General Election 2017

[Demitri_C]

2 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Imagine having to vote for Diane Abbott to prevent the Tories winning. That's the predicament I'm in.

You poor sod

[theboyangel]

It's happening!

mps have voted in favour (522 for 13 against) of the election.

brace yourselves for 8 weeks of bullshit, back stabbing and promises just waiting to be broken!

 

[StefanAVFC]

The 13 who voted against:

Quote

 

Nine Labour MPs: 

1.       Ronnie Campbell

2.       Ann Clwyd

3.       Paul Farrelly

4.       Jim Fitzpatrick

5.       Clive Lewis

6.       Fiona Mactaggart

7.       Liz McInnes

8.       Dennis Skinner

9.       Graham Stringer

 

Three Independent MPs:

1.       Lady Slyvia Hermon

2.       Natalie McGarry (suspended SNP)

3.       Michelle Thomson (suspended SNP)

 

One SLDP MP: 

1.       Dr Alasdair McDonnell

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-39628713

Edited April 19, 2017 by StefanAVFC

[PaulC]

1 hour ago, theboyangel said:

I'm in the same boat as a lot of people.

there's no real competition for May at the moment, partially hence her reasons for having an election. I can't stand the woman for several reasons and don't want her in power. 

my problem is, I live in a small Devonshire town which is predominantly Tory. However the local mp is really decent, likeable and actually helpful in the community so I have no reason to vote against him. 

I like the bloke and would rather him retain his seat than some unknown who may not give a toss about the area I live in. 

At least my Tory cares!

and that's the way people should vote.

[jon_c]

My constituency is a choice of Plaid or the Lib Dems.

Democracy is the worst. 

[Awol]

I wonder if the Russians have the bandwidth to cope with rigging the French, German and U.K. elections simultaneously? 

If the SNP take Bedfordshire I might start believing in the power of Putin's propaganda.

[PompeyVillan]

Last election mine was Tory by a huge majority, UKIP and then Labour. And for what it's worth my MP has never rebelled in the commons. He turns and pushes blue when he's told to. And that'll do him nicely thank you very much. He went to the Baftas though so it's not all doom and gloom.

[terrytini]

6 hours ago, Awol said:

See that's exactly what I mean about you being hysterical. 

"Inciting hatred!" Were you incited to hatred? Was anyone on this forum? Was anyone at all, or have you just made an assumption about how it made people less intelligent than you feel? 

Have a day off mate, there will be plenty of stuff to genuinely outraged about over the next few years.

Having read the debate between the two of you I have to say I 'enjoyed' reading it.  I do take your points on press freedom and the libertarian approach on board and fully see the merit of your argument.

But IMO you are misguided if you can't see the threat this increasingly grotesque 'journalism' is to all our well beings with its insidious poisoning of what passes for debate/ news/ information.

And it's got nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with engagement, fear, and ignorance. I've three girls and a lad, there's little to choose intelligence wise but two of the girls lap this stuff up as if it's gospel. I've three brothers, and one talks as if his entire education is from reading this stuff.

However 'elitist' it sounds there are many many ways people of all sorts need protection from others, and there are many many ways society needs protecting from potential dangers within.

Whilst criminalising  articles appearing in Newspapers would be unforgivable and dangerous, there certainly needs to be a beefing up of the current scrutiny and remedial avenues available. There is a tighter set of controls and available actions on VT than there is - effectively - on Headlines like these, and real people don't have the use of an ignore button where headlines are concerned.

Every advertiser, politician, trader, and pop star know the value of publicity (and, of course, propaganda).

And if maybe the Mail goes too far, well that's okay with those on the side of extremism ( of any political leaning) because little by little they push back what's acceptable.

And the idea that he/we should not worry because of how much worse could happen is the most dangerous of all in my view.

 

[terrytini]

4 hours ago, Straggler said:

Really, really.  The last time was at a dinner party at a friends house in a leafy suburb of Oxford.  I knew about half of the people there and the ones I didn't know started talking about Brexit from a leave stance.  I chipped in with my 2 cents and they just turned on me.  Not a physical threat or anything like that, but they went for me like they had found a traitor in their midst with much of the rhetoric that you have seen in the press used.  I felt so bad for my host as it basically ended the evening right there as the rift in the room just wasn't going to go away.  It's just not normal.  It may be that I have been unlucky with some of the people I have met and I have had reasonable debates with leavers too, so I'm not saying it is anything like universal, but I have experienced it. 

 

I had to leave my own brothers funeral wake after twenty minutes due to the aggression and nastiness from others ( including one of my brothers) when they became aware I voted remain and was happy with Asian immigration ( oddly given as part of the reason they wanted Brexit).... and European immigration.....and no, I didn't raise it, or make a clever point, or anything....it was just clear that I wasn't welcome.

But the thing is, I can picture it happening the other way as well........the trouble with this screeching bile from the press is that it de-civilises us all.

[terrytini]

4 hours ago, LakotaDakota said:

this ok then?

You can't see the difference ?

Im staggered.

And that's without getting into the fact that if you trawl the last forty years you'll find a handful of such articles knocking one way and literally hundreds going the 'other' way.

[terrytini]

3 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

previously you've used

Enemies of the Nation

now

Enemies of the State

 

the headline was

Enemies of the people

 

I just feel that the pedantry is important seeing as your post asked they  simply report facts

 

 

 

Perhaps that's part of the danger ?

Most people will remember the sentiment, not the precise words.

Eg, my daughter said " the judges tried to stop the Referendum result so they are the enemy, they shouldn't be trying to stop it"

Hands up if that's healthy, whichever side you are on ?

Edited April 19, 2017 by terrytini
Added a closing sentence

[dAVe80]

My Labour MP has a small majority, so the Toreis will be targeting us for sure. I could even see them bringing in a decent candidate (by which I mean, someone better than the chinless ****witt they put up last time). Our big advantage is that we have far more members in the constituency, than the rest of the parties put together.

[tonyh29]

Just now, terrytini said:

Perhaps that's part of the danger ?

Most people will remember the sentiment, not the precise words.

In fairness I also get annoyed when people quote "you don't make friends with salad "  when it's actually "you don't win friends with salad "

but , I dunno , I'm more of the school of Yesterday’s news is tomorrow’s fish-and-chip paper , for sure there are some people who are more alert to current affairs , but the vast majority have probably already forgotten those headlines and moved on to us all being killed by Kim Jong Un or whatever

 

 

[LakotaDakota]

13 minutes ago, terrytini said:

You can't see the difference ?

Im staggered.

And that's without getting into the fact that if you trawl the last forty years you'll find a handful of such articles knocking one way and literally hundreds going the 'other' way.

didn't trawl anything, typed anti tory front page into google, they were a couple of the first ones....

[terrytini]

1 minute ago, LakotaDakota said:

didn't trawl anything, typed anti tory front page into google, they were a couple of the first ones....

Yes sorry it reads like I said you did, I dint mean that. 

I mean/ meant that IF you did, you'd find the imbalance I've suggested. In fact just go through any weeks headlines and you will.

Sometime back there was a big study done by some media centre and it was about 85/90 % of headlines were shall we say pro- right/ anti left ( using those terms as a very crude shorthand ).

Anyway, the imbalance is a secondary issue, of those in question one set is (IMO of course ) uglier by several million degrees !!

[terrytini]

As for the election, if anyone from Labour, the Greens, or Lib Dems even pretends it's about anything other than Brexit they are either ignorant or untruthful.

Everything else pales.

As such, as a Labour supporter, who wants - at the least - as close ties as possible and ideally a second referendum, I will vote Lib Dem.  And just hope others do the same.  And I can't say how much I will hate doing that......it stinks basically.  If Labour have any sense left at all they will agree the Lib Dem policy on EU AND have a non competing pact at any close seats.

 If they don't they've all sold us down the river.

[NurembergVillan]

39 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

In fairness I also get annoyed when people quote "you don't make friends with salad "  when it's actually "you don't win friends with salad "

but , I dunno , I'm more of the school of Yesterday’s news is tomorrow’s fish-and-chip paper , for sure there are some people who are more alert to current affairs , but the vast majority have probably already forgotten those headlines and moved on to us all being killed by Kim Jong Un or whatever

You genuinely don't win friends with salad.  Or conversations about politics!

I agree with you in terms of the news - stories come and go.  Celebrity super-injunctions, serial killers, whatever, they all have one individual or a small group as the focal point and a particular issue that makes it newsworthy (or not, in most cases!).

With the likes of the Mail, Sun and Express though, it's shallow rhetoric and often founded in selective truth or outright lies.  It's aimed at broader groups of people, and the definitions have very fuzzy edges - "Migrants", "Remoaners".  It's death by a thousand paper cuts, as the "facts" of each story become irrelevant and forgotten but the more bullshit that's piled on, the harder it is to get the stench out.

The division is intentional too.  As humans, we love an escape goat (go on, treat yourself to some pedantry there ;)) and so these outlets are on the one hand showing people how tough their lives are, and on the other giving them someone to blame - all the while diverting attention away from the corporate pigs who are really pulling all the strings.

We're living in a post-facts world, where yesterdays news is now also yesterday's fish and chip paper, and the headlines are all that matters.

[a m ole]

If she's not willing to debate, why is the election even happening?

Its proof if we needed it that this is nothing more than a self-serving exercise.

Shes trying to remove the fact that she is an unelected PM from her record, and do it in the easiest way possible. Force it through in 8 weeks, don't bother campaigning, hide from debates and ride off the back of Brexit.

What a slug.

[Awol]

Apparently (and not seen it yet) wee Timmy Farron has refused to say gay sex is not a sin (he's a committed Christian) when questioned by the Channel 4 news' morality police. 

I wonder how such blatant homophobia will sit with Remainers thinking of voting Lib Dem? 

An interesting dilemma.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

As for the election, if anyone from Labour, the Greens, or Lib Dems even pretends it's about anything other than Brexit they are either ignorant or untruthful.

Everything else pales.

As such, as a Labour supporter, who wants - at the least - as close ties as possible and ideally a second referendum, I will vote Lib Dem.  And just hope others do the same.  And I can't say how much I will hate doing that......it stinks basically.  If Labour have any sense left at all they will agree the Lib Dem policy on EU AND have a non competing pact at any close seats.

 If they don't they've all sold us down the river.

I dunno - I get the sentiment. But there's kind of two other theories (at least) as to what it's about that I've seen - the imminence of 20 odd tories being charged for election fraud (under consideration by the cps, apparently) - and what that might do to her majority - presumably if they were charged, they'd have to be suspended and thus unable to vote (with the Gov't) until cleared or locked away and hoofed out. That would mean a minority gov't which could then get nothing done. So when you add that to the shambles that is Labour - the temptation to get a big majority must be enormous. Cynical as F, but realistically, logical.

The other aspect is that rather than wanting to do nasty hard brexit, she knows that would be mental and wants to get enough "normal" tories in, so that the hard brexit nutters can be sidelined. The stuff the EU has done and said has perhaps focussed the clouded Rule Britannia brains of the people working on Brexit to realise that the outcome is going to be nowhere near the utopia that they promised - so when people realise that they're all going to be unhappy, not just those who voted remain, but a bunch of hacked-off leavers, too. SO do election now to preserve tory rule for the next 5 years, rather than the next 3.