British Voters

[Ragnorokr]

@ Brits:

My perception of this [utterly predictable] scandal and the political atmosphere in the UK is that Brown would have to be out of his mind to call an early election.

That is true, because Gordon Brown only ever think's of Gordon Brown. If he had any feelings for his own party, and Britain, he would call a general election as soon as possible.

The electorate is implacably against Labour now, and the longer they stay in government, the more damaged they will become, and the bigger majority the Tories will have after the general election.

Just as the 1992 General Election was a win too far for the Tories, I have long feared that the 2005 General Election was also a win too far for Labour. Both of those elections were lost by the opposition, rather than won by the governing party, as both clearly looked out of ideas, but the opposition couldn't come up with a viable alternative. Michael Howard in 2005 was as convincing as a PM as Neil Kinnock in 1992.

If the political pendulum swings too far in favour of the Tories, we will end up with the same kind of one party state we had from the 1980's and late 1990's. None of it will do British politics any good at all.

OF COURSE the opposition want an early poll: The investigation is still under way. They want an election before more dirty linen gets aired and whilst the voters are still in high dudgeon and likely to turn on Labor en masse.

I think Labours days in office are numbered now anyway. Both main parties are equally guilty of abusing Westminsters expenses system, so I don't see why this should dent Labours share of the vote more than the Tories.

Labour MP's can sing themselves the lullaby that their poor election results is down to the expenses scandal, and/or the recession, but I think people are turning against Labour because their long term in office has made them lose touch with the electorate, and the electorate are now sick of them.

It could be argued that Labour was never in touch with the leectorate in the first place. They were voted in to increase investment in public services, to improve them, not waste money on bean counters and quangoes.

The vital part that Labour forgot was that while the electorate wanted more money spent on public services that were neglected by the Tories, they still wanted value for money, and a sustainable level of investment, not a War Chest, that turned into a Golden Rule On Borrowing (with adjustable goal posts) that turned into a level of insane borrowing that now threatens Britains triple A credit rating.

As they say"a week is a long time in politics" In Brown's place it'd be holding on for dear life,in the belief things can only get better.I think that may be the case, the public finds out just how many Tories have had their snouts buried in the public trough,and how deep.

Regardless, I think the next British general election will be a corker.

Be interested in your views.Am I on the right cricket pitch?

The trouble for Brown here is that Cameron has taken the initiative over the expenses scandal. The electorate also has a long memory, Tory ministers caught up in scandal, in the 1990's were sacked when they were found out, and never allowed to resurface again. I Can't say the same for Labour.

I have no party political loyalties, but I could never envisage Peter Mandelson, after his scandalous escapades, becoming a Lord, let alone deputy Prime Minister in all but name in the Tory party, nor in the Labour party at any other time in history than right now.