General Election May 2015

[biffvernon]

Wind power:



Yesterday two of her posters blew into the carriageway. Nobody died. (But that was just good luck.)

132 Unauthorised marks on highways.

(1)A person who, without either the consent of the highway authority for the highway in question or an authorisation given by or under an enactment or a reasonable excuse, paints or otherwise inscribes or affixes any picture, letter, sign or other mark upon the surface of a highway or upon any tree, structure or works on or in a highway is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding £100 or, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction under this subsection, to a fine not exceeding £200.

(2)The highway authority for a highway may, without prejudice to their powers apart from this subsection and whether or not proceedings in respect of the matter have been taken in pursuance of subsection (1) above, remove any picture, letter, sign or other mark which has, without either the consent of the authority or an authorisation given by or under an enactment, been painted or otherwise inscribed or affixed upon the surface of the highway or upon any tree, structure or works on or in the highway.

"THE HIGHWAYS AGENCY WILL NOT GIVE CONSENT TO THE SITING OF POSTERS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF TRUNK ROADS. ALL POSTERS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE TRUNK ROADS."

[biffvernon]

The Police replied to my e-mail reporting the posters blown onto the road thus:

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

I have this morning informed Highways and the local planning dept whom would be the prosecuting agent in these circumstances. The safety of all road users within Lincolnshire is of our primary concern. It is usual the in the run up to a general election to have a police liaison officer who is able to offer advice and guidance to political candidates in such matters as this, and today I have informed Supt Taylor who is responsible for neighbourhood policing for this area.

Kind Regards

Insp Michelle Mcilroy

[biffvernon]

THE Green Party has been told to withdraw its manifesto after it claimed oil would eventually run out.

The party has been dismissed as ‘a bunch of utter psychopaths’ for rejecting scientific evidence that the world’s oil wells replenish themselves every five years.

The manifesto states: “What about, right, we maybe try to make electricity with other things like wind and waves and sunshine? Because when people say that oil will last forever they’re, you know, talking shit.”

A Green Party spokesman: “It’s a radical idea, certainly. But how do we prove it? Well, this lunchtime go and get yourself some soup and then eat it all. You’ll notice that once you’ve eaten all of it, it’s not there any more. That cup of soup is finished.

“Do a before and after picture then show it to your friends to see if they can tell the difference.”

A Conservative Party spokesman said: “Have you ever heard anything so dangerously unhinged in your life? Was it written by Charles Manson?”

A Labour Party spokesman added: “We still don’t know if oil lasts forever, so we should build more nuclear power stations just in case.

“Because uranium lasts forever.”

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/ ... 5041497345

[emordnilap]

The Labour party's manifesto could be mashed up from the The Daily Mash. Here, George Monbiot examines it.

He quite rightly points out how the Conservatives and their corporate handlers frame - a vitally important word - the zeitgeist, meaning all other parties find themselves working within that frame.

The frame is 'normality' that the regime dictates. It is a million miles from any kind of fairness or morality.

The dominant Tory frame, constructed and polished across seven years by its skilled cabinet makers, is that the all-important issue is the deficit. The financial crisis, it claims, was caused not by the banks, but by irresponsible government spending, for which the only cure is austerity.

In reality, the deficit should rank somewhere in the low hundreds on the list of political priorities. It’s a con; an excuse for redrafting the social contract on behalf of the elite.

[biffvernon]

That's a great thought, emorlnilap.

[raspberry-blower]

Talking of debts and deficits here's Another Angry Voice's take

People find it difficult to accept the evidence that I'm presenting because it conflicts so badly with the narratives they've been conditioned to accept as true through their endless repetition in the mainstream media.

One of the assertions that people really struggle to accept is that George Osborne has created more new debt than every Labour government in history combined. This one is particularly hard for people to come to terms with because it conflicts with the (totally inaccurate) "folk wisdom" that "Labour always spend loads of money, then the Tories have to tidy up the mess". Further confusion is added by the way that Tory politicians (including the Prime Minister David Cameron) try to conflate the meanings of "the debt" and "the deficit" which are economic terms with completely different meanings.

The main parties are all of the same mindless, nonsensical neo-liberal hue

[emordnilap]

Talking of debts and deficits here's Another Angry Voice's take

People find it difficult to accept the evidence that I'm presenting because it conflicts so badly with the narratives they've been conditioned to accept as true through their endless repetition in the mainstream media.

Precisely. It's the old 'truth by repitition' scam. Control the frame, the narrative, and you can sell the boldest of lies. And those that see past the falsehoods are nuts or hippies or something because of this.

AAV does write rather well.

I've been saying for some time that the Labour party (hey, not just the British one!) are redundant, they needn't actually exist as a separate party. They could save a lot of money in paperwork and admin. if they owned up to the party that truly espouses their ideals.

They are further right than most past Tory governments. They should disband immediately. They certainly should get zero votes, along with all their bosom buddies in the Conservatives, the Liberal 'Democrats', the UKiP et al.

And before you say it, yes, there are one or two good people Labour parliamentarians. They're kidding themselves though. AAV again:

Some people seem to be under the impression that under the leadership of Ed Miliband, the Labour party have taken significant steps back towards the left. Once again, a look at some of their actual policies shows that they are certainly not a socialist party, and if they have shifted back towards the left, they have only taken a few almost imperceptibly small baby steps away from the course of orthodox neoliberalism.

[oobers]

What do you folks think of this idea:
http://www.voteswap.org/seat/i65906

Calder Valley
Green supporters should vote Labour here to help stop a Tory government
Labour has a reasonable chance of winning this seat. We suggest you vote Labour here and if you are a Green supporter swap your vote with a Labour supporter willing to vote Green elsewhere.

[Snail]

What do people think of the SNP and sturgeon down south? Looked today at the newspaper front pages, listened to John major on the news, etc. Are people down south being frightened into voting conservative. How are they reacting to the constant focus on snp. Just wondering.

Nicola Sturgeon might be an honest politician. Hope so. Maybe I'm naive.

[UndercoverElephant]

What do people think of the SNP and sturgeon down south? Looked today at the newspaper front pages, listened to John major on the news, etc. Are people down south being frightened into voting conservative. How are they reacting to the constant focus on snp. Just wondering.

Nicola Sturgeon might be an honest politician. Hope so. Maybe I'm naive.

There's no such thing as an honest politician.

Are people being frightened into voting conservative? I very much doubt it. I suspect most of the people who weren't planning on voting tory, and who are scared of the possible influence of the SNP (in terms of trying to break up the UK) are even more scared of the possibility of a majority tory government.

The established parties are scared of perpetual coalition. Most of the people are not scared of coalitions, not least because the established parties don't like them. Similarly, I suspect the tories are more scared of the SNP than the public are.

I don't really understand what the problem is anyway. It's not a secret that I don't like the SNP - not when they are being nationalists anyway. But in the context of Westminster, they're just a socialist party slightly to the left of the labour party. What's scary about that?

[Tarrel]

What's scary about that?

Nothing, unless you see the World through Tory eyes and can't break out of the paradigm of ever-increasing privatisation in a "market-driven" economy.

[Tarrel]

When Nicola Sturgeon says she is not pushing for another independence referendum in the near future, I believe her. Don't forget that there are parliamentary elections in Scotland next year, and the SNP has a majority to protect. That means keeping the 55% of Scottish voters who voted "no" on-side. Keeping a majority up here is more difficult than it is for any of the parties at Westminster, due to the PR system. I think there is a certain "Sending Our Team To Wembley" aspect of the SNP's strong support in Scotland, with a potential prize of greater recognition, influence and presence. A too-radical stance on independence in the short term could cause some of that more moderate support to evaporate, with a price to be paid next year at Holyrood. In their hearts, everyone knows that the SNP's overriding objective is to ultimately achieve Scottish independence, but I think for now many of the supporters are happy for them to be "our team in London", pushing the more progressive agenda in a United Kingdom.

I think Sturgeon will push for a gradual transfer of fiscal powers, aiming ultimately for full financial responsibility, but that shouldn't worry people down south. It would ultimately lead to the end of what many folks in the south see as an over-generous Barnett formula, and Scotland standing on its own feet. If Scotland can't do that then it's Scotland's problem, not a problem for the people in England. Whether the Establishment parties and their media friends can spin the IFS "black hole" numbers sufficiently strongly to unsettle would-be SNP voters north of the border is a moot point.

Suggesting that the SNP is going to immediately start driving a wedge into the Union the minute their MPs arrive in Westminster is shrill, fear-mongering propaganda.

As a matter of interest, I know that the SNP are placing greater value on winning Lib Dem seats than Labour ones. They want to unseat the Lib Dems as the third biggest party in the Commons, and swinging a Lib Dem seat gives them two hits for the price of one. The way it was put to me, Westminster is geared up to be a "three party system". Being the third largest party gives access to committees, debating time, etc, that the fourth, fifth or any other party don't get. This is where the real power is wielded, not through some kind of "blackmail gun to Labour's head" as suggested by the shrill media.

[UndercoverElephant]

I'd like to believe you, and maybe you are right. Hopefully the SNP are aware that a lot of the people who vote for them either don't support independence at all, or feel pushed into that position because they are socialists and the labour party isn't (anymore).

It's just so obvious that in Scotland people have the opportunity to vote for the SNP as a way of pressuring the labour party to move towards the left without risking letting a tory in. It's the perfect "protest vote", because they have nothing to lose. I have no such choice in south-east England. Either I vote labour or I help Amber Rudd to get re-elected for the Tories.

Whatever happens, it looks like British politics has changed forever. It seems increasingly unlikely that either labour or the tories will get an overall majority in future elections. And that makes the whole situation very interesting indeed, especially if the libdems get hammered really badly, because without the libdems as potential coalition partners it is very difficult to see how the tories could get in again even as the main party in a coalition. We could be looking at the tories being locked out of power long-term, for the first time since the middle of the 18th century. Only the disappearance of UKIP could give them real hope of a majority, and that won't happen unless the UK leaves the EU...but if the tories are locked out of power, I can't see how the UK would leave the EU! How ironic is that? The more successful UKIP are at bleeding votes (and MPs...) from the tories, the less likely there is to be a tory-led government that would actually hold a referendum on EU membership.

[oobers]

Well, I've made my pledge to vote labour at http://voteswap.org The FAQs tell me

At the moment we have more Labour supporters offering to vote Green in return for a swap. This is because there are both more Labour than Green voters nationally, and more safe constituencies than marginals. Contrast this with the numbers of Green voters living in the relatively small number of Labour target seats

They have over 10,000 pledges so far. It seems to me this is a great tool. It could improve the Green share of vote nationally and simultaneously help to keep out tories in marginals. IMO the best result the Green party can hope for in this election is a massive share of vote. With very few MPs to show for it, the pressure will be ramped up for proper electoral reform. On the other hand, it feels a bit odd since I just spent several hours distributing Green party newsletters!

[Tarrel]

Well, I've made my pledge to vote labour at http://voteswap.org The FAQs tell me

At the moment we have more Labour supporters offering to vote Green in return for a swap. This is because there are both more Labour than Green voters nationally, and more safe constituencies than marginals. Contrast this with the numbers of Green voters living in the relatively small number of Labour target seats

They have over 10,000 pledges so far. It seems to me this is a great tool. It could improve the Green share of vote nationally and simultaneously help to keep out tories in marginals. IMO the best result the Green party can hope for in this election is a massive share of vote. With very few MPs to show for it, the pressure will be ramped up for proper electoral reform. On the other hand, it feels a bit odd since I just spent several hours distributing Green party newsletters!

"Sorry, this website only covers English constituencies."