General Election 2017

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

You let us brutalize the vulnerable, inside trade, bend over for the Saudis and tear foxes to shreds for kicks, and you might get to keep what you've got?

You're not going to be shouting about it.

Slightly confused, Dave.

My point is that, should it be a Tory majority of 80/90 or more, they (the Tories) will be telling us afterwards that obviously the campaign was fine, their messages were accepted and endorsed by 'the people', that their 'strong 'n' stable' thing triumphed and that 'the will of the people' has spoken overwhelmingly in favour of May and her party.

They won't be shouting about their policies or even what they actually intend to do, they'll just be telling us how 'significant' an election victory in the 'most significant election in her [May's] lifetime' it was - though I still think they'll also be plotting behind the scenes to have May being replaced at an appropriate (for them) time.

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

Oh absolutely. There are staunch Labour fans that will vote for them regardless.

I'm just at a loss how anyone can think she's a good leader. Even if I didn't find her politics vile, I could see she **** hopeless. It's painfully obvious. Even last night was clear, how strong must a leader be to dodge being visible amongst their rivals and to the public?

Yeah I don't disagree. She's appalling, and her and the Tories in general are coming off very badly.

[magnkarl]

3 minutes ago, Chindie said:

They seem to think Brexit is a magic word that stops people using common sense.

You'd call it dogwhistle stuff, but that's probably giving it too much credit.

Yes of course I'm a vile barely human coward, but Brexit.

I genuinely don't know how anyone can look at her and how she acts and go 'yeah, that's what I want in a leader. Power hungry, cowardly, contemptuous, liberty grabbing, heartless... Perfect'.

Yet apparently a large segment of the population do. I can only assume you could peg a blue rosette on a pig and they'd go for it.

It is an interesting point, however we still have to keep in mind that over half of the referendum vote wanted us to leave. The BBC trying to counter act this by holding the debate in one of the most remain heavy cities in our country hasn't helped calm the seas. They should have held this in neutral territory in one of the contested seats - instead they chose a pro-EU, pro-immigration, pro-labour (together with Lib-Dems) university city. You can argue that people may not like the Conservatives - however stating that the audience last night reflects the population is a pipedream. 

Also, Corbyn has several black spots in his career and policies that people seem to have forgotten. Labour's got the wind in their sails and May is stranded in the middle of the ocean with no weather. For me it doesn't mean that we should stop being critical of Labour.

And saying that Labour aren't using cliches is a massive reach. The way Corbyn uses key phrases like "fair" "everyone" "inclusive" etc over and over, with no answers for how he's going to fund it all is just as much a cliche and a reach for the younger voters than what Theresa is doing with Brexiteers.

[Davkaus]

1 minute ago, magnkarl said:

with no answers for how he's going to fund it all

Have you had your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears?

[Chindie]

I don't even particularly rate Corbyn but he's pissing over May from a great height.

[ChrisVillan]

4 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

And saying that Labour aren't using cliches is a massive reach. The way Corbyn uses key phrases like "fair" "everyone" "inclusive" etc over and over, with no answers for how he's going to fund it all is just as much a cliche and a reach for the younger voters than what Theresa is doing with Brexiteers.

Those are words. 

[magnkarl]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

Have you had your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears?

I know he costed much of his manifesto, more than the conservatives. However looking at the calculations for the childcare policy for example shows that the math is extremely biased and probably won't hold up. He's added policy in the manifesto that he thought would appeal to young people - there's nothing wrong with that. But I think you'll find that looking at it with some realism shows some gaps in both where he's going to fund it and how he's costed the policy.

[MCU]

Regarding where's the money coming from; getting rid of Trident would be absolutely ridiculous, Corbyn saying basically we won't use it is irrelevant, it's called a deterrent because that's what it is, it deters. 

[Dr_Pangloss]

Corbyn is doing far more to elucidate his policies and their respective sources of revenue than May is. May's domestic policies amount to 'we will get back to you' (e.g. Social Care) and the belief in the 'magic Brexit money tree' - i.e. that her unique negotiation skills will unlock the best deal (including the possibility of no deal) that will drive economic growth and revenues - despite not actually saying how she will do that. At least Corbyn is clear that he will seek tariff free trade with the EU. 

Edited June 1, 2017 by Dr_Pangloss

[Dr_Pangloss]

2 minutes ago, Warnock said:

Regarding where's the money coming from; getting rid of Trident would be absolutely ridiculous, Corbyn saying basically we won't use it is irrelevant, it's called a deterrent because that's what it is, it deters. 

Fairly sure his manifesto says he will not scrap it.

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

To be fair i didnt corbyn didnt say that much. Rudd was hopeless (but at least she had the guts to attend unlikr her boss) as was farron but i think some are over hyping corbyn he wasnt impressive either. Only caroline lucas spoke well and looked like a prime minster out of the lot.

Corbyn performed better in the other debate in my view.

If I was marking their performances (i.e. ignoring their policies and records) I'd give the highest score to Leanne wood last night, she was really good. She skewered nuttals and Corbyn several times. Next, Caroline Lucas who I agree spoke very well, then the SNP man and Farron both did quite well, Corbyn 5th, and equal last Rudd and Nuttals. None of them were terrible or disastrous. At the end they each got 30 seconds to say their message. Corbyn was spot on 30 seconds, none of the others were, though they were all close. I think that shows how much Corbyn has practiced, which suggests 2 things - firstly that he or his team was maybe always planning for attending  last night, and secondly that he's cottoned on that being a shambling, scruffy rebel, as he was, had to stop. He's far better prepared and his demeanour is much better with interviewers and so on. He's improved a lot, he's realised he needs to look the part and act the part. 

[peterms]

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

26 minutes ago, villaglint said:

Well not ON a pig no. 

Abbot?

[darrenm]

40 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

but there is certain bias towards labour as well.  The mirror is anti conservatives just like how the torygraph is anti-labour. So works both ways

Yesterday was very biased towards Labour. If that had halpened in a live debate against corbyn everyone would be  moaning. That at least should have been neutral in my view.

There's the Mirror and.... the Independent a bit recently and the Guardian has stopped attacking Corbyn for a bit.

Other than that it's The Telegraph, Time, Express, Sun, Daily Mail, Metro, all rabidly against Labour. It's astoundingly one-sided.

The TV channels have been pretty balanced save for the odd ITV and BBC news item which has been a bit oddly produced in Tory favour.

Definitely doesn't work both ways. Not to anywhere near the same levels anyway. The crowd last night was just pretty anti-Tory as already said. Their supporters tolerate the current lot, other supporters really hate the Tories.

[ml1dch]

18 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

It is an interesting point, however we still have to keep in mind that over half of the referendum vote wanted us to leave. The BBC trying to counter act this by holding the debate in one of the most remain heavy cities in our country hasn't helped calm the seas. They should have held this in neutral territory in one of the contested seats - instead they chose a pro-EU, pro-immigration, pro-labour (together with Lib-Dems) university city. You can argue that people may not like the Conservatives - however stating that the audience last night reflects the population is a pipedream.

It was an independently selected audience, picked to match declared voting intentions in line with national demographics.

But still, I'm sure you know best. They probably got an intern to round up a few hundred bodies from the local Student Union is how the audience was actually picked. Well, because it's obvious. Lefty BBC, innit.

[blandy]

17 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

And saying that Labour aren't using cliches is a massive reach

Agreed. "For the many not the few", "the tories are weak on the strong, and strong on the weak", "hitting the poorest hardest" and many more. But there is a difference, and the difference is difference ( sorry ). Labour, greens, lib dems, etc. are all talking about how they'd do major things differently and they're offering "hope". The tories are offering only slogans and fear. They're doing that because it worked last time. But I think they've blundered. It seems like, by taking it to extremes with their strong and stable guff, they've sort of been found out, people laugh at them when they say it. They contrast behaviour with slogans and laugh again, they listen for any hint of actual policy detail and find none. The pm hiding away is becoming a widely spread bit of knowledge, the poll messages of the tories "blowing it" are starting to get out there. I assume they'll do what they always do and stoke up their bile through their tame papers and put out the usual nasty stuff at every opportunity. But they're making a right mess of things. 

[TrentVilla]

 

I wonder what the shortest tenure is of any PM to win an election? As I think May will win then be brought down by her own party.

[TrentVilla]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

 But there is a difference, and the difference is difference ( sorry ). 

Bravo... 

[Chindie]

No May is better than a bad May.

[mjmooney]

It's quite amusing. It was obvious from about three years ago that she was trying to morph herself into the next Thatcher with the leadership in mind. And it worked. Unfortunately for her, it seems to have dawned on her that a string of pearls isn't enough. Thatcher (for all the fact that I despised her) was a smart and ruthless operator, hard as nails. Mother Theresa is about as hard as a Mister Whippy in a microwave. Goner.