posted
Quick straw poll: can any forites see themselves in a situation where they'd ever vote for the Tories?
PF. No. Rather than devoting his time to the 'public service' (novel concept) of helping to form a genuine democratic opposition to the present government, Ken Clarke has, since 1997, devoted much more of his time to encouraging smoking in Third World children. He and his crowd are still the unbearable in pursuit of the unthinkable.
Posts: 8657
| IP: Logged
Hmmm. Krystal Miller sounds like one of these foxy Conservative chicks. I'd maybe vote for a party that had more than its fair quota of sexy women. Do any of our other readers agree?
Posts: 8657
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by ben: Quick straw poll: can any forites see themselves in a situation where they'd ever vote for the Tories?
Not at the moment, no, but parties do change and so does their relevance to the times. At the last election I was very keen on the Lib Dems but only because a lot of their policies matched my own concerns at the time. That could well change by next election though, in both our cases.
I'm always a bit uncomfortable with these "life-long Labour/Conservative voter" types, especially as the parties themselves change so much over the years. Does that mean the life-long voter also changes, or that they simply don't actually have any views of their own and just assume their chosen party will always do the right thing?
Posts: 8467
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by ben: Hmmm. Krystal Miller sounds like one of these foxy Conservative chicks. I'd maybe vote for a party that had more than its fair quota of sexy women. Do any of our other readers agree?
My memory is a bit fuzzy here, but when the Conservatives moved their HQ from Smith Square to Victoria Street I think, or maybe Horseferry Road? Anyway, it was above a cafe. Possibly Starbucks. Me and a mate took to hanging out at said cafe, hoping to make it with hott foxy Conservative chicks. I thought I could tell them about my New Labour past and they'd want me in the same way I find white South African women so attractive.
Sadly, unsurprisingly, we were unsuccessful.
Posts: 5190
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by vikram: Germany has the wonderfully named Julia Bonk:
Doesn't her T-shirt say something about a great love of Nazis? If this is the case I think that I would have to fill her mouth with dick whenever she wanted to talk about party policy, can you make a face like this ->
quote:Originally posted by vikram: Germany has the wonderfully named Julia Bonk:
Doesn't her T-shirt say something about a great love of Nazis?
I think it says "A better life without Nazis", but I haven't done German since '94. Anyway, a rather odd choice of apparel.
Yep. Literally "A more beautiful life without Nazis."
It's a bit weak isn't it? In my day we were always going to "smash" 'em, not just paper over them.
In answer to Ben's question. NO! Unless the only alternative was BNP, I can't see it happening.
Selecting shiny, Dail Mail friendly media babes didn't work for Esther McVey in Wirral West last time around. But having said that she reduced the Labour incumbent's majority to less than 1,000 and succeeded in getting various lazy journalists to describe her as a TV star.Posts: 915
| IP: Logged
posted
That's a great idea, Vikram. On polling day, you walk into your booth and peer through the tiny hole to see...each candidate dancing away for your vote.
quote:Originally posted by vikram: peep holes for local elections, yes. for general elections, i think glory holes would be more appropriate.
Hmm... so candidates each get five minutes to try and get you to spunk on their card, through a hole in the wall? But how do you decide who goes first? And what happens if the BNP candidate happens to give a great handjob?
Posts: 14015
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by vikram: peep holes for local elections, yes. for general elections, i think glory holes would be more appropriate.
Hmm... so candidates each get five minutes to try and get you to spunk on their card, through a hole in the wall? But how do you decide who goes first? And what happens if the BNP candidate happens to give a great handjob?
From perfectly reasonable political question to Universal WANKER Suffrage in less than 20 posts.
If I were to position La Cicciolina on the Grand National course, do you think I could prevail on all of you to throw yourselves, slavering, beneath the racehorses?
Posts: 915
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by dang65: Does that mean the life-long voter also changes, or that they simply don't actually have any views of their own and just assume their chosen party will always do the right thing?
What, you mean like people are fucking stupid or something?
I don't get the last bit of OJ's post as I don't know what the Italian wotsit is. The sufragette that threw herself under the king's horse was at Tattenham Corner during the Derby by the way; flat horses travel faster and in a much more closely packed group, making stampede-death more likely than in a long, slowly run race like the National.
I don't really know much about Ken Clarke. I think I'm unlikely to ever vote Conservative as I don't agree with most of their policies and if they said they'd changed them I wouldn't believe it. I guess that's how you become a life-long voter.
-------------------- What I object to is the colour of some of these wheelie bins and where they are left, in some areas outside all week in the front garden. Posts: 4941
| IP: Logged
posted
To be honest, OJ, I think the replies say more about the Conservative Party than the treatment of the question.
The problem they have is that by definition they are 'Old Values', if you get my drift, and as such have to elect a certain type of leader. Portillo, I think, would have been able to lead the Party well, but although he may appeal to the more middle-ground voters, he had no support from the grass root support. (He's a shirt-lifter etc) What I'm saying is, the Tory hardcore will always choose a leader that nobody else will vote for.
Posts: 2434
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Roy: To be honest, OJ, I think the replies say more about the Conservative Party than the treatment of the question.
The problem they have is that by definition they are 'Old Values', if you get my drift, and as such have to elect a certain type of leader.
I don't follow. How does you talking about wanking over pole-dancing parliamentary candidates reflect on the Tory party?
I don't think much of the Conservative party's values myself, but I'd love to see you explain how "family values" led you to go into spasm at the sight of a woman.
Posts: 915
| IP: Logged
If you are easily distracted from something it is more than likely that you have very little interest in it. The speed that the thread moved away from a serious discussion of the Tories is, in my view, indicative of how little they are considered.
There's been about a thread about censorship going for days now and there has not been one 'I love wanking to porn, ha ha' comment.
And I tried to make a comment about the Tories, but you ignored that.
quote:Originally posted by Roy: The problem they have is that by definition they are 'Old Values', if you get my drift, and as such have to elect a certain type of leader.
Not necessarily. Compare the ascendent Thatcherites with the Labour party of the 1980s and even the old-style 'one nation' Tories exemplified by Ted Heath and Ian Gilmour; it's arguable that the latter two shared more in the way of assumptions and worldview than the two sets of (nominal) Conservatives did. Post-1983 'Maggie's Farm' was very much about revolution and radicalism and destroying the verities of the post-war settlement (the inherent value of a 'working class', the need for government to work with unions, a belief that everyone has their 'station in life').
Some writers (Geoffrey Wheatcroft is one, I think) have pinned these 'glory days' of slash and burn as a period during which the Tories alienated key sectors of society - even as they enjoyed short-term electoral success - storing up problems that have since come into full view, especially since 1997.
It's a commonplace that British politicians look across the Atlantic for new ideas and one would have thought that the revivifying effect of the Clinton administration on the Republican Party might have offer some clues on how to improve their performance. To now, none of that seems to have worked - not even the 'Karl Rove lite' stuff practiced by Lynton Crosby (their election advisor) back in the Spring.
Looking at the prospective candidates one doesn't really get the sense of the significant change of direction that would be needed in order for them to win back power - or even, at the very least, provide a credible, effective parliamentary opposition.
Posts: 8657
| IP: Logged
posted
Also, you can't discount the fact that Blair has on many key issues- mainly foereign policy such as Iraq but also taking on the EU - acted just as any Conservative leader would have done, which makes it hard for them to fight against him.
Posts: 2434
| IP: Logged
posted
I think his opposition to the War is fat Ken's trump card - that and his patented cigar-chomping, Scotch-swilling 'your Dad's mate' act... the English love that sort of flim flam.
Hard to see how the party and members that rejected him twice already are going to let him in, though, and I don't think there's the naked hunger for power among Tory n00bs that would allow them to accept Clarke over someone with some sort of galvanising new vision. That said, if they lose a fourth election, as a party they're finished.
Posts: 8657
| IP: Logged
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic