NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, I may not know as much about politics as many of you here, but it seems to me that David Cameron has been trying to win over middle England and challenging Gordon Brown to an election since July. Any speculations on when the next election will occur?

Sunday afternoon.

Any speculations on when the next election will occur?

When the British populace tires of the war in Iran?

labour were going to have one (Mr Browns party) but he chickened out as it was to close and then when it would have happened according to the polls the conservitives (Cameron) would have one ..... but does it matter both parties are just the same and it will be one or the other ... the libs have some good policies but a load of awful ones (imo) aswell .... but really all the politicians suck over here .... but id vote for whoever was likly to win over the racist bnp party

So Cameron should win if an election happened now ... so there wont be one until close to Browns full term is over or he feels he can win ... insert 3+ years or when Brown is ahead as my reply lol

When the British populace tires of the war in Iran?

damit they did it yet again ... when did we invade Iran grrrrrrr
(seriously i hope that never happens (and i hope Brown is to sensible)

Not a clue, although, if Brown is to chicken out of one because he might lose, probably not until 2009.

2009, just after Bush leaves the White House and we can fully withdraw from Iraq without being complained at, which will give Gordon Brown a massive vote boost - that is if he survives the internal politicking in the Labour Party for a year and a half.

2009. He's not going to wait until the legal limit of may 2010 - waiting five years since the last election is going to be the ultimate vote loser. He'll spend the rest of the time trying to 1)shift the political debate from crime, tax and immigration, where the tories currently have the upper hand with the electorate (to my deep and lasting regret - not that I like Labour either) and 2)do everything in his power to prevent a likely successful referendum on Scottish independence. I'd like nothing more than to see his face after a returning officer gives a majority for independence in a referendum...

do everything in his power to prevent a likely successful referendum on Scottish independence. I’d like nothing more than to see his face after a returning officer gives a majority for independence in a referendum...
Successful?

From up here, it doesn’t seem likely that a referendum will turn out with a large pro-independence vote. That’s if we even get a referendum in the first place; every party apart from the Nats and perhaps the Greens is steadily refusing to even contemplate about a referendum.

Saying that, I think a large amount of people want a referendum, they just probably won’t vote ‘yes’ for independence.

I'd give it till at least late 2008, that is if such an election actually mattered

it seems to me that David Cameron has been trying to win over middle England and challenging Gordon Brown to an election since July.

:eek: he's after the ring!

:eek: he’s after the ring!
One PM to rule them all,
One PM to find them,
One PM to bring them all and in the darkness bind them,
In the land of Middle England, where the Swing Voters lie.

Successful?

From up here, it doesn’t seem likely that a referendum will turn out with a large pro-independence vote. That’s if we even get a referendum in the first place; every party apart from the Nats and perhaps the Greens is steadily refusing to even contemplate about a referendum.

Saying that, I think a large amount of people want a referendum, they just probably won’t vote ‘yes’ for independence.
From what I've read, support for independence depends on whether there is an option for further devolution or not, with a simple yes/no bringing a yes, and yes/no/devolution not. But, I suppose, polls aren't particulary reliable when the entire result changes depending on the wording. I don't think it will happen any time soon, but the way I see it, unionist parties have to win a parliamentary majority every time, while the SNP/Greens et al only have to win once when they get the opportunity.

One PM to rule them all,
One PM to find them,
One PM to bring them all and in the darkness bind them,
In the land of Middle England, where the Swing Voters lie.
Ha!:D

But it's the sad truth, really.

It seems like there was a similar thread to this about two weeks ago. How many elections do you Britons have?

It seems like there was a similar thread to this about two weeks ago. How many elections do you Britons have?
A couple of weeks back the PM decided not to have an early election because his party was down in opinion polls. Prior to this, his party was up in the polls and it looked like he would call an election.

So yeah, we potentially have an election every time the government knows they can win. :p

...the way I see it, unionist parties have to win a parliamentary majority every time, while the SNP/Greens et al only have to win once when they get the opportunity.
And there’s the rub: I think it’ll be quite some time until a non-Unionist party can hold a large majority in Holyrood.

Not even Salmond’s silver tongue can achieve that just now.

It seems like there was a similar thread to this about two weeks ago. How many elections do you Britons have?
As many as we damn well like.

Realistically, one every 3-5 years.

And there’s the rub: I think it’ll be quite some time until a non-Unionist party can hold a large majority in Holyrood.

Not even Salmond’s silver tongue can achieve that just now.
You think so? I mean, would it even take a large majority in the Scottish Parliament in order to pass a bill allowing for a referendum? Scraping a majority by one or two votes could well provide ammo to the SNP in a referendum if a big enough majority of Scots want one, and Labour/Libs/Tories are somehow seen as anti democratic.

It'll be interesting to see how 'English votes on English laws' and a potential Tory government impacts this if they win in '09, especially if they are seen as insensitive to Scottish interests (they've got what, one Scottish MP?) Although I doubt it will effect anything that much, I suppose, though I still feel it's more of a question of when rather than if to some degree.

You think so? I mean, would it even take a large majority in the Scottish Parliament in order to pass a bill allowing for a referendum? Scraping a majority by one or two votes could well provide ammo to the SNP in a referendum if a big enough majority of Scots want one, and Labour/Libs/Tories are somehow seen as anti democratic.
I think you’re right that the Libs, Labs and Tories have suffered slightly from there stern stance on a referendum, but the SNP only holds 47 of 129 seats at Holyrood; one less than Labour. That’s only 32.9% (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliamentary_Election%2C_2007)) of the electorate voting for the Nats, and I sincerely doubt that everyone who voted for them supports independence. A lot of voters, in some ways like myself, voted SNP hoping Labour would be kicked out, but knowing if they did so, the Nats wouldn’t have enough clout to instantly break away from the Union.

And that’s just what happened. Now the Scottish Executive/Government is all about compromise, with relatively minor parties (see: the Greens) being able to exert more influence on the government’s policies.

It’ll be interesting to see how ‘English votes on English laws’ and a potential Tory government impacts this if they win in ‘09, especially if they are seen as insensitive to Scottish interests (they’ve got what, one Scottish MP?) Although I doubt it will effect anything that much, I suppose, though I still feel it’s more of a question of when rather than if to some degree.
The lone Scottish Tory MP is one David Mundell, MP for the Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale constituency.

I too am interested to see what’ll happen if a Tory government arrives in 2009 (though I wouldn’t hold your breath). If anything, I reckon it’ll push Holyrood even further away from Westminster; Cameron’s statements about the SNP and Scotland in general hasn’t exactly warmed the Scottish public to him. I can see a Tory executive attempting to rain in the a Nationalist-led Scottish Executive, failing miserably, and making the case for independence much stronger.

I think you’re right that the Libs, Labs and Tories have suffered slightly from there stern stance on a referendum, but the SNP only holds 47 of 129 seats at Holyrood; one less than Labour. That’s only 32.9% (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliamentary_Election%2C_2007)) of the electorate voting for the Nats, and I sincerely doubt that everyone who voted for them supports independence. A lot of voters, in some ways like myself, voted SNP hoping Labour would be kicked out, but knowing if they did so, the Nats wouldn’t have enough clout to instantly break away from the Union.

And that’s just what happened. Now the Scottish Executive/Government is all about compromise, with relatively minor parties (see: the Greens) being able to exert more influence on the government’s policies.

Makes sense, I suppose, although that's quite a dangerous game if you support the union.


The lone Scottish Tory MP is one David Mundell, MP for the Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale constituency.

I too am interested to see what’ll happen if a Tory government arrives in 2009 (though I wouldn’t hold your breath). If anything, I reckon it’ll push Holyrood even further away from Westminster; Cameron’s statements about the SNP and Scotland in general hasn’t exactly warmed the Scottish public to him. I can see a Tory executive attempting to rain in the a Nationalist-led Scottish Executive, failing miserably, and making the case for independence much stronger.

Well, a Tory government is hardly certain at the next election. From what I can see is that they are trying to have their cake (the union) and eat it too (but without those pesky lib/lab voting Scots). My gut feeling is that that is a mix that Salmond could easily blow up in his face. Nonetheless, it does make, from a cynical political point of view, electoral sense to, say revise the barnett formula and get english votes, simply because it plays to the Tory voter base and 500 English constituencies are better than 50 safe non-Tory Scottish ones.

I guess we'll have to wait until 2009 and 2011 and see.

Makes sense, I suppose, although that’s quite a dangerous game if you support the union.
I’m not a massive supporter of the Union; I prefer decentralised, more local government, so in effect I support ‘independence’. But not the form independence the SNP is on about.

I don’t see why Scotland can’ be a more autonomous region, but still with ties to England, Wales and NI/Ireland.

I guess we’ll have to wait until 2009 and 2011 and see.
And suffer inane Tory/Labour/SNP campaigns on the way...