• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

'Special' relationship back on

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    I exactly opposed his view that Cameron is a newly elected leader - he isn't elected like Obama to lead, it just so happens he is head of the party that people voted for.
    However, the PM is head of government. Queenie said, "Young David, can you have a go at forming a government, dearie? That 'orrid sweaty has jacked it in. I never liked 'im. I bet he was a kiddie fidler".
    How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

    Follow me on Twitter - LinkedIn Profile - The HAB blog - New Blog: Mad Cameron
    Xeno points: +5 - Asperger rating: 36 - Paranoid Schizophrenic rating: 44%

    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office" - Aesop

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by AtW View Post
      There are maybe 10-15% swing vote that they need to get in UK and maybe 5% in the USA and that's what it is all about.


      My experience with politics goes much deeper than you think
      Does that 10-15% include people that don't necessarily vote (~40%)?

      What percentage of those 10-15% vote based it on personality (of the leaders) and what percentage on policy or both? I would normally vote Tory (core), Cleggs honesty (personality) was slightly more appealing than Cameron's, but Cleggs policies were less appealing. So personality and policy were factors in my decision making. I didn't vote.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
        Does that 10-15% include people that don't necessarily vote (~40%)?
        I am talking about 10-15% of those who vote, those who don't clearly don't give a tulip about result and thus outside of the equation.

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by AtW View Post
          I know that FFS, look at what TimberCub posted:

          ""

          I exactly opposed his view that Cameron is a newly elected leader - he isn't elected like Obama to lead, it just so happens he is head of the party that people voted for.
          People do get upset if you change the leader of the party that they voted for, even if they might have voted for that party with a different leader anyway. It could be that the stats you quote are misleading though. If election results only swing by 15% max as you say, it doesn't necessarily follow that only 15% of people are floating voters, it might be that 30% changed party in one direction while 45% went another. That's an extreme example of course, the true picture would be too complex for you to understand

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
            President Barack Obama said on Tuesday he told new British Prime Minister David Cameron he remained committed to a "special relationship" between their countries and looked forward to seeing Gary Mckinnon on the next flight over.
            Insanity: repeating the same actions, but expecting different results.
            threadeds website, and here's my blog.

            Comment

            Working...
            X