All bets are on!

DJen I did not say that I was low profile on politics, but that a lot of others are.
Eloethan I don't agree with you at all, the Lib Dems will have done all they could behind the scenes to implement their policies.Of course we look at facts and figures, but to continually bludgeon people with them endlessly on here is what is boring.DJen says "this is a chance for ordinary people to try and pursuade other ordinary people of the errors of their thinking".this is telling anyone that does not agree with your politics that they are wrong.Which of course is what you think.Others think differently.

Golly how glad we are not to be able to vote! Just would not know what to do. I could never get involved in politics in the UK- as the First Past the Post system meant our vote would always end up in the bin- as we lived in a staunchly solid Tory area. We swayed from Lib Dem to labour- and voted Lib Dem at local level as our Lib Dem councillor was very active, approachable and really effective at local level....

Selfishly, we will do much better personally if the Tories win- but I just could not vote for them, seeing what they have done to the NHS, Education and Social Services- just could NOT.

Being on holiday for 2 weeks with very true blue Tories for 2 weeks meant I had to button my lip (hey, ho... ;) )- a lot of the time. Of course very rich people who can opt out of NHS, opt out of school system and went to the best Public Schools and sent their kids and grand-kids to same + do not know anyone who has ever needed social help- cannot fathom why so many people are suffering so! And tax avoidance by the million and mansion tax on their multiple properties worth many millions will be more important to them.

For me, it is totally wrong that people in so many constituencies will vote and their vote will end up in the bin as if they didn't exist.

I am just puzzled that because someone looks at things from a different political perspective to another another person it constitutes 'errors of their thinking'.
It sounds suspiciously like an invitation for brainwashing.
It is not as black and white as that, if it was there would be no floating voters.

There is nothing worse than someone saying ' allow me to point out the error of your ways' (or thinking).

I said persuade, roses. I assume you know what that means. Isn't that what all politics is about, trying to persuade others to think your way. I try and persuade by asking people to look at the facts and figures. Nothing wrong with that.

Granjura, that's first past the post, which is what both Labour and Tory wanted. The irony is that if they had had PR, the Tories would have a majority this time. Shot themselves in the foot again, as they did with Scottish devolution.

PR may be back on the table sometime in the future, as it looks like coalition governments may become the norm anyway.That was always the reason given against PR, that you would end up in coalition and not one party in power.Even without it, that is what we are getting.Coalition can be a good thing, but it does depend on the parties involved.

Just one 'another' myself (too much thinking about where to put my X)

I would prefer a moderate coalition without any extremist views, but could we depend on getting that?

I think you are trying to make a bit too much out of what I said, roses, as usual.
Most people who are on the left think those on the right are wrong, and vice versa. Who's trying to bludgeon now?

you perhaps DJen? We have moved on now.

I agree with you Rosequartz a moderate coalition without any extremist views would be ideal.We could not be sure we would be getting that, and it could be a problem.

GT - peoples eyes and ears.

?

It's sort of off the subject but I wonder if any of our Scottish grans consider that the independence vote might have had a different result if Nicola Sturgeon had been the party leader then? She has so much more charisma than Alex Salmond.
I'm actually pleased that the SNP is a real left wing party and wish we had a similar one in England. The Greens do their best but NS is so much more of a professional leader.
I don't mind if the SNP holds the balance in a government of the UK

That's a refreshing view to hear, trisher, and you could be right about the referendum result, who knows.
Ms Sturgeon gives the impression of being very capable and balanced and I'm hoping the SNP can make a useful contribution to UK government.
If the SNP has the opportunity to make useful changes at Westminster but fails to do that through their own fault, then I think their support will plummet dramatically.

See Durhamjen excellent article on the other (pictures what party to vote for) thread. I know many people in Banking who know that this is the truth, and will even say so in private, of course.

The Banking sector totally abused the responsibilities given to them by labour via Gordon Brown- and many made millions on the back of this abuse of trust.

As much as I love the underdog and Scotland- the concept of the tail wagging the dog, without the dog having any recourse, just seems exaggerated and wrong. How can the Scotts have full voting rights on English issues, and the English nought in exchange. And what about them having so much more rights than the Welsh too?

That concept is exaggerated and wrong and will not happen.

Any extremist party fills me with fear and foreboding. We have not lived through extremism in the United Kingdom but we have seen the effects of it and fought against it, both right and left, and I would not like to see it come in by the back door.

I agree with your post granjura

Old fuddy duddies like DH and me could see that it would all end in tears.

The SNP is not extremist - but perhaps you mean UKIP. SNP has social democratic policies and principles. As it happens to be regionally based, it iinevitably has the interests of Scotland at heart, but I would be very happy to see social democratic policies applied nation-wide.

I think we are getting it all a bit out of perspective with the tail wagging the dog bit. Look at the last coalition, there wasn't much accusation of the tail wagging the dog then, except perhaps from the extreme right wing of the Tories, and we wouldn't want them to have much say would we?

I am not sure that the SNP could just be seen as "nationally based" - their brief is to become independent and thus break up the UK. I have no problem with their other policies and I admire NS, but having a large cohort of MPs in the BRITISH parliament who wish to create a situation where the United Kingdom ceases to be seems a bit dodgy to me.

If, as seems likely, SNP turn out to be the 3rd largest party at Westminster, I believe some of us might have to rethink the concept of 'underdog'.
I'm a Scot but will be voting for a progressive, left-of-centre party whose main push is for ending austerity.
On their agenda is also the move towards independence but at some time in the future.
It is NOT the immediate priority for Thursday.
I genuinely believe that a strong SNP presence will benefit the whole of the UK.
Then everyone who wanted Scotland to remain within the UK can congratulate themselves on achieving a good outcome!

To me too, Mishap

Yes mcem. The amount of seats the SNP may get will be no more than the Libs got last time, and if Westminster can't control the potential breakup of the UK then in my opinion they are too wimpy for words and get all they deserve.

Well said, mcem. That is what I was trying to say. If I was north of the Border, I'd be voting with you for a party whose policies resonate with my left of centre principles.
mishap, if you were quoting me, I didn't say that the SNP were 'nationally based'. My words were 'regionally based'.