Never again
Monday, March 10, 2008
Love And Happiness In Samoa
HIJOS DE PUTA
Well, this is the worst, and I saw it coming: the pain in the ass that will give us about why the PP has lost. And besides, we were ungrateful because they have been saying for 3 years: that if the tension, if the hardness of the PP, if extreme right, bla bla bla. And finally, it has lost the PP, because people do not like the tension and the speech is harsh, but the mood, dialogue, moderation, etc ... And we're getting the pain in the ass with it for a few months and hesitate to say within 3 years if necessary. Comes in handy, as something they goes wrong, and criticize the opposition to remind us all that if we have not learned the lesson.
is true that the PP lost the elections, and hoped to win them seriously, and is, ultimately, the PP whose turn it is to analyze the results, see what they did wrong and what strategy will continue to next 4 years.
However, we can say whatever they want, if we analyze the results do not coincide at all with what we have warned those friendly political analysts.
As said, the PP is intended to approach the center, however, his speech hoarse would ever closer to the extreme right or extreme right. But if we the results, the PP has won 406,829 more votes than in past elections and have not been precisely the extreme right. The parties that could be considered extreme right have lost votes, but have been won. No vote has been useful to right-wing PP.
I have taken the results of these elections and have added the results obtained by the major parties of the extreme right to the last elections, these are: FA of Jons, Democracia Nacional, Spain 2000 and Authentic Falange. These formations amounted to 36,266 last general election and these elections have achieved 38,317. They have won votes and they could add those of AES, that from 2004 no data. That is, with this already, the PP has won almost half a million votes, and have not been on the extreme right. Where did he get? We will have to see what formations have lost votes. In addition, we are talking about has been almost equal participation in past elections. They have lost votes and seats and Ezquerra IU. IU in the last elections won 1,269,532 votes, and these have got 963,040 votes (Llamazares Congratulations to IU has managed to pass the 2,639,774 in 1996 to 963,040 yesterday). Ezquerra there has been a tremendous thud, which has risen from 652,196 votes in 2004 to 296,473 in this election, losing 355,723 votes. For Ezquerra deduce that many of these votes have gone to the abstention, and abstention has been a nearly 5-point difference compared to past elections.
Returning to the above, the PP has added nearly a half million more votes, and IU and Ezquerra have lost a few thousand votes. Also here I get to UPyD, which has added just over 300,000 votes. We need between UPyD and PP have added about 700,000 votes had to come from somewhere. Ezquerra UI and have lost votes, but we understand that the lost votes and Ezquerra IU have not been to PP, or UPyD. UPyD
PP and 700,000 votes have gotten together and have not gone or IU, or Ezquerra or the extreme right. Well that is not otherwise have left the center, and have been caught at the center of the PSOE. Watch your where. It is clear that the PSOE has taken those on the far left.
summary, the PP will have many tests to check how they will lead his party to score more votes and win the next election. But of course, it is clear, according to the results that his alleged speech bronco and the strategy of tension have not subtracted votes from the center, but won them. And it is clear that the alleged temper and moderation of Zapatero has not been such as he has lost votes from the center and has won the ultra-left.
Of course, despite this, I am not the slightest doubt that the kind Political analysts progressives are going to continue counting the PP has lost the tension, and that should change by moderation and all that.
And I say, yes, the PP has to analyze the results, and clearly will have to study very well what they should do for the 4 years to come. But people moderate and center so you do not like are sanitary cordons, Tinell pacts, fines for labeling in Castilian, political negotiations with ETA or the Catalan statutes nobody cares. 
Well, this is the worst, and I saw it coming: the pain in the ass that will give us about why the PP has lost. And besides, we were ungrateful because they have been saying for 3 years: that if the tension, if the hardness of the PP, if extreme right, bla bla bla. And finally, it has lost the PP, because people do not like the tension and the speech is harsh, but the mood, dialogue, moderation, etc ... And we're getting the pain in the ass with it for a few months and hesitate to say within 3 years if necessary. Comes in handy, as something they goes wrong, and criticize the opposition to remind us all that if we have not learned the lesson.
is true that the PP lost the elections, and hoped to win them seriously, and is, ultimately, the PP whose turn it is to analyze the results, see what they did wrong and what strategy will continue to next 4 years.
However, we can say whatever they want, if we analyze the results do not coincide at all with what we have warned those friendly political analysts.
As said, the PP is intended to approach the center, however, his speech hoarse would ever closer to the extreme right or extreme right. But if we the results, the PP has won 406,829 more votes than in past elections and have not been precisely the extreme right. The parties that could be considered extreme right have lost votes, but have been won. No vote has been useful to right-wing PP.
I have taken the results of these elections and have added the results obtained by the major parties of the extreme right to the last elections, these are: FA of Jons, Democracia Nacional, Spain 2000 and Authentic Falange. These formations amounted to 36,266 last general election and these elections have achieved 38,317. They have won votes and they could add those of AES, that from 2004 no data. That is, with this already, the PP has won almost half a million votes, and have not been on the extreme right. Where did he get? We will have to see what formations have lost votes. In addition, we are talking about has been almost equal participation in past elections. They have lost votes and seats and Ezquerra IU. IU in the last elections won 1,269,532 votes, and these have got 963,040 votes (Llamazares Congratulations to IU has managed to pass the 2,639,774 in 1996 to 963,040 yesterday). Ezquerra there has been a tremendous thud, which has risen from 652,196 votes in 2004 to 296,473 in this election, losing 355,723 votes. For Ezquerra deduce that many of these votes have gone to the abstention, and abstention has been a nearly 5-point difference compared to past elections.
Returning to the above, the PP has added nearly a half million more votes, and IU and Ezquerra have lost a few thousand votes. Also here I get to UPyD, which has added just over 300,000 votes. We need between UPyD and PP have added about 700,000 votes had to come from somewhere. Ezquerra UI and have lost votes, but we understand that the lost votes and Ezquerra IU have not been to PP, or UPyD. UPyD
PP and 700,000 votes have gotten together and have not gone or IU, or Ezquerra or the extreme right. Well that is not otherwise have left the center, and have been caught at the center of the PSOE. Watch your where. It is clear that the PSOE has taken those on the far left.
summary, the PP will have many tests to check how they will lead his party to score more votes and win the next election. But of course, it is clear, according to the results that his alleged speech bronco and the strategy of tension have not subtracted votes from the center, but won them. And it is clear that the alleged temper and moderation of Zapatero has not been such as he has lost votes from the center and has won the ultra-left.
Of course, despite this, I am not the slightest doubt that the kind Political analysts progressives are going to continue counting the PP has lost the tension, and that should change by moderation and all that.
And I say, yes, the PP has to analyze the results, and clearly will have to study very well what they should do for the 4 years to come. But people moderate and center so you do not like are sanitary cordons, Tinell pacts, fines for labeling in Castilian, political negotiations with ETA or the Catalan statutes nobody cares.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Standard Suitcase Width
dies former Socialist councilor Isaias Carrasco, shot in front
Mondragón his wife and daughter. Do not say yet who the author, but we understand that the same rats were cowards as usual, those of ETA.
All ETA murderers do not deserve to live, neither they nor the sons of bitches that support them.
How To Use A Bag To Ice A Cake
Well it's fine for labeling in Castilian
Naive me. I thought Rajoy dodged the question on this subject because I was actually totally against, but I looked away to not disturb your partner Nazionale. Franco was a fascist not because of what it was, but what he did, including imposing a language and discriminate others. Therefore, among other things, was a fascist. Do vice versa is fascist too. I will not to say that Zapatero is a fascist, because it is not, but apart from an impressive mental cocoa, a décifit democratic spirit and a natural propensity to lie, is that it has some tics significantly totalitarian.
And this guy is going to win on Sunday. I say to the English as well as tell American, every town has what he deserves.
What's wrong with this country? This country was a moral example to the world when half the country took to the streets to reject the blackmail of ETA, when killed Miguel Angel Blanco.
Now they will vote for a guy who says he does not know what that is Tinell Pact, but puts it in his white paper. Then there are journalists who say the Tinell Pact was limited to no pacts with the PP within the government of Catalonia, not statewide. Lie, and if not that you read the susudicho Covenant (PDF).
are the same journalists who have actively and passively with ETA ZP was adamant that there was no political concessions and political agreements and intend to achieve them. Lie. I wonder what happens to many people "as he likes his blue eyes and cute face? How to lie openly? Logical
Naive me. I thought Rajoy dodged the question on this subject because I was actually totally against, but I looked away to not disturb your partner Nazionale. Franco was a fascist not because of what it was, but what he did, including imposing a language and discriminate others. Therefore, among other things, was a fascist. Do vice versa is fascist too. I will not to say that Zapatero is a fascist, because it is not, but apart from an impressive mental cocoa, a décifit democratic spirit and a natural propensity to lie, is that it has some tics significantly totalitarian.
And this guy is going to win on Sunday. I say to the English as well as tell American, every town has what he deserves.
What's wrong with this country? This country was a moral example to the world when half the country took to the streets to reject the blackmail of ETA, when killed Miguel Angel Blanco.
Now they will vote for a guy who says he does not know what that is Tinell Pact, but puts it in his white paper. Then there are journalists who say the Tinell Pact was limited to no pacts with the PP within the government of Catalonia, not statewide. Lie, and if not that you read the susudicho Covenant (PDF).
are the same journalists who have actively and passively with ETA ZP was adamant that there was no political concessions and political agreements and intend to achieve them. Lie. I wonder what happens to many people "as he likes his blue eyes and cute face? How to lie openly? Logical
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Does Steel Seal Work 2010
ETA Zapatero prefers
. They have never been so close to achieving their goals, so to win ZP prefiern ; to return to negotiate.
Come together: Zapatero was firm and made no political price for peace. 
In this regard, it is illustrative note issued by the so-called collective of Basque political prisoners "(EPPK) on the 'failed negotiation process." "Never before have we come so far in recognizing the rights of Euskal Herria, but then the Government of Spain, as the PNV, give him back the political agreement should specify those rights." Inmates say that "this process was founded in shaping a framework that integrates the four areas of the south (Basque Country and Navarra) and recognize the right decision. In fact, if you opened the door to resolving the conflict (the cease-fire) was because the English government gave its approval to the statute of autonomy to four. "
Come together: Zapatero was firm and made no political price for peace.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
How Long To Cook Ribs
Debate ZP-Rajoy (2) 2008 Elections
I, instead of asking who they thought was better, ask if they liked the debate. I do not like anything. The first debate itself, but the second so we are counting as in the first debate, since almost prefer not to discuss. PP is supposed to let this debate proposals for Where were you? Something said, but in its early Interventions said the same thing last week. Zapatero became the batteries and began proposing ways. We may look better or worse, realistic or demagogic, but he started tips.
I believe that this debate was better Zapatero. Much better than the previous debate. He was calm, confident, knowing what was going to debate and agile on many occasions, and original (I say this for the paper). Rajoy, in their responses, should be used to discuss briefly what you think the current situation, if it were possible, to comment briefly why Zapatero measures do not seem the most appropriate, and then take as long as possible to explain simple manner what actions will take his game and always with an optimistic intonation. But he devoted himself to remember how bad it is everything and when something was not specifically intended.
I do not think seriously that the prime minister of a country like Spain and the main opposition leader spend about 10 minutes to discuss what was the first question asked at the conference Rajoy. A citizen could not care less what was the first question Rajoy. Nobody seriously thinks Rajoy did not ask any questions of an economic nature in the whole legislature as much as Zapatero insists.
To clarify, the first question was "How do you rate early days of his government? " and was in the answer to that question which asked Rajoy something economic.
Y Rajoy not only asked about the economy but criticized that so little talk of economy and also predicted that as he had left things the PP government would normally grow to 3%, creating 2 million jobs ( 2 million is what has created these past 4 years, not 3 million as said ZP) , an unemployment rate of 8% and price stability.
Theirs would congratulate Zapatero for not coming with some nonsense of hers in the economy as well.
I've never given too much importance to the atrocities they have said to each other. Yes, in fact, as were the atrocities he has done ZP with its negotiations with ETA, the Catalan Statute, Historical Memory, the alliance with tyrants banana etc ... But the Socialists have been scandalized by the hype or disqualifications of the PP. I said that, if such things offend them so they have something to say about the continual interruptions Rajoy Zapatero, is that they may not know the prince of peace dialogue and a dialogue has to stop talking to the other ?, throw it in the dead of ETA and Rajoy 11-M did not deserve some criticism? so that the PSOE is or has been the focus of what democracy means? Have they invented them? Will the others are Phalangists? Is it not an exaggeration to say that the PP is anticatlán and antiandaluz? The
that the opposition party always has to support government policy against terrorism is already a very tiresome argument, apart from false. In El Pais said today following:
I can not speak for the PP, but in mine, and that in this case is very similar to the PP. Without conditions will support the government's counterterrorism policy if the policy makes a legal, moral, democratic and efficient. Will support the war against terrorism if it does as it is doing now (assuming there are no negotiations right now. With ZP never know), that is, if you go for the murderers. I will not support a policy of never negotiating with ETA policy, a policy of ninguneo to victims of terrorism, a policy that brings murderers on the street for false hunger strikes, a policy of relaxation police etc ...
I for one believe that the most exciting is the UPyD . Zapatero is a pathological liar, but with her telegenic, charming face and not hurt a fly in his life wants to fool many people. Rajoy would be an excellent manager, but as he and his team have prepared a discussion with her doubts.
Rosa Díez's party offers at least a little more than illusion. 
I, instead of asking who they thought was better, ask if they liked the debate. I do not like anything. The first debate itself, but the second so we are counting as in the first debate, since almost prefer not to discuss. PP is supposed to let this debate proposals for Where were you? Something said, but in its early Interventions said the same thing last week. Zapatero became the batteries and began proposing ways. We may look better or worse, realistic or demagogic, but he started tips.
I believe that this debate was better Zapatero. Much better than the previous debate. He was calm, confident, knowing what was going to debate and agile on many occasions, and original (I say this for the paper). Rajoy, in their responses, should be used to discuss briefly what you think the current situation, if it were possible, to comment briefly why Zapatero measures do not seem the most appropriate, and then take as long as possible to explain simple manner what actions will take his game and always with an optimistic intonation. But he devoted himself to remember how bad it is everything and when something was not specifically intended.
I do not think seriously that the prime minister of a country like Spain and the main opposition leader spend about 10 minutes to discuss what was the first question asked at the conference Rajoy. A citizen could not care less what was the first question Rajoy. Nobody seriously thinks Rajoy did not ask any questions of an economic nature in the whole legislature as much as Zapatero insists.
To clarify, the first question was "How do you rate early days of his government? " and was in the answer to that question which asked Rajoy something economic.
Y Rajoy not only asked about the economy but criticized that so little talk of economy and also predicted that as he had left things the PP government would normally grow to 3%, creating 2 million jobs ( 2 million is what has created these past 4 years, not 3 million as said ZP) , an unemployment rate of 8% and price stability.
Theirs would congratulate Zapatero for not coming with some nonsense of hers in the economy as well.
I've never given too much importance to the atrocities they have said to each other. Yes, in fact, as were the atrocities he has done ZP with its negotiations with ETA, the Catalan Statute, Historical Memory, the alliance with tyrants banana etc ... But the Socialists have been scandalized by the hype or disqualifications of the PP. I said that, if such things offend them so they have something to say about the continual interruptions Rajoy Zapatero, is that they may not know the prince of peace dialogue and a dialogue has to stop talking to the other ?, throw it in the dead of ETA and Rajoy 11-M did not deserve some criticism? so that the PSOE is or has been the focus of what democracy means? Have they invented them? Will the others are Phalangists? Is it not an exaggeration to say that the PP is anticatlán and antiandaluz? The
that the opposition party always has to support government policy against terrorism is already a very tiresome argument, apart from false. In El Pais said today following:
Zapatero on terrorism could not get his opponent to commit, like him, unconditionally supporting the war against terrorism of the future government if he won the PP. This party will support only if the other does the policy he proposes.
I can not speak for the PP, but in mine, and that in this case is very similar to the PP. Without conditions will support the government's counterterrorism policy if the policy makes a legal, moral, democratic and efficient. Will support the war against terrorism if it does as it is doing now (assuming there are no negotiations right now. With ZP never know), that is, if you go for the murderers. I will not support a policy of never negotiating with ETA policy, a policy of ninguneo to victims of terrorism, a policy that brings murderers on the street for false hunger strikes, a policy of relaxation police etc ...
I for one believe that the most exciting is the UPyD . Zapatero is a pathological liar, but with her telegenic, charming face and not hurt a fly in his life wants to fool many people. Rajoy would be an excellent manager, but as he and his team have prepared a discussion with her doubts.
Rosa Díez's party offers at least a little more than illusion.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
05 Hyundai Elantra Overheating
I love analyzing polls, and that's what I've been doing for the last 4 years. And these last few weeks more, if possible. All the polls say will win the PSOE, by little, but you will win. I think so too. But do not rule out can win the PP. I tend to take into account what the polls say, but I'm skeptical. There are things that clearly do not add polls. For example, it is very common in discussions between the two leading candidates, as was the Zapatero-Rajoy on Monday, supporters of each party says it has looked better the candidate of his party, regardless if truth has been better in the debate. It is very common, but even the biggest supporters of a party may give a more objective view of the debate. Was the case of debate Solbes Pizarro and where a majority of people gave Solbes winner, and I think was better in the debate. I like a lot more ideas than those of Solbes Pizarro, Pizarro and I think you can do much better than Solbes, however, Solbes, in this debate was better. We are looking at who communicated better. In the case of debate Rajoy-Zapatero, Rajoy was clearly better. However, the polls showed winning with Zapatero. That is, the polls do not say it all.
is what happens with the voting intention polls. If today go to results published by El País , it says that the PSOE win by 42.9% of the vote compared to 38.8% of PP. This is simply impossible. In past elections there was a shift in favor of the PSOE, which won with 42.59% of the vote, and the PP was left with a 37.71. Then we find that the poll El Pais says that the PSOE will win with a higher score than that obtained in the last election. That do not believe anyone.
In the last elections took place at 3 days before the election the biggest terrorist attack in the history of Europe, the PSOE was able to communicate that the executive of the PP was lying, and that was a huge turnaround for the PSOE, was to vote more people, many who had planned to vote for the PP changed their vote or abstained. In the first case I think it is clear that the PSOE will favor a high turnout, just have to go to results 2000 elections, and can see that there was an abstention 31.29% compared to 24.34% in 2004, severely damaging the PSOE as the difference in votes was about to 3,000,000 votes 3 million vote difference! !, and in the case of PP there was only a difference of 700,000 votes. The survey of The Country expected a 75%, which is very unlikely to occur.
In the second case, I found this situation to people close to me, and others who say that many well-known act. All surveys show that the PP is more faithful to vote PSOE. World published a story a few days ago which echoed that 7.7% of PSOE voters in recent elections change the vote after the debate . In most of the faithful to vote polling shows that loyalty to vote for the PSOE is 60% and PP of about 80%. And we must add that there is a percentage of people who hide their vote, and this is usually for the PP.
I include the case of UPyD. It's a shame that hardly appears in the polls, but this match is going to take some votes from the PP and PSOE. I'd love to know what percentage that takes the PSOE and the PP respectively. UPyD It was supposed to disgruntled party PSOE, but I think there will be more older voters than the PSOE PP. (It would be my case if he could vote. Since PP would have voted in 2004, and UPyD now.) In any case, this match will be against the PSOE and the nationalists. It's one more vote to oust ZP, which is the main thing in this election. And I think they can get a seat.
The key will be at the level of participation. The newspaper ABC , for example, in a poll predicts a 70-71% stake . And I think that with that level of participation would win the PP. Not reach 75% of the 2004 election, or to 68% in 2000, but will be in between.
I fear he will win the PSOE, or prefer to think that to get used to the idea. But I think the polls, all, overestimate the vote to Zapatero, and next Sunday the PP will get more votes than the polls say.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)