Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Thought I should start a UK election thread! Polling day is in less than 2 weeks!

How are you gunna be voting if it all? And what issues are most importnat to you?

I'll probably vote Conservative, this is my first election, as I'm only 18.

Where I live it is really close between Labour and Conservative. So I guess it will have to be Labour. The other parties standing where I live - Lib Dem,Plaid Cymru, and UKIP are a million miles behind and will never get elected.

If we had a proportional representation system for elections I would be voting for the Liberal Democrats.

It would be a cold day in hell before I voted Conservative, Thatcher destroyed many parts of South Wales.

Still, they are better than this party: http://www.veritasparty.co.uk/

GNR-Chris

imagine a political party naming themselves after the latin for "truth"...i think im going to die laughing

conservatives can piss off...they did the same to parts of scotland...i was amused thatcher was defending scotland about the regiments...she would make good manure

labour are just as corrupt as the conservatives were a decade ago...id rather vote for the raving loony party

ill vote SNP...

Im in no way bias towards any party, but i feel that Labour have done a good job so far and i trust them more than the Conservatives too keep that job up.

I'm not english but I like Tony Blair. 8)

I wonder if this will go 90 pages like the U.S. election thread did?   :hihi:

[Little Britain]Computer says No[/Little Britain]

 ;D

gr8 show litl britian is. I'm conservativ al the way

i see this happening all too often that that is everyone tends now to look at them all and say well they are all bad ill vote for the best of the worst.

same thing happens in Canada too...... i beleive they are having a 3 part special on CBC Newsworld called "The Politics of Fear" where it goes into how it used to be you voted on who you thought would do the best for the country and bring it forward into the future. now you vote for the one that scares you of the other guy the best.

funny shit i think but it seems so true

I can't say I've followed the UK elections at all, so excuse me for asking.

For those of you who aren't voting for Labour, or just hate Blair, what's the worst thing about them/him?

For somebody who hasn't followed UK politics, it seems like Blair's support for George W Bush is the thing most people object to. Instead of things he has done, or hasn't, for the country.




/jarmo

went to war on flawed information.
a shitload of stealth taxes.
the labour party is now as right wing as the tories were ten years ago.

I grew up a labour supporter, but i'll never vote for Bliar's party. So it'll either be Scottish Socialist or Scottish National. Not even a consideration of voting Tory, they've showed constant contempt for scotland for decades and their campaign is built on fear and xenophobia. And their leader is Dracula.

Living in N.Ireland I do hope New Labour stays.Quite frankly New Labour has done a hell of alot more for N.Ireland than the Tories have and ever will.
I will vote in our local elections this year again for Sinn Fein.

thats ok, because tony blair is actually scottish ;D

Good? : ok:

 :smoking: Izzy? :smoking:

The worst thing?

The total inability to tell the truth ranks pretty high, the man is just dishonest

Other complaints

The scores of new taxes - and no improvements in law and order or the NHS despite fantastic levels of investment (where did it all go?)
The failure to provide leadership on Europe - are we to be sold out to Brussels or not?
The total mess of the immigration system
Student fees
Iraq

there the things annoying me about Mr Blair currently

That applies to all politicians don't you think???
They promise you the world in order for you to vote for them,then when they do get in.That's when and only when they reveal their true hidden agenda.They are all full of false promises and pretences.
Politicians in the end imo are nothing more than liars  with more blood on their hands than most.

you have to admit thought that gordon brown is the best chancellor of the exchequer in the history of UK government

actually no, i quite lyk lib dem

He is very good but to say the best ever is a bit strong, the economy was already growing very well before he took over the Chancellorship, some credit must go to the Conservatives for this.

I'd say Peel is the best Chancellor

I think Labour are guaranteed to win to be honest.

Tony Blair and Labour are the biggest bunch of left wing pussies and are setting about destroying this country!

I disagree with their stance on:
Crime
the way the NHS is run
Immigration
Taxes

and hate the way he has turned himself into a dictator. We don't get to vote on any of the things that matter, such as when the country goes to war or how our taxes are spent. It is beyond me why people that have never lived in the real world and not gained real world life experience are the ones that get into power and set the laws for us normal people.

I doubt it because Tony is not as polarizing a leader as is George. Plus, Tony tries to court the political center whereas George is mainly interested in placating the extreme right of the Republican party.

yeh totally. Blair is an cok suka. I think Charles Kennedy deservs a chance

left wing pussys? he may be a pussy, but left wing he is not.

Giving this thread a bump up to the top.

Anyone watching Leaders Question Time right now?

Both Howard and Blair got booed? ;D

Its only a week to go and I don't really know who to vote for to be honest. It would be easier if most politicians were not arseholes, but that will never happen.

GNR-Chris

just finished watching question time. as big an asshole as bliar is, i've got admit he's a fantastic politician. there were some very difficult and thorny questions put to him and to most people it will appear that he came out quite well.

i've no respect for the man as my country's prime minister, but he's an incredibly intelligent man and a masterful public speaker. far better in front of a crowd than howard.

i still won't vote for him tho - either the SSP or SNP,

Really?? I dont remember when the last bone was that Bush gave to his right wing base.? He seems to be acting against them if you ask me. 

As to the question, I think it is because the US has such a dramatic effect on the rest of the world that everyone follows it.  Not that the UK doesnt, but I think everyone really convinces themselves that there is a lot to lose one way or the other with the difference in American presidents.  In reality, a change power in the UK might have more of an effect than that of the US because of all of the checks and balances in the US system.  I also think that in general most people from smaller countries tend to know a lot more about other countries than those from larger countries such as the US.  I recently talked about this subject with one of my professors who is from Australia.  He knows everything about every country, and I was asking why there is such a difference.  He thought it had a lot to do with the size of one's country.  Makes sense.

For me, it all comes down to the way he runs the government.

The British PM is supposed to be 'Primus Inter Pares' (first among equals), but Mr Blair has operated like an absolute monarch at times. A lot of commentators have noted that crucial decisions are taken by Blair and a small group of 'courtiers' (Alistair Campbell, Alan Milburn and various pollsters (amongst others) and sometimes Gordon Brown and whoever the appropriate cabinet minister is). And this all takes place while sitting on the sofas at number 10 (see the Butler report). Executive decisions in UK government ought to taken by the cabinet as a whole during cabinet meetings, (where discussion has been replaced by a string of 'presentations' by ministers). Indeed, ministers have often found themselves shut out of the decision making process altogether. (I suspect this was the case for the Iraq war. Apparently, Blair did not share the Attorney General's legal advice with the cabinet).

Blair's courtiers have also totally dominated the civil service, which has been reduced to a vast machine for carrying out Blair & co's wishes, rather than the neutral, expert and anonymous body for policy advice and implementation that it ought to be. Their job now is to hit whatever new targets the PM and his court have handed down form on high on Whitehall this week, regardless of conditions on the ground. See the ludicrous deluge of home office 'initiatives' on crime for evidence. Or the NHS target culture that means politically unfashionable medical work gets neglected and forces doctors into bizarre practises like taking wheels off stretchers in order to hit the 'hospital bed target' or GP surgeries not booking appointments more than 48 hours in advance to hit the 'waiting times' target. And don't get me started on MRSA All this so the little men in Whitehall can report that their masters bidding has been done. On top of it all, the concept of the ?anonymous? civil servant died with the sad tale of Dr David Kelly.


As for Parliament, well, it always has trouble holding a party with a large majority to account. But Blair has really shown open contempt for procedure on occasion (his poor attendance record, announcing policy in the media first, using emergency legislation to override the House of Lords on fox hunting, eviscerating legal advice and intelligence on Iraq before presenting to the House etc etc etc... the list goes on).

Let?s also not forget Blair and the New Labour machines strange relationship with the ?truth?. Calling them ?liars? as the Tories have been reduced to (more on them later), is too crude. But they are very adept at creating versions of events, or ?narratives? just happen to be politically useful, through leaving out unpleasant facts, distorting all opposing viewpoints and diluting complex issues into easy to digest messages, which is then distributed in a neat little, slickly presented package by the Labour spin machine, with a little help form the bastions of the left-liberal media, especially the Grauniad and the BBC. And when help is not forthcoming, they go and try to tear down the ?guilty parties?. I refer to the BBC and number 10?s row over the ?sexed up? Iraq dossier.

Speaking of which the ?Saddam can launch unleash apocalypse on British targets in 45 minute claim? is a prime example of this governments tendency to be driven by spin. Governments trying to present themselves in the best possible light is one thing, and to use slick presentation is perhaps necessary to get across to millions of voters. But to sacrifice integrity and openness for this is appalling and will only do them harm in the long run. I for one supported the invasion of Iraq and believe there were many sound realpolitik and human rights reasons for doing so. But this government picked up on the contentious WMD argument, as this was the most palatable to voters. Subsequent events heave now them looking like fools and destroyed many peoples faith in them. Other crocks of shit form the New Labour ?narrative? include their outrageous claims about Tory policy in this campaign (nowhere have the Conservatives said they will introduce NHS charges, abolish the minimum wage and cut public spending absolutely) and their claims that they did not preclude introducing top up fees in their last manifesto.

Because I think this Britain and its democracy is heading for trouble if this style of government continues, I will be voting Conservative. Labour will no doubt emerge victorious come next week, but if their majority in parliament can be cut significantly, then Blair will need to conduct his leadership in a more consensual, less arrogant fashion. He will need to compromise more with his colleagues in cabinet, party and parliament just to be able to function, and to stave off the inevitable Labour Party Coup to install Gordon Brown as new leader.

I?m also concerned that the ?Credit Card? economy will soon have its bubble burst, as Taxes will have to go up to fill the big old public finance deficit. Brown and Blair deserve a pat on the back for keeping the economy growing nicely, but the conditions for that came about thanks to the last Tory government?s legacy (killing the Trade Union dinosaurs and creating flexible free markets, for one) and favourable global conditions. But this situation is at risk if the Chancellor keeps pumping up the public sector with billions of taxpayer and creditors pounds. (To digress for a moment, a lot of this money has gone on creating a New Labour ?client state? of Civil servants, whose actual usefulness is sometimes in doubt, who will vote Labour as their jobs depend on it). I predict a widening trade gap and higher inflation and interest rates.

Having said all of this, I?m not too crazy about the Conservatives at the moment, despite being a man of the centre-right and a lifelong Tory voter. Their manifesto is sketchy and too focussed on rubbishing New Labour?s record rather than outline their own vision for Britain. The policy proposals themselves range from the half baked (pupil passports, off-shore immigration centres) to the rather good (elected police commissioners, taking certain powers back from Europe, topping up private pension savings etc). And it?s a shame that they?ve allowed the immigration thing to overshadow everything, which has also led many voters to see Mr Howard as nothing but a grumpy old man.

I think the Conservatives problem is that they have not modernised their policies and, crucially, their image. Voters still associate them with all the bad goings on of the Major and the later Thatcher years, and I?ve heard a lot of people saying that hey cannot bear to see ?that lot? in power again.

Okay, that is my two cents. I?m going for a long lie down now. Wake me up when the court of King Tony has been overthrown.

All good points but you have to give him credit he was on The Simpsons afterall, or was that Mr. Bean

What do you mean by that?

 :smoking: Izzy? :smoking:

bump.

we can't get beat by the canadian election thread.

alex salmond of the snp wants blair impeached...i say, go for it...all we need is a padded jail cell that he cant lie his way out of

I know what you mean, although most of the time he doesn't answer the question, he either sort of answers it or just starts banging on about the economy.

I'm considering voting English Democrats because the Scots are run so much better with their own parliament, it's unfair really, the difference ina childs school meal budget for example is double in Scot what it is in Eng, but I dunno whether it will be a waste of a vote.

actually i wouldnt say the parliament has been a major success...maybe a partial success with laws that pertain to scotland as scotland has completely different legal and education system and the economy is quite different from england...im not really sure if you would call a larger subsidy a good thing...the reason its there is that we have lots of bad habits when it comes to eating...glasgows health is quite awful but despite that we enjoy what we eat lol...bear in mind that scotland only has control of some elements of government and not others

im not sure what you would be gaining by voting for english democrats because laws and everything else for england is passed by the current parliament in london...do you really think anything will change if you voted for them?

The British people really do baffle me at times.  Most people agree that the Tories being back in would be a very bad idea, but everybody seems sick and tired of Labour as well.  People say they don't like our system, because all we've got to choose from are these two sleazy parties who aren't honest and don't represent everyday people.

Why doesn't anyone want to give Lib Dems a chance??

Is it because their leader is a stuttering, uncharismatic fool with ginger hair?...probably.  It's such a shame though, because they stand for some really important things, and Britain really would be a different kind of place with them in power.  They want to reduce pollution and help the environment, they want rid of GM crops, they want to reduce classroom sizes and improve school discipline, they are open about raising taxes and say exactly what they would spend the extra money on (as opposed to the alternatives, who claim to be willing to splash out on everything while lowering taxes at the same time).  They were against the Iraq war from the start (I hate the Tories so damn much, criticising Labour now when they were dead for it at the time).

People say Lib Dems don't have the experience to run a country but, in all fairness, neither did Labour until they were voted in.  If people gave them a chance, you never know, we might actually have a party that people can trust and respect.  It's a shame they have such a sad excuse for a leader at the front line though.

No, it wouldn't change but it's a protest vote, it's why people vote Green and BNP, not to get a government but as a protest vote, I probably won't vote for them but I thought about it.

No, it wouldn't change but it's a protest vote, it's why people vote Green and BNP, not to get a government but as a protest vote, I probably won't vote for them but I thought about it.

im voting BNP and NO....its not a protest vote. Something needs to change........if you live where i live then you would see what i mean!!    : ok:

whilst i truelly dislike the BNP and what they stand for, i'm still happy you're not voting for kilroy's party. fucking tosser.

And who ever was saying the scottish parliament has been a success has been getting some pretty bogus info. It's a front. There's nothing to it. The scottish parliament has such a small amount of power it's ludicrous. On the same day the parliament discussed the war in iraq (obviously no vote could take place) a law on dog's shitting in public parks was passed. It's a mock parliament to keep the moderate nationalists happy. I can't imagine any english parliament being any different - not that it will happen anyways.

the only reason I don't want Blair to win is that he's had more than enough time to do the things he keeps blabbing on about doing. What will another 4 years change? Nothing. The NHS will still be shit 4 years from now, the immigration problem will definitely be worse, and student fees will go even higher.
But still he's the best candidate.

Fair enough, I have no problem with that, all I mean is that you're not going to  bring about a new government voting BNP, and the people that scare me are not the BNP but the real fascists are the people trying to ban them from running as a party.

People don't want to give the Lib Dems a chance because most people realise their policies are absolute wank.

Bring the drinking age to 16.
Scrap mandatory life sentences for murders
Give pedophiles and rapists the vote.
Imposing a new local council tax which will hit middle income homes hard
Scrapping council tax and replacing it with a local income tax which will lead to retired millionares paying less tax than a student nurse on ?18,000 a year!

you think its ok for there to be a party that exists which actively encourages racial and religious hatred? i expect people to be jailed for that

and you think there are parties out there that are more fascist than the BNP?...you make no sense

yea thats quite dumb isnt it...what if everyone decided to retire?...theyd have to dclare bankrupcy :hihi:

I hate the BNP's policies and views and the way they whip up fear and prejudice as an alternative towards outsiders rather than offering constructive solutions to the problems many depressed working class areas (where much of thier support comes from) face. I also despise the PC mafia who have colonised Briatain's instituions and have tried to smother all non - 'progressive' (also a heavily loaded term) opinions. The best way to silence the groups like the BNP in a democracy is to let them have a platform, and then blow them offit through proper discussion and critique, rahter than name-calling.

Incidnetally, has anyone actually seen the BNP's manifesto? Reintroducing national service?! An assault rifle for every household?! That'll help solve the violent crime problem :-\ (though immigrants could find this useful when the BNP sned thier thugs to intimidate and/or deport them).

That's exactly right, I had a big arguement with my old History teacher and a commie in my group, they were saying they shouldn't have a voice but I said that they should and you should discuss things with them to make them look stupid, which wouldn't be hard!

The assault rifle is for ex-military homes not every home.

They also want to scrap income tax and put a massive increase on VAT. So no-one can call them Nazi's cos there's nothing socialist about that!

errm, National Socialist German Worker's Party = Nazi.

Hitler was sent by the german government to infiltrate the Nazi's as they were scared they were too socialist.

The red base of the Nazi flag is to represent the party's socialist base.




Socialism is not directly related to the level of taxation. The BNP can very easily be described as nazis and fascists.

But morons pretty much sums them up best.

Disappointing election - status quo was maintained no one gained or lost in a serious way.

I liked the way Mr Blair announced this morning he was adopting all the Tory policies :confused:

Congrats to the Northern Ireland lot for finally finishing off the peace process - slow clap for them i feel :no:

A government with 36% of the vote, i love the way we claim to be a democracy and yet the government isn't even backed by a majority of the population....

Our system sucks

I think we will see the political centre of gravity shift leftward - at least amongst  the elites.

Thanks to the lower than expected majority, Blair will need to appease his (old labourite) backbenchers and may have to abandon some of the more 'new' labour policies, such as public service reform. He will also have to drop his king like command of the civil sercvice, his party and parliament, as I mentioned earlier (huzzah!)

Mr Blair will also have to begin the process of handing over the reins to Mr Brown soon. With their 'co-headlining' campaign and the cabinet resuffle, there appears to be a tacit acceptance that Brown is the inevitable sucessor. As chancellor, Gordon Brown's only real legacy has been the mushrooming of public sector central control and spending centralised control and the beginnings of a kind of wealth redistribution (Tax credits for the poor, 'stealth taxes for the rest of us). Having already broken his 'golden rule' by borrowing to cover deficits, it will be interesting to how he will sort out the financial mess he is creating in the years to come, and I reckon his instincts lean toward higher taxing and spending.

Labour also lost quite a lot of votes to Britain's new kids on the left -the lib dems, especially in northern cities. (And also just enough in London marginals to hand victory to the Tories). Under Charles Kennedy, the Liberals have appealed to the more collectivist, humanitarian instincts of the British public - in both the middle and working classes, with their policies on defence, pensions, tax etc, and are akin to Old Labour stripped of its rampant class hatred. Labour (under both Blair and Brown) will surely attempt to regain voters from the left side in the years to come, especially if it wants to boost its pathetic (for a governing party) 36% vote share.

This gives the Tories a great chance to regain the centre and centre-right vote that New Labour spectacularly siezed in 1997. The next leader should deliver a positive, generous alternative vision on the economy, public services, pensions, transport etc - issues that matter to the whole nation. Thier past campaign has been too negative and focussed on small fry 'dog whistle' issues such as immigration and 'travellers' which were of some use in marginal seats but not much elsewhere (note that their vote share was increased by less than 1%). Still, this is the first election since 1983 where they have made serious gains - I think they have a good chacne of wining the next one if they can pick up votes from the disillusioned and the soon to be dissilusion voters of the centre-right (especailly after Brother Gordon takes charge).


IT is also very significant that the two main parties only gained 69% of the vote between them, which I reckon will herald another change in competition between British political parties. When 2 party support sank in the early twenties, the end result was Labour usrping the liberals as a major party. After it dipped again in 1974, British politics became more polarised as the the economic life of the country slowly unravelled. The outcome was Mrs Thatcher leading the Conservatives to power on a free market agenda as Labour was pulled ever more leftward by the unions and the millitants in its ranks.

The relatively high proportion of people voting for 'minor' parites shows that there is a lot of disillusion with the main parties agendas (which lets face it, were broadly similar on the major issues). Perhaps if the Conservatives can offer bold new ideas on these mjor issues then it can attract a lot of support from fringe party and lib dem voters (as well as recliaming support lost to new labour). For better or worse, Mrs Thatcher was very big on visions and on ideas, and led the Cons to an 18yr rule by picking up the the discontent felt by voters in tjhe 70's and offering them a positive alternative to the trouble and strife of Labour rule.

More broadly speaking, I think a PR-based electoral system could be the only way to get the people more involved in British democracy, just for the sake of making them feel that thier participation matters. It would also prevent the sad spectacle of an over-mighty 'elected dictatorship' ruling against the will of the people from occuring again.

Don't forget though, even with 'pure' PR systems, it is extremely rare to find governments that were backed by over 50% of the voting population (based on first preference votes).


It's a real tragedy that the forces ofoderation have lost out in Northern IrReland. I guess that ordinary unionists felt that the peace process was too Sinn Fein/IRA friendly(i.e. the realese of paramilitaries from prison, appointing MCGuinness to a senior cabinet post, the failure to stop the IRA from its criminal operations whilst dismantiling the Royal Ulster Constabulry...). Still, voting for the DUP will only pour petrol on the fire - Ian Paisley is a dangerous mix of demogogue and fire and brimstone preacher. This is the man who deployed a band of hecklers to harrass Pope John Paul II on a visit to the UK, so I don't think there is much hope of reconciliation.  :no:

sadly i finally found out  turd ass labour and tony blair got in again. Another 5 years of retards ruling our country. Why do people vote for assholes? Why not just over throw them.

Tonny Blair is a good prime minister for England, point of vue of a french guy.  8)
Now I hope Nicolas Sarkozy will be the next french president in 2007, you'll see, He is fantastic. :P?

I know what a nazi is, you can call em fascists but not nazis cos i dont see anything socialist from them myself. putting vat up hugely gets rid of sliding scale tax and means everyone pays as much as eceryone else, therefore wholey un-socialist

come on dude the nazis weren't the least bit socialist they just stuck it in the title cause it sounded good to your standard bog level german who was barely making ends meat at the time ........ they were hardly gonna call themselves "The National Satanic German Wankers Party" or somethin

i can't be bothered getting in to this, but the nazi's had and maintained socialist leanings.

uhhh its the prime minister of the UK, not England...1 in 5 MP's are NOT english...

Oh, i've just finished my 10th book on the subject..in the last month....damn exams, lets see how much i remember off the top of my head,

The 'Socialist' part was really just to make them stand out and was part of their manifesto even before Hitler took over, Hitler had been sent by the army to investigate them in 1919 with the army believing they were a left wing party due to their name the 'National Socialist German Workers Party' (NSDAP) - he most certainly was not a socialist and choose to distance himself from a significant left wing element of the party led by Gregor Strasser. The Nazi's paramilitary organisation, the SA, was largely working class and left wing too. To cut a long story short - Strasser became increasingly dissilluisoioned with Hitler, Hitler was busy winning the support of industry who were unhappy with any left wing element of the party, Hitler needed their support to get into governement - Strasser then quit.

Fast forward to June 1934, Hitler has been in power for a year and the left wing of his party have been causing problems and increasingly frustrated with Hitler's 'moderate' position. Hitler wishes to secure his position and become President upon the then Presidents death, to do this he needed the support of the 'elites'. The Army is unhappy with the SA, industry is unhappy with the SA, so what does Hitler do - he asks the army for trucks and guns - drives off to the SA's headquarters and the SS shoot the the leadership and Hitler's best friend Ernst Rohm. They also kill 5,000 others as well as our old friend Strasser.

The left wing of the party is effectively dead and the rest of the crazy lot behind Hitler think about mischief that doesn't involve class structure and social mobility....so while they had some left wing leanings, it was effectively killed off (quite literally) early on and wasn't really maintained. But the Nazi's weren't really left or right wing, they were pretty much unique - after all is racial world domination a left or right wing view?

Back to the notes...

The nazis did actually have some socialist policies although they scrapped some of them to appeal more to the racist nutters in germany

How so?

He refuses to do anything about the border, and he has spent more money on government programs than most recent Presidents.  In addition, he refuses to give any real support to his judicial nominees.

LOL, yea but that PALES in comparison to what he does give to his base. Give me a break.

God forbid  :-X

He's the biggest hypocrite there can be in politics !  :P

I don't think so. My point of vue is that he is the most brillant and intelligent politician nowadays in France,  he may seem hypocrit and arrogant when you watch him on TV but he is not. I think the guy knows he is the best (or among the best) and he plays with that strenght. that's it. It's neither beeing hypocrit nor arrogant, it's just knowing you are competent. He is also extremely energetic. Our country needs that. To tell you the truth, I'm fed-up with all these old and static politicians, it's time to move on. We need some fresh and young persons. He is the right guy at the right place at the right moment. Well...I hope. 8)

I have to acknowledge that the guy is always on the move ... he seems to be dynamic ... but what are his achievements ? Le conseil du culte musulman (with extremists all over the place ?) ? When he left the government crimes were higher than when he entered ... and what about prostitution ?
To sum up Sarkozy's program : "me me me me blablabla" ! The guy is a total joke ... and I pray god that french people will be wiser than in 2002 ...  :P
Last post in the topic because here I guess people were discussing UK elections not Mr "When I shave in the morning I'm already picturing myself as president".  ;)

Rain, Sarkozy didn't invent or bring extremists all over the place, they've been there for many years but nobody wanted to see them.? ok he created UOIF but he wanted to give them a representative concil in the french society. The idea wasn't bad, but the men choosen (or elected) were. The problem is that nobody wanted to see them when Mr Jospin was the prime minister and even before in the 90's, but they already were there. Jospin did nothing against insecurity (in a global term) economically and socially he was exellent, he did a great job, but concerning the insecurity, the rise of Islamism, antisemitism and violence, wich was the Number 1 problem back in 2002, he did nothing. Besides I heard something different about Sarkozy: I heard aggressions were lower when he was in the governement. But I may be wrong. Considering you're right, if the aggresions were higher, why did he become so popular? Now, indeed back to the topic. Tonny Blair Rocks (he loves Oasis : ok:)

like what?

Actually, to me these are most important issues.  What has he given to the base?

find yer own thread ya diddies :hihi: