Your predictions for the UK election

I reckon Lib Dems will sneak a win

I believe it will be a hung parliament with a conservative majority.

dunno

BMP

I say hung with a center-left majority.

>>4
The BMP is a russian armored personnel vehicle which marked a revolution in mechanized infantry units during the 60s, the basic BMP design is still in use to this day rather like the ak47 which revolutionised modern assault rifles.

Perhaps the soviets had a well developed "get it right the first time" doctrine which enabled them to create such cost-effective weapons.

Three way Mexican stand off for about a year with the centre left majority till the queen dissolve parliament.

>>2
This, although i want lib dems to win.

>>2

You were half right

How labour did it

Step 1: Bribe the electorate through benefits and tax credits; never mind that all we're doing is taking their money and giving a little back, they're thick.

Step 2: Bring in a shit-ton of immigrants, don't bother assimilating them into society, just make sure they know that we give them free housing and benefits.

Step 3: Create a huge amount of public sector jobs in admin and other cheap areas where we don't have to train them very well or have them in contact with the general public; that way we reduce unemployment figures and we get a whole swathe of the population who'll vote for us because they want to keep their job.

Step 4: Fuck up the education system; devalue the universities and get as many through them in rubbish courses. Who cares if they're worthless or destroy the old centres of learning; it makes them feel like they owe us something and indeed they do: over 20,000 pounds of debt. Also, they can just go into public sector work.

Step 5: Keep the Scottish constituencies for Westminster, despite the fact that they're not effected by Westminster's domestic policies. Make sure they're all Labour safe seats. Ignore the West Lothian question at all times.

Step 6: Encourage postal voting and then commit electoral fraud; we've only been called out on it two or three times and nobody's done anything!

Step 7: Despite ruining pretty much everything, such as civil liberties, the education system, the economy, etc and having 13 years in which to carry out our election manifestos (1997: House of Lords reform, Electoral Reform)

That's pretty much how they do it

>Lib Dems will sneak a win
i bet op feels like an idiot now lulz

>>11
QUOTE FAILURE
lulz

Back to /b/, please

>>12
"Lib Dems will sneak a win"

>>13
That is not how you quote silly!

>>14
"That's how I quote silly!"

>>15
Terrible!

>>10

I bet you feel like a homo having that huge cock in you're mouth, amirite?

>>17
labour DID ruin the economy with their right-wing economic policies

>>18
They ruined it with well meaning but corruptive state interventionism, they should have expanded apon Thatcher's monetarist policies.

>>18
sorry that was directed at >>11


Also:

We've got councils for the minutia of regional affairs, in national elections people are generally voting with the national government in mind, and rightly so because that's the most significant consequence.

First-past-the-post is barely democratic. It was designed back when only a handful of rich people in the country were able to vote at all and it's been sustained all these years only because it favours the party in power. It's an unjustifiable anachronism and it needs to go.

>>19
Ha! Living in the past much? Those policies have shown themselves to be disastrous in the financial crisis. The world is setting course in a different direction right now. Get with the program.

>>21
You argue that they were bad policies but the financial crisis occurred because of a large shift between people pursing wealth to people being given wealth they did not earn and could not afford (that's the housing crisis).  They were "shown to be disastrous" because wealth was destroyed and no side won anything except those who bet on the failure happening.

Furthermore, removing the government from the market in the United States would have done much to avert the housing crisis which led to the financial crisis.  It was the government, at the behest of misguided unions and community organizations, who passed laws removing restrictions and insisting that mortgage companies offer people who could barely afford meager housing expensive housing.  Default.  Default.  Default.  Under other conditions, selling real estate mortgages would have been a legitimate business venture that would not have damaged anything.

I realize that I have been saying this but my argument has been the perspective of an American looking at America.  My argument however is not the substance but the ideas: giving people substantial wealth or privileges they did not earn and perhaps can not afford is dangerous.  Thatcher monetarism does not do this as far as I am aware nor did it truly contribute to the financial crisis.

How long until there are splits within the Tory and LibDem ranks, and the 55% on the no-confidence vote is achieved?