Oliver Coppard to win sheffield hallam?

[Litotes 63]

Once again read back about 10 pages for the truth about the Forgemasters loan.

 

---------- Post added 29-04-2015 at 21:55 ----------

 

 

The true nasty party speaks again.

 

---------- Post added 29-04-2015 at 21:59 ----------

 

 

Labour also sent everyone to University, devaluing degrees. Universities needed more money to sustain the numbers that wanted degrees. We have too many Universities offering too many Mickey Mouse degrees, but with many employed by the Universities little will change. If all the soft Universities were shut, and only the decent ones offering proper degrees survived, then maybe fees would be able to come down.

 

Nice elitist thoughts there...

Perhas you represent the nasti party attitude?

 

Where do you stand on immigration?

[go4it 10]

Nice elitist thoughts there...

Perhas you represent the nasti party attitude?

 

But that is the problem with the Labour Party - anyone wanting to better themselves or is good at what they do is classed as elitist. And we have to share everything with those who can be bothered.

[Localman 10]

Do you have the same opinion of the Labour party who failed to provide the promised loan to Forgemasters?

 

I think you'll find that was Mr Clegg as well.

 

I don't think there is anything to be gained from tat-for-tat allegations about not delivering on promises. There are all sorts of reasons why promises may not be kept. For example, the reasons why Cameron has not kept his immigration promise are quite different from the reason Osborne has not kept his deficit reduction promise.

 

However, what makes Clegg's u-turn on tuition fees distinct is that, as the insiders have confirmed, it was a promise he made knowing full well that he never intended to keep it. It was duplicitous.

 

And, it is not as though Clegg was without form in this regard.

 

Most will remember the recent local elections when millions of Liberal Democrat leaflets carried Mr Clegg's personal promise that, if elected, the Liberal Democrats would scrap council tax and replace it with local income tax. All sorts of promises were being made to people about how their local tax bills were to be cut through this change.

 

Yet, just 2 months after those elections, Mr Clegg announced that he was scrapping the Liberal Democrat's commitment to Local Income Tax because it was simply practically undeliverable. What was astonishing was that he made the announcement without even telling, let alone consulting, the Liberal Democrat local government spokeswoman. Clegg had known it wouldn't work long before the elections, but he was prepared to take his troops into battle on that promise because he believed it would be politically advantageous.

[smiggs 10]

But that is the problem with the Labour Party - anyone wanting to better themselves or is good at what they do is classed as elitist. And we have to share everything with those who can be bothered.

 

Switching sides for a minute here. How would people who want to better the themselves benefit in any way from reducing the number of university places? Everyone who wants to go to university should be able to go to university, a Tory government had the chance to change how universities are funded didn't cut places on the contrary they have increased since their funding model came in.

 

Reducing the number of university places certainly wouldn't be Mr Clegg's position either so I suggest you pick a better argument.

[1978 14]

There seem to be some very well entrenched views here, but those who like to make a bet seem to be putting their money on Coppard, even though Clegg remains the marginal favourite. That's what the bookies are saying tonight; http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/sheffield-hallam/winning-party

 

By the time this link is checked who knows what the odds may be?

[whiteowl 54]

There seem to be some very well entrenched views here, but those who like to make a bet seem to be putting their money on Coppard, even though Clegg remains the marginal favourite. That's what the bookies are saying tonight; http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/sheffield-hallam/winning-party

 

By the time this link is checked who knows what the odds may be?

 

When I posted earlier in the thread he was 1/2. According to the link above (at the time of writing) half have gone up marginally and half have gone down marginally.

Still looks like the bookies have Clegg odds-on to hang on, whilst it's not a sure bet, it's probably a fair indicator.

[ubermaus 10]

Some big bets going on coppard. Bookies dont usually get it wrong.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 00:08 ----------

 

When I posted earlier in the thread he was 1/2. According to the link above (at the time of writing) half have gone up marginally and half have gone down marginally.

Still looks like the bookies have Clegg odds-on to hang on, whilst it's not a sure bet, it's probably a fair indicator.

 

In a two horse race its hardly certain. Some bookies have coppard at 6/4.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 00:10 ----------

 

Well its clearly going to be a close run thing. Though I think there will be a hardcore Tory rump who will be unable to bring themselves to vote Lib Dem.

 

I agree...clegg appeals to neither hard right nor left. Coppard is kind of blair esq and a housewives fave.

[mattleonard 10]

It's ok though. the Labour Party are ethical. If you ignore the fact Ed Miliband claims back his energy bills, Ed Balls switching his secondary home, etc etc

 

Then there's the fact that Ed Milliband's biggest sound bite of the campaign has been based on his rewriting history about how he failed to follow through on his intentions regarding Syria because he couldn't stand up to his backbenchers.

[ubermaus 10]

Ronnie o sullivan popped in to show his support for coppard this morning..its on his twitter feed.

[Eater Sundae 12]

Some big bets going on coppard. Bookies dont usually get it wrong.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 00:08 ----------

 

 

In a two horse race its hardly certain. Some bookies have coppard at 6/4.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 00:10 ----------

 

 

I agree...clegg appeals to neither hard right nor left. Coppard is kind of blair esq and a housewives fave.

 

Exactly. You rarely see poor bookies, but there are plenty of poor punters. I hope those placing the big bets can afford it.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 08:06 ----------

 

I think you'll find that was Mr Clegg as well.

 

I don't think there is anything to be gained from tat-for-tat allegations about not delivering on promises. There are all sorts of reasons why promises may not be kept. For example, the reasons why Cameron has not kept his immigration promise are quite different from the reason Osborne has not kept his deficit reduction promise.

 

However, what makes Clegg's u-turn on tuition fees distinct is that, as the insiders have confirmed, it was a promise he made knowing full well that he never intended to keep it. It was duplicitous.

 

And, it is not as though Clegg was without form in this regard.

 

Most will remember the recent local elections when millions of Liberal Democrat leaflets carried Mr Clegg's personal promise that, if elected, the Liberal Democrats would scrap council tax and replace it with local income tax. All sorts of promises were being made to people about how their local tax bills were to be cut through this change.

 

Yet, just 2 months after those elections, Mr Clegg announced that he was scrapping the Liberal Democrat's commitment to Local Income Tax because it was simply practically undeliverable. What was astonishing was that he made the announcement without even telling, let alone consulting, the Liberal Democrat local government spokeswoman. Clegg had known it wouldn't work long before the elections, but he was prepared to take his troops into battle on that promise because he believed it would be politically advantageous.

 

Just before the last election, Labour made a promise re Forgemasters that they were never going to have to meet.

 

It basically boils down to this...

 

The Lib-Dems have done a pretty decent job of keeping the Tories in check and protecting the take home pay of the lower paid, whilst helping the country to get back towards solvency. Labour supporters can't really argue that and so go after Clegg on a personal level, and on some spurious idea that a Labour party that created and will retain the whole student fees situation is somehow better than a party that failed to remove it because they were not given the mandate to do so.

 

The Lib-Dem's failure to remove student fees is no different from Labour's failure to give the loan the Forgemasters.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Eater Sundae

[stressconsul 10]

Nick Clegg‘s Chief of Staff, Danny Alexander, like Clegg himself, fearful for his seat after supporting the Coalition Government’s sustained attack on the poor, has leaked Tory plans for an £8bn cut to welfare, including slashing child benefits and child tax credits.

 

The proposed cuts include:

1. Limiting support to 2 children in child benefit and child tax credit, so cutting up to £3,500 from a family with three children.

2. Removing the higher rate child benefit from the first child, an average cut of over £360 for every family with children.

3. Means testing child benefit – cutting £1,750 for a two child middle income family

4. Removing child benefit from 16 to 19 year olds – a cut of over £1,000 for parents of a single child.

 

The Conservatives have consistently refused to tell the Institute for Fiscal Studies what their welfare cuts were to be. The only one the Tories have disclosed is a two-year freeze in working age benefits.

 

Alexander says: “It’s clear from our time in government that the Tories target will be slashing support for families.

 

So why have Clegg and Alexander supported such measures as the Bedroom Tax in the past?

Why have they stood by while over a million souls are relying on food banks?

Why have thee presided over a low pay, part time, zero hours economy?

Why have they sat by while the poorest and most vulnerable have suffered targeted benefits sanctions.

Why have they allowed the disabled and terminally ill to be forced to seek work?

 

Its is no good Clegg and Alexander trying to distance themselves from the Tories now in order to keep their seats. We know what their record is.

[LeMaquis 10]

It basically boils down to this...

 

The Lib-Dems have done a pretty decent job of keeping the Tories in check and protecting the take home pay of the lower paid, whilst helping the country to get back towards solvency.

 

The Lib-Dems are going to lose most of their vote and half their seats. Nothing you post on here is going to change that reality. The fact that we are discussing the strong possibility of Clegg losing his seat confirms it.