The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > UK election...when trends are bucked.

UK election...when trends are bucked.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
The UK election outcome contained some interesting aspects.

Let's look at 2 seats and see if we can work it out?

The trend for Labour has been down...down....down... and Labor has done nothing but increase debt, and a litany of other disastrous downward plunging decisions....

On his first day of work, the new incoming chief secretary of the U.K. treasury, David Law, was greeted with the following note from his outgoing predecessor:

“Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left.”

BLACKBURN. (JACK STRAW)

Straws vote for the past few elections.

1992 26,663 Labour
1997 23,141
2001 21,808
2005 17,562

2010 21,571 !

The loss of conservative votes after 1992 do not seem to have gone anywhere else.. looks more like they just didn't vote to me.

Now let's look at another contentious seat

"BARKING and DAGENHAM" (MARGARET HODGE)

1997 21,698
2001 15,302
2005 13,826

2010 24,628 !

Any sleuths out there who can shed light on these surprising outcomes ?

Bear in mind...the national mood was 'anti labour(Brown?)' as the results for 2010 show.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Thursday, 20 May 2010 6:14:35 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I haven't quite figured out why you have asked this question, ALGOREisRICH, but for the moment I'll take it at face value.

In summary, there were no "surprises" here, at all.

Blackburn:

First, your data for 1997 is incorrect. The figure is 26,141, not 23,141 as stated.

So the major movement in support for Jack Straw would seem to be confined to 2001 onwards.

The main point to note is that the UK has a "first past the post" system, so the most important measurement is that of the "majority" over the second-placed candidate. You will see that Straw's majority has been extremely consistent in the last three elections, between eight and ten thousand votes. So nothing noteworthy there.

Barking:

The Westminster constituency is Barking; Barking and Dagenham is the Local Council.

Margaret Hodge has been the Member for Barking since 1994.

The apparent low vote of 15,302 in 2001 conceals the fact that this represented 61% of those who voted.

The even lower vote of 2005 can be attributed to the appearance of a high-profile British National Party candidate, who took votes from both Labour and Conservative. Her majority, though, was still close to 9,000, which was 30% of the total turnout.

In 2010 the BNP candidate was the even higher profile Nick Griffin. For whatever reason, an additional 15,000 voters turned out on this occasion (61.4% of the electorate, up from 50.1%), and two thirds of these extra voters supported Hodge, while the BNP support declined.

Hope this helps.

I'd be genuinely interested to know why you thought it significant enough to comment upon.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 20 May 2010 9:19:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thankyou Pericles for that helpful analysis and minor factual correction. Sorry the figure was slips for 1997 on Straw.. many figures..back and forth.. u know how it goes.

Why interested ? I'm interested in the whole UK election and associated social trends.

I understand that in Barking, high powered use was made of the Democrat Blue state digital election methods and some rather frantic ringing around of pensioners in a kind of scare campaign took place.

The demographic changes over the past decade might explain the increased voter turnout in 2010 and could do with some more in depth scrutiny.

This might help

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s/baileybd

Don't you just love that video which 'begins' from the point of Bailey lashing out at the poor (naturally innocent) young Asian bloke ? :)
Those BNP scum are truly 'nazi scum' using thug tactics to impose their fascist views on the people of Barking..specially the immigrants...or so UAF would have everyone believe.

This might be more helpful though in showing the prelude to him lashing out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dELv_bYZTL4

But even that vid does not show the full story.

The 2 accounts are clear evidence of how political/activist groups edit material to suit their agenda.

The FULL version shows the 3 Asians approaching Bailey in a menacing way.. him backing off and using open hands to fairly gently push them away from being in his face... but in the interests of balance and truth..he is asking them "any robbers among you" as they approach.
(which in those areas might be a fair question for a white bloke)
But even THAT does not tell the full story.
The precedent was a violent attack on Griffin earlier which caused him to abort his public campaign speech.

So..many layers to find the real truth eh.

Needless to say the tactics of UAF/HopeNotHate (funded and supported by all the major parties) as shown in this video are using the same level of vile imbalance in the rest of their public activism in the attempt to thwart the BNP from gaining ground.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Thursday, 20 May 2010 11:53:58 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thought it might be about race, ALGOREisRICH.

Not at all about "the whole UK election and associated social trends."

Why the attempt at deceit? Just be bold, come straight out with it.

Incidentally, I happen to know the area, and the people, very well. I still have a couple of relatives there. Just thought I'd mention it.

>>The demographic changes over the past decade might explain the increased voter turnout in 2010 and could do with some more in depth scrutiny<<

The boundary changes since the last election consisted of the inclusion of three wards. According to The Economist...

"Once a solid Labour bastion of the white working class, Barking has become increasingly marginal, especially after boundary changes brought it three wards where the BNP is strong"

http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=16015534

Curious, then, that the BNP vote declined by 2.1%.

>>The 2 accounts are clear evidence of how political/activist groups edit material to suit their agenda<<

That is indeed a staggering insight. It might take me a while to process its full import.

Nah, just kidding. But that was a seriously naive thing for you to say, wasn't it.

So, what's the takeaway from all this?

You like the BNP. You think they have been hard done by in Barking. You are concerned that there are people over there who will band together in an attempt to keep these troglodytes out of power.

Incidentally, the Barking and Dagenham Council election was held on the same day as the General Election. Labour candidates won in every Ward, and now occupy all 51 seats on the Council.

Now, what was your question?

Ah yes.

>>Any sleuths out there who can shed light on these surprising outcomes ?<<

Lots of light now, I hope.

Still no surprises, though.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 20 May 2010 2:21:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Factual correction Pericles

The BNP vote in Barking increased.

2005 4,916

2010 6,620 An increase of 30%

Overall results: (UK)

2005 BNP polled 192,745
2010 BNP polled 563,743 over 200% increase. (I must be missing something ? help if I am..I'm using wiki so who knows.)

how pray tell did you get your figure of a 2.1% decline for either Barking or UK as a whole ?

As to it being about 'race' ? I am aware of 3 issues which are of concern to residents of Barking irrespective of race.. they are:

Employment (lack thereof)
Housing (access to.. availiability of)
Immigration (probably more a concern to the white working class who are feeling marginalized over the above 2 issues)

FORD PLANT CLOSURE. 50,000 Barking/Dagenham workers were employed at the ford assembly plant until, due to incessant Union/communist attacks on productivity and competitiveness.. the inevitable happened..the plant surcumbed to the more efficient, lower cost labor in Europe and other countries and.. it shut down.
Now it employs approx 2000 people in Diesel engine assembly.

48,000 unemployed in one foul swoop..and you think it's about race ?
I suggest that any racial resentment is a by product and a minor component of mass unemployement.
Union 'heroes' caused a 3 month stoppage in 1971-ish and it virtually killed an already sick company. Did they care ? not on your life!
Did Labor look after the Unionists ? 18,000,000 pounds to "Unite" union for 'training of representatives' (eeeuwwww) speaks volumes in recent weeks and the Treasury official said to the incoming minister "No more money left" gee..I wonder why ?
Get over yourself on race Pericles there is much more to it than that.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Thursday, 20 May 2010 3:16:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles: << Why the attempt at deceit? >>

I asked a very similar question just now in another thread. Perhaps BOAZ_David/Polycarp/no_THIS_ismeBD/ALGOREisRICH just doesn't know how to be honest.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 20 May 2010 7:54:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Still stirring the pot, I see, Boaz.

But it's as important as ever that you pay attention to the facts. It was always your weakness, rushing into print before absorbing the detail necessary to support your knee-jerk prejudices

There's no place to hide, you know. All your previous incarnations are still here, to provide the necessary depth of understanding to your posts.

Which is why I laughed out loud when you wrote this:

>>Get over yourself on race Pericles there is much more to it than that.<<

I'm sure you said that with a straight face. maybe you even thought that it is fair comment. But do yourself a favour, and look at your reflection in the OLO mirror for a moment.

You started this thread with a faux-naif question about the UK election.

The intention - your intention - all along, was to highlight the impact that (you surmise) the BNP has had on the political scene over there. Despite the fact that you know nothing more about it than you read in the neo-fascist blogosphre - amply illustrated, by the way, by your choice of news source.

So here's the bottom line. You continue to pretend that you are "just observing interesting social trends", and I will continue to point out the error of your ways.

Does that work for you?

OK, here's today's starter.

You cite three problems in Barking that are "irrespective of race" - employment, housing and immigration.

If you then look at how those problems are characterized by the BNP, you will find that they use race to connect the dots.

"The party wants to make immigrants, and in particular Muslims, the scapegoats for everything – falling living and educational standards, rising crime, terrorist activities, even traffic congestion."

http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2010/04/bnp-manifesto-seeks-more-than-votes.html

Incidentally, the BNP share-of-vote in Barking declined by 2.1%, from 16.9% to 14.8%

That's actually a fall of 12.4% in their "share-of-vote".

Note also that the BNP had 339 candidates standing in 2010, as opposed to 117 in 2005.

That's 1,647 votes-per-candidate in 2005, and 1,663 votes-per-candidate in 2010.

Them's the facts. Enjoy.
Posted by Pericles, Friday, 21 May 2010 9:04:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aah...Pericles..I see it now. Err..that you are looking at very unrerpresentative numbers.

Let's bullet point it.

-Labor believed it would lose the seat (to BNP). (Internal polling)
-HOPEnotHATE and LABOUR did a mammoth job in..
a) Scaring residents about BNP (demonizing them) with very graphpic posters of Griffin leading a triumphant procession of Nazi's with hitler in the background.
b) 100s of people pounding the streets to promote labour.
c) Drumming up 'large numbers' of voters to actually vote, who were told they and their children would be in deep poo if the BNP got in.. (methinks migrants)

In spite of ALL that.. the BNP vote went up by 30%ish... and you really think the -2.1 'share' of the turnout vote means anything other than the above ?

Talking elections (and the Quran) with you is like reading Dickens to a 2 yr old.

Putting all this together, we have an outcome which was very much against Labour's own polling prediction. However the increase in BNP vote was in keeping at least in part with their polling...though the scare campaign (putting electoral fraud aside for the moment) might have done part of the trick. I am very interested in locating people who

-had decided to vote BNP prior to the election...
-but who changed their mind on polling day..
-why they might have changed.

I'm sure the BNP is also very interested in that information too.

Question. If an indigenous party representing the interests and aspirations of black/Aboriginal Aussies emerged.. would you call them 'racist' ?
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Friday, 21 May 2010 5:08:57 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm not surprised at the result, considering the massive media influence that's dragging all new governments back to the right.

It's no secret that Murdoch/Fox are vigourously against Obama, Rudd and Brown.

The creeping BNP influence has just captured disaffected voters who want to blame somebody for anything and everything. A bit like the "none-of-the-above One Nation fad that we had here.

Despite the gloss they really are an appalling pack of individuals who were upset about being "outed" when their membership lists were leaked.

Maybe one day soon they will put on their brown shirts have a "night of broken glass" by smashing foreign-owned shop windows.
Posted by rache, Saturday, 22 May 2010 1:14:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Rache...

by and large I tend to agree with you on what you said.. not all, but some.

With this I agree:

//The creeping BNP influence has just captured disaffected voters who want to blame somebody for anything and everything. A bit like the "none-of-the-above One Nation fad that we had here.//

Remember how One Nation was 'dissappeared' ? it basically happened when the Libs actually LISTENED and embraced quite a few of her policies (Mainly tough on immigration/assylum seekers) and suddenly the reason for people wandering from the major parties ceased to exist...

So...their support waned.

I am still very surprised by the HUGE labor vote in Barking when the people who are dissaffected are still dissaffected..downcast and have no logical reason to support Labor or Hodge (the cupboard capitalist, sex abuse coverup covergirl)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Hodge#Child_abuse_controversy

and who have left the Tories with "Sorry there is no money left"

So.. this was no surprise to informed residents of Barking..they already knew Labour was not 'there' for them... the only thing they have going for the future is a huge urban re-development scheme which will create lots of construction jobs in the short term.. and as the flyer says:

//It will provide much needed space for small businesses, and aims to bring home the message to local residents and visitors that Barking and Dagenham is a place where businesses can start up and flourish. The centre will provide businesses with a range of facilities, services and support needed to boost their growth.//

The Problem here is that 48,000 of Barking residents were Ford Assembly Plant workers.. who are now unemployed.
They are factory workers..not rocket scientists or economic whizz kids.
My concern is that there is no 'originating' business there.. without manufacturing.. those 48,000 workers are to be blunt..screwed.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 22 May 2010 6:00:50 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
RACHE.. I'll stick with you for a bit.

Could you please describe your political position for the sake of reference and discussion ?

I've gained the impression you are a bit of a socialist and/or greeny..
and I'm not saying that just to criticize.. but to establish a working position for discussion. I do have some deep concerns about how workable ideologies are in practice in a changing global environment, but my focus is primarily on the Western countries (us) and in particular Barking/Dagenham as a good example which will be instructive for us all.

We could also choose a local example of FORD the broadmeadows and Geelong plants. But we see the 'future' more clearly in Barking.

My own position politically, is more centrist. I have socialist ideas and capitalist ones in my poor aging head.
Examples..I do believe in a 'Peoples' bank. or.. the equivalent thereof. I also believe in a strong public health system (backed up by private for those with $$$) and access to Dental help for the low income earners. I believe 'Corrections' is a state responsiblity, not private 'for profit'.

Thanx
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 22 May 2010 6:07:05 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If it matters, I am somewhat slightly to the left of what used to be regarded as "centre". That centre has moved very much to the right over the last decade.

As Beazley senior said years ago, "the ALP used to be the cream of the working class but now it's the dregs of the middle class". Nevertheless I think they attempt to be fair to the wider population than the conservatives. Both are equally corrupt and act in their own self-interest although I think the Libs are worse in this regard. I made up my mind about them back in the Whitlam era and have seen no reason to change since - in fact they're even worse.

Typically the ALP get in, make a few much-needed changes and self destruct. The LNP get in, slowly dismantle some of the changes and usually get thrown out when the society they create gets too bad.

I'm not particularly a Greens supporter. They have good intentions but push it a bit too far at times.

Privatisation and Private/Public Partnerships were actually championed and pushed by the WTC years ago and governments are just falling in line globally. Nevertheless I have always thought it was a treacherous mistake on behalf of future generations. I'm afraid that electricity and water will be the next ones to go.
Posted by rache, Sunday, 23 May 2010 2:53:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Let's dig a little deeper, shall we Boaz?

>>Aah...Pericles..I see it now. Err..that you are looking at very unrerpresentative numbers.<<

They seem pretty straightforward to me. Which begs the question, what would you classify as "representative"?

>>the BNP vote went up by 30%ish<<

Yes, it did. But slightly ahead of that statistic in the "representative" stakes might well be that:

15,437 more people voted in 2010 over 2005

Of those, 11% gave their votes to BNP, and 70% gave their votes to Margaret Hodge.

You suggest that those people did so because there was a "scare campaign" against the BNP. What, exactly, were they told to be scared of?

>>Talking elections (and the Quran) with you is like reading Dickens to a 2 yr old.<<

That's pretty rich. You live in the suburbs of Melbourne, and presume to be some kind of in-touch psephologist when it comes to a place about which you know nothing except what you read on neo-fascist UK blogs.

Three of my - close - relatives worked at Ford in Dagenham, by the way, two of them for their entire working life. Which is how I know the area particularly well.

And just to prove you know nothing, you give it all away with this...

>> 48,000 of Barking residents were Ford Assembly Plant workers<<

Absolute nonsense.

The entire Barking electorate - men and women - stands at around 72,000. Ford's workers came from several other electorates, including Romford, Newham, Dagenham and Rainham, and Hornchurch and Upminster.

Boaz, you cannot pretend to an understanding of UK politics from the sources you use. You are simply stirring. And this time you have chosen a topic upon which I can categorically state that you know less than nothing.

Stop reading all those propaganda sites, and broaden your reading.

And for goodness sake, brush up on your maths.
Posted by Pericles, Sunday, 23 May 2010 1:29:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Pericles.. thanx for that.. yes you did highlight one weakness in my argument..that I assumed all those workers came from the Barking Area. Fair point..I did indeed assume that.

But (this will seem crazy 2 u) most of my information came not from "neo fascist" blogs as you put it,- unless you consider the socialists so ?
One of my sources is

Searchlight

By far the largest employer in the area was the Ford motor plant in Dagenham. Most of its 40,000 employees lived on the surrounding council estates built from the 1930s onwards. As the workforce became more multiracial during the 1960s and 1970s, neither the trade unions at the plant nor the locally very active Communist party did more than make token gestures to tackle the racism among large elements of the white workforce. This led to outbreaks of violence both within the plant and on the housing estates.

Another source I used was a Socialist/Union history site.

RACHE.. that was a wonderful answer and very informative. We are actually more in agreement than you realize.

You mentioned that the Libs tend to be more self interested than Labor .. I would disagree there, as I intend to show in the Maurice Strong thread.. but I can't just 'dump' it all out there in one go.
Please drop in and see what you can offer.

Serious Question.
OECD cumulative debt is now > 100% of total GDP. (average)
Japan is 175% (the mind boggles) Australia is just 10%ish..

http://www.oecdobserver.org/cp/36/Private-debt-large.gif

Do you think Labor would have the balls to suddenly limit social expenditure and lose an election just to fix the economy ?

I wish I knew the 'Socialist Answer' to this which is why I asked you.
Now I see ur more like me... Maybe mr Morgan can help or Pericles or Wobbles?
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Sunday, 23 May 2010 4:24:01 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PERICLES.. "what were they told to be scared of"?

Just think of what a scheming socialist might say when they have a real fear of the BNP taking that seat and even worse..control of the council and of course the Urban Renewal money :) *drool*

Things reported (by BNP) "BNP will cut your pensions"

From HopeNotHate

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/the-real-bnp/

# The BNP would kick out all those people who were not born in Britain.
# If non-white people were ordered out of Britain then the NHS would collapse overnight.
# The BNP would introduce apartheid into Britain.
# Mixed-race relationships would be outlawed.
# The BNP’s answer to violent crime is to allow every household to have a gun.

Yep.. quite a scare campaign I'd say and all barefaced lies.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Sunday, 23 May 2010 4:32:24 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This didn't exactly help either.

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/Nick-Griffin-an-apologist-for-Nazism
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Sunday, 23 May 2010 4:36:41 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Do you think Labor would have the balls to suddenly limit social expenditure and lose an election just to fix the economy ?"

No but I think that the Libs will say and do anything and everything to get back into power, so they claim to "reinvent themselves" and "learn from their defeat" in some new way every time they ditch their leader. No long-term vision, just short-term opportunism.

As I said, historically they usually get thrown out because they cause enough fragmentation and dissent within society that people just have enough. Remember Hawke and his post-Fraser reconciliation after scapegoating the dole-bludgers? Do you remember what the country was like in those days?

Likewise Howard had his illegals, local terrorists, republicans and those inferred soldier-hating opponents to the wars. All deliberate political strategy to keep society fighting among itself instead of challenging the government.

They bring out the worst in people and use it to their own advantage.
Posted by rache, Sunday, 23 May 2010 8:45:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Forgot to include this -

http://www.zen26144.zen.co.uk/resources/The%20BNP%20Uncovered.pdf
Posted by rache, Sunday, 23 May 2010 8:56:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm always delighted to set you straight on these matters, Boaz. It is a bit unfortunate for you that you have chosen a topic upon which you are so easily exposed.

Your "excuse" that you cited Searchlight doesn't actually help your cause.

"Most of its 40,000 employees lived on the surrounding council estates built from the 1930s onwards."

Which is absolutely true. However, you couldn't know that i) the Ford plant was not in the Barking constituency, ii) that the "surrounding" council estates covered a number of different constituencies.

Incidentally, do you know what a "council estate" in that part of the world looks like? I strongly doubt that you do.

All of which serves as an example to others, as to how you manufacture topics without the least understanding of the real issues, but instead simply manufacture outrage/shock/anger/whatever, to suit your BNP-style agenda.

Talking of which, I notice that you write a whole lot about what others say about the BNP, but fail to use their very own material.

From their election manifesto:

"...indigenous British people are set to become a minority well within 50 years. This will result in the extinction of the British people, culture, heritage and identity. The BNP will take all steps necessary to halt and reverse this process."

All steps necessary.

To halt and reverse this process.

And you were suggesting that Searchlight was somehow exaggerating the issue?

Oh, and the bit about guns?

>>The BNP’s answer to violent crime is to allow every household to have a gun<<

"The right to bear arms is encapsulated in the 1688 Declaration of Rights. Firearms do not kill people; criminals kill people — especially when the innocent people do not possess firearms with which to defend themselves."

And your response?

>>Yep.. quite a scare campaign I'd say and all barefaced lies.<<

You might like to review that judgment, in light of the facts.

Incidentally, have you actually read their manifesto? If not, I suggest you do so.

http://www.general-election-2010.co.uk/bnp-manifesto-2010-general-election

Don't forget the old truism.

If you lie down with dogs, you will wake up with fleas.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 24 May 2010 10:08:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Rache

your 2nd last post (without the link) is one where I find myself in fundamental agreement. (about both sides) but add that on some of the HOward issues.. there was a lot of propoganda flying around from the Left which rather exagerated it all. The stupid Coalition did not do well with the children overboard thing.. I've heard some very 'close to the action' accounts which basically accord with what they said but the point I'd make is they didn't NEED to try to politicize that issue.. so it came back as egg on them.

On your link post.. yep..seen it all, and mostly it's anachronistic, dragging up stuff from long ago "National Front" days. If I listed the sins of the Labour party and the corruption and scandal of just the last few years.. the BNP 'sins' would pale by comparison.
Consider this.
Labour gives P18,000,000 to Unite Union for 'retraining union reps' and then the Treausury bloke leaves blunt note "sorry..no money left"

That is an utter disgrace and I would say shows their true lying,scheming, abysmal and 'pig swill' level of character. They put Lesbian BOMBER terrorist supporters in the Equality Commission.. aarggggh.
The BNP are angels when compared. The Nazi stuff is old news..and out of date, well and truly..but hey..it makes good scare campaigns :)

Pericles
I'll take correction on any factual omission or error :) if you will.

Primarily the 'halt and reverse' must be taken in the light of Griffins on record interviews where they have clearly spelt out (it's in the policies too I believe) that 'well integrated/assimilated migrants who embrace British life and culture are welcome"

Also..you might like to reflect on the application of such sentiments to an Aboriginal party... if there ever is one, and would you criticize them the same way ?
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Monday, 24 May 2010 5:59:46 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am in awe of your ability to ignore anything that you don't want to hear, Boaz.

>>I'll take correction on any factual omission or error :) if you will.<<

The "facts" upon which you built your original post have all been discredited. All that is left is your - now unsupported - opinion. Yet you sail along as if nothing has changed. Impressive.

But pretty pointless, really.

>>Primarily the 'halt and reverse' must be taken in the light of Griffins on record interviews<<

You are suggesting that the manifesto doesn't actually mean what it says? Fair enough, I suppose, for a political party that doesn't want to be held to its promises. But in this case, I'm pretty sure they mean every word.

All steps necessary.

To halt and reverse this process

>>it's in the policies too I believe<<

If it is, show us.

I took the trouble to give you the URL, after all. All you have to do is read it.

>>Also..you might like to reflect on the application of such sentiments to an Aboriginal party... if there ever is one, and would you criticize them the same way ?<<

That's enigmatic. Which "such sentiments" are you referring to?

As I recall, the Aborigines were here first.

Look, you have plenty of other threads to go and play in, where you have been able to get away with your usual mixture of half-truths and paranoia. I suggest you quit this one before it becomes embarrassing.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 24 May 2010 7:48:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles... your idea of me being embarrassed is one of your own making and mind... but let's move on.

My point here is to explore the British electoral situation not support the BNP per se.

I have a serious question for you.. and I would like your considered answer if you don't mind.

-UK DEBT to GDP 68% (approx)

-LABOR gave PS18,000,000 to Unite union while in office (just recently)

-The Treasury bloke left a note for the incoming replacement "Sorry..no money left"

-Labor support has depended on HUGE public spending.

The UK economy depends for 68% of it's income on "Financial Services"
Which is great for the small number of pinstriped suited yuppies who work in it. Manufacturing is going down..down down...and will pretty much be supplanted by Chinese manufacturing.
http://www.ifsl.org.uk/output/ReportItem.aspx?NewsID=50

This leaves a LARGE number of UNemployed workers, and a small number of Pinstripes. (echoes of french revolution?)

If the European Economy faulters.. this will dramatically effect the pin stripes and the capacity of any government to keep all the public spending going.

Given that governments stand or fall on the 'me me me.now now now' mentality... and slogans like 'More Jobs' 'Improved National Health' etc...

How do you see things panning out for UK in the next 5 yrs?
specially as those instruments of "keeping the masses happy" are curtailed in the interests of repaying huge national debt.

This very instructive graph
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html

shows that it is possible to overcome massive national debt, but it took 30 yrs of what must have been austerity. That was THEN..when the UK actually had a lot more going for it. This...is NOW..

ECONOMY WATCH

"The consensus for 2010 has now shifted to flat to negative growth, with the Economist forecasting 1.1 per cent drop in GDP."

Thoughts ?
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Wednesday, 26 May 2010 7:34:32 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy