UK General Election 2015

[JustAnotherLogin]

Mojocvh said:

Questions for you.

How many active vessels does the RN have. Hint try 19...
How many fast jet squadrons does the RAF have. Hint try 7....

Want to go back and try again?

For example the Navy has 85 active vessels if i have counted correctly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_...

Even allowing for mistakes I think I am closer than you

[JustAnotherLogin]

greygoose said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

Mojocvh said:

Questions for you.

How many active vessels does the RN have. Hint try 19...
How many fast jet squadrons does the RAF have. Hint try 7....

Want to go back and try again?

For example the Navy has 85 active vessels if i have counted correctly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_...

Even allowing for mistakes I think I am closer than you

I am not sure the Victory would be that effective nowadays.

I didn't include the classic ships

[JustAnotherLogin]

FiF said:

Oh come on let's stop this stupid handbags at dawn stuff.

True the Andrew just has 19 active warships of destroyer and frigate type.

That doesn't include many more vessels of other types and just as one example, seeing as this subject cropped up from discussion about fishery protection, River class patrol boats of which there are four, 3 on UK duties one tasked to the Falklands.

That's not counting all the other patrol boats, but which nevertheless are classed as warships, on various duties which RN classes as within the Patrol section of the surface fleet, "Safeguarding UK territorial waters and fishing rights"

It's true that in the event of an alteration of GB-EU relationship there would have to be significant re tasking and resource allocation.

Source www.royalnavy.mod.uk which information source sends a gunboat to sort you lot out, backed up with a few hardass bootnecks.

Same figures as the Wiki I quoted
Unless you want to include fleet auxilaries etc as well, but they aren't technically RN (though the RN page list them), so i didn't

Worth pointing out that Mojos figures also exclude ships bigger than destroyers: helicopter carriers for example, as well as all the submarines.

[JustAnotherLogin]

BGARK said:

UKIP are doing fine + 4% this week.

Best case scenario in my opinion would be a UKIP-CON coalition.

Selective use of polls again?

The only one they are up 4% is ICM, and that is because last week there was a statistical outlier where UKIP polled 7%

In my view UKIP aren't going to get enough seats to be worthy of a place at the table. The polls are suggesting between 1 and 5, and have been for a while.

All they will do is take votes from the Tores and hand it to Lab/SNP. I know that's not a popular view here, but that's where the evidence points.

[JustAnotherLogin]

BGARK said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

In my view

In my view if we got dropped onto a deserted Island, you are probably the first one that would be eaten..

Inaccurate as usual.

You persist in this "little Kipper" view that Kippers are a majority view.

Plus I have a "calm stare into the distance" that can stun at 200m; I can track an Apache helicopter on foot, and can kill with only a pea-shooter at 500m

[JustAnotherLogin]

BGARK said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

BGARK said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

In my view

In my view if we got dropped onto a deserted Island, you are probably the first one that would be eaten..

Inaccurate as usual.

You persist in this "little Kipper" view that Kippers are a majority view.

Plus I have a "calm stare into the distance" that can stun at 200m; I can track an Apache helicopter on foot, and can kill with only a pea-shooter at 500m

I said "probably", as usual you persist in pretending to know what people are really like by writing on the internet and making stuff up, do you work for the media?

I do not think kippers have the majority view, as stated many times most of the population are retarded, hence labour etc..

Ah selective memory as well.

You said that in my view I would be the first one eaten, not because of me guessing what people think, but because of what the polls etc are clearly showing.

I admit I guessed at the explanation for your refusal to face facts. But to be fair the explanation I chose was one of the more polite ones

Edited by JustAnotherLogin on Monday 20th April 22:38

[JustAnotherLogin]

BGARK said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

I admit I guess at the explanation for your refusal to face facts. But to be fair the explanation I chose was one of the more polite ones

Facts based on stuff you type, ok got it, it must be true then.

Polite because like most people with your views, if others dont agree with you its best to shout at people, protest or call them stupid.

When people type rubbish like

"In my view if we got dropped onto a deserted Island, you are probably the first one that would be eaten"

then I think you deserve all you get

All the evidence shows that more people proposing to vote UKIP would vote Tory than Labour if there was no UKIP candidate.
All the evidence shows that the number of seats that UKIP will get is not significant

You do the maths this time. Or alternatively propose any evidence to contradict this

[JustAnotherLogin]

gottans said:

When will it be over, just going on too long I am starting to suffer PTED, help. Hopefully watching the snooker on the red button will help.

Post Traumatic Election Disorder.

Nothing compared to the impact of being forced to watch snooker

[JustAnotherLogin]

Greg66 said:

I was thinking a bit more about this. The key to it is the English - and specifically Labour and perhaps UKIP English voters - deciding they'd rather have the Cons than the SNP running things.

The real die hard English Labour voters probably won't be too upset to see the SNP's hand in the Government as it will be pushing left wing policies that that demographic will be happy with.

The key is the more moderate centrist English Labour voter and the English UKIP voter. It is them who have to be persuaded that the SNP is unacceptably far left, or too Scottish, or something, and then to vote Con.

The system we have allows Scotland, with 1/13 of the vote, to control Wstminster if the two major parties are even. It needs the English as a whole to gang together to combat that - assuming that they want to.

The other key of course being the Kippers who would rather a left wing Lab/SNP coalition who definitely won't give an EU referendum rather than a Tory/LD coalition who probably would (depending on coalition negotiations) or even a Tory govt who would

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

The other key of course being the Kippers who would rather a left wing Lab/SNP coalition who definitely won't give an EU referendum rather than a Tory/LD coalition who probably would (depending on coalition negotiations) or even a Tory govt who would

Come Again?

Lab + SNP won't give a referendum on leaving EU
Tory + LD probably would
Tory only govt would

Kippers will vote for UKIP, which means that we are likely to get a Lab/SNP, thus losing them their most desired policy. Whereas if they voted for Tory we would get a Tory govt. Indeed if even just the Kippers who voted Tory at the last election voted Tory at this then there would be a Tory govt

So we can blame the Kippers for the Lab/SNP govt and the loss of the EU referendum

Tried to make it simple for you Scuffers. But its hard to avoid the use of a 4 syllable word occasionally

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

so, after all that you're just repeating the old vote UKIP get Labour bullst again?

forget 4 syllables, 4 words would have covered it!

And yet you still don't get it because you call it bullst

The polls (Ashcroft's being the most detailed) show that 2/3 to 3/4 of UKIP supporters voted Tory in 2010

Current polling suggested a Lab/SNP govt
Take the UKIP voters and distribute (lets be pessimistic) in the ration 2/3 to Tory, 1/3 to Lab

That would give approx 44% of vote to Tories and 39% to Labour
That would be either a Tory majority, or a Tory-LD coalition

You can bluster all you like, but those are the cold hard facts. Kippers are giving the election to Lab/SNP, and in the process denying themselves a referendum on leaving the EU

By all means vote UKIP, but at least do it with your eyes open of the consequences instead of your current ridiculous denial of the facts

[JustAnotherLogin]

johnxjsc1985 said:

think your wrong mate. I want to vote UKIP and I know lots of people where I live want to do the same.But the UKIP candidate will not get a sniff of a chance however if the Conservative candidate is close we will all switch to Conservative and I think a lot of people are smart enough to work that out for themselves without all the stupid vote UKIP get Labour nonsense

Your argument is undermined by the fact that S2art is denying it just above you

S2art
If the Kippers only voted UKIP where they are likely to win ahead of the Tories, then the gains would be even greater, as that looks like only about 3 seats. I only only considered the whole country as one, because the figures are much easier to get

[JustAnotherLogin]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Maybe the voters of Rochester and Stroud understand the point, Tories look to be ahead

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/04/six-more-marg...

[JustAnotherLogin]

s2art said:

Farage has said he wants people to vote intelligently. That means vote Tory when the UKIP candidate has no chance IF AND ONLY IF it means keeping Labour out. Equally Tory voters should vote UKIP if the Tory candidate has little chance, Heywood and Middleton being a classic example.

Lets hope they follow his advice.

What about you S2art, are you in a constituency where it makes sense to vote Tory?
Don41?
NicD?
Dandarez?
Scuffers?

Will you?

[JustAnotherLogin]

Greg66 said:

Hmm. 315 (Con/LD/DUP possibly in a formal coalition) vs 318 (Lab/SNP in an informal alliance ). Maybe 322 if you add 4 (PC and the Greens). Maybe more if you add the SDLP. And if Sinn Fein take 6, 323 is the magic number.

Bottom line is that a formal minority coalition could end up nobbled by a collection of tax and spend parties who then would not band together in a formal anything. Except they'd have to in order to get business done.

What a fking fk up.

Could be a big constitutional argument if that is the case. Which is the legitimate govt out of that?

The big question is whether anyone can get a Queens Speech through

Cameron is in the seat to start, if he can get Con, LD, DUP and UKIP to vote for, or abstain, it would need all the others to vote it down
And if they do, and then can't agree their own Queen's speech, then the electorate is likely to punish them

[JustAnotherLogin]

FiF said:

We've only had Con canvasser round and did not make any attempt to persuade me as an undecided after I raised concerns about their manifesto and particular reasons why I had parted the ways due to Cameron.
All he said was don't vote UKIP, not even a please.

So much like on PH then.

Who are deciding between then?

Presumably not Conservative if you have parted ways. Who else?

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

the more it goes on, the more I think that UKIP stand a pretty good chance of 25% of the vote and a decent haul of seats...

.

Really?


And what is a decent haul may I ask.

Aren't there some bets going on this? Are you putting money on this?

[JustAnotherLogin]

speedy_thrills said:

That's interesting as opinion polling (including Poplus you quotes above) has been flat:

If you ignore the last 36 hours of that data (so you get to the point on which the seat predictions and betting odds had moved) then it wasn't flat. There were indications that UKIPpers were switching to Tories to avoid Lab-SNP coalition. Ashcroft reported on same (as mentioned on here).

So the changes were understandable. Regrettably that has at least partially reversed now.

The seat predictions I can see from the various organisations range from Labour the biggest party by 4, through Tories by 9 (seems a popular prediction) to Tories by 32 (bit of an outlier)

UKIP from 1 to 3 seats

Unfortunately only that outlier of Tories by 32 is likely to beat an informal arrangement of Labour & SNP plus Greens, Plaid etc.

So unless a lot more Kippers swap to Tories, we can say goodbye referendum, and hello lots of taxes and borrowing

[JustAnotherLogin]

Strocky said:

Axionknight said:

Strocky said:

I'll be exercising my democratic right the same as any other voter on Thursday, a referendum isn't in the SNP manifesto for this election, so yes, by default, I'll be supporting the union

Vote Tory ;-)

If I thought it would help those at the bottom rather than those at the top, I would, they don't, so I won't

There was me thinking that reducing unemployment, raising the tax threshold, more money in the NHS etc would all help those "at the bottom"

And if one has compassion for the those less well off than us, then a commitment to foreign aid would also seem a good policy

[JustAnotherLogin]

Good point Scuffers.