UK General Election 2010

by **The Custonian empire** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:48 pm

that man who hosts is very interuptive
humph

by **Angleter** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:49 pm

Why isn't Lt. Col. Kojak Slaphead III of the Bald Brummies Against the Big-Footed Conspiracy Party there?

I won't really watch, but Clegg'll probably do well, since he has nothing to lose. If he screws up, the talk won't be of Clegg imploding, it'll be about who won out of Brown and Cameron. If he does well, the talk'll be of Clegg's magnificent performance.

Does Clegg have Vince Cable standing next to him behind the lectern? If not, I wonder if he's imagining Vince's calming presence close to him.

by **Tomland Union** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:49 pm

Now they are talking about crime in Burnley

by **Serrland** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:49 pm

Cameron sure is going pretty anecdote heavy here, isn't here?

by **Hydesland** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:50 pm

Tomland Union wrote:Now they are talking about crime in Burnley

Might as well be talking about hydrogen atoms in water.

by **Kulverint** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:50 pm

On to the prison rates. Cameron has material, and policies, and I like his idea of burglars leaving their rights at the door. All parties seemingly agreed on more police, and Brown laughing at Clegg's attack on ID cards.

by **Chumblywumbly** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:51 pm

What, exactly, is the connection between police paperwork and the public perception of lax judicial punishments?

by **Angleter** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:51 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:
The blessed Chris wrote:
Chumblywumbly wrote:
Hydesland wrote:Cameron wants migration quotas They can be dodgy.

"Tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands".

Hooba-jooba-wah?

Net migration was c. 50,000 per annum under Major, and peaked at over 200,000 per annum in either 2008 or 2007.

I'm more hooba-joobying at why we would want to limit immigration to tens of thousands.

Because our public services really don't need hundreds of thousands more immigrants right now? And because we don't have a labour shortage, so we don't really need them anyway anymore?

by **Tomland Union** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:51 pm

I agree with Cleg-more police officers and less ID cards

by **Kulverint** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:51 pm

Serrland wrote:Cameron sure is going pretty anecdote heavy here, isn't here?

Yes, I've noticed that. He just happens to have met someone from the same city as the questioner, dealing with the same issue.

by **Chumblywumbly** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:52 pm

Angleter wrote:Because our public services really don't need hundreds of thousands more immigrants right now? And because we don't have a labour shortage, so we don't really need them anyway anymore?

I suspect we won't agree, but I don't see a lack of labour shortage as a good reason to prevent people from moving about.

by **The Custonian empire** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:52 pm

Down with the druggys, says cameron

by **Kulverint** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:52 pm

Cameron's now saying drugs are causing most of Britain's crimes. Sure, they cause some, but not most!

by **Angleter** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:53 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:What, exactly, is the connection between police paperwork and the public perception of lax judicial punishments?

Whoever said that (Cameron?) obviously never watches Law & Order. "In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police, who investigate crime; and the district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories. DONK DONK!"

Honestly...

by **Tomland Union** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:54 pm

Some suspicious coughing after Cleg said that he was from Sheffield

by **Chumblywumbly** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:55 pm

Christ, is there anyone in the UK the PM hopefuls haven't claimed to have met and conversed with?

by **Angleter** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:55 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:
Angleter wrote:Because our public services really don't need hundreds of thousands more immigrants right now? And because we don't have a labour shortage, so we don't really need them anyway anymore?

I suspect we won't agree, but I don't see a lack of labour shortage as a good reason to prevent people from moving about.

But why do we need immigrants? Why have we ever needed immigrants? To fill a labour shortage, that's why. Without the need to fill a labour shortage, there's no need for us to take in immigrants- most likely they'd join the unemployed at further cost to the State. It's senseless.

by **Angleter** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:56 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:Christ, is there anyone in the UK the PM hopefuls haven't claimed to have met and conversed with?

Me. If they'd met with me, they wouldn't mention it for all the criticism I'd have given them all.

by **Chumblywumbly** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:57 pm

ITV really scrimped on the debate's set.

Also: Gordojokefail

by **The Custonian empire** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:57 pm

whoah somethings up with brown he's s-s-s-s-smiling

by **Tomland Union** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:57 pm

Shock, horror Gordon Brown made a Joke!

The host did not like it however

by **Chumblywumbly** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:58 pm

Angleter wrote:But why do we need immigrants?

Why should immigration be based on need?

by **The blessed Chris** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:58 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:Christ, is there anyone in the UK the PM hopefuls haven't claimed to have met and conversed with?

It is getting tedious now. Slightly less than the spectacle of Brown number wanking his way through the debate.

by **The blessed Chris** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:58 pm

Chumblywumbly wrote:
Angleter wrote:But why do we need immigrants?

Why should immigration be based on need?

As opposed to?

by **Hydesland** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:58 pm

I quite like this presenter. "SHUT THE FUCK UP ITS CAMERON'S TURN"

UK General Election 2010

If the UK GE was held today, which party would you vote for?

Who is online