General Election 2017

[darrenm]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

Oh, she could. I wouldn't trust Abbott to run a home office let alone the Home Office.

Fair enough. I doubt Abbott understands the necessary hashtags either.

[Guest av1]

1 minute ago, darrenm said:

He has no ties to terrorist organisations. A lot of shit went on with NI back in the day and lots of people coerced with many less than savoury people. People may be right that he went too far by supporting causes rather than staying neutral but he seems to be guided by his conscience. It's weird that we're arguing what kind of people he kept company with at various points in history while the Tories are actively killing disabled people by ideology choice. While May's husband is directly benefitting from her policies. While they sell arms to Saudi Arabia.

It's a footnote. It's completely inconsequential. What does it have to do with anything now?

It's the desperate distraction technique of a right wing media who have nothing left to throw at him and see the polls narrowing. And anyone making a big deal out of it is just falling into their trap. It's amazing the amount of limited thinkers who are suddenly parroting the 'terrorist sympathiser' stuff without knowing any of the background. 

As said mate, I've voted labour all my life. I would never, ever vote for the tories, but I just don't feel comfortable voting for Corbyn. And I'm not going to vote for a leader and a party i don't have faith in just to stop the tories. 

I thought long and hard about it, and I've simply decided not to vote. 

 

[colhint]

8 minutes ago, darrenm said:

He has no ties to terrorist organisations. A lot of shit went on with NI back in the day and lots of people coerced with many less than savoury people. People may be right that he went too far by supporting causes rather than staying neutral but he seems to be guided by his conscience. It's weird that we're arguing what kind of people he kept company with at various points in history while the Tories are actively killing disabled people by ideology choice. While May's husband is directly benefitting from her policies. While they sell arms to Saudi Arabia.

It's a footnote. It's completely inconsequential. What does it have to do with anything now?

It's the desperate distraction technique of a right wing media who have nothing left to throw at him and see the polls narrowing. And anyone making a big deal out of it is just falling into their trap. It's amazing the amount of limited thinkers who are suddenly parroting the 'terrorist sympathiser' stuff without knowing any of the background. 

You talk about May and her Ideological choice. Do you not think mixing with all these terrorist groups isn't an ideological choice?

[darrenm]

3 minutes ago, colhint said:

You talk about May and her Ideological choice. Do you not think mixing with all these terrorist groups isn't an ideological choice?

One is taking money off disabled people, cancer sufferers. The other is a possibly misplaced sense of standing up for the oppressed.

[PompeyVillan]

What a lovely little Conservative narrative this IRA thing is. It taps into fear, national identity and patriotism. 

This is their trump card, and it couldn't have come at a better time when they were faultering badly and the country is in mourning.

If the Tories are putting Amber Rudd up for debate, that's feckin cynical. But it then forces Labour to do the same. I think they'll put John McDonnall forward although it wouldn't hurt to give Angela Raynor another outing. She did well against Rudd on QT.

[PompeyVillan]

18 minutes ago, av1 said:

As said mate, I've voted labour all my life. I would never, ever vote for the tories, but I just don't feel comfortable voting for Corbyn. And I'm not going to vote for a leader and a party i don't have faith in just to stop the tories. 

I thought long and hard about it, and I've simply decided not to vote. 

 

Spoil ballot then, show the parties your dissatisfaction. Let them know that you're listening and that you matter, but disagree with all of them. Otherwise they'll think you don't care.

[darrenm]

21 minutes ago, av1 said:

As said mate, I've voted labour all my life. I would never, ever vote for the tories, but I just don't feel comfortable voting for Corbyn. And I'm not going to vote for a leader and a party i don't have faith in just to stop the tories. 

I thought long and hard about it, and I've simply decided not to vote. 

 

That's fair enough mate. Your choice. I would say that not voting for Labour is almost by default a vote for the Tories. But like Pompey says, if you feel that strongly a huge cock on your ballot sheet is in order

[darrenm]

6 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said:

What a lovely little Conservative narrative this IRA thing is. It taps into fear, national identity and patriotism. 

This is their trump card, and it couldn't have come at a better time when they were faultering badly and the country is in mourning.

If the Tories are putting Amber Rudd up for debate, that's feckin cynical. But it then forces Labour to do the same. I think they'll put John McDonnall forward although it wouldn't hurt to give Angela Raynor another outing. She did well against Rudd on QT.

Yeah I underestimated Crosby. He's tweeting constant lies from CCHQ and pretend MP accounts and they're getting ridiculed on Twitter. But using the recent terrorism fear to then tell people they should be afraid of Corbyn for some reason they won't really say because of his old irrelevant links to McGuinness and Adams in the papers is working. The BoJo one is particularly amusing though e.g.

 

[peterms]

12 minutes ago, darrenm said:

That's fair enough mate. Your choice. I would say that not voting for Labour is almost by default a vote for the Tories. But like Pompey says, if you feel that strongly a huge cock on your ballot sheet is in order

Every count I've attended has had cocks on several ballot papers.  They are briefly shown to representatives from each party so that they can be agreed as a spoilt ballot.  They are not judged for aesthetics or artistic merit, and no message is taken from them.

One word of warning.  If the cock is drawn in the box next to a candidate's name, it will be claimed as a vote for that candidate, and almost certainly agreed to be so.  If it is partly in that box but not another one, or can otherwise be interpreted as arguably a mark against the name of one and only one candidate, it will be contested, and it will be a matter of judgement and discussion among the parties as to how it is counted.

[jon_c]

26 minutes ago, darrenm said:

That's fair enough mate. Your choice. I would say that not voting for Labour is almost by default a vote for the Tories. But like Pompey says, if you feel that strongly a huge cock on your ballot sheet is in order

I only had a choice of Lib Dem or Plaid in the locals and that is exactly what I did. There were only two spoilt votes in my area too. The other one was my other half. 

[PompeyVillan]

14 minutes ago, peterms said:

Every count I've attended has had cocks on several ballot papers.  They are briefly shown to representatives from each party so that they can be agreed as a spoilt ballot.  They are not judged for aesthetics or artistic merit, and no message is taken from them.

One word of warning.  If the cock is drawn in the box next to a candidate's name, it will be claimed as a vote for that candidate, and almost certainly agreed to be so.  If it is partly in that box but not another one, or can otherwise be interpreted as arguably a mark against the name of one and only one candidate, it will be contested, and it will be a matter of judgement and discussion among the parties as to how it is counted.

For most blokes that'll likely be the most their cock has ever been discussed or contested.

Edited May 28, 2017 by PompeyVillan

[Dodgyknees]

The Tories don't have to have good policies, they just need to be good at lying.

[darrenm]

29 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said:

For most blokes that'll likely be the most their cock has ever been discussed or contested.

Tory voters? 

[PompeyVillan]

SNP will do well again this election, but I'm bored of the "we're working on it" narrative. Andrew Neill let Nicola Sturgeon off on that account.

Labour have failed large parts of the country, including Scotland. No surprise Scotland have abandoned Labour and gone SNP. It's hardly Scotland's fault either that Labour can't convince England to vote for them. 

However, a vote for the SNP will only serve to continue to return a Conservative government in Westminster in my opinion. Something they strongly oppose.

And in terms of another IndyRef, they need to be careful of what they wish for. Lose another one and they could have an air of UKIP about them. 

Edited May 28, 2017 by PompeyVillan

[peterms]

Hi from Scotland. 

SNP had a lot of goodwill after devo.  That hasn't been lost, but is being dissipated, slowly.  People are wary of being too critical, given the utter dreadfulness of ths tory government and the desire to see the most visible alternative doing better.

However, the SNP lack a coherent economic narrative (laughably exposed on the currency issue) and have no alternative economic theory.  So they try to ameliorate the worst excesses of tory nastiness, without actually confronting it, despite the rhetoric.  Sticking plasters rather than sticking it to them.

Labour is currently moribund up here, lacking autonomy, dieection, amd a distinct philosophy.  Like the SNP, they have been cowed into not challenging the absurd austerity policy except in rhetoric alone.

These things wil change, and some of us are working on it, but they won't change in two weeks. 

The tory vote will consolidate, they will direct their legions of zombie voters effectively, they will win a couple of seats, but it will be no big deal.  The real battle is in England.

[a m ole]

looking forward to 'May Vs Corbyn' on C4, when's the weigh in?

[ml1dch]

32 minutes ago, peterms said:

However, the SNP lack a coherent economic narrative (laughably exposed on the currency issue) and have no alternative economic theory. 

Didn't you get the memo?

Based on recent votes that's exactly the position you need to be in to convince people to vote in your favour.

[darrenm]

10 minutes ago, a m ole said:

looking forward to 'May Vs Corbyn' on C4, when's the weigh in?

I am as well. I'm sure the Tory puppeteers wouldn't allow any format where May would have to answer anything non vetted so it'll probably be a bit of a letdown.

[PompeyVillan]

2 hours ago, peterms said:

Hi from Scotland. 

SNP had a lot of goodwill after devo.  That hasn't been lost, but is being dissipated, slowly.  People are wary of being too critical, given the utter dreadfulness of ths tory government and the desire to see the most visible alternative doing better.

However, the SNP lack a coherent economic narrative (laughably exposed on the currency issue) and have no alternative economic theory.  So they try to ameliorate the worst excesses of tory nastiness, without actually confronting it, despite the rhetoric.  Sticking plasters rather than sticking it to them.

Labour is currently moribund up here, lacking autonomy, dieection, amd a distinct philosophy.  Like the SNP, they have been cowed into not challenging the absurd austerity policy except in rhetoric alone.

These things wil change, and some of us are working on it, but they won't change in two weeks. 

The tory vote will consolidate, they will direct their legions of zombie voters effectively, they will win a couple of seats, but it will be no big deal.  The real battle is in England.

"It's all Westminster's fault" is getting old too and may well play into Labour and Conservative hands. 

My feeling is let Scotland have another independence referendum if they really want one. But post Brexit. They do keep electing a nationalist party after all. 

Then Scotland will either be free of the shackles of the evil English (and much, much poorer as a result) or they'll be forced to be pragmatic like the rest of us.

Thing is it's a poisonous issue in England because nobody wants to be the ones that can be blamed for breaking the UK up so nobody is going to willingly offer another referendum up. 

Unless there's a coalition of chaos of course.

[blandy]

20 hours ago, peterms said:

 

I like and rate Caroline Lucas and detest Theresa May, but that kind of tweet is ludicrous. The pm doesn't decide who goes on watch lists, (or the state of alert for that matter). It doesn't really help or advance anyone's cause to lie like that, or propagate lies.

if the twit hadn't  mentioned May, then fair point to a degree.