Jaziek

That's [cabbage]. What state services? Schooling? Access to driving on the roads? Lol. As I've stated before, they pay their fair share of taxes to use the schools, and it helps our economy even if they didn't. They also paid $13 billion into Social Security this past year and only collected $1 billion. You know they probably don't pay taxes, given that they are illegal immigrants. Whether or not that means they should be denied basic services is another issue entirely, but still. And I think we're drifting a bit off topic here. This is the UK election thread remember, lets at least try to [bleep] about our corrupt politicians here, not american ones.

Cancelled my account. Runs out on the 13th. My guild collapsed (man I sure know how to pick 'em!) and I don't have the time, nor the inclination, to find another one at the moment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB8AjhnLYkw FINALLY.

I'm gonna call it at about 250-260 each for labour and tory, and about 100-110 for LD.

If we implemented PR, we'd never see another Tory government ever again, it would never even be close to possible.

Same here. I live in Sunderland south constituency. For the last 3 elections it has been the fastest to count the votes and return the result in the country. Here, it is simply a foregone conclusion that labour will win. I think it is something like a 70% majority. So yeah, a Murdoch owned paper. Anyway, If you aren't rich, you won't benefit under the Tories, simple as that.

So your dad earns millions every year. Good for you. But seriously, tax should not be the only factor that you base your vote on.

what is your problem with getting rid of trident? And for the second point, no he doesnt. Been reading the Torygraph have we?

man you know what would make that better? SOME ALTERNATE CAMERA ANGLES. [bleep]. YOU. DICE. For taking out features for no reason. But yeah, it is still pretty awesome

one of the ace combats?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwYKV-ta9mI I am well aware that many, if not all of the frags in this video are setup, and or hacks. But you know what? I just don't care. The production values are just too good. It is so well synced with the music. It always gets me fired up to play some CS.

The sky news debate was asbsolute trash. You could see the Murdoch bias shining through from the get go.

Weak follow up. The Cartman's dad resolution was lameas hell, and they took the censoring gag WAY too far.

You say indecisive like its a bad thing. I would far rather have laws made that were well balanced, well thought through, and well adjusted to win the support of the majority of all the parties represented in the commons, than ones that can be rushed through with a three line whip. I do indeed say indecisive like it's a bad thing. I would rather have a rapid response law that deals with a given situation effectively than no law which allows a period of anarchy until the government finishes it's deals and bartering and comes up with a compromise which doesn't fix a problem. Take the methadrone fiasco. How many more lives would have been lost if the government didn't do anything for a few more weeks? If the rapidly put together law is obviously the right response to the problem, then it'll get through regardless. I can't think of a situation which would necessitate the use of a party's majority in order to quickly force through a bill. You can't? Natural disasters. Large scale strikes. When international relations with another country, or between two other countries, turn sour. Economic crashes. A new 'legal' drug hits the market. Plenty of these kinds of incidents happen every year, and you have to choose an action to deal with it one way or the other or face the consequences. That's what a strong government is all about. Do you think that the opposing party would vote down legislaton put forward by the party in power purely on the basis that it was put forward by the other party, not them? No. That doesn't happen, this isn't the USA. Should the situation call for it, and the proposed law be good enough, then the right decision will be made. And yeah, the mephedrone thing is hardly a good example. The media whipped itself up into hysteria, and they pushed through a completly unecessary piece of legislation.

You say indecisive like its a bad thing. I would far rather have laws made that were well balanced, well thought through, and well adjusted to win the support of the majority of all the parties represented in the commons, than ones that can be rushed through with a three line whip. I do indeed say indecisive like it's a bad thing. I would rather have a rapid response law that deals with a given situation effectively than no law which allows a period of anarchy until the government finishes it's deals and bartering and comes up with a compromise which doesn't fix a problem. Take the methadrone fiasco. How many more lives would have been lost if the government didn't do anything for a few more weeks? If the rapidly put together law is obviously the right response to the problem, then it'll get through regardless. I can't think of a situation which would necessitate the use of a party's majority in order to quickly force through a bill.

You say indecisive like its a bad thing. I would far rather have laws made that were well balanced, well thought through, and well adjusted to win the support of the majority of all the parties represented in the commons, than ones that can be rushed through with a three line whip.

Hopefully. It is better than the alternative. And yeah dusqi. Voting reform would be the best thing to happen to UK politics since... Forever. And yet another reason to vote for the lib dems, and keep cameron as far away from number 10 as possible, is to keep Murdoch and his greedy paws away from the BBC.

festergut and rotface hardmodes 1 shot, and putricide hardmode to phase 3, good progress night.

woo, the lib dems are in the lead. oh no wait, lets put this new data into the seat calculator... oh look, this would still end up as.. CON 245 seats (+47) LAB 275 seats (-81) LIB 99 seats (+37) Gotta love our awesome system huh?

The lib dems stand no chance whatsoever of actually getting in. The voting system in this country is completely [bleep]ed up. If we had PR, then maybe, but as it is, not a chance. That said, I'll still be voting for them. also dusqi, yes, the lib dems did oppose the bill, but don't forget that it was a lib dem lord that added the most controvertial clause in the bill, before it was passed to the commons. Erm you do realise over recent years they have progressively closed the gap between them and labour/conservatives and that this year as it stands they are topping or close to topping a lot of opinion polls, so for once they actually do stand a chance of getting in. No, they really don't. It isn't a "whoever gets the most votes wins" system. There are way WAY too many safe seats for both the tories and labour for the lib dems to stand a realistic chance. Its a first past the post system I know that. However what you fail to see is that most of the safe seats are no longer considered safe. Safe seats are the ones obtained from voting areas where location specific opinion polls and voting trends have always favour one party by a huge margin. Many of the labour safe seats are no longer considered safe as a lot of people have become disillusioned with it. Equally many of the conservative safe seats are considered in threat as the lib dems are making significant encroachment on their margin. Over the past years Lib Dems have actually taken some of the conservative and labour safe seats. And by all counts they do stand a real chance this year. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8627292.stm "The ComRes poll for the Sunday Mirror and Independent on Sunday puts the Conservatives on 31, the Lib Dems on 29 and Labour on 27. The poll of 1,006 people was conducted on on 16 and 17 April. Meanwhile, an ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph puts the Conservatives on 34, Labour on 29 and the Lib Dems on 27. It says this is the Conservatives' lowest rating in an ICM poll since September 2007. " And as more people poll for the Lib Dems, more people who have always liked the Lib Dem policies but don't think they could win will see that that is not the case and so will add their support. And there are still 19 days to the election. There are more people who vote along their traditional party line, and more people who vote based on traditional party stereotypes, than there will ever be people whose mind can be changed by actual party policy.

POOOOOOOOOOSH. also, you're awful. What do you think is wrong with it though?

The lib dems stand no chance whatsoever of actually getting in. The voting system in this country is completely [bleep]ed up. If we had PR, then maybe, but as it is, not a chance. That said, I'll still be voting for them. also dusqi, yes, the lib dems did oppose the bill, but don't forget that it was a lib dem lord that added the most controvertial clause in the bill, before it was passed to the commons. Erm you do realise over recent years they have progressively closed the gap between them and labour/conservatives and that this year as it stands they are topping or close to topping a lot of opinion polls, so for once they actually do stand a chance of getting in. No, they really don't. It isn't a "whoever gets the most votes wins" system. There are way WAY too many safe seats for both the tories and labour for the lib dems to stand a realistic chance.

The lib dems stand no chance whatsoever of actually getting in. The voting system in this country is completely [bleep]ed up. If we had PR, then maybe, but as it is, not a chance. That said, I'll still be voting for them. also dusqi, yes, the lib dems did oppose the bill, but don't forget that it was a lib dem lord that added the most controvertial clause in the bill, before it was passed to the commons.

My new(ish) UI. I'm still finishing it up, but the basic layout is done.

Just did saurfang 10 hardmode. That [cabbage] is INSANE towards the end. Very satisfying to get it down.