• 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!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "'Special' relationship back on"

Collapse

  • threaded
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • HairyArsedBloke
    replied
    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".

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    Cameron, or any other Prime Minister is not our 'leader'. This is a monarchy.
    I know that FFS, look at what TimberCub posted:

    "
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Hmm. Does he say that to all new elected leaders?
    "

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • HairyArsedBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    I am well aware of that, thank you.

    Like I said Obama was directly elected to lead his country - Cameron will lead the country by proxy - people voted for Conservative party and he had to make a deal to actually get into #10. Pretty much anybody in his position would have gotten in - even Brown, compare this system with fight OBama had to put up with and it's clear they are totally incomparable.
    Cameron, or any other Prime Minister is not our 'leader'. This is a monarchy.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    If people vote for a particular party why do you think politicians bother with expensive election campaigns?
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    1. We have a parliamentary system, not a presidential one.

    2. The PM is head of government and not head of State. These are separate entities in most countries, but not in the US.
    I am well aware of that, thank you.

    Like I said Obama was directly elected to lead his country - Cameron will lead the country by proxy - people voted for Conservative party and he had to make a deal to actually get into #10. Pretty much anybody in his position would have gotten in - even Brown, compare this system with fight OBama had to put up with and it's clear they are totally incomparable.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Bollox - most people vote for a party, not particular leader - there are some notable exceptions in history but UK politics aint one of them.
    If people vote for a particular party why do you think politicians bother with expensive election campaigns? Part of it is policy and part is personality. 'Most' is a key word in your sentence, it's just a case identifying relative proportions of each, which probably varies election to election based on differences in personality and differences in policy. A large core of people probably vote for a fixed party and the rest float on personality and policy.

    Leave a comment:


  • HairyArsedBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Obama was elected directly to be leader of his country, Cameron wasn't.
    You need to go and do a bit of research in to how things work in the UK.

    1. We have a parliamentary system, not a presidential one.

    2. The PM is head of government and not head of State. These are separate entities in most countries, but not in the US.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Not directly perhaps, but IMO people do vote for party leaders here as well as for parties and policies.
    Bollox - most people vote for a party, not particular leader - there are some notable exceptions in history but UK politics aint one of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Obama was elected directly to be leader of his country, Cameron wasn't.
    Not directly perhaps, but IMO people do vote for party leaders here as well as for parties and policies. Especially as all 3 main parties turn to the centre ground. Although probably a significant core of people vote for a particular party regardless of its leader or policies.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Hmm. Does he say that to all new elected leaders?
    Obama was elected directly to be leader of his country, Cameron wasn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    started a topic 'Special' relationship back on

    'Special' relationship back on

    Obama invites UK's Cameron to Washington

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - 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 invited him to visit Washington this summer.

    "The United States has no closer friend and ally than the United Kingdom, and I reiterated my deep and personal commitment to the special relationship between our two countries -- a bond that has endured for generations and across party lines, and that is essential to the security and prosperity of our two countries and the world," Obama said in a statement after calling Cameron to congratulate him.
    Hmm. Does he say that to all new elected leaders?

Working...
X