winner as they would wield the most influence and power.

[AgentAxeman 189]

Just stick to words you know the meaning of. Especially when you're trying to be clever.

 

I'll try.......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...................cat, hat, sat, etc.

 

[Guest alex]

Think the unions are actually trying to be reasonable here although the OP demonstrates my point about how things will be perceived irrespective of that.

Also, re: AA's and Renton's battle of wills - who says politics is boring?

[Christmas Tree 4851]

So democracy's ok when it suits.

 

Who'd have thought, the tory voters that got them in support the cuts being implemented that effect them least.

 

Not sure what's undemocratic about the people suffering the worst of the cuts not lying down and taking it up the arse.

 

Firstly there was always going to cuts and therefore job losses whoever won the election.

 

Secondly and more importantly most cuts havent even been decided yet so its not the "people" rising up its the communist egomaniacs like Crow who are trying to organise mass general strikes.

 

If this action goes ahead it will have very little support from the majority of the public imo.

[Guest alex]

So democracy's ok when it suits.

 

Who'd have thought, the tory voters that got them in support the cuts being implemented that effect them least.

 

Not sure what's undemocratic about the people suffering the worst of the cuts not lying down and taking it up the arse.

 

Firstly there was always going to cuts and therefore job losses whoever won the election.

 

Secondly and more importantly most cuts havent even been decided yet so its not the "people" rising up its the communist egomaniacs like Crow who are trying to organise mass general strikes.

 

If this action goes ahead it will have very little support from the majority of the public imo.

Have the mass general strikes you're talking about been anywhere near as widely mooted as the cuts proposed by the government? If so, provide the evidence.

Edited September 14, 2010 by alex

[Christmas Tree 4851]

At the moment Tory scum just think "benefit cheats" will be affected by the cuts - as it becomes apparent that it will effect them after all to some degree their tune will change.

 

Also CT a Union's whole raison d'etre is to protect and fight for its members jobs - surely that includes opposing cuts to those jobs?

 

Dont totally disagree with the second point however theres something a bit different going on here I think. Talking about General coordinated strikes is bad enough, but before most cuts have been announced is not on really.

 

Add to the mix that a lot of the private sector has been putting up with job losses, pay cuts and various shit for the last three years while the public sector has been protected by Labours wasteful spending. All points to a very unpleasant time.

[Christmas Tree 4851]

How old is Danny Alexander as well? Have his balls actually dropped yet?

 

 

 

[Christmas Tree 4851]

So democracy's ok when it suits.

 

Who'd have thought, the tory voters that got them in support the cuts being implemented that effect them least.

 

Not sure what's undemocratic about the people suffering the worst of the cuts not lying down and taking it up the arse.

 

Firstly there was always going to cuts and therefore job losses whoever won the election.

 

Secondly and more importantly most cuts havent even been decided yet so its not the "people" rising up its the communist egomaniacs like Crow who are trying to organise mass general strikes.

 

If this action goes ahead it will have very little support from the majority of the public imo.

Have the mass general strikes you're talking about been anywhere near as widely mooted as the cuts proposed by the government? If so, provide the evidence.

 

Well they only came to light yesterday with the start of the TUC conference but every media source from TV to press etc are all running with it. The labour candidates are all over it. Surely your not after google links to the biggest story of the last 24 hours?

[Guest alex]

Only speech I heard was quite reasonable tbh. Not heard any others. Surely it would make sense to quote the stuff you have a problem with though.