Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wasspj

  1. He told him to hop it as soon as the order was given. We no longer live in a world where it takes a month for the orders to arrive.
  2. The russians were already occupying the airport when Sir Mike Jackson told him to hop it.
  3. He's an idiot who tried to get british troops to storm an airfield occupied by russian forces in kosovo.
  4. Given the things that are already known about Giuliani, there aren't many "secrets" which could damage him. you are equating "working" with "popular" when it comes to policies, but the two are not alwas the same. In the UK, the concept of universal, comprehensive healthcare, free at the point of access, from cradle to grave, provided by the state is quite popular. It is however demonstrably not working. Those democrats are of couse right wing nutjob democrats like Ted Kennedy The co-sponsors of his most high profile bills would suggest this is something of a stretch. In reality, like most politicians with presidential aspirations, his record is all over the place. While it cannot be denied that McCain lacks the charm of Reagan (with the possible exception of Bill Clinton, who doesn't) He could in some ways be saved in this respect if the Democrats nominated Obama, as a response to the age issue could quote Reagan's youth and inexperience putdown (which after all would apply far more to Obama than it did to Mondale) and could tap into Reagan nostalgia. It would not of course work against the other potential democrats.
  5. NH went for Bush in 2000, and Kerry hardly won a landslide in 2004. It is certainly up for grabs, but probably unlikely to be critical. Pennsylvania went for Kerry by a similar margin that Ohio went for Bush, so as you say, both are up for grabs. I think 2008 will come down much more to who the Democrats nominate than the Republicans. Obama seems to be getting something of a free pass at the moment in terms of his being a lot more left wing than he lets on, and with a limited senate record to defend, he would probably be less susceptible to the liberal wiener attacks which did for Mondale/Dukakis/Kerry. He also projects himself as a serious person with something to say. Clinton has too much of a past, and if the GOP nominated an even halfway credible candidate she would get creamed. Her history leaves so many mud pits that a lot would be bound to stick, and she upsets a lot of Democrats. At the risk of straying back on topic, Mitt Romney wouldn't have to worry about base issues against her because faced with the prospect of presidthe ent Hillary, the religious right would vote for a Satan-Beelzebub ticket. Absent the unexpected appearance of a kiddy fiddling conviction, Giulliani pretty much guarentees the GOP a win, but he will probably lose out because the primary voters will prefer to take the risk and nominate a candidate they are more comfortable with. My gut feeling is that McCain will beat Clinton, winning the Bush 2004 states plus New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, with Michigan, Minnesota and Oregon being the swing states.
  6. You could essentially achieve it by making a one constituency scenario in the British version of Prime Minister forever.
  7. pete_wass@hotmail.com cheers
  8. I missed that, I wasn't really looking that far down the order. Very weird.
  9. The Canadian experience is unlikely to happen here though as there aren't any prospective challengers to the tories from the right, nor is there any great appetite for them to emerge.
  10. The monarchy is a wonderful institution which saves us from electing f***wit presidents like clinton. can anyone imagine a president blair (cherie that is.) She also saves the government a fortune in rent.
  11. The joys of being the pro monarchy party.
  12. It depends a lot on what changes he made to the platform. I could play with myself as the tory candidate, and on some issues I would be to the right of Michael Howard, on others I would be to the left. It would still be a realistic platform for the present Tory party. Also The game doesn't include an awful lot of possible candidates. You can play the scenario as Theresa May or Ken Clarke, but not as David Davis yet he is the only one of the three who could conceivably actually be leader of the tory party.
  13. slightly weirder is Plaid winning 27 seats and the ScotNats winning 37. That really would have made election night exciting
  14. That would actually be an interesting result, because while the Tories would get the support of both unionist parties, the Lib Dems would in reality almost certainly go for brown, as would the nationalists in northern ireland. Who formed the government would thus depend on how many seats the SNP and Plaid Cymru won
  15. your figures for the libdems are about right. The Labour figure is high, think more 27% to 40% They did well due to a combination of an intellectually dead tory party by 1997 and Blair. Blair's appeal is gone, and the tories look ready to start improving. A few years of Brown will hurt them, not help them, and there are too many unreconstructed socialists in there. The tory figure is low. By 1997 we had exhausted the promise of the 80s and had nothing new to offer. We were also up against an electoral genius at the height of his powers. We still got 30% of the vote. The upper limit is a bit low. While we are not there yet, it is quite conceivable that a revitalised Tory party could get 45%, especially if we offer the voters a reasoned, logical alternative to the tax and spend policies of the present government which are failing and increasingly visibly so. I'd say the realistic range for the Tories is 30% to 45%
  • Create New...