General Election 2015

[gary1979666]

It is a shame there's no head to head though - I think if (big if) he'd held his composure, Dave would have knocked Ed out of the park (with most voters - I think you guys aren't for turning here).

the fact of Chicken Dave's chicken act proves your thinking wrong.

Facts 3: tory self-help nil.

[eFestivals]

I think in the video he says if the tories were to win a 3rd term...., but don't think that has been quoted in the papers, but has been labelled presumptuous by Labour. But as I say I don't think that really matters too much. I think it could be the dangling of a Boris carrot.

It *IS* presumptuous - it's a standard PR trick, of trying to implant an idea for the result of this vote as a way ofr trying to pre-decide it in people's minds so they act to that pre-decided idea. Anyone with knowledge of standard marketing tricks will know of that one.

What is moronic about it is that it's clearly a lie. There's no way of working what Chicken Dave said within the UK political system.

[eFestivals]

It is a shame there's no head to head though - I think if (big if) he'd held his composure, Dave would have knocked Ed out of the park (with most voters - I think you guys aren't for turning here).

the fact of Chicken Dave's chicken act proves your thinking wrong.

Facts 3: tory self-help nil.

What don't you understand there gary?

If your thinking is right, why is Chicken Dave being that chicken?

Who runs from a sure victory for themselves?

Your own words prove your own thinking wrong, unless you're able to give an alternative reason for why he doesn't want the debates?

[gary1979666]

What don't you understand there gary?

If your thinking is right, why is Chicken Dave being that chicken?

Who runs from a sure victory for themselves?

Your own words prove your own thinking wrong, unless you're able to give an alternative reason for why he doesn't want the debates?

I don't think the victory is sure at all. As I said "if (big if) he'd held his composure...." then victory would be his against Milliband. In the 7-way, I think we're all agreed he has it all to lose.

I'm not completely disagreeing with you in this - we all know why he's running scared of the debate. We're at the point where we're nitpicking over words now, so it's losing the fun. My main objection was you ignoring my wording, then claiming you're interpretation as fact.

[eFestivals]

I don't think the victory is sure at all.

in which case we both agree he's Chicken Dave, and it's our agreed fact.

[eFestivals]

In the 7-way, I think we're all agreed he has it all to lose.

only because Chicken Dave has been a shit PM, and not because of the debate format or even a debate.

I'm not completely disagreeing with you in this - we all know why he's running scared of the debate. We're at the point where we're nitpicking over words now, so it's losing the fun. My main objection was you ignoring my wording, then claiming you're interpretation as fact.

So we all agree that we know he's running scared.

But the fact of him running scared isn't a fact?

You're only proving that I called it right as 'a fact'.

[LJS]

only because Chicken Dave has been a shit PM, and not because of the debate format or even a debate.

So we all agree that we know he's running scared.

But the fact of him running scared isn't a fact?

You're only proving that I called it right as 'a fact'.

Just because you say something doesn't make it a fact.

Even when someone agrees with you, that still doesn't make it a fact.

Even though I agree with both of you, that still doesn't make it a fact.

The fact is... "chicken Dave is running scared" is an opinion.

[gary1979666]

Just because you say something doesn't make it a fact.

Even when someone agrees with you, that still doesn't make it a fact.

Even though I agree with both of you, that still doesn't make it a fact.

The fact is... "chicken Dave is running scared" is an opinion.

Hang on - with 3 of us, I think we can get it past the fact committee!!

[eFestivals]

Just because you say something doesn't make it a fact.

there is a reason. That reason is the fact.

Given that both Gary and me agree that there is only the chicken reason, to us it's the fact.

But anyway, if you know what a fact is, perhaps admit to them now and then, instead of deciding that the facts about Scotland are only what you say they are and against all evidence?

[eFestivals]

Hang on - with 3 of us, I think we can get it past the fact committee!!

there very definitely is a true fact somewhere about why Chicken Dave is chicken.

Given that none of us have a clue for what else it might be - in fact, the whole country - it's a safe assumption.

But less of a safe assumption than Scotland's fucked economy, that much I'll admit. I wonder if LJS can manage that admission too?

[philipsteak]

I hope the debates operate at this high a level.

I don't think they will

[LJS]

In case anyone thinks chicken LJS is running scared of cock a doodle Neil's constant barbs about the Scottish economy, I have given my view in the Indy thread.

The fact that Neil feels the need to constantly repeat his opinion, does not make me feel any great need to repeat mine.

[eFestivals]

I have given my view in the Indy thread.

you have, but never a version where you accept the facts of the Scottish economy as stated by St Alex.

Alex is right about everything, except when GERS is published. Then it's a unionist plot led by Alex to do down Scotland. It's a lie to suggest that Scotland doesn't pay its way, or to say it's more economically fucked than whole-UK.

Those are the facts according to all snippers, including LJS.

[fred quimby]

Is Neil being sponsored for every time he writes Chicken

or has he a deal with KFC

[eFestivals]

Is Neil being sponsored for every time he writes Chicken

or has he a deal with KFC

i'm just keeping to the facts

(and better than any snipper can )

Edited March 24, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

i'm just keeping to the facts

(and better than any snipper can )

That's a matter of opinion.

[gary1979666]

i'm just keeping to the facts

(and better than any snipper can )

Facts with a secret blend of 18 herbs and spices?

[eFestivals]

That's a matter of opinion.

my comment there was tongue in cheek, and yet....

You still can't reference even St Alex's facts about Scotland.

[eFestivals]

Facts with a secret blend of 18 herbs and spices?

Lord go no.

Why would Chicken Dave pay a licence fee when he can make up his own lies for free?

[LJS]

Hands up.... Who gives zero fucks about the Scottish Independence referendum that has been and gone and wishes Neil would shut the fuck up about it

*everyone puts their hands up*

Great... Moving on

Well, I do give some fucks about the Indy ref, but us yessers have been told to accept the result.

It would appear Neil wants to keep fighting the battle.

[midnight]

He didn't start his answer with "if":

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/cameron-rules-out-third-term-prime-minister-three-successors

That said, he did just give a direct no to a direct question of whether he would stand again. I don't think his reply was ridiculous.

I didn't find it ridiculous either, but presumptious, yes. And I thought along the lines of Gary's comment (offering up the Boris option up as a carrot, though why this guy continues to be so popular is one of life's eternal mysteries to me).

[eFestivals]

Well, I do give some fucks about the Indy ref, but us yessers have been told to accept the result.

It would appear Neil wants to keep fighting the battle.

it seems that snippers have been told to accept the result but don't accept it at all, and are the ones still fighting the battle. I'm still trying tpo get them to face up to any smidgen of reality, but they just won't have it - not even the SNP's stated reality of the Scottish economy. But let's just pretend it's nothing like that at all, cos snippers love their myths.

Meanwhile, when they've got their wish of destroying Labour in England as well as Scotland, who's the opposition to the forever-tory nightmare they'll have created?

[Comfy Bean]

it seems that snippers have been told to accept the result but don't accept it at all, and are the ones still fighting the battle. I'm still trying tpo get them to face up to any smidgen of reality, but they just won't have it - not even the SNP's stated reality of the Scottish economy. But let's just pretend it's nothing like that at all, cos snippers love their myths.

Meanwhile, when they've got their wish of destroying Labour in England as well as Scotland, who's the opposition to the forever-tory nightmare they'll have created?

So the SNP are " destroying Labour in England " I thought Salmond would " die a failure " mate. You need to make your mind up. Surely the SNP can`t influence English Labour voters to the extent they will be " destroyed " ? Labour should be walking this election by winning more than enough seats in England after 5 years of Tory austerity. Perhaps them signing up to it isn`t helping their cause..... The worrying fact is that they weren`t ( walking it ) long before Salmond started his trolling

Dave to be " locked out " of Downing Street by a group of anti Torie MP`s. Someone call Boris, the 2nd and final term could be over before it`s even started.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/24/conservatives-slam-salmond-deeply-sinister-threat-miliband

As well as sending the right wing press over the edge, I like the way this will hopefully engage Labour in something a bit more interesting than vote SNP get Tory ! Great move by Salmond in my opinion, over to you Jim Murphy.

I liked Salmonds response to questions on immigration. Noticeable difference to the words of the Labour party he is destroying

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/alex-salmond-i-would-bring-down-any-tory-minority-government

Like Labour, the SNP opposes a referendum on UK membership of the European Union, and Salmond has no interest in seeking to renegotiate British membership of the EU. He is unashamedly in favour of immigration and, indeed, wants more of it. “Does Scotland need more people? Yes. The debate I want to have is one that recognises the underlying challenge, which is how to balance your working age and your retired population . . . You want to encourage people to come and stay, but I’m in favour of immigration rather than migrant labour . . . The offer you want to make to people is: if you like us, come be part of us.”

What about the need to limit the availability of welfare benefits for EU migrants, as both the Tories and Labour propose? Are you bothered about migrants being able to claim benefits as soon as they arrive?

“No,” Salmond says. “I’m much more concerned with the thought that we want to be leading Europe in terms of the balance of the working and non-working population.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-risks-alienating-black-voters-with-nhs-immigration-leaflet-10014644.html

David Lammy, who is running to be Labour’s candidate in next year’s election for London Mayor, has received complaints from around the country from party supporters offended by the leaflet. “It has gone down like a lead balloon,” he said. “We are a pro-immigration party and we should stay that way, engaging in the debate on immigration but not on Ukip’s terms. We should be taking on Ukip by challenging the myths it is peddling about immigration, and by arguing against the kind of divided, intolerant and isolated nation that it wants to turn Britain into.

“Forty per cent of London’s nurses are immigrants – many of them are my constituents – and they tell me there is no way they would pass their three-year qualification if they didn’t speak good English. These people are the lifeblood of our NHS and we should not forget that. I have never been a fan of any approach that seeks to divide society into different groups and target them independently.”

Edited March 25, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[eFestivals]

So the SNP are " destroying Labour in England "

what don't you understand?

The SNP are losing them votes.

Do you think the tories are using the slogan "vote Labour get SNP" because it doesn't win them votes?

[eFestivals]

and do you think Salmond is banging home the same tory message because he wants Labour to win, or because he wants the tories to win because he sees that as the route to indy?

What "principle" does Salmond hold above all others? That he wants a Labour govt, or that he wants to destroy the UK set-up for his own grab at power?