The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter- Winston Churchill

TV Debates- Interesting indeed...

Opinion polls have been round since the dawn of General Elections, and have usually been able to predict the result fairly well. However, with the opinion polls of the BBC, YouGov and ComRes all conflicting over the majority party (either Conservative or Labour), there is no stand out factor. So will televised debates be that deciding factor?

2010 televised debates: a great success, but much
has changed since the times of recession

First used in 2010, it differentiated the men from the boys. Well remembered by me in particular, Brown stood bamboozled as both Cameron and Clegg (still existing at the time) held new prospects for the UK. They talked of refreshing new economic policies and immigration, compared to Brown's glum expression saying all that needed to be said. So unsurprisingly, a coalition was formed between Cameron and Clegg. But 5 years later, Clegg has fallen (spectacularly), Cameron's lost ground and newbie Miliband has held his stricken personality together, to form an unpredictable finale in May.

However, not 1 month ago, Cameron refused to take part in any televised debate unless the smaller parties were included (e.g. Greens, Northern Irish parties, Welsh parties etc.). Now that some of his pledge has been fulfilled, with the Greens, Plaid Cymru and the SNP now included, Cameron now wants his entire commitment to be fulfilled. But it may be his downfall.

Not everyone wants to know about the democracy of the UK, it's hard to discriminate between one part of the UK from another, but if Cameron doesn't attend any of these televised debates, it's almost certain that Labour will gain hugely from the debates in popularity and could have May's General Election "in the bag". I agree with Nick Robinson on this issue, that Cameron doesn't want to be seen saying "no", as this will leave him out of contention, and possibly leave the Tories staring down the barrel of a gun. But Cameron can't just say "yes" either, or the Conservatives will lose popularity with many of the nationalists and unionists from NI, Scotland and Wales that are excluded.

With the lines drawn, and the consequences huge, Cameron needs to act fast. His ideal situation is to get all the excluded smaller parties from the UK into the debates, or Cameron faces a backlash from the devolution promises made to Scotland, and subsequently be ousted if not carried out to the rest of the UK. However, in reality, I can't see this feasibly working, due to the farce inevitably created by inviting unionists and nationalists to a debate on the UK.... With UKIP.... There will be eggs...

Jordan Ifield (when these debates are occurring, I'm just going to be in the background in a deck chair, with popcorn)

If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change your attitude- Maya Angelou

Farage- The Tables have Turned

It was not long ago that Mark Reckless defected from the Tories to UKIP, and the entire country went up in arms, claiming that UKIP may even win over 10 seats in the General Election. And now common sense has set in.

"Egg the parrot"- Embarrassed as the NHS leaves
Farage on life support

Amjad Bashir, defected from the Conservatives to UKIP in 2014, however he made a remarkable U-turn just 3 days ago, and in the process, has taken Farage with him. By resigning from UKIP, he furthermore accused UKIP of having "ridiculous lack of policies", which has always been the case with the radical side of UKIP, always dreaming that leaving the EU would solve world hunger, poverty and answer the meaning of life. However, keen to rectify this scandal, Farage appeared on the Andrew Marr show, and inadvertently justified these accusations.

 Like many of the big parties, Farage said that our beloved NHS was in crisis and needed more funding; but that the £3billion being pumped into the life support machine, would be from not paying EU membership.... Seriously... Instead of denying the claims made by Bashir over "lack of policies", he has further exposed UKIP's policies, as the answer to everything is to: leave the EU. This isn't the only time Farage has hit rough tides when debating the EU; claiming it to be an "insurance-based health care" in 2012, and said if UKIP were in power, anyone who wasn't English, couldn't work for the NHS.

"Amjad Bashir had reached the end of the road with UKIP"- More like pushed under the bus...

So where does this leave UKIP? Well, two weeks ago, they were in poll position amongst 3rd parties, and were even expected to pull in a coalition with the Cnswrvatives come May, however whilst this is still a possibility, Farage hasgot himself in a mess, in more than one way. I've always relented UKIP's lack of policies, often using the analogy of leaving the EU as the messiah. However, this event has fully exposed this, and as an MEP has left UKIP on the issue, their credibility has been put under scrutiny. Their main economic policy is gain funding by leaving the EU, the same can be said for the NHS, and as many have gathered, the process is not as simple as that, with not many of us imagining to see the £3 billion promised by Farage. Another monty python reference in "What have the Romans ever done for us?" comes to mind regarding this topic, their entire manifesto is based on immigration and the EU, questioning their status as a "party" and not a pressure group. So it's fair to say the UKIP manifesto in May will be interesting...

Jordan Ifield (I told you so)

Let me clarify this very definitely. This is not an authoritarian organization- L. Ron Hubbard

Conservative Identity- Thatcher's legacy continues

4 months before a General Election, it's usually preferable not to anger a large group of electorates. Since the Conservative's walked into power in 2010, teachers, firefighters and nurses have all walked out in strike action, often against their pension cuts. However, in typical Thatcher style, the Tories handling of such a situation is more right wing than anticipated, and because of that; it becomes crude.

The Tories proposal would compose of online voting, that must achieve a backing of at least 40% from eligible union members, instead of their previous proposal of 50% turnout, which was reported by unions as "undemocratic". But the impact on the Conservatives isn't going to be positive, that's guaranteed. Such a proposal brings thoughts of the late Margaret Thatcher to mind, and how her strict "authoritarian" regime, especially against strikes, ruined her reputation, as well as the party's.

"I think before a strike is allowed to go ahead it must have much more support from the union members and cannot be called by politicised union leaders," - Patrick McLoughlin (Transport Secretary) advertising the "flaw" in strikes, and agitate unions.

Firefighters strike 2014- will the Tories regret their new proposal?

Labour are naturally going to pounce on this, that's for certain. Labelling the proposal "undemocratic" and "not listening to the masses", and I'm afraid I can only agree with such criticisms. David Cameron is fighting a losing battle when it comes to public services; the constant cutting, strikes over pensions and now proposing to make strikes less possible. And it's going to cost them in the election, when they lose electorates to Labour. It's especially hard when your traditional ideology includes getting "ignoring" unions. Ignoring is harsh term, maybe less favourable, but it still leaves the Conservatives with a flaw, and hardly at the right time with May's General Election coming fast.

Simple solution: take a page out of Labour's book from 1997 and have some policies which in-explicitly are from the other wing. Take Labour 1997, they were compromising on privatization, and later on in the 2008 economic crash, whilst the Labour government nationalized banks, they privatized them as soon as possible. such as Northern Rock who got re-privatized back in November 2011. So embrace a more liberal policy on the public services, and the Tories may embrace the rewards, however with such a strong Thatcher legacy, and Cameron's reliance on it, I'm afraid their new proposal will come back to haunt them come 7th May.

Jordan Ifield  

I don't know if you've ever noticed this, but first impressions
 are often entirely wrong- Lemony Snicket

Jim Murphy is Robin Hood.... Unfortunately

The Scottish Independence Referendum has left it's large imprint over UK Politics, and most evidently on Labour, who have their Scottish Leader resign and in its wake, risk losing a considerable amounts of seats in one of their most recently dominant grounds. So the torch was passed on to Jim Murphy, to pick up the pieces of trust in Scotland.... And he's only become a scapegoat.

I think this was Murphy's thought process when making this proposal. NHS= In Crisis= Needs more jobs= Needs money for jobs= Re-distribution of money. When phrased in terminology such as this, he sounds too communist to be true. However, whilst this a broad term of his policy for 1,000 new nurses in Scotland for the NHS, it does show the ever growing power struggle between Scotland and England, and especially Labour. It's not the proposal of jobs, it's where the money is coming from to fund them. By using the infamous "Barnett Formula", he would gain it from taxpayers in London... Cue the civil war.

Boris Johnson, described the plan as "fiscally vindictive" to the south east of England and amounted to trying to "bribe the Scots to vote Labour", while Labour's Dame Tessa Jowell said London should not be treated as a "cash cow".

 Whilst many Scottish Nationalists would be probably happy and rejoyceful after the announcement, but even some of Labour's own MP's have waded in to knock some sense into him. Diane Abbott, Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, scrutinized his proposal was surprised, saying he was "boasting". Whilst that word baffles me for myself, because I feel the word "betrayed" should be used, but it does highlight the main problem with the Anglo-Scot relationship. The Scottish want further devolution, which we've granted, however (rightfully) the English have demanded further powers to themselves, which the Scottish deny. This can be summarized into one term: The West Lothian Question. And until that's solved, no one's going anywhere in Scotland (accept the SNP).

The deadlock in not trusting each other will only end up with Scotland being sympathized on by politicians dreamy eyed about losing them from the UK. So take away their powers in regards to the West Lothian Question and grant them their further devolution plans and then, in the infamous words of Monty Python.... "GET ON WITH IT!" I can't see any progress in Anglo-Scottish relations, or any improvement to the 6 party-way for the General Election improving. At this rate, all we'll be getting is a SNP coalition with either Conservative or Labour. Because all I can see on 7 May 2015 is Scotland being entirely SNP.

Jordan Ifield (I'm actually pro-union... Which is scary)

It's good to shut up sometimes- Marcel Marceau

Nick Clegg- Lightning Strikes Twice

I return to the BBC News Politics Home after my last blog and I see another Lib Dem boast.... Is it Christmas? It just seems that Nick Clegg wants to attract attention to his desperate situation, and this is politics I'm talking about, and it seems more like a homeless charity at this moment. Boldly claiming that the Lib Dems would "provide heart to the Conservatives and spine to Labour" is almost contradicting beyond belief when they themselves have neither in Nick Clegg. 

Nick Clegg: As sorry as his promises

"A strong coalition government with Liberal Democrats anchoring it in the centre ground, and not lurching to the extremes of left or right, remains the best way to make sure we finish the job and finish it fairly,"- Nick Clegg, sounds as if they're already in another coalition

But it's his ease of manner that scares me, being a Lib Dem sympathizer makes this cringe worthy, and I'm not sure whether they're the same party that were strong in 2010 (or at least stronger than now). Most Lib Dems are becoming scared of a potential implosion come May's General Election, but as Simon Hughes justified yesterday, the ones at the top of the tree are taking no notice of this apparent threat. And as many expect, this'll come back to haunt them.

As I said in my last blog, UKIP will beat the Lib Dems in the next General Election at this rate, but Clegg's oblivious nature makes me lose confidence in politics itself. Accountability is the clear culprit in this case, how can Clegg stay as Leader if he can't understand what his party want? He isn't listening, or at least he's appearing to. Perhaps trying to ignore UKIP, but it's one of many reasons the Lib Dems aren't popular anymore, they aren't taking their responsibilities seriously. And so, by consequences of the biggest culprit of politics of them all, they are discouraging electorates from politics. Game over.

Jordan Ifield (self-implosion imminent) 

More tears are shed over answered tears than unanswered ones- Mother Teresa

Lib Dems- Desperate Times

Dear... Oh dear.... Implosion imminent. Not only did I forget to update my blog over the festive period, but the Lib Dems have now passed the line of "no return". Simon Hughes, former Deputy Leader of the Lib Dems, has stepped into the thick mist of this years' General Election, as he says that the party will go in a coalition with any party, starting with the largest party, with no specific preferences....Talk about begging.

Not too long ago, I predicted that the Lib Dems would implode. They just seem to have so much less support since their coalition with the Conservatives has started, seeking criticism from their lack of involvement/strength and poor policies. All are debatable, but are agreeable with the vast masses, even by Liberal Democrats. So when Mr Hughes, over in the dark corners of the Lib Dem trash zone, steps in and implies that they've already lost, the laughing stock is on. During the run up to the 2010 General Election, many saw the Lib Dems, and Nick Clegg as a fresh alternative to David Cameron, without any Labour nonsense too. But as always with the Lib Dems in General Elections, they fell hard and only just about clinched a coalition. So now that their popularity is as low as their common sense, they are surely expected to flop. And with them expecting a coalition, and UKIP currently beating them in opinion polls, I don't think they'll even achieve that.

"We will work as we did this time with any other coalition partner because the national interest has to come first." - Simon Hughes, when the reality sank in

The two most likely competitors for a "coalition".... God Help Us

Much of the problem is his, as quote "third party" label for the Lib Dems, which just isn't justifiable any more. The uprise of UKIP and the SNP (to name a few) have at least some contention now for the label "third party", and I wouldn't be surprised if any of these 3 parties challenged for a role in a coalition. Nigel Farage and Nicola Sturgeon are more strong willed and passionate than Nick Clegg, and can actually stand up to some scrutiny. At this current moment of time, Clegg and the Lib Dems are behind UKIP, as I said earlier, and whilst I'm certainly no UKIP supporter, I can see why. The Lib Dems have only, as far as I can see, made one successful policy in school meals. And then to lose a lot of credibility in the university "promise" and the contradiction created through it to their "broken promises" propaganda. Could it get any worse? Oh yeah, they've done nothing else. Better?

Jordan Ifield (sorry for the lack of posts, I'll make up for it)