The unofficial AFC Rushden & Diamonds messageboard

Mad Dog wrote:I’ve lost my faith in the current government, but hell will freeze over before I vote Tory. We’re in for some even dark times if they get in.

Going to have to think carefully on how I vote this year.

If you don't want the dreaded Eton toffs to get in then there is only one way to vote, Labour might be shite but rather them than going back 50 years to servitude under the aristocracy.

woody wrote:

Mad Dog wrote:
Going to have to think carefully on how I vote this year.

I think your comment is exactly what GB and THE DARK LORD will be hoping for...... "better the Devil you know......................."

The problem is we're talking about two devils, not one. The Tories started the ball rolling back in 1979 with rampant privatisation and the axing of apprenticeships. And I have seen nothing to suggest that they have changed. They are the party of the rich and the privilaged.

coltrane wrote:

Mad Dog wrote:I’ve lost my faith in the current government, but hell will freeze over before I vote Tory. We’re in for some even dark times if they get in.

Going to have to think carefully on how I vote this year.

If you don't want the dreaded Eton toffs to get in then there is only one way to vote, Labour might be shite but rather them than going back 50 years to servitude under the aristocracy.

This is the problem with our our politics. People have got so entrenched in the two party system that they will only vote for one or the other thus meaning it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils, deciding who will do the least damage. As a result we’re in a situation where we’re choosing between two parties that are very close overall.

That said people should get themselves more informed on the situation. In this area back when we had the local elections, Northamptonshire gave its Tory Council an increased majority, despite pissing £32 million up the wall!

Btw, something that might be of interest:

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/

The Tory lead is now down to a prediction of a 26 seat majority. I'm predicting a hung parliament at the next election which could make things very interesting.

By the way Woody we're governed under a PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM (I know you like putting various phrases and words in block capitals so I thought I'd join you), we as a country don't decide our Prime Minister, party leaders are decided by the parties and we elect our local MP to represent us. Then the largest party is the party of government and the leader of that party is Prime Minister. The people of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath elected GORDON BROWN in 2005 ergo he was elected to be PM as were all 356 other Labour MPs because all could've decided to run for the leadership in 2007.

I assume you already knew the above but I had to reiterate it because the idea that Gordon Brown wasn't elected to be PM is plain wrong and is the view of the ignorant, tabloid reader.

As for the original article you linked, it's hardly a 'stealth tax', don't be a twat on the road = no extra fee. Simples.

Sara Pascoe wrote:By the way Woody we're governed under a PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM (I know you like putting various phrases and words in block capitals so I thought I'd join you), we as a country don't decide our Prime Minister, party leaders are decided by the parties and we elect our local MP to represent us. Then the largest party is the party of government and the leader of that party is Prime Minister. The people of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath elected GORDON BROWN in 2005 ergo he was elected to be PM as were all 356 other Labour MPs because all could've decided to run for the leadership in 2007.

I assume you already knew the above but I had to reiterate it because the idea that Gordon Brown wasn't elected to be PM is plain wrong and is the view of the ignorant, tabloid reader.

As for the original article you linked, it's hardly a 'stealth tax', don't be a twat on the road = no extra fee. Simples.

To be honest I hadn't paid much attention to the specifics of this thread - Brown is not the leader of my country, etc. - but having just read the original article I'm amazed anyone can complain. "Under the plans, a fine of £60 for speeding, using a mobile phone while driving or not wearing a seatbelt would be increased to £75." Good, surely? Increase it to £150, for all I care, maybe peope will begin to think twice about dangerous driving.

Irish Diamond wrote:To be honest I hadn't paid much attention to the specifics of this thread - Brown is not the leader of my country, etc. - but having just read the original article I'm amazed anyone can complain. "Under the plans, a fine of £60 for speeding, using a mobile phone while driving or not wearing a seatbelt would be increased to £75." Good, surely? Increase it to £150, for all I care, maybe peope will begin to think twice about dangerous driving.

I totally agree. Make it a £200 fine and 6 points, then it may actually deter the dick heads who think they are above the law and continue to use a mobile while driving.

You're right Ireland have got enough troubles of their own without worrying about Great Britain.

Irish Diamond wrote:or not wearing a seatbelt would be increased to £75.[/b]" Good, surely? Increase it to £150, for all I care, maybe peope will begin to think twice about dangerous driving.

I've never worn a seatbelt and I doubt I ever will. I've only ever been fined whilst living in MK. Fine what they like it still won't get me to put one on.

Have you seen the advert when the guy headbutts the windscreen, gruesome isn't it? :lol:

rudolph_hucker wrote:

Irish Diamond wrote:or not wearing a seatbelt would be increased to £75.[/b]" Good, surely? Increase it to £150, for all I care, maybe peope will begin to think twice about dangerous driving.

I've never worn a seatbelt and I doubt I ever will. I've only ever been fined whilst living in MK. Fine what they like it still won't get me to put one on.

Can I ask why you refuse to wear one?