Moment of the night?

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Maranello

In terms of another Tory leader, who would be up to the job though?

Theresa May for me. Conservative with a small "c" yet with enough balls IMHO to do the job. Guarenteed to corner the show fancier vote (not that I'm one of them). Why she didnt go for it last time amazed me.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by King Aragorn

Stunning win by Galloway. Most unexpected but wow, what a huge swing. Loved that.

yep that set "racial relations" back 10 years at least.

Originally Posted by King Aragrn

The low was seeing Jack Straw win by quite a big margin. He didn't lose many votes now, did he?

Well why should that be a low?,after all Britain went to war in Iraq with Public Opinion well behind the goverment, a lot of people forget that.
And what did New Labour so wrong?, the war was just, it freed the Iraq people from the evil clutches of Sadam, and saved our children facing a maybe worse problem in the next gereration, because he had the know how for WMD, remember the huge cannon, with a fatastic range, the scud missiles raining down on Israel, who where not part of the first "Gulf War", he has used gas on his own people, the Kurds-the Marsh Arabs, and when he had the means to deliver chemical or bialogical weapons on Europe, he would have done, even worse if he had aquired the Nuke.
I am not a Labour supporter, nor a Lib Dem, but I supported their actions, what I did not support was thier lies for making a case for war, like telling us all about the "45 minute warning".
He should have told the British people the truth, that we where going to war in Iraq to get rid of Sadam,and to make Europe safer for our children, don't forget Sadam had a deal where he could have left with safe passage with all his family.
Very sad for all who died, but this happens in war, soldiers know this can happen when they sign up, was is always possible.

Originally Posted by King Armagon

By the way, BBC is reporting that Howard will step down before the next elections. It isn't mere speculation now.

I think it is sad, he has made the next General Election that much more winnable for the Conservatives, we are nopw a nation of marginals,
i hopr they replace him with a moderate, but also with his hard stance on Europe.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

NEWS FLASH> Howard will stand down "sooner rather than later". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...ge/4521941.stm. Yippee !!!!!!!!!!!

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Ernest

yep that set "racial relations" back 10 years at least.

LOL You shouldn't believe everything Alistair Campbell tells you Ern! It did nothing of the sort, and was easily the best result of the night for those from minority communities, as well as those from other communities who do not want Britain to be involved in the murder of innocent civilians in unjust, illegal and counter-productive attacks on, and occupations of, other countries.

[King Aragorn]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Well why should that be a low?,after all Britain went to war in Iraq with Public Opinion well behind the goverment, a lot of people forget that.
And what did New Labour so wrong?, the war was just, it freed the Iraq people from the evil clutches of Sadam, and saved our children facing a maybe worse problem in the next gereration, because he had the know how for WMD, remember the huge cannon, with a fatastic range, the scud missiles raining down on Israel, who where not part of the first "Gulf War", he has used gas on his own people, the Kurds-the Marsh Arabs, and when he had the means to deliver chemical or bialogical weapons on Europe, he would have done, even worse if he had aquired the Nuke.
I am not a Labour supporter, nor a Lib Dem, but I supported their actions, what I did not support was thier lies for making a case for war, like telling us all about the "45 minute warning".
He should have told the British people the truth, that we where going to war in Iraq to get rid of Sadam,and to make Europe safer for our children, don't forget Sadam had a deal where he could have left with safe passage with all his family.
Very sad for all who died, but this happens in war, soldiers know this can happen when they sign up, was is always possible.

Ernest,

The aim of this thread, as I understood it, was to ask the opinion of the members here about what was the best moment for them during the night and some, including myself, also gave their personal opinion of what was the worst thing they went through during the night (In regards to the elections, of course). Hence, when I made that comment, I wasn't saying that Jack Straw's victory was a low for the whole British nation or something on that line.

As to your comments about the Iraq war being totally justified, I don't really think this is the thread to discuss that issue and if you want to take the discussion any further, do open another thread and I will duly join you.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Maranello

LOL You shouldn't believe everything Alistair Campbell tells you Ern! It did nothing of the sort, and was easily the best result of the night for those from minority communities, as well as those from other communities who do not want Britain to be involved in the murder of innocent civilians in unjust, illegal and counter-productive attacks on, and occupations of, other countries.

I'm not sure it set race relations back either, but I can't stand George Galloway at any price. One of the best parts of the evening was therefore seeing the face off between Jeremy Paxman and Galloway (I only saw it this morning, in fact). Paxman's opening question - "Are you proud of having defeated one of the very few black, female MPs who were in the House?" - was certainly provocative, and I accept that Galloway didn't want to answer it. But it doesn't strike me as an unfair question at all, and for Galloway to threaten to walk off if Paxman repeated it a third time - again, certainly his right - didn't strike me as the actions of a sensible man. Eventually, Paxman turned his back on Galloway completely, and I trust millions more will do so during the period of his membership of Parliament. Certainly he is one of the least pleasant individuals in the House (witness his comments about his fellow members: "a pretty ineffectual bunch who all merge into one another" or something like that, coupled with a "never heard of him" comment about one of his fellow MPs). Now, as an elector, I think I should be able to say this, but I don't think it is appropriate for a Member of one of the world's most exclusive clubs. And quite what his new constituents think he will do for them is a mystery to me: he's in it for one man, and one man only.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Yes he's a common version of Tony Blair, not to put to finer point on it. When tony gets questions he doesnt like he A: spins the question round or B: Lies. Galloway either a: trys to turn the question into something to do with the Iraq war or b: Walks off.

Very grown up !

[Maranello]

You are right OF, I watched Paxman vs Galloway live, and it was riveting pantomime. I have felt for the past couple of years now, that Paxo is too unhealthily cynical about the whole process, too antagonistic. Sure, not everyone can be as well-respected as D. Dimbleby, or as suave as Frost, and hence a John Humphreys or J.Dimbleby style of interrogation works well for me; what I cannot stand is Paxo's recent obsession in proving in every single interview that the interviewee is a liar, or hiding something back; one cannot have an intelligent discussion on issues in this way, and the impression one has is of one man point to prove the other is wrong; the issues get lost in the haze for most people, even if they are ever articulated.

After BBC, Galloway was interviewed at greater length by Sky's Adam Boulton; a much more sensible and meaningful discussion. No name-calling or abuse by Boulton, instead, intelligent, searching questions about the election and the politics of the East End and of Respect. Accordingly, Galloway was forced to address the substantive issues and concerns many people have, defend his actions and his politics, and actually did a decent job. I agree he has a rather chequered history, and is a self-publicist to rival Ken Livingstone; however, he is certainly charismatic, and has given some of the more memorable Commons moments over the past few years, to rival those provided by Messrs Benn, Hague and Kenneth Clarke (and Robin Cook, though that was over ten years ago now). His electors did absolutely the right thing in my opinion, and this is something that will work well for all the Muslims of the UK in the longer term, showing them the benefits of being engaged in the Elections process and participating actively in the wider society.

PS: I have followed Galloway over the past few years (there aren't that many characters in the House), so I don't measure him through the prism of the Iraq adventure only. However, I can appreciate that when looked through that prism, he does not always come out smelling of roses!

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Galloway isnt even doing the same sport as Tony benn, let alone the same league. Saw him and norman tebbit on the beeb this mrning and, although I'm not a fan of either of them policy wise, they would run rings round galloway. I'm sure Tony Benn could have stood at the same seat, got the same result, and still understood the needs of the constients. As a former constient of him, I felt he always put them first, whether you agreed with him or not.

BTW Paxman IMHO is a rude **** who is way past his sell by date. not funny not insightful just nasty. You'd get better responses if Ann robinson was doing the questions.

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Well why should that be a low?,after all Britain went to war in Iraq with Public Opinion well behind the goverment, a lot of people forget that.
.

Well, this is pretty much right of centre spin this. Yes, public opinion was behind the war at the start - but based on believing that the fallacy of the 45 minute claim was true - and based upon a lot of other spurious spin. Personally, I believe deposing Saddam is ultimately 'a good thing' but the way it was done was just plain wrong.

Anyway, as King Aragorn said - this is another topic entirely.

Who would be a good leader for the Tories? Well, the only Tories I respect at all are Malcolm Rifkind and Ken Clarke. I still very much doubt they'd convince me to vote for them in the future. They are probably too old to be the next leader though. It will probably be someone like David Davis - though god help us if its Oliver Let'ch'win. Sleaze merchant if ever there was one!!!

PS. I'm still looking for a party with a social agenda, but anti-PC! Thinking about it, if we were to form a W-A-T political party, what would your manifesto include?

Here's a couple of my policy ideas:

(i) Take some investment from the NHS and put it towards furthering competitive sport in schools. This will generate long term health savings as it should reduce the obesity rates (i'm sure we could do a discounted cashflow analysis to calculate the cash benefit - OF knows what I mean, no doubt!! )
(ii) Increase the speed limit on motorways to 80mph, but rigidly enforce it
(iii) Reopen closed railway branch lines/stations to large commuter type towns (e.g. Ringwood, Wimborne, Soham - the list goes on)
(iv) Tax the highest rate tax payers at 50%, but use the saving to increase the personal allowance for all tax payers. This will effectively provide additional income for the lowest earners but would not be benefit encouraging - the tax benefit would be for workers, not scroungers.
(v) A higher rate of road tax for MPVs and 4x4 and Sports Utility Vehicles (at least double the current max, maybe even higher) unless a legitimate reason for their use exists i.e. you have more than 5 children or you own a farm.
(vi) - this one's purely selfish - caravans should be banned from using single carriageway trunk routes between the hours of 7am and 10am.

What would other people's policies be, and what are your opinions of these?