• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

General Election 2015

Which party would you cast your vote for?

  • Conservative

    Votes: 2 4.2%
  • Labour

    Votes: 8 16.7%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Greens

    Votes: 14 29.2%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 3 6.3%
  • BNP

    Votes: 2 4.2%
  • SNP

    Votes: 6 12.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 4.2%
  • None of the above (feel free to post in thread)

    Votes: 11 22.9%

  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .
You beat me to it! We've just watched the whole episode. Oor Nicola did good. :)

Full clip of her interview here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2tabx8_the-unexpurgated-sturgeon_news

Only half of her interview was in the show, but that link shows all of it.

I knew Jon Stewart would be nice to her, but still, she held her own and made us proud. Surprised he didn't say anything about the headlines calling her "The Most Dangerous Woman in Britain". :D
 
Go Nicola!

Mirror online poll on who should be labour leader: Jeremy Corbyn 52%, Andy Burnham 18%, Liz Kendall 15%, Yvette Cooper 11%

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labours-next-leader-must-learn-5843084

In your fucking face new labour (it's only an online poll, and i'm sure the labour party machine will ignore it (and it means nothing if corbyn doesn't get 35 mps to back him)). Corbyn's one of the (few) good ones - him becoming leader of labour would make me seriously reconsider my apathy towards them. I don't accept the assumption that the only way labour could succeed is by moving to the right - if labour had clearly stated they'd nationalise the railways/electricity/royal mail/NHS, and had dared to make a strong case for keynesian spending against austerity (and didn't feel the need to jump through all the ridiculous hoops the media gave them to appear right wing enough) i think they'd have won the last election - helped by how much more the media would have turned on them if they did say those things.

A petition to hassle labour mps into nominating jeremy corbyn:

https://www.change.org/p/labour-par...ty-views-and-the-chance-to-signal-their-suppo
 
^

Totally agree. People aren't as scared of 'ideas' as the MSM would have us believe. Vurtual, your own musings on this forum are evidence of this. EADD is hardly a hotbed of radicalism (no, it really fucking isn't) but some well explained political ideas by yourself had posters fawning over you (bit strong but you know what I mean).

People will vote for left wing ideas, properly explained. It is only the hegemony of the ruling class and the institutions they control that keeps people from living a better life.
 
SHM: This is clear looking at voteforpolicies (chomsky always quotes us polling data showing that the public attitudes to policies are consistently social democratic when divorced from parties). Also i remember reading that even a majority of the tory party supports rail nationalisation (here).

TD: what other vote? was it a local election or something?
 
Jeremy Corbyn made it! (he got the 35th mp nomination with 2 minutes to go) - thanks to a big campaign of hassling labour mps to support him. The suspicion is that he's only really there to make andy burnham look less left wing (ha!). If the polls we had before are any indication (54% corbyn to 19% burnham), maybe the one member one vote policy could give the bastards an upset (and the core labour party voters the leader they actually want) - this all seems very unlikely, but hope is hard to kill off fully.

Apparently you can join the labour party for £3 just to vote for the leader (link) - i'll see how it pans out but i might just have to hold my nose to supoort a socialist...
 
Frankie Boyle on the Labour Leadership election: seems it takes a disgraced comedian to provide decent political analysis (with jokes) http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...hip-candidates-boring-rightwing-frankie-boyle

Interesting times in British politics. We can look forward to David Cameron’s merciless manoeuvring against his rivals – “It’s a touch unconventional, Boris, but I’m appointing you Israel’s ambassador to Syria!” – and a London mayoral race between a group of characters you would normally expect to see arguing about how to deal with Batman. And yet we know that none of this is good, in the same way we know that seeing a beautiful mural on the side of a building just means that you’re in a really shit neighbourhood.

At least the Labour leadership election offers a reassuring oasis of boredom. The candidates have few redeeming features, or features of any kind. They work most successfully not as politicians, but as a sort of broad-ranging challenge to satire. Yvette Cooper has a broken, downbeat delivery that could make Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah sound like a cancer diagnosis. Andy Burnham sounds like he wishes that there were speedbumps in Mario Kart. They both give interviews with the halting, guarded intonation of a hostage. Liz Kendall at least has the alarming air of an Apprentice candidate, and surely that show’s unique dynamic – where you can be fired without actually having a job – meshes neatly with the party’s increasingly colourful views on workers’ rights.

Of course, none of the frontrunners are proper socialists; they don’t even hate each other. Jeremy Corbyn did scrape together enough nominations to stand, causing the left of the party to get quite excited that it is still allowed to lose. One of the few decent politicians remaining in the Labour party, he reminds me of those old drinkers you see haunting a new bar because they used to go to the pub that was there before.


Much of the contest so far has involved the candidates fretting about how the party can be more pro-business. It is not even clear what they mean by this word “business”. Are they worried about small businesses that care about being able to borrow money; manufacturing businesses that care about high growth; transnational businesses that care about you taking your tax bill and shoving it up your arse; or the banking business, which doesn’t care whether anybody lives or dies but would like a lot of hot Russian mafia money to flash about the dying nervous system of the finance industry as though we’re treating Aids with cocaine? Obviously, those are all interests that sometimes oppose each other in various ways. I’m reduced to imagining that “pro-business” is simply a rhetorical code for “rightwing”, and that we are watching leadership contenders wonder aloud whether they are being rightwing enough.

We’re told that they are responding to the concerns of voters. Labour keeps saying: “We’re concerned about immigration because that’s what people say on the doorstep.” You’re a political party. You’re not asking people if they want anything down the shops – you’re meant to have guiding principles. Also, it is a mistake to think that British people say what they mean. We’ll tell you that our core value is hard work, but nobody actually means it. People know that there is no social mobility any more; hard work doesn’t help you get ahead. Working hard just means that you finish early and get given more work. Hardworking is a word we came up with to describe people at work who we like but are a bit thick. We don’t remember hardworking footballers. We celebrate the ones who were unbelievably brilliant but died at 26 when heading an effort against the crossbar dislodged a fatal dose of ketamine from the back of their nose.

There is a very simple case to be made against austerity, but Labour doesn’t have the guts to make it. This seems strange when it was wiped out by an anti-austerity party in Scotland. The SNP trounced them so emphatically that Nicola Sturgeon’s Scottish scriptwriters had to desperately search their memories for words that express pleasure. “Hang on! I think my mum said something when I got my degree … ‘not bad’, I think it was – write down ‘not bad’.” There is every chance that the changes in Scotland are structural and Labour is gone for ever, like cholera or Rangers.

A third of the electorate didn’t vote at the last election, and many who said they were going to vote Labour didn’t vote at all. Can it really be easier to convert Tories than to reconnect with your own core support? Perhaps these prospective leaders simply live in a class bubble, and their understanding of real people lacks nuance. One thing about being pro-business and working with business is that you spend a lot of time with, well, Tories. Perhaps you spend a lot of time with other politicians, and at the echo chamber of party events. So you get your information about people from polls (which can be misleading) and the media (which is deliberately misleading), and we end up with a leadership campaign aimed at a public who hate benefits, immigrants and shirkers. Labour’s candidates seem to have the same estimation of the public as a tabloid editor. Still, they must know that they are not going to win the next election, barring some kind of apocalyptic meltdown of the banking sector. I make them about 3-1.
 
Last edited:
Missed all this due to a 4 month bluelight absence.

Basically... I would have been saying:

Farage seems pretty down to earth, though I sense darker undertones... strikes me as a bit of a Hitler... really needed to address the Nazi/bnp perception people have on the party and convince us that there was sense in their actions.... but never did. Just slagged off more immigrants. Really worried by their popularity

Green - voted for them before, but wont anymore. Don't like to think of our country being ruled by an Australian (not being xenophobic, it's a bit like when England football team have a foreign manager. Everyone thinks "wtf!")... Totally disagree with them scrapping our nuclear weapons, think that leaves us vulnerable and they do act as a deterrent to war. Don't agree with legalising brothels and they are way too soft on drugs, of course.

Milliband - No charisma. Seemed to be outsmarted on the debates by farage and Cameron. Didn't think he was the right man to lead the country.

Cameron - hate tory's, would never vote for them... but he seems to be the lesser of 3 evils and better than milliband.





So who won it in the end then?
 
Last edited:
You must have watched different debates than me - cameron floundered, farage spluttered (temazepamed up apparently), milliband was his usual halting self, but his arguments (what it's about after all) pissed all over cameron's from where i was standing. If sturgeon wasn't there to put them all in the shade and undermine miliband's attempts at leftishness, he'd have 'won' all the debates imo. Miliband lost the media battle (and hence the election), due to not having any mates who own the media.

I didn't like bennet much, but cos she was useless - australian didn't come into it (would you say the same about a jew?)

Cameron's the best of three evils? Bloody hell!

How exactly do our nuclear bombs act as a deterrent over and above america's stockpile? (and we can't even use ours without their permission). What do you think of the 'ploughshares' movement's attitude to nukes?
 
Last edited:
You must have watched different debates than me - cameron floundered, farage spluttered (temazepamed up apparently), milliband was his usual halting self, but his arguments (what it's about after all) pissed all over cameron's from where i was standing. If sturgeon wasn't there to put them all in the shade and undermine miliband's attempts at leftishness, he'd have 'won' all the debates imo. Miliband lost the media battle (and hence the election), due to not having any mates who own the media.

Erm, I felt like Milliband kept trying to make Cameron look stupid and failed every time. Cameron countered with swift rebuttles to millibands accusations each time making milliband look a bit silly. Oh and the Russell brand debate also was the final nail in millibands political coffin for me. The "Ed stone" was the, er, Ed stone to that coffin.

What do you think of the 'ploughshares' movement's attitude to nukes?

Not really for it. Seems to me destroying nukes may just give opportunities to future warmongers.
 
We see what we want to see i guess. To me, in the first (non-)debate cameron was all over the shop against paxman and miliband was pretty good - even challenging paxman and getting the audience on his side (though the 'hell yeah' was cringeworthy). The second debate neither cameron or miliband really did much of use next to sturgeon who stole the show. Oh well, all academic now.

I'd have thought getting rid of our irrelevant nukes which we can't ever use without america (who've got thousands of nukes) wanting us to would reduce opportunities for future warmongers in this country (and we produce more than most).
 
I missed the Cameron paxman debate, was referring to the live debate with all 5. Yes sturgeon stole the show I admit, but in the few banters they had I felt Cameron was better than Ed.

As for Nukes, I think the Lib Dems policy of downsizing them seems more sensible, but greens destruction of all weapons as over the top. A lot of their policies seem too far left for me and I don't see them as practical or stable for the country.
 
The paxman was a definite lose for cameron and for the first time miliband came off to the public as something more than wallace. This is when operation bacon sandwich mark 2 kicked in. Harder to call between cameron and miliband in the 5 way.

The greens aren't that far left at all - slightly left of (what used to be) centre really. Austerity economics is bollocks and all serious economists/commentators know it (and can prove it) - and yet the media have managed to hoodwink the public into believing stuff like the nation's finances are like a credit card, and that we've got no money so we have to cut public services - when you believe things like that, maybe conservatives (or nu labour) can seem like a sensible choice. When powerful interests can so successfully make the population believe stuff that's bullshit and directly against their interests we are nowhere near democracy.
 
Only 25% of the electorate voted Tory. We could burn them down. It's possible. That's not that many people really.

And steal their money because let's face it, they have the money. New form of governing and the radical redistribution of wealth in one move.

It's possible. Just saying.
 
Only 25% of the electorate voted Tory. We could burn them down. It's possible. That's not that many people really.

And steal their money because let's face it, they have the money. New form of governing and the radical redistribution of wealth in one move.

It's possible. Just saying.

I'm up for it. Hopefully ClassWarfare will kick up a bit of chaos this weekend at the anti-austerity demo.
 
"... [Jeremy Corben] reminds me of those old drinkers you see haunting a new bar because they used to go to the pub that was there before." - bwaaahahahahahahahahahhaahaa!!!

Sad but true. He's the only one of the bunch who comes close to bringing at least vague feelings of hope. Which no doubt means one of those other utter non-entities - the women are especially vapid for some reason, with Burnham coming over like some kinda low-rent Tony Blair impersonator (now with added "regional" accent!!!). Watching their interviews on Newsnight has been uniformly painful to the point of tortuous (with the exception of Corben who at least said things that seemed to have actual content of some kind).

Also, 25 Things the Tory Government Has Pledged to Do - genuinely terrifying. Be afraid, be very afraid indeed. Then stop being afraid and make with the burnings.
 
Top