Did anyone hear Milligland getting a kicking on Jeremy Vine?

[Bing o]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344724/Ed...

An exerpt of the comments - it really does confuse me how Labour are still ahead in the polls?

'I get really frustrated when I see you on TV night after night with your growling voice slagging off our government who are doing their utmost to keep this country on its feet.'
Sian Williams

'What chance do I stand as a person in the country if you’re quite happy to tread all over your brother to get to the top?'

Darren, ex RAF serviceman

'How can we trust anybody who didn’t even put his name down as the father of his first child on the birth certificate?’

Kevin O’Neill, Birmingham

'Why hasn’t he got married? Why hasn’t he committed his life to his partner?'

Paul Henry

'I was in tears when Kinnock lost. You’re not getting your messages across. And there’s no passion there, you’re so sort of laid back. You’re not fighting.'

Sandra, Somerset

[thinfourth2]

Bing o said:

An exerpt of the comments - it really does confuse me how Labour are still ahead in the polls?

The population are morons, they see david cameron as thatcher, thatcher was a nasty person, population don't want nasty person so support labour.

[Digga]

thinfourth2 said:

Bing o said:

An exerpt of the comments - it really does confuse me how Labour are still ahead in the polls?

The population are morons, they see david cameron as thatcher, thatcher was a nasty person, population don't want nasty person so support labour.

That. Never underestimate the stupidity of the masses. Ever.

That and the 'world UK owes me a living' handout mentality which Liebor and their union counterparts pander to.

[powerstroke]

Most of the interview sounded like a labour party politcal broadcast To me!!! the BBC have been doing there best since the election to reabilitate labour and promote them....

[Sticks.]

Digga said:

thinfourth2 said:

Bing o said:

An exerpt of the comments - it really does confuse me how Labour are still ahead in the polls?

The population are morons, they see david cameron as thatcher, thatcher was a nasty person, population don't want nasty person so support labour.

That. Never underestimate the stupidity of the masses. Ever.

That and the 'world UK owes me a living' handout mentality which Liebor and their union counterparts pander to.

Might it not be complacency to assume no-one could vote for anyone else other than Cameron unless they're stupid? As Bingo pointed out re quangos, they're not immune from making a c0ck up of things, aiming for political point scoring rathern than what's best for us, just like the last lot.

And when Fat Eric says no one will notice the cuts to local authorities..... well, he might not.

Edited by Sticks. on Friday 7th January 10:18

[Republik]

The sad truth is, he probably will lead this god foresaken country at some point in the future.

[Blib]

I honestly cannot bring myself to envisage that man as our Prime Minister. His voice, as much as what he says, is horrid.

[Bing o]

Republik said:

The sad truth is, he probably will lead this god foresaken country at some point in the future.

I will give £10 to the charity of your choice if he does!! There is NO WAY he will be PM.




(Well, there is a way, it's just too horrible to consider).

[Digga]

Sticks. said:

Might it not be complacency to assume no-one could vote for anyone else other than Cameron unless they're stupid?

Yes. The Tories are far from the panacea. However, in the real world, pragmatism dicates that - as we are mired in an effective two-party contest - any vote other than for CMD runs the risk of being a vote for Liebor.

It's no as binary here as in the USA, but it aint brilliant and until the country has less leaning/bias toward Liebor, we won't get the governments we deserve.

[limpsfield]

I listened to it on iPlayer after reading that Mail article and it is not quite the kicking the Wail makes out - but the Jeremy Vine show audience does come over as sharing similar traits to the mail reader.

Regardless, Miliband did not come out covered in glory - and such an irritating voice.

[Tsippy]

Blib said:

I honestly cannot bring myself to envisage that man as our Prime Minister. His voice, as much as what he says, is horrid.

I have to mute the TV everytime he speaks

[andy400]

I'm far from being an intellectual powerhouse myself, but every time I listen to Ed Milliband speak I can't help but think of colleagues I've known whose opinions have clearly far outgrown their intelligence and ability - you know the sort, I'm sure.

I've met his brother, and whilst I wouldn't exactly say he impressed me, he certainly seems to stand head and shoulders above Ed in most areas. I am still flabbergasted (and, perhaps, grateful) that Labour chose the Ed over the David.

[Republik]

Bing o said:

Republik said:

The sad truth is, he probably will lead this god foresaken country at some point in the future.

I will give £10 to the charity of your choice if he does!! There is NO WAY he will be PM.




(Well, there is a way, it's just too horrible to consider).

I really hope you never have to pay that £10. It would be a disaster if he became PM.

[elster]

andy400 said:

I've met his brother, and whilst I wouldn't exactly say he impressed me, he certainly seems to stand head and shoulders above Ed in most areas. I am still flabbergasted (and, perhaps, grateful) that Labour chose the Ed over the David.

Not really a surprise. Labour are naturally left leaning. As Ed spoke he was pushing himself towards Labours homeland of the Unions. David is much more of a central leader and would have won comfortably if the unions didn't get the vote.

The choice was Diane or Ed.

[off_again]

Bing o said:

Republik said:

The sad truth is, he probably will lead this god foresaken country at some point in the future.

I will give £10 to the charity of your choice if he does!! There is NO WAY he will be PM.




(Well, there is a way, it's just too horrible to consider).

Completely agree - the current coalition have got to completely screw things up for Labour to be elected again. There is no spice, and sparkle with Labour at the moment. I fully expect to see several years of infighting and leadership contests, followed by the radical left trying to sieze power and then getting a druming in the next election. Maybe, just maybe they might do well after then, but Milliband wont be around for then.

[toast boy]

elster said:

andy400 said:

I've met his brother, and whilst I wouldn't exactly say he impressed me, he certainly seems to stand head and shoulders above Ed in most areas. I am still flabbergasted (and, perhaps, grateful) that Labour chose the Ed over the David.

Not really a surprise. Labour are naturally left leaning. As Ed spoke he was pushing himself towards Labours homeland of the Unions. David is much more of a central leader and would have won comfortably if the unions didn't get the vote.

The choice was Diane or Ed.

I'm far from a Labour supporter but I have to say there was something about David that I liked. Ed on the other hand just seems like a man with little to no charisma who is way out of his depth. On Jeremy Vine he seemed to completely lack any conviction in any of his answers to the questions thrown his way, if he answered them at all. The sad thing is that I'm pretty sure that unless the coalition do something spectacular in the next few years he'll win just down to the idiocy of the general populace.

[Fittster]

off_again said:

Bing o said:

Republik said:

The sad truth is, he probably will lead this god foresaken country at some point in the future.

I will give £10 to the charity of your choice if he does!! There is NO WAY he will be PM.




(Well, there is a way, it's just too horrible to consider).

Completely agree - the current coalition have got to completely screw things up for Labour to be elected again. There is no spice, and sparkle with Labour at the moment. I fully expect to see several years of infighting and leadership contests, followed by the radical left trying to sieze power and then getting a druming in the next election. Maybe, just maybe they might do well after then, but Milliband wont be around for then.

"Tonight’s YouGov/Sun voting intention figures are CON 39%, LAB 43%, LDEM 7%. It’s the highest Labour lead YouGov have shown since November, and the lowest Liberal Democrat score they’ve ever shown (the last time the Lib Dems scored lower than 7% was back in 1990). The government’s net approval figure is down to minus 20 (33% approve, 53% disapprove), which is also the lowest it’s been since the election."

[Victor McDade]

thinfourth2 said:

Bing o said:

An exerpt of the comments - it really does confuse me how Labour are still ahead in the polls?

The population are morons, they see david cameron as thatcher, thatcher was a nasty person, population don't want nasty person so support labour.

They are not morons, they are just self serving and short sighted.

If I were a council worker I'd vote Labour, if I were a civil servant I'd vote labour, if I were an immigrant I'd vote labour, if I were on incapacity benefits I'd vote labour, if I were scottish or welsh I'd vote labour.........doesn't take much to get the votes up to a winning margin does it.

Labours irresponsible spending effectively bribes large portions of the electorate. They are not morons for then voting labour, but they are simply looking after their own.

[Johnnytheboy]

And of course Labour don't need as high a share of the votes as the Tories so that'd translate into a big majority.

So the same old thing will happen. Tories will sort out the financial mess left by Labour, make themselves unpopular doing so, Labour will get back in and get the economy in a mess again.... etc.

[Fittster]

Johnnytheboy said:

And of course Labour don't need as high a share of the votes as the Tories so that'd translate into a big majority.

The government will be changing the constituency boundaries this year (I think we can assume that in future they will favour the parties making the changes.

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/news.php?ex=0&a...