New Conservative candidate Maria Hutchings issues warning to party

Daily Echo: Warning to Tories as they take a poll lead Warning to Tories as they take a poll lead

Tories were warned not to expect a direct boost in support from Chris Huhne's fall from grace as they unveiled their candidate for the Eastleigh by-election.

Maria Hutchings, who failed to topple Huhne in 2010, will fight the seat again after a guilty plea to dodging a speeding penalty ended the ex-cabinet minister's political career.

Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps and Mrs Hutchings both spoke about ''trust'' ahead of a weekend blitz in what promises to be a brutal battle with their Liberal coalition partners.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg had earlier urged voters not to exact retribution for his former leadership rival's disgrace as the party moved the writ in the Commons for a February 28 poll.

But former Tory Treasurer Lord Ashcroft warned his party that though it started the contest in the lead, his polling suggested few voters were likely to ''switch out of disgust''.

The survey conducted for the peer in the immediate wake of Huhne's resignation put the Tories on 34%, with Lib Dems on 31%, Labour on 19% and Ukip fourth with 13%.

Sources said the Tories were preparing a ''big push'' in the Hampshire town tomorrow when local Lib Dems are due to meet to select the party's own candidate.

It is defending a 3,864 majority.

Mr Shapps - who has previously declared the people of Eastleigh were ''sold a lie'' by Huhne - hailed Mrs Hutchings as someone ''people in Eastleigh can trust''.

Huhne - the MP since 2005 - consistently denied avoiding a driving ban by getting his wife to accept penalty points before changing his plea to guilty Mrs Hutchings, first thrust into the limelight in 2005 when she challenged then prime minister Tony Blair during a TV debate over a special school closure, said: ''We need a local MP we can trust - someone who will support people who work hard and do the right thing''.

She added: ''Although I may not be a professional politician, I'm a straight-talking businesswoman and mother of four who lives in the local area.''

Mr Clegg said: ''I think the choice for the people of Eastleigh in the by-election is what kind of an MP do they want to have now.

''I hope that it will be on that basis rather than in a mood or spirit of retribution that the debate will be conducted in Eastleigh.''

He sought to draw a clear distinction with his Westminster coalition partners by highlighting the Lib Dem commitment to a 1% annual ''mansion tax'' on £2 million-plus properties to fund tax cuts for ''hard-pressed families'' - a proposal the Tories have consistently rejected.

Labour sources are hoping for a strong showing, but privately accept they have little chances of winning despite being nine points up on their 2010 showing in the Ashcroft-commissioned poll.

The figures represent a fall of almost 16 points in Lib Dem support since the 2010 general election, when Huhne scooped 46.5% of the vote.

Tories are down five points since the election and Labour and Ukip both up nine.

Lord Ashcroft, a major Tory donor who was deputy chairman of the party until 2010, said the poll suggested both coalition parties have ''everything to play for''.

While Tory voters were the most committed to the party and the party was most likely to attract wavering Lib Dems, Labour voters were the most open to switching and preferred the Lib Dems.

And two-thirds of those taking part in the poll agreed that ''the Lib Dems do a good job locally in my area'', where the party dominates the local council with 40 out of 44 seats.

''Huhne was a popular and, by all accounts, assiduous MP, and many in Eastleigh will be sad to see him go and circumstances of his departure,'' Lord Ashcroft cautioned.

''The Tories should not expect many to switch out of disgust,'' he added, predicting a ''bruising - but fascinating'' contest.

John Denham, Labour MP for the neighbouring Southampton Itchen constituency, said: ''In this campaign the Lib Dems and the Conservatives will try to blame each other for what's gone wrong.

''Only by voting Labour can Eastleigh people reject a Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government that cuts taxes for millionaires and doesn't understand how tough life is for local people.''

:: Some 1,006 adults were interviewed by telephone in the Eastleigh constituency on February 4 and 5.

Comments (91)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:33am Fri 8 Feb 13

localnews says...

Ladies and Gentlemen.....welcom
e to the latest round of who can lie the most to gain a seat in power
Ladies and Gentlemen.....welcom e to the latest round of who can lie the most to gain a seat in power localnews

7:34am Fri 8 Feb 13

The Wickham Man says...

localnews wrote:
Ladies and Gentlemen.....welcom

e to the latest round of who can lie the most to gain a seat in power
Sad but true.
[quote][p][bold]localnews[/bold] wrote: Ladies and Gentlemen.....welcom e to the latest round of who can lie the most to gain a seat in power[/p][/quote]Sad but true. The Wickham Man

8:22am Fri 8 Feb 13

Datarater says...

Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie. Datarater

8:42am Fri 8 Feb 13

FoysCornerBoy says...

Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
[quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest? FoysCornerBoy

8:47am Fri 8 Feb 13

aldermoorboy says...

Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.
Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years. aldermoorboy

9:00am Fri 8 Feb 13

CharlieOxbridge says...

A vote for the Tories will make no difference to the current Government. Use this as an opportunity to show your displeasure of the EU, the Political class and the daft bureaucracy of this Country - vote for UKIP.
A vote for the Tories will make no difference to the current Government. Use this as an opportunity to show your displeasure of the EU, the Political class and the daft bureaucracy of this Country - vote for UKIP. CharlieOxbridge

9:13am Fri 8 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Would that be the Lord Ashcroft who doesn't pay tax and the Grant Shapps(aka Michael Green) of selling dodgy software fame talking about trust.

I'd rather trust my cat not to chase birds and mice than anybody backed by these two.
Would that be the Lord Ashcroft who doesn't pay tax and the Grant Shapps(aka Michael Green) of selling dodgy software fame talking about trust. I'd rather trust my cat not to chase birds and mice than anybody backed by these two. Yorkyboy22

9:14am Fri 8 Feb 13

Outside of the Box says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you'' Outside of the Box

9:16am Fri 8 Feb 13

Outside of the Box says...

In other news,,,its quite cloudy outside
In other news,,,its quite cloudy outside Outside of the Box

9:18am Fri 8 Feb 13

Lone Ranger. says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.
Oh you are obviously ignoring the request for information on the IOW idea as you have um ...... No idea ........ Now turning to something else that confirms that you have um ... No idea
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.[/p][/quote]Oh you are obviously ignoring the request for information on the IOW idea as you have um ...... No idea ........ Now turning to something else that confirms that you have um ... No idea Lone Ranger.

9:25am Fri 8 Feb 13

Linesman says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.
In debt because they bailed out Banks and Building Societies so that people did not lose their savings, have their houses repossessed and businesses did not go bankrupt.

What alternative policy did your beloved Tories suggest at the time?

THEY DID NOT. THEY HAD NO IDEA HOW TO DEAL WITH THE CRISIS.

Added to that, councils that had invested in Icelandic Banks had to be bailed out, otherwise they would have gone bust, with staff unpaid and no services provided.

Once again, neither Cameron nor Clegg offered a different solution.

So what have the coalition government done since they took charge two and a half years ago?

Well, for a start, Osborne has got us even deeper in debt.

Still, look on the bright side.

He has give a tax break to the Highest earners, paid for, in part, by reducing the Winter Fuel Allowance for the elderly.

So much for 'We are all in this together!'
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.[/p][/quote]In debt because they bailed out Banks and Building Societies so that people did not lose their savings, have their houses repossessed and businesses did not go bankrupt. What alternative policy did your beloved Tories suggest at the time? THEY DID NOT. THEY HAD NO IDEA HOW TO DEAL WITH THE CRISIS. Added to that, councils that had invested in Icelandic Banks had to be bailed out, otherwise they would have gone bust, with staff unpaid and no services provided. Once again, neither Cameron nor Clegg offered a different solution. So what have the coalition government done since they took charge two and a half years ago? Well, for a start, Osborne has got us even deeper in debt. Still, look on the bright side. He has give a tax break to the Highest earners, paid for, in part, by reducing the Winter Fuel Allowance for the elderly. So much for 'We are all in this together!' Linesman

9:30am Fri 8 Feb 13

Might SS says...

Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour
Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour Might SS

9:48am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
[quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march. southy

9:51am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
The National Health Action Party more likely split the right wing vote right up, think they are going to do well, but how well will be the question, they could ineffect take out the Torys and Lib/dem of the race.
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]The National Health Action Party more likely split the right wing vote right up, think they are going to do well, but how well will be the question, they could ineffect take out the Torys and Lib/dem of the race. southy

9:54am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Might SS wrote:
Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour
Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.
[quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour[/p][/quote]Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election. southy

10:10am Fri 8 Feb 13

Outside of the Box says...

Linesman wrote:
aldermoorboy wrote:
Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.
In debt because they bailed out Banks and Building Societies so that people did not lose their savings, have their houses repossessed and businesses did not go bankrupt.

What alternative policy did your beloved Tories suggest at the time?

THEY DID NOT. THEY HAD NO IDEA HOW TO DEAL WITH THE CRISIS.

Added to that, councils that had invested in Icelandic Banks had to be bailed out, otherwise they would have gone bust, with staff unpaid and no services provided.

Once again, neither Cameron nor Clegg offered a different solution.

So what have the coalition government done since they took charge two and a half years ago?

Well, for a start, Osborne has got us even deeper in debt.

Still, look on the bright side.

He has give a tax break to the Highest earners, paid for, in part, by reducing the Winter Fuel Allowance for the elderly.

So much for 'We are all in this together!'
Not only did the Tories or Lib Dem's not know how to deal with the crisis, at that time when they were in opposition the Tories fully supported the actions of the Government,,,,someth
ing they seem to have forgotten now.

As for Aldermoorboy having no idea, I tend to ignore his comments which always made out of blindful ignorance of the truth and de-void of all facts
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Denham we are in this mess because Labour put us in debt, allowed people to get in debt and it will take decades to recover and not years.[/p][/quote]In debt because they bailed out Banks and Building Societies so that people did not lose their savings, have their houses repossessed and businesses did not go bankrupt. What alternative policy did your beloved Tories suggest at the time? THEY DID NOT. THEY HAD NO IDEA HOW TO DEAL WITH THE CRISIS. Added to that, councils that had invested in Icelandic Banks had to be bailed out, otherwise they would have gone bust, with staff unpaid and no services provided. Once again, neither Cameron nor Clegg offered a different solution. So what have the coalition government done since they took charge two and a half years ago? Well, for a start, Osborne has got us even deeper in debt. Still, look on the bright side. He has give a tax break to the Highest earners, paid for, in part, by reducing the Winter Fuel Allowance for the elderly. So much for 'We are all in this together!'[/p][/quote]Not only did the Tories or Lib Dem's not know how to deal with the crisis, at that time when they were in opposition the Tories fully supported the actions of the Government,,,,someth ing they seem to have forgotten now. As for Aldermoorboy having no idea, I tend to ignore his comments which always made out of blindful ignorance of the truth and de-void of all facts Outside of the Box

10:10am Fri 8 Feb 13

Outside of the Box says...

southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
It was a joke Pete,,,lighten up me old son
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]It was a joke Pete,,,lighten up me old son Outside of the Box

10:26am Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you. Torchie1

10:30am Fri 8 Feb 13

St Retford says...

Rest easy, people of Eastleigh. She has a crucifix on display which means she almost certainly hates gays.
Rest easy, people of Eastleigh. She has a crucifix on display which means she almost certainly hates gays. St Retford

10:33am Fri 8 Feb 13

good-gosh says...

Elections are 90% tribal. Trouble is, I don’t think Eastleigh knows what tribe it belongs to.
Elections are 90% tribal. Trouble is, I don’t think Eastleigh knows what tribe it belongs to. good-gosh

10:38am Fri 8 Feb 13

The Wickham Man says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably). The Wickham Man

10:47am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Outside of the Box wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
It was a joke Pete,,,lighten up me old son
Ok dad :-)
[quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]It was a joke Pete,,,lighten up me old son[/p][/quote]Ok dad :-) southy

10:47am Fri 8 Feb 13

St Retford says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
You know how Labour spent more money on it and it got loads better, but then the tories started spending less money on it and it got loads worse?

Well, that does sort of suggest there's a correlation between the amount invested in it and the service it provides.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]You know how Labour spent more money on it and it got loads better, but then the tories started spending less money on it and it got loads worse? Well, that does sort of suggest there's a correlation between the amount invested in it and the service it provides. St Retford

10:49am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back. southy

10:53am Fri 8 Feb 13

stuartjebbitt says...

Remember, potentially it's only a 2 year MP, the seat comes up again in 2015. a suspect a lot of people will vote for Maria who wouldn't normally dream of voting Tory, simply because she's the only hope of putting a spanner in the Lib dems much hated local plan for Eastleigh, that will see the loss of great swathes of our green space. Unfortunately no one else has the money or resources to hope to overturn the lib dems in such a short space of time. I suspect some people will vote tactically this time and then return to their normal voting patterns in 2015.
Remember, potentially it's only a 2 year MP, the seat comes up again in 2015. a suspect a lot of people will vote for Maria who wouldn't normally dream of voting Tory, simply because she's the only hope of putting a spanner in the Lib dems much hated local plan for Eastleigh, that will see the loss of great swathes of our green space. Unfortunately no one else has the money or resources to hope to overturn the lib dems in such a short space of time. I suspect some people will vote tactically this time and then return to their normal voting patterns in 2015. stuartjebbitt

10:57am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to. southy

10:57am Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Does this mean that Tusc now a second policy in their manifesto, 'No Cuts' and 'Take back the NHS' ? As for "better hope that the TUSC don't get power", I don't think anyone will lose any sleep over that prospect.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Does this mean that Tusc now a second policy in their manifesto, 'No Cuts' and 'Take back the NHS' ? As for "better hope that the TUSC don't get power", I don't think anyone will lose any sleep over that prospect. Torchie1

11:21am Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards. freefinker

11:31am Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
Another subject you clearly no nothing about because everything has been done under recognised parliamentary procedures that can be verified by looking at the appropriate website that I told you about. However if you want to carry on excavating your frighteningly deep hole there is another avenue that you can move down and it too has a website. Look at Ombudsman.org.uk where complaints against Parliament and the Health service can be registered. If you are correct there will be an investigation which could delay the By-Election if your complaint is upheld. On the other hand........
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote]Another subject you clearly no nothing about because everything has been done under recognised parliamentary procedures that can be verified by looking at the appropriate website that I told you about. However if you want to carry on excavating your frighteningly deep hole there is another avenue that you can move down and it too has a website. Look at Ombudsman.org.uk where complaints against Parliament and the Health service can be registered. If you are correct there will be an investigation which could delay the By-Election if your complaint is upheld. On the other hand........ Torchie1

11:38am Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour
Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.
.. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding.

Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour[/p][/quote]Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.[/p][/quote].. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding. Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality. freefinker

11:43am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence. southy

11:46am Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ? Torchie1

11:59am Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour
Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.
.. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding.

Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality.
The only fool is your self Free.
Thatcher had a majority and came 2 votes of calling an early election, Callinghan had a minority government (that had a bigger margin than this government) and was also in a coalition with the Liberals at the time, and lost the vote of no confidence.
If the Tory party had not moved the goal posts in 2010 as soon as they got in office, and change the rule of 51/49 to 52/48 a vote of not confidence would of all ready been called, So far to date Labour as not lost any seats in by-elections but they have won a seat in a by-election and this one will give them the 2 that they need to apply the pressure. We all ready know some Torys MP's will abstain, while a number of Lib/Dems will vote with Labour in a vote of no confidence, (the back benchers of the Lib/Dems did not want to go into a coalition with the Torys).
You totally demonstrate you do not have a clue how things happen, its not just about what the rules are its more about how the MP's will vote.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour[/p][/quote]Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.[/p][/quote].. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding. Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality.[/p][/quote]The only fool is your self Free. Thatcher had a majority and came 2 votes of calling an early election, Callinghan had a minority government (that had a bigger margin than this government) and was also in a coalition with the Liberals at the time, and lost the vote of no confidence. If the Tory party had not moved the goal posts in 2010 as soon as they got in office, and change the rule of 51/49 to 52/48 a vote of not confidence would of all ready been called, So far to date Labour as not lost any seats in by-elections but they have won a seat in a by-election and this one will give them the 2 that they need to apply the pressure. We all ready know some Torys MP's will abstain, while a number of Lib/Dems will vote with Labour in a vote of no confidence, (the back benchers of the Lib/Dems did not want to go into a coalition with the Torys). You totally demonstrate you do not have a clue how things happen, its not just about what the rules are its more about how the MP's will vote. southy

12:05pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet. southy

12:08pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

I'm off to grab a bottle of wine and some chocolate, this afternoon is going to be highly entertaining.

Free, how's your February list coming on? Would you like me to buy you some more paper, you must be running out.
I'm off to grab a bottle of wine and some chocolate, this afternoon is going to be highly entertaining. Free, how's your February list coming on? Would you like me to buy you some more paper, you must be running out. IronLady2010

12:10pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Oh what a load of old rubbish.

Nobody knows how people will actually vote. And even if you did, what difference would it make? And as for unregistered new arrivals, don’t you think they will turn out to have a representative cross section of electoral voting intentions?

Deposit. From 1918 to 1985 it was £150 and you needed to secure 12.5% of the vote to get it back. Yes, it was the Tories who altered it to £500 in 1985, but they reduced the threshold to 5%. Now, taking into account inflation since 1918 and the reduced threshold I think you smaller parties have an absolute bargain. And that was the capitalist Tories who opened up the democratic electoral process to you smaller parties.

Stop you getting organised? Do me a favour. As Stephen J pointed out to you, there were going to be only two outcomes to the Huhne trial. If TUSC/SP failed to actually realise that one of them would result in a by-election then you really are a totally naïve bunch of political no-hope amateurs.

As I say, nothing but excuses.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Oh what a load of old rubbish. Nobody knows how people will actually vote. And even if you did, what difference would it make? And as for unregistered new arrivals, don’t you think they will turn out to have a representative cross section of electoral voting intentions? Deposit. From 1918 to 1985 it was £150 and you needed to secure 12.5% of the vote to get it back. Yes, it was the Tories who altered it to £500 in 1985, but they reduced the threshold to 5%. Now, taking into account inflation since 1918 and the reduced threshold I think you smaller parties have an absolute bargain. And that was the capitalist Tories who opened up the democratic electoral process to you smaller parties. Stop you getting organised? Do me a favour. As Stephen J pointed out to you, there were going to be only two outcomes to the Huhne trial. If TUSC/SP failed to actually realise that one of them would result in a by-election then you really are a totally naïve bunch of political no-hope amateurs. As I say, nothing but excuses. freefinker

12:12pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour
Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.
.. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding.

Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality.
The only fool is your self Free.
Thatcher had a majority and came 2 votes of calling an early election, Callinghan had a minority government (that had a bigger margin than this government) and was also in a coalition with the Liberals at the time, and lost the vote of no confidence.
If the Tory party had not moved the goal posts in 2010 as soon as they got in office, and change the rule of 51/49 to 52/48 a vote of not confidence would of all ready been called, So far to date Labour as not lost any seats in by-elections but they have won a seat in a by-election and this one will give them the 2 that they need to apply the pressure. We all ready know some Torys MP's will abstain, while a number of Lib/Dems will vote with Labour in a vote of no confidence, (the back benchers of the Lib/Dems did not want to go into a coalition with the Torys).
You totally demonstrate you do not have a clue how things happen, its not just about what the rules are its more about how the MP's will vote.
.. pure fantasy politics.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: Be good to show them both what's what and vote labour[/p][/quote]Would agree with you that Labour would be the better bet, a Labour win here would put Labour in a good place to be able to get a vote of no confidence though and bring this government down and force the early call for a general election.[/p][/quote].. no it wouldn't, you fool. I explained clearly to you yesterday the state of parliamentary arithmetic, the rules of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, and the impossibility of a vote of no confidence succeeding. Again you clearly demonstrate your total political naivety and the inability of the Trotskyist far-left to come to terms with reality.[/p][/quote]The only fool is your self Free. Thatcher had a majority and came 2 votes of calling an early election, Callinghan had a minority government (that had a bigger margin than this government) and was also in a coalition with the Liberals at the time, and lost the vote of no confidence. If the Tory party had not moved the goal posts in 2010 as soon as they got in office, and change the rule of 51/49 to 52/48 a vote of not confidence would of all ready been called, So far to date Labour as not lost any seats in by-elections but they have won a seat in a by-election and this one will give them the 2 that they need to apply the pressure. We all ready know some Torys MP's will abstain, while a number of Lib/Dems will vote with Labour in a vote of no confidence, (the back benchers of the Lib/Dems did not want to go into a coalition with the Torys). You totally demonstrate you do not have a clue how things happen, its not just about what the rules are its more about how the MP's will vote.[/p][/quote].. pure fantasy politics. freefinker

12:14pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I'm off to grab a bottle of wine and some chocolate, this afternoon is going to be highly entertaining.

Free, how's your February list coming on? Would you like me to buy you some more paper, you must be running out.
.. it's getting longer and longer.
May even have to do a by election special.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I'm off to grab a bottle of wine and some chocolate, this afternoon is going to be highly entertaining. Free, how's your February list coming on? Would you like me to buy you some more paper, you must be running out.[/p][/quote].. it's getting longer and longer. May even have to do a by election special. freefinker

12:18pm Fri 8 Feb 13

AndyAndrews says...

Unlike most posters I live in the Eastleigh consituency and will be voting: for whichever candidate is most likely to beat the LibDem, even if I have to vote Tory for the first time. Last time Huhne got my vote on false pretences then gave me this awful coalition government: it's payback time.
Unlike most posters I live in the Eastleigh consituency and will be voting: for whichever candidate is most likely to beat the LibDem, even if I have to vote Tory for the first time. Last time Huhne got my vote on false pretences then gave me this awful coalition government: it's payback time. AndyAndrews

12:20pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years? Stephen J

12:24pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
.. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote].. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today. freefinker

12:29pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Conservative 306 seats -1 seat
Labour 258 seats +1
Liberal Democrat 57
Democratic Unionist Party 8
SNP 6
Sinn Fein 5
Social Democratic & Labour Party 3
Alliance Party 1
Green 1
Independent 1
Speaker 1

Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it.
Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain.
the speaker will cast there vote if it matters
Conservative 306 seats -1 seat Labour 258 seats +1 Liberal Democrat 57 Democratic Unionist Party 8 SNP 6 Sinn Fein 5 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance Party 1 Green 1 Independent 1 Speaker 1 Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it. Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain. the speaker will cast there vote if it matters southy

12:34pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions. Torchie1

12:37pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
.. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.
Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote].. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.[/p][/quote]Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's southy

12:46pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce. southy

12:55pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
.. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.
Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's
You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote].. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.[/p][/quote]Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's[/p][/quote]You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years? Stephen J

12:56pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Conservative 306 seats -1 seat
Labour 258 seats +1
Liberal Democrat 57
Democratic Unionist Party 8
SNP 6
Sinn Fein 5
Social Democratic & Labour Party 3
Alliance Party 1
Green 1
Independent 1
Speaker 1

Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it.
Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain.
the speaker will cast there vote if it matters
.. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery.

So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist.

Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader.

Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Conservative 306 seats -1 seat Labour 258 seats +1 Liberal Democrat 57 Democratic Unionist Party 8 SNP 6 Sinn Fein 5 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance Party 1 Green 1 Independent 1 Speaker 1 Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it. Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain. the speaker will cast there vote if it matters[/p][/quote].. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery. So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist. Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader. Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it. freefinker

1:04pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote]Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news? Torchie1

1:05pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge? freefinker

1:34pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
.. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.
Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's
You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
We have achived more than the Labour party did, and where we are at is at the same stage of the Labour party in the mid 1800's, the orgins of the Labour party started in Bradford with the coming together of the Railway union and Socialist groups, One of those socialist groups was the Socialist Party who had been around for 2 years before hand, drop there name like the other socialist groups did, ILP started in the mid 1800's and was sort of stuck till 1893 when Scottish politician Keir Hardie joined this group got it registered the ILP, then in 1900 all the other unions joined and became to be known as the LRC, The labour party is a lot older than people think it is.
In the Three years we done more than the ILP have, the TUSC it self is a bit older than 3 years, it started off as the NO2EU group, that name is there just not used as a election engine just as a debate forum.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote].. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.[/p][/quote]Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's[/p][/quote]You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote]We have achived more than the Labour party did, and where we are at is at the same stage of the Labour party in the mid 1800's, the orgins of the Labour party started in Bradford with the coming together of the Railway union and Socialist groups, One of those socialist groups was the Socialist Party who had been around for 2 years before hand, drop there name like the other socialist groups did, ILP started in the mid 1800's and was sort of stuck till 1893 when Scottish politician Keir Hardie joined this group got it registered the ILP, then in 1900 all the other unions joined and became to be known as the LRC, The labour party is a lot older than people think it is. In the Three years we done more than the ILP have, the TUSC it self is a bit older than 3 years, it started off as the NO2EU group, that name is there just not used as a election engine just as a debate forum. southy

1:40pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?[/p][/quote]They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups. southy

1:42pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news?
Try the Electoral Commission
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote]Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news?[/p][/quote]Try the Electoral Commission southy

1:49pm Fri 8 Feb 13

The Wickham Man says...

southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up. The Wickham Man

2:09pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Conservative 306 seats -1 seat
Labour 258 seats +1
Liberal Democrat 57
Democratic Unionist Party 8
SNP 6
Sinn Fein 5
Social Democratic & Labour Party 3
Alliance Party 1
Green 1
Independent 1
Speaker 1

Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it.
Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain.
the speaker will cast there vote if it matters
.. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery.

So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist.

Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader.

Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it.
Wrong Labour had a coalition with the Librals party, why do you think there was so much turmoil in 2010 with in the Lib/Dems joining up with the Torys, they had never done this before apart from during the war, but they had joined up with the labour party in the 70's.
Callaghan did have a minority government and it was a coalition with the libs, the understanding is the coalition, the understanding is that they support labour in there policys and labour would put up some of there policy that is a coalition an agreement.
Do you under stand that part. and the ones to watch are the back benchers they will be out to try and save there seats, and that will mean they will vote against the Lib/dem whip in numbers, like they did with callinghan, if there is not enough of them to stop any come back from the whip they will abstain from voting, and there will be a number of Troy MPS that will allso abstain ecause they also will want to try and keep there seat.
Dont take to much notice on the 2011 act as part of it says this "applies for the purposes of the Timetable in rule 1 in Schedule 1 to the Representation of the People Act 1983." and if you follow it back wards you end up with the 1956 act.
Which brings it all back to first have a vote on, weather to have a vote of no-confidence followed by the vote on a vote of no-confidence, also the Queen is also able to step in and say desoulve or take that vote of no confidence in which it would be 50/50. (but the crown as not step in for a very long time, they are to scared to)
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Conservative 306 seats -1 seat Labour 258 seats +1 Liberal Democrat 57 Democratic Unionist Party 8 SNP 6 Sinn Fein 5 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance Party 1 Green 1 Independent 1 Speaker 1 Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it. Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain. the speaker will cast there vote if it matters[/p][/quote].. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery. So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist. Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader. Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it.[/p][/quote]Wrong Labour had a coalition with the Librals party, why do you think there was so much turmoil in 2010 with in the Lib/Dems joining up with the Torys, they had never done this before apart from during the war, but they had joined up with the labour party in the 70's. Callaghan did have a minority government and it was a coalition with the libs, the understanding is the coalition, the understanding is that they support labour in there policys and labour would put up some of there policy that is a coalition an agreement. Do you under stand that part. and the ones to watch are the back benchers they will be out to try and save there seats, and that will mean they will vote against the Lib/dem whip in numbers, like they did with callinghan, if there is not enough of them to stop any come back from the whip they will abstain from voting, and there will be a number of Troy MPS that will allso abstain ecause they also will want to try and keep there seat. Dont take to much notice on the 2011 act as part of it says this "applies for the purposes of the Timetable in rule 1 in Schedule 1 to the Representation of the People Act 1983." and if you follow it back wards you end up with the 1956 act. Which brings it all back to first have a vote on, weather to have a vote of no-confidence followed by the vote on a vote of no-confidence, also the Queen is also able to step in and say desoulve or take that vote of no confidence in which it would be 50/50. (but the crown as not step in for a very long time, they are to scared to) southy

2:15pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it.

There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are
Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it. There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are southy

2:16pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news?
Try the Electoral Commission
I've visited the site and used the search words Eastleigh/Chrise Huhne/ Complaints/Feb 28th 2013/Tusc/38%, which all seem to have the same result :-
"Page not found

Unfortunately the page or document you are looking for was not available."

Any other suggestions?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote]Which secret website would I have to visit to monitor the progress of this complaint as it isn't being mentioned in the mainstream news?[/p][/quote]Try the Electoral Commission[/p][/quote]I've visited the site and used the search words Eastleigh/Chrise Huhne/ Complaints/Feb 28th 2013/Tusc/38%, which all seem to have the same result :- "Page not found Unfortunately the page or document you are looking for was not available." Any other suggestions? Torchie1

2:18pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it.

There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are
Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it. There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are[/p][/quote]Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist. Torchie1

2:23pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.
yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list.
Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.[/p][/quote]yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list. Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector southy

2:24pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it.

There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are
Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist.
It do exist, it has existed since the civil war.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it. There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are[/p][/quote]Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist.[/p][/quote]It do exist, it has existed since the civil war. southy

2:25pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.
No, they didn't.
And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'.

As their website says: -

'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY?
Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.'

You are yet again caught out telling lies.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?[/p][/quote]They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.[/p][/quote]No, they didn't. And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'. As their website says: - 'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY? Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.' You are yet again caught out telling lies. freefinker

2:29pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Conservative 306 seats -1 seat
Labour 258 seats +1
Liberal Democrat 57
Democratic Unionist Party 8
SNP 6
Sinn Fein 5
Social Democratic & Labour Party 3
Alliance Party 1
Green 1
Independent 1
Speaker 1

Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it.
Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain.
the speaker will cast there vote if it matters
.. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery.

So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist.

Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader.

Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it.
Wrong Labour had a coalition with the Librals party, why do you think there was so much turmoil in 2010 with in the Lib/Dems joining up with the Torys, they had never done this before apart from during the war, but they had joined up with the labour party in the 70's.
Callaghan did have a minority government and it was a coalition with the libs, the understanding is the coalition, the understanding is that they support labour in there policys and labour would put up some of there policy that is a coalition an agreement.
Do you under stand that part. and the ones to watch are the back benchers they will be out to try and save there seats, and that will mean they will vote against the Lib/dem whip in numbers, like they did with callinghan, if there is not enough of them to stop any come back from the whip they will abstain from voting, and there will be a number of Troy MPS that will allso abstain ecause they also will want to try and keep there seat.
Dont take to much notice on the 2011 act as part of it says this "applies for the purposes of the Timetable in rule 1 in Schedule 1 to the Representation of the People Act 1983." and if you follow it back wards you end up with the 1956 act.
Which brings it all back to first have a vote on, weather to have a vote of no-confidence followed by the vote on a vote of no-confidence, also the Queen is also able to step in and say desoulve or take that vote of no confidence in which it would be 50/50. (but the crown as not step in for a very long time, they are to scared to)
.. fantasy politics again. You haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Next general election, Spring 2015. Do you want to disagree with me? If so, name your (revised) date.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Conservative 306 seats -1 seat Labour 258 seats +1 Liberal Democrat 57 Democratic Unionist Party 8 SNP 6 Sinn Fein 5 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance Party 1 Green 1 Independent 1 Speaker 1 Just look at how close it is will you before posting again, and then understand this much about it. Labour will all vote together in a vote of no-confidence 259 plus on top will be 25 more votes bring that to 284 votes, then take into account the Lib/dem back benchers voting with Labour that would be more than enough to bring this government to and end and take into account the number of Tory MP's that will abstain. the speaker will cast there vote if it matters[/p][/quote].. let's look at the Lib Dems. As I have pointed out to you already, they face neo-extinction at the next general election – and rightly so for their treachery. So, what's in it for them to bring down their cosy coalition arrangement? Er, nothing. They would all rather hang on to their privileges and parliamentary salary until 2015. Indeed, they all voted for the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 to, partially, ensure that the coalition would persist. Which leaves us with your rebellious Tories. Come off it. When it comes to votes of confidence they ALL rally behind the leader. Callaghan had a minority government. It was NOT a coalition with the Liberals; although there was an ‘understanding’. There were no Liberals in the government. The Liberals were thus free to vote against the confidence motion, which they did. This is most definitely NOT the situation in 2013. There is not the slightest hope in hell of a confidence vote bring down this coalition. Next general election – 2015. You had better start getting ready for it.[/p][/quote]Wrong Labour had a coalition with the Librals party, why do you think there was so much turmoil in 2010 with in the Lib/Dems joining up with the Torys, they had never done this before apart from during the war, but they had joined up with the labour party in the 70's. Callaghan did have a minority government and it was a coalition with the libs, the understanding is the coalition, the understanding is that they support labour in there policys and labour would put up some of there policy that is a coalition an agreement. Do you under stand that part. and the ones to watch are the back benchers they will be out to try and save there seats, and that will mean they will vote against the Lib/dem whip in numbers, like they did with callinghan, if there is not enough of them to stop any come back from the whip they will abstain from voting, and there will be a number of Troy MPS that will allso abstain ecause they also will want to try and keep there seat. Dont take to much notice on the 2011 act as part of it says this "applies for the purposes of the Timetable in rule 1 in Schedule 1 to the Representation of the People Act 1983." and if you follow it back wards you end up with the 1956 act. Which brings it all back to first have a vote on, weather to have a vote of no-confidence followed by the vote on a vote of no-confidence, also the Queen is also able to step in and say desoulve or take that vote of no confidence in which it would be 50/50. (but the crown as not step in for a very long time, they are to scared to)[/p][/quote].. fantasy politics again. You haven't a clue what you're talking about. Next general election, Spring 2015. Do you want to disagree with me? If so, name your (revised) date. freefinker

2:31pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it.

There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are
.. oh, wow. That's a good one. You really do make it up as you go along.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it. There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are[/p][/quote].. oh, wow. That's a good one. You really do make it up as you go along. freefinker

2:37pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

Great reading! Keep it up Southy, I have bought an extra bottle of wine and some Lindt choccies.

This is far better than watching a stand up comedian on TV!
Great reading! Keep it up Southy, I have bought an extra bottle of wine and some Lindt choccies. This is far better than watching a stand up comedian on TV! IronLady2010

2:42pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it.

There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are
Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist.
It do exist, it has existed since the civil war.
.. are you sure? Could it be even older, perhaps in that secret copy of Magna Carta you used to keep quoting from? You know the one where the words and meanings are totally different to all the other copies that are known about.

It would seem you are even too foolish to try and fool the rest of us. Do you really think after all the lies and nonsense you have made up over the years we would actually believe you when you say ‘there is also an act where people on mass can force a early election … it do exist, it has existed since the civil war .. but i forgot what the numbers are.’ Dream on.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Free do not think it is straight foreward it is not, there are a lot of twist and turns and different direction they could take it. There is also an act where people on mass can force a early election, but i forgot what the numbers are[/p][/quote]Don't worry, you haven't forgotten because it doesn't exist.[/p][/quote]It do exist, it has existed since the civil war.[/p][/quote].. are you sure? Could it be even older, perhaps in that secret copy of Magna Carta you used to keep quoting from? You know the one where the words and meanings are totally different to all the other copies that are known about. It would seem you are even too foolish to try and fool the rest of us. Do you really think after all the lies and nonsense you have made up over the years we would actually believe you when you say ‘there is also an act where people on mass can force a early election … it do exist, it has existed since the civil war .. but i forgot what the numbers are.’ Dream on. freefinker

2:43pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
.. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.
Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's
You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?
We have achived more than the Labour party did, and where we are at is at the same stage of the Labour party in the mid 1800's, the orgins of the Labour party started in Bradford with the coming together of the Railway union and Socialist groups, One of those socialist groups was the Socialist Party who had been around for 2 years before hand, drop there name like the other socialist groups did, ILP started in the mid 1800's and was sort of stuck till 1893 when Scottish politician Keir Hardie joined this group got it registered the ILP, then in 1900 all the other unions joined and became to be known as the LRC, The labour party is a lot older than people think it is.
In the Three years we done more than the ILP have, the TUSC it self is a bit older than 3 years, it started off as the NO2EU group, that name is there just not used as a election engine just as a debate forum.
Are you saying it's too early for the TUSC to be demonstrating electoral success? Come on, you must have achieved something tangible in four years. After all, the Labour Representation League of 1869 had two MPs in five years. In what sense can you demonstrate that you're doing better?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]Ah yes. History. You claim to be following in the footsteps of those who founded the Labour Party. Within just a few months of being founded, the Labour Representation Committee had two MPs returned to Parliament. In terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote].. and they achieved that without the full universal suffrage we have today.[/p][/quote]Few mths and the rest it was over 50 years before they got an MP, the Labour party first started to be formed in the 1800's not the 1900's, the Labour party started well before they change there name to the Labour party, they had other names before then, first union of of the left started in Bradford in the 1800's[/p][/quote]You know perhaps better than most that Labour as a political party has its origins in the Labour Representation Committee which was founded in February 1900. Though completely unprepared for the 1900 general election, the LRC got two MPs elected in the October. It was a modest but significant achievement. You've said before that what you are trying to do is similar to what the founders of the Labour Party were doing, so the comparison is a fair one. I ask again; in terms of electoral success, what has the TUSC achieved in three years?[/p][/quote]We have achived more than the Labour party did, and where we are at is at the same stage of the Labour party in the mid 1800's, the orgins of the Labour party started in Bradford with the coming together of the Railway union and Socialist groups, One of those socialist groups was the Socialist Party who had been around for 2 years before hand, drop there name like the other socialist groups did, ILP started in the mid 1800's and was sort of stuck till 1893 when Scottish politician Keir Hardie joined this group got it registered the ILP, then in 1900 all the other unions joined and became to be known as the LRC, The labour party is a lot older than people think it is. In the Three years we done more than the ILP have, the TUSC it self is a bit older than 3 years, it started off as the NO2EU group, that name is there just not used as a election engine just as a debate forum.[/p][/quote]Are you saying it's too early for the TUSC to be demonstrating electoral success? Come on, you must have achieved something tangible in four years. After all, the Labour Representation League of 1869 had two MPs in five years. In what sense can you demonstrate that you're doing better? Stephen J

2:49pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.
yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list.
Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector
.. the case you refer to is tragic but as usual you have your facts wrong.

Although this company was dealing mainly with clients under local government and/or NHS contracts (not a practice I approve of, by the way) this lady was a totally private client of this company. She as not NHS/local government outsourced to private carers.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.[/p][/quote]yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list. Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector[/p][/quote].. the case you refer to is tragic but as usual you have your facts wrong. Although this company was dealing mainly with clients under local government and/or NHS contracts (not a practice I approve of, by the way) this lady was a totally private client of this company. She as not NHS/local government outsourced to private carers. freefinker

2:57pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.
No, they didn't.
And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'.

As their website says: -

'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY?
Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.'

You are yet again caught out telling lies.
set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party.
Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years.
More to them than you know.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?[/p][/quote]They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.[/p][/quote]No, they didn't. And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'. As their website says: - 'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY? Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.' You are yet again caught out telling lies.[/p][/quote]set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party. Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years. More to them than you know. southy

3:05pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.
yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list.
Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector
.. the case you refer to is tragic but as usual you have your facts wrong.

Although this company was dealing mainly with clients under local government and/or NHS contracts (not a practice I approve of, by the way) this lady was a totally private client of this company. She as not NHS/local government outsourced to private carers.
but they failed to inform the local powers they also failed in handing over the paper work on her, so they was unaware that she was on there books.
this is all about cheap labour at a high cost.
Learn the private sector wants big profit with the smallest amount of out goings and that do not benefit the people they care for.
With the NHS they put the people that they care for first and money last or thats the way its ment to be working but that been changing since the capitaslist have taken control, with the private sector its money first and the people they care for last
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.[/p][/quote]yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list. Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector[/p][/quote].. the case you refer to is tragic but as usual you have your facts wrong. Although this company was dealing mainly with clients under local government and/or NHS contracts (not a practice I approve of, by the way) this lady was a totally private client of this company. She as not NHS/local government outsourced to private carers.[/p][/quote]but they failed to inform the local powers they also failed in handing over the paper work on her, so they was unaware that she was on there books. this is all about cheap labour at a high cost. Learn the private sector wants big profit with the smallest amount of out goings and that do not benefit the people they care for. With the NHS they put the people that they care for first and money last or thats the way its ment to be working but that been changing since the capitaslist have taken control, with the private sector its money first and the people they care for last southy

3:27pm Fri 8 Feb 13

southy says...

Oh dear any one else got a mail with a picture with a altered picture of a DWP booklet.
Oh dear any one else got a mail with a picture with a altered picture of a DWP booklet. southy

3:39pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
But, as it says above, National Health Action IS putting up a candidate. So small parties are by no means excluded. You say you don't have time to get organised. Then your administrative and governance processes need changing. What about funding? You know that the TUSC could get funding from the RMT branch and regional political funds. Great! The consituency includes a railway town and the Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters so Bob Crow and Matt Wrack would be well at home personally drumming up support for a TUSC candidature. Now I know that you can't necessarily answer for the whole of the Left in a different area from your own. But what seems, so far, to be total ambivalence to this election from your side is at best curious and at worst extremely frustrating to those would want a real left-wing choice on the ballot paper.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]But, as it says above, National Health Action IS putting up a candidate. So small parties are by no means excluded. You say you don't have time to get organised. Then your administrative and governance processes need changing. What about funding? You know that the TUSC could get funding from the RMT branch and regional political funds. Great! The consituency includes a railway town and the Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters so Bob Crow and Matt Wrack would be well at home personally drumming up support for a TUSC candidature. Now I know that you can't necessarily answer for the whole of the Left in a different area from your own. But what seems, so far, to be total ambivalence to this election from your side is at best curious and at worst extremely frustrating to those would want a real left-wing choice on the ballot paper. Stephen J

3:59pm Fri 8 Feb 13

The Wickham Man says...

southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
southy wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution.
For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).
Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold.
And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.
Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.
yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list.
Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector
I just said to you it is CHEAPER - and that is why the NHS does it you doughboy. The figures are quite clear and every hospital and primary healthcare trust is now doing it, and it works. Are you saying you know better than the actual patients getting this care? and are you so stupid as to think the NHS would just decide to outsource a service that cost more than doing it themselves? You are so wrapped up in dogma you can't even think straight but like I said - you and the other trots don;t actually care about patient health and comfort at all - you are only interested in the NHS for its jobs.
As for that case you quote - I'm not proposing that illegal immigrants perform any kind of patient care, though you will find plenty of illegal immigrant ancillaries working in hospitals already if that was your point.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]Defend the NHS from what for Gods sake - the right to take 50% of Britains entire taxable revenue and turn it into a dirty, slow substandard service? Your post is a classic example of union scremongering with no substance or evidence let alone a solution. For the money spent on it The NHS is rubbish and if you don't have any solutions (and not by chucking yet more money at it because that hasn't worked) then what is the point of your stupid little "action" party (action = strike presumably).[/p][/quote]Its dirty and rubbish because the capitalist want to get there hands on it, where the private sector can not compeat with the NHS, so they are running down and getting ready to be sold. And I will tell you now if its is every sold to the private sector, you better hope that the TUSC don't get power, because it will be taken back.[/p][/quote]Ignorant ill informed tripe. To give just one example - the NHS outsources chemotherapy and dyalysis to people in their own homes so they don't have the distress of waiting hours in a hospital then being turfed out afterwards feeling sick and groggy to make their way home. The NHS outsources this to private companies because it is CHEAPER to do so and the patients who benefit most from it love the convenience and comfort. Most still do a full days work and still get their treatment. You with your stupid, thick unonised Worzel Gummidge head on would ignore the needs of the patient and just think about jobs jobs jobs. Yeah, let sick people sit around all day in waiting rooms, so long as some broom pusher somewhere gets a job out of it that's all that matters. You know nothing about large organisations except what you see by standing at the bottom and looking up.[/p][/quote]yes and just look what happen not to long ago an OAP died, who was being look after by the private sector who was employing illegal immergrates, when they got raided the OAP was handed over to the local powers to be, but forgot to tell them that the OAP was now on there list. Handing over the NHS outsources to private company is not cheaper it cost a lot more to the tax payers, and it is all about giving Tax money to the private sector[/p][/quote]I just said to you it is CHEAPER - and that is why the NHS does it you doughboy. The figures are quite clear and every hospital and primary healthcare trust is now doing it, and it works. Are you saying you know better than the actual patients getting this care? and are you so stupid as to think the NHS would just decide to outsource a service that cost more than doing it themselves? You are so wrapped up in dogma you can't even think straight but like I said - you and the other trots don;t actually care about patient health and comfort at all - you are only interested in the NHS for its jobs. As for that case you quote - I'm not proposing that illegal immigrants perform any kind of patient care, though you will find plenty of illegal immigrant ancillaries working in hospitals already if that was your point. The Wickham Man

4:31pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
Oh dear any one else got a mail with a picture with a altered picture of a DWP booklet.
Did it come from TUSC HQ? Maybe they didn't like the official version so just made one up, you seem to do the same very often.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Oh dear any one else got a mail with a picture with a altered picture of a DWP booklet.[/p][/quote]Did it come from TUSC HQ? Maybe they didn't like the official version so just made one up, you seem to do the same very often. IronLady2010

4:52pm Fri 8 Feb 13

localnews says...

Southy would fit in with the rest of the jokers in Westminster,1.he believe's he's right on everything,2 he lies but swears its the truth,3.make's it up as he goes along,4 refuses to listen to anyone else's point of view......all in all PFP (perfect for parliament)
Southy would fit in with the rest of the jokers in Westminster,1.he believe's he's right on everything,2 he lies but swears its the truth,3.make's it up as he goes along,4 refuses to listen to anyone else's point of view......all in all PFP (perfect for parliament) localnews

4:58pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.
No, they didn't.
And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'.

As their website says: -

'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY?
Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.'

You are yet again caught out telling lies.
set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party.
Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years.
More to them than you know.
.. total rubbish. I've known of David Babbs for years; since well before he got 38 Degrees going. On the democratic, libertarian, ecological, centre-left; but certainly not a mad, authoritarian, dictatorial, undemocratic, lets reopen the coal pits, far left Trot like yourself.

38 Degrees is scrupulously non-political. That they have stands at various environmental, political and other meetings is NOT ever an endorsement of that grouping.

38 Degrees have NOT started a petition about this by-election being undemocratic – that is a lie.
You, southy, obviously could not have signed it – that is a lie; and you most certainly know it.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?[/p][/quote]They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.[/p][/quote]No, they didn't. And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'. As their website says: - 'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY? Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.' You are yet again caught out telling lies.[/p][/quote]set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party. Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years. More to them than you know.[/p][/quote].. total rubbish. I've known of David Babbs for years; since well before he got 38 Degrees going. On the democratic, libertarian, ecological, centre-left; but certainly not a mad, authoritarian, dictatorial, undemocratic, lets reopen the coal pits, far left Trot like yourself. 38 Degrees is scrupulously non-political. That they have stands at various environmental, political and other meetings is NOT ever an endorsement of that grouping. 38 Degrees have NOT started a petition about this by-election being undemocratic – that is a lie. You, southy, obviously could not have signed it – that is a lie; and you most certainly know it. freefinker

4:59pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

localnews wrote:
Southy would fit in with the rest of the jokers in Westminster,1.he believe's he's right on everything,2 he lies but swears its the truth,3.make's it up as he goes along,4 refuses to listen to anyone else's point of view......all in all PFP (perfect for parliament)
NO NO NO and NO.

Politicians do lie, but at least they try and cover it up. Southy is just an honest liar, he actually publishes his lies and argues them, he makes no attempt to hide them!

So, based on the above, he would be useless in Parliament.
[quote][p][bold]localnews[/bold] wrote: Southy would fit in with the rest of the jokers in Westminster,1.he believe's he's right on everything,2 he lies but swears its the truth,3.make's it up as he goes along,4 refuses to listen to anyone else's point of view......all in all PFP (perfect for parliament)[/p][/quote]NO NO NO and NO. Politicians do lie, but at least they try and cover it up. Southy is just an honest liar, he actually publishes his lies and argues them, he makes no attempt to hide them! So, based on the above, he would be useless in Parliament. IronLady2010

5:05pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply. freefinker

5:10pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

freefinker wrote:
Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
LOL What are the T & C's?
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply.[/p][/quote]LOL What are the T & C's? IronLady2010

5:17pm Fri 8 Feb 13

freefinker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
LOL What are the T & C's?
I'm serious. Why should the electorate be denied this choice?

What a hopeless bunch of excuses southy has come up with so far as to why not. I’m up for removing one such obstacle.

T & C's - er, that the whole £500 is donated by posters to this website. That they do actually use it to stand in the by-election. Er, sure there must be something else; I'll add to it as and when.

Join me?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply.[/p][/quote]LOL What are the T & C's?[/p][/quote]I'm serious. Why should the electorate be denied this choice? What a hopeless bunch of excuses southy has come up with so far as to why not. I’m up for removing one such obstacle. T & C's - er, that the whole £500 is donated by posters to this website. That they do actually use it to stand in the by-election. Er, sure there must be something else; I'll add to it as and when. Join me? freefinker

5:43pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Outside of the Box wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Datarater wrote:
Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though.

Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.
I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?
You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry????

For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working.

As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''
As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to.
The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.
Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.
Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part.
I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.
.. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging.

Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses.

The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining?

If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety.

Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy.

You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.
Free try and think will you.
The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote.
Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3.
Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections.
Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's.
And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today.
It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.
When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?
I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to).
The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence.
The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.
If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.
They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election.
And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.
.. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%).

Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?
They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.
No, they didn't.
And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'.

As their website says: -

'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY?
Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.'

You are yet again caught out telling lies.
set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party.
Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years.
More to them than you know.
Hi Southy,

If 38 Degree was set up by socialists, as you are saying today, then how come their candidate could divide the right wing / Tory vote in Eastleigh as you wrote yesterday? Since when hard core Tory voters have fallen mad in love with front organisations of real socialists or even those who want to save Bevan’s vision of NHS?

Following is the cut and paste, in case you have forgotten what you posted:
southy says...
1:32pm Thu 7 Feb 13
“been informed that The National Health Action party are putting up a candidate.

That will split the Right wing voters right up. “

I beg you to start going through your memory bank before making contradictory comments. PLEASE Pete.

Although I do not go to 38degree meetings, I do support them and am on their national mailing list. I have always been under the impression that this body is not associated with any political party, their sole aim is to save the NHS.

I may be wrong but in my view not only the Socialist Party but most groups on the left have got this habit of trying to jump on every band wagon that comes along. 38 Degree today and after Eastleigh it will be something else. Ordinary people are more intelligent than most political activists tend to think. Small groupings of left should start smelling coffee, preferably of non Starbucks variety, ordinary people do not like habitual piggy backers, quick jumpers and fast deserters.

Regarding the info you wanted yesterday, there is no legal requirement about when the political parties should be selecting their candidates. Political parties can select their candidates whenever they wish. Theoretically a party could select a candidate even on the closing day of nominations.

Whether we like the Tories or hate them, in all fairness in Eastleigh they have not been caught napping like not only small groups on the left but also even NuLabour, which I understand still has not selected any candidate for Eastleigh.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Datarater[/bold] wrote: Looks like a dead cert for the Tories. The LibDem vote won't turnout and the ancient class warriors stand no chance. UKIP might affect the poll though. Let's see what happens at the hustings - it could be a goodie.[/p][/quote]I wouldn't be so sure. Today the National Health Action Party - set up to defend the NHS - will select a candidate to fight the Eastleigh by election. This will be a wild card. Remember what happened in Wyre Forest?[/p][/quote]You forgot Pete and his band of not so TUSC merrymen,,,,,will the Redbridge Rocket make late entry???? For it's a 2 horse race,,,,the spinless Lib Dem's whos leader sold out to the devil so he could be called Deputy PM or the lying cheating Tories who's devil incarnate leader CaMoron who is hellbent on destroying the country with is economic policy simply ins't working. As Lloyd Grossman used to say ''David it's over you''[/p][/quote]As far as I know the TUSC will not be contending the By-election, calling it faster than normal, would not give us time to be able to. The government as called this early to stop the minor partys from, if they had called at normal date it would of been at the end of march.[/p][/quote]Paranoia still rules the Tusc wannabe. There is no 'normal date' and the date of the By-Election wasn't called by the Coalition it was called by the Liberal Democrats as it would have been called by Labour if Denham's seat was in a By-Election. It's all in line with established procedures and laid out on the parliamentary website but as it doesn't fit in with your conspiracy theory against Tusc, I don't suppose you have bothered to check the facts. If the date is suspect why haven't Labour questioned it and this too can be verified by looking at Hansard which is available on-line. You post this rubbish after your fellow socialist asked you to stop behaving so childishly and you wonder why no-one votes for you.[/p][/quote]Torchie theres no Paranoia, calling this by-election fast was done deliberity, it was to stop any new voters (like those that have just moved into the area) from being able to vote if they wish to, its is shorter than the time allowed before an election, It was also to stop smaller partys being able to get organise and be able to take part. I would call that undemocratic the actions of doing a fast election, but then again Capitalist have all ways been known as undemocratic and only do so because they was force to.[/p][/quote].. excuses, excuses, excuses. That's all we ever get from you. You need to read what Paramjit said yesterday and stop digging. Why would any party 'deliberately' want to stop new arrivals to the area from voting? It's just another of your very daft excuses. The election has been called by the Lib Dems entirely within the rules - how come YOU are the only one complaining? If TUSC/SP couldn't see the possibility of this by-election looming on the horizon it says an awful lot about your political naivety. Seems other 'smaller partys' have been able to get their act together; only TUSC/SP can't - probably too busy arguing amongst yourselves over some obscure aspect of Trotskyist philosophy. You call this 'undemocratic'? What a cheek. All you have done the last few days is make excuse after excuse for NOT putting yourself forward for democratic scrutiny by the electorate. I think the real reason is, however, you know you would get a severe beating by the people of Eastleigh if you did stand. Cowards.[/p][/quote]Free try and think will you. The reason sticks out a mile, for one they do not know how new voters will vote. Reason why they are calling it fast is to stop the smaller partys getting organise to make a stand against the big 3. Remember it was the Torys that put in the ruling about Parimentry elections to have a deposit, in the first place to stop small groups contesting elections. Capitalism as all ways been undemocratic, it took Socialist thinking people to give you the vote i the first place. If right wing aka capitalist had there way the only people that would be allowed to vote would be Lords and Gentry, land owners, business owners and managerment of business, If you check your history it was the Torys that voted no to widing voting spectrum in the 1800's and 1900's. And if you knew any thing about Trotsky policy it was more democratic than what you see today. It only came about because he change his plea from Not Guilty to Guilty, or are you saying you knew what the judges was going to do before they heard all the edvidence.[/p][/quote]When in danger of having to admit you're wrong, the usual group of irrelevant trivia is introduced as a smoke screen. Are you going to complain to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or just carry on making a fool of yourself ?[/p][/quote]I don't have to complain the complaints have been going in all ready (oh its not an Ombudsman you complain to). The fool is your self, if you can not see the tatic that was played here, The Torys can not afford for any one else to win this seat, that is likely to vote against them in a vote of no-confidence. The only people that knew what was going on was the Lib/Dems Comittee and the Tory Cabinet.[/p][/quote]If everyone cheats as much as you suggest, and you won't raise an official complaint about it, you've admitted defeat without bothering to look for the starting gate. Have you actually looked at the Ombudsman's site and tried to follow the complaints procedure ? I accept that he personally won't 'down tools' so he can deal with you but there's a very clear pathway laid out for the most challenged simpleton to follow. If you have 'evidence' of a conspiracy, it could end with an interview on a mainstream news channel and valuable free publicity for your somewhat misguided cause. It won't cost a kopek to do any of this and you have nothing to lose, so have the courage of your convictions.[/p][/quote]They all cheat at the top, you should know that by now, just look at the cheating done with expenses claims, plus this is not cheating this is unfair tactics to push others out of the election. And I don't need to complain, my complaint would of gone in with 38% as a block complaint that was posted with in an hour of the date being anounce.[/p][/quote].. that's very strange southy as I'm quite involved with 38 Degrees (which is what I assume you mean by 38%). Definitely not seen them making a complaint about the timing of the by election. Nothing on their website either. Is this another one of your deliberate lies? Just to extricate yourself from Torchie1’s challenge?[/p][/quote]They sent out mail about an hour after it was anounce the date of the election, I am also well involved in 38% as it is part and parsel of the Socialist groups.[/p][/quote]No, they didn't. And most definitely, no, they are NOT 'part and parsel of the Socialist groups'. As their website says: - 'IS 38 DEGREES CONNECTED TO A PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY? Absolutely not. 38 Degrees is independent of all political parties.' You are yet again caught out telling lies.[/p][/quote]set up by Socialist Free, not lies just Socialist that have not alined them selfs to any party. Why do you think they take part in the demo and rallys, they been present at evry london rally in the last 3 years, they aslo took part in the final section of youth for jobs jarrow march and was present at the Socialist conference in the last 3 years. More to them than you know.[/p][/quote]Hi Southy, If 38 Degree was set up by socialists, as you are saying today, then how come their candidate could divide the right wing / Tory vote in Eastleigh as you wrote yesterday? Since when hard core Tory voters have fallen mad in love with front organisations of real socialists or even those who want to save Bevan’s vision of NHS? Following is the cut and paste, in case you have forgotten what you posted: southy says... 1:32pm Thu 7 Feb 13 “been informed that The National Health Action party are putting up a candidate. That will split the Right wing voters right up. “ I beg you to start going through your memory bank before making contradictory comments. PLEASE Pete. Although I do not go to 38degree meetings, I do support them and am on their national mailing list. I have always been under the impression that this body is not associated with any political party, their sole aim is to save the NHS. I may be wrong but in my view not only the Socialist Party but most groups on the left have got this habit of trying to jump on every band wagon that comes along. 38 Degree today and after Eastleigh it will be something else. Ordinary people are more intelligent than most political activists tend to think. Small groupings of left should start smelling coffee, preferably of non Starbucks variety, ordinary people do not like habitual piggy backers, quick jumpers and fast deserters. Regarding the info you wanted yesterday, there is no legal requirement about when the political parties should be selecting their candidates. Political parties can select their candidates whenever they wish. Theoretically a party could select a candidate even on the closing day of nominations. Whether we like the Tories or hate them, in all fairness in Eastleigh they have not been caught napping like not only small groups on the left but also even NuLabour, which I understand still has not selected any candidate for Eastleigh. Paramjit Bahia

5:49pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

freefinker wrote:
Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!!
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply.[/p][/quote]No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!! Paramjit Bahia

6:01pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!!
I can offer you a glass of wine Mr Bahia, I'm sure you could do with a glass after reading Southy's posts.

It must be frustrating for you to read posts from someone who should share similar views to you and yet, you read nothing but untruths.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply.[/p][/quote]No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!![/p][/quote]I can offer you a glass of wine Mr Bahia, I'm sure you could do with a glass after reading Southy's posts. It must be frustrating for you to read posts from someone who should share similar views to you and yet, you read nothing but untruths. IronLady2010

8:09pm Fri 8 Feb 13

apm1954 says...

i am an ex lib dem cllr in poole do not trust the liberals i fought for 3 decades against tories now they are the same party i am ashamed to have been part of it 11 years a cllr i must have been a sucker
i am an ex lib dem cllr in poole do not trust the liberals i fought for 3 decades against tories now they are the same party i am ashamed to have been part of it 11 years a cllr i must have been a sucker apm1954

8:38pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
freefinker wrote:
Right folks, here's the deal.

As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need.

Anybody else want to join me?

southy would be my ideal candidate.

T & C's apply.
No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!!
I can offer you a glass of wine Mr Bahia, I'm sure you could do with a glass after reading Southy's posts.

It must be frustrating for you to read posts from someone who should share similar views to you and yet, you read nothing but untruths.
Many thanks for your offer, but I don’t drink alcohol or smoke. Perfect candidate to be a priest in Sikh temple, but I am highly allergic to religion!

I know Pete personally; he is one of the nicest people around. Basically he means well has heart of gold but sometimes gets carried away. Nobody is perfect all of us have our own individual faults

Hope you have a nice week end, observing socialist Southy holding the fort against very well informed Freefinker.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: Right folks, here's the deal. As I want to see the electorate of Eastleigh have the real choice of a true left wing candidate (e.g. TUSC, SP, SWP, etc.) I'm willing to put up £100 towards the £500 deposit they need. Anybody else want to join me? southy would be my ideal candidate. T & C's apply.[/p][/quote]No I am not asking for £100, but only big jar of strong coffee to keep awake for reading all the comments!!![/p][/quote]I can offer you a glass of wine Mr Bahia, I'm sure you could do with a glass after reading Southy's posts. It must be frustrating for you to read posts from someone who should share similar views to you and yet, you read nothing but untruths.[/p][/quote]Many thanks for your offer, but I don’t drink alcohol or smoke. Perfect candidate to be a priest in Sikh temple, but I am highly allergic to religion! I know Pete personally; he is one of the nicest people around. Basically he means well has heart of gold but sometimes gets carried away. Nobody is perfect all of us have our own individual faults Hope you have a nice week end, observing socialist Southy holding the fort against very well informed Freefinker. Paramjit Bahia

8:49pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

apm1954 wrote:
i am an ex lib dem cllr in poole do not trust the liberals i fought for 3 decades against tories now they are the same party i am ashamed to have been part of it 11 years a cllr i must have been a sucker
No individual can be held responsible for the opportunist deeds of his/her party. So don't feel bad about it, just walk away and leave them alone to do their Kama kazi.
As Clegg and co are not likely to give up their ministerial perks and limos there won't be much of LibDem Party left after next election.
You obviously have done your share of service to your community, so feel proud of that.
[quote][p][bold]apm1954[/bold] wrote: i am an ex lib dem cllr in poole do not trust the liberals i fought for 3 decades against tories now they are the same party i am ashamed to have been part of it 11 years a cllr i must have been a sucker[/p][/quote]No individual can be held responsible for the opportunist deeds of his/her party. So don't feel bad about it, just walk away and leave them alone to do their Kama kazi. As Clegg and co are not likely to give up their ministerial perks and limos there won't be much of LibDem Party left after next election. You obviously have done your share of service to your community, so feel proud of that. Paramjit Bahia

11:27pm Fri 8 Feb 13

behonest says...

It's good to hear the Tories talk about 'trust', of course.

They said at the last election they were against the minimum price of alcohol tax, so I voted for them. They betrayed us, and now plan to introduce this tax.

They made no mention of taking child benefit away. We trusted them. They've taken child benefit away from middle and high earners.

They made no mention of legalising gay marriage, but now they are doing it without any say from the public. We may be in favour of it in principle, but we have not been consulted and a centuries-old tradition of Britain is being changed without any democratic mandate.

Yes, good old 'trustworthy' Tories. Tax crazy t0ssers.
It's good to hear the Tories talk about 'trust', of course. They said at the last election they were against the minimum price of alcohol tax, so I voted for them. They betrayed us, and now plan to introduce this tax. They made no mention of taking child benefit away. We trusted them. They've taken child benefit away from middle and high earners. They made no mention of legalising gay marriage, but now they are doing it without any say from the public. We may be in favour of it in principle, but we have not been consulted and a centuries-old tradition of Britain is being changed without any democratic mandate. Yes, good old 'trustworthy' Tories. Tax crazy t0ssers. behonest

3:00pm Sat 9 Feb 13

sam1970 says...

Time for a change. Lib/Lab/Con = more of the same, a vote for UKIP is a vote for a a Party that will put Britain and the British people first. I would love to see a UKIP MP in parliament. We need their voice of reason and common sense.
Time for a change. Lib/Lab/Con = more of the same, a vote for UKIP is a vote for a a Party that will put Britain and the British people first. I would love to see a UKIP MP in parliament. We need their voice of reason and common sense. sam1970

5:48pm Sat 9 Feb 13

kingnotail says...

Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?
Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one? kingnotail

7:33pm Sat 9 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

kingnotail wrote:
Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?
Why do you care, you despise Southampton!
[quote][p][bold]kingnotail[/bold] wrote: Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?[/p][/quote]Why do you care, you despise Southampton! IronLady2010

9:20pm Sat 9 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

sam1970 wrote:
Time for a change. Lib/Lab/Con = more of the same, a vote for UKIP is a vote for a a Party that will put Britain and the British people first. I would love to see a UKIP MP in parliament. We need their voice of reason and common sense.
Sometimes you can over do the campaign. Keep posting like this and I'll vote anything but UKIP! You're getting annoying and boring!
[quote][p][bold]sam1970[/bold] wrote: Time for a change. Lib/Lab/Con = more of the same, a vote for UKIP is a vote for a a Party that will put Britain and the British people first. I would love to see a UKIP MP in parliament. We need their voice of reason and common sense.[/p][/quote]Sometimes you can over do the campaign. Keep posting like this and I'll vote anything but UKIP! You're getting annoying and boring! IronLady2010

1:33pm Sun 10 Feb 13

kingnotail says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
kingnotail wrote:
Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?
Why do you care, you despise Southampton!
Even the MPs outdo the rest of the country in terms of corruption and all-round grubbiness.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kingnotail[/bold] wrote: Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?[/p][/quote]Why do you care, you despise Southampton![/p][/quote]Even the MPs outdo the rest of the country in terms of corruption and all-round grubbiness. kingnotail

11:55pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Pikey-Biker says...

kingnotail wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
kingnotail wrote: Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?
Why do you care, you despise Southampton!
Even the MPs outdo the rest of the country in terms of corruption and all-round grubbiness.
same everywhere
[quote][p][bold]kingnotail[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kingnotail[/bold] wrote: Why would the people of Eastleigh want to vote for a Tory MP, considering what happened to their last one?[/p][/quote]Why do you care, you despise Southampton![/p][/quote]Even the MPs outdo the rest of the country in terms of corruption and all-round grubbiness.[/p][/quote]same everywhere Pikey-Biker

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree