Romney actually has some fans in Poland

[Supersonic]

England turned out bad because of a rabid and liberal British press.

Hahah what? If anything, the conservative papers were even more critical of him than the left-wing ones!

There's barely such a thing as small-c conservatives in Britain.

Britain is one of the most small-c countries in the world.

It's why we still have things like the House of Lords, Monarchy and a FPTP electoral system.

[Supersonic]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Inertia and traditional conservatism in the UK can arguably be seen as one and the same. For better or worse.

England turned out bad because of a rabid and liberal British press.

Hahah what? If anything, the conservative papers were even more critical of him than the left-wing ones!

There's barely such a thing as small-c conservatives in Britain.

Britain is one of the most small-c countries in the world.

It's why we still have things like the House of Lords, Monarchy and a FPTP electoral system.

Can any of those first two say no to the House of Commons on a major issue? Does anything restrict the ability of the Commons to do something other then precedent and tradition, which are things that can be overturned with a vote of the said body?

The House of Lords, as of now, can vote down Commons passed bills, but this only sends it back to the original chamber to 'rethink'. Usually the government tries, and usually succeeds, in overturning votes by the House of Lords. One example of the Lords causing a government 'rethink' was in 2008 when Gordon Brown had to back down over the 72 (?) day detention without trial bill, it was reduced to 24 days I believe.

The Monarchy technically can veto any bill, but hasn't done since the 1710's or so. So it's a non-factor. Although the Monarch is informed of all major government decisions. If a government goes all Nazi-crazy though, then I presume the Queen would exercise her reserve powers.

To the second question, since Parliament is sovereign, anything can be passed by the Commons, heck even the Scottish Parliament could be legally abolished by the House. While this won't happen, technically, no, nothing restricts the power of the Commons. (A case can be made for EU-made laws overriding UK law, but that's another debate).

[Supersonic]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Inertia and traditional conservatism in the UK can arguably be seen as one and the same. For better or worse.

England turned out bad because of a rabid and liberal British press.

Hahah what? If anything, the conservative papers were even more critical of him than the left-wing ones!

There's barely such a thing as small-c conservatives in Britain.

Britain is one of the most small-c countries in the world.

It's why we still have things like the House of Lords, Monarchy and a FPTP electoral system.

Can any of those first two say no to the House of Commons on a major issue? Does anything restrict the ability of the Commons to do something other then precedent and tradition, which are things that can be overturned with a vote of the said body?

The House of Lords, as of now, can vote down Commons passed bills, but this only sends it back to the original chamber to 'rethink'. Usually the government tries, and usually succeeds, in overturning votes by the House of Lords. One example of the Lords causing a government 'rethink' was in 2008 when Gordon Brown had to back down over the 72 (?) day detention without trial bill, it was reduced to 24 days I believe.

The Monarchy technically can veto any bill, but hasn't done since the 1710's or so. So it's a non-factor. Although the Monarch is informed of all major government decisions. If a government goes all Nazi-crazy though, then I presume the Queen would exercise her reserve powers.

To the second question, since Parliament is sovereign, anything can be passed by the Commons, heck even the Scottish Parliament could be legally abolished by the House. While this won't happen, technically, no, nothing restricts the power of the Commons. (A case can be made for EU-made laws overriding UK law, but that's another debate).

In Britain, criticisms of Constitution being unwritten come primarily from the left, correct?

Hmm, a small minority of left wing, and by that I mean, the Labour Party, criticises the constitutional settlement. Most Liberals (UK centrists, although some may call them faux-Tories post 2010), favour a big re-hash of the constitution. I'm talking, fully written, US style with a bill of rights. Elected Lords with extended powers etc, etc.

[Supersonic]

What I can say, from my own experiences, is that among grassroots Conservative Party opinion, views of President Obama are rather low indeed. Generally I've heard the term 'socialist' and 'big government' thrown around alot, also he's perceived as being rather 'anti-British' for what it's worth.

However views on Romney are rather mixed, some Conservatives, like myself, would support the GOP, while others are raving Gary Johnson fans. A minority think the Republicans are 'racist hicks', so they back the President.

[Supersonic]

British opinion on immigration is more conservative than America as a whole, and right wing opinion as exemplified by the Sun, Mail (especially) and Express much more so.

Immigration is one of the few instances of British conservatism, if such a thing can truly be defined, that is to the right of the GOP.