General Election, June 8th

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Buce said:

 

When the govt has the most to lose by changing the system, you know it's not going to happen.

Oh definately. Although coupled with a government's ability to alter boundaries the current system is basically a fix. If you get one good majority you can just move the constituency lines to make it easier to defend. 

[Alf Bentley]

On 4/26/2017 at 19:31, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

To the young people of today, the 1950s will seem like a another age. For us "Oldies" it was an era of childhood that seems like yesterday. From waking up to ice on the inside of the window, washing in tin baths in front of a coal fire, and spoonfuls of cod-liver oil, home life was a million miles away from today.

 

I have wonderful memories of train rides (steam trains, with the distinctive smell of steam and soot),  short trousers, many cobbled streets, the smell of iodine put on bumps and bruises, and kiddies from all backgrounds playing happily together ,. our games would be simple, and boring to kids of today, but they remain happily implanted in my memory, The was so much more open spaces, that became the wild West, or the jungles of Africa. There were our little gangs, that had hideouts, and a girl member to keep it clean.

 

Televisions were a luxury, and as such were far more enjoyable if you had a friend whose parents had one, so we could watch our favourite cowboy, or maybe Muffin the Mule, or Billy Bunter.. The smell of home cooking was awesome. Saturday morning meant the pictures, and for sixpence ( around two and a half pence in todays money) we would have three hours of entertainment. Indoors we would play board games, play with  "Dinky" cars, and read the masses of comics that were around then, swopping with one another.

 

School days meant a breakfast of home made porridge, bread and dripping, or syrup on toast. Believe it or not it tasted wonderful to me. Sunday lunch was usually roast beef, the cheapest meat in those days!

 

Most of the people in the streets would leave a door unlocked when at home, so that any neighbour could just walk straight in for a cuppa, and long conversations would ensue, often to the clicking of knitting needles, making my next school jumper. On school days you woke up quickly when the jolly old feet met cold lino, and there was no central heating.

 

Memories of the war still lingered, with the bomb sights to play hide and seek in, Rationing was still quite common, and I well remember cutting my coupons out of the sweet rationing book, really excited about getting the two ounces worth that were allowed per week.. We still had a fair deal of horses and carts, delivering such things as ginger beer, milk, fruit and veg, and of course the rag and bone man, I loved to dash out and give the horses a carrot, or drop it into the nose bag they would wear. The postman, the milkman, and telegram boy, all wore smart uniforms, which looked very impressive. As kids we would go from door to door, collecting unwanted newspapers, that we would sell to the fishmonger for a "tanner"

 

I could really write a book, about life then, if I had the time, and what I have mentioned is just the tip of the ice burg. We had great respect for adults, whose life was generally bloody hard, compared to most today. Mum's had to hand wash, and use a hand mangle, unless you were rich, and cook for the family, as the only instant sort of food I remember was fish and chips. Vacuum cleaners were a luxury most people I knew could not afford. The radio was usually all most of us had for light entertainment, although watching for the chimneys sweeps brush to appear coming out of the chimney pot, always amused us kids.

 

The war  years brought communities close together, and this remained until the mid sixties. People would help out others, if they could, and life was so much slower, to the point of being serene. The multiple number of leafy lanes, with no cars racing down them, remain so memorable., with the sweet smelling flowers that covered the banks. Everything was so much slower then. Even the dogs couldn't be bothered to chase the cats.

 

Every one I ever saw in my childhood was white, and even at college many years later, because they were not  there. They were in this country in vastly smaller numbers, but I never encountered any of them. There were; none at my places of education, which is why so many people take exception to my talking of the good old days, where they challenge me on race, as if this was the reason. They didn't experience life then, which was sixty years or so ago, and quite frankly they don't care, which is their misguided prerogative, and attitude. Life was honest, fresh and free for me.

 

It was not all sweetness and light, for I lost my entire family in an accident (Mum, Dad, and two older sisters), spending a few years in a children's home, until I was adopted, after which life became rosy once more.

 

Apart from the latte, I would love to experience my life back then, I will forever love my life in the fifties, and reminisce on an era that forever more, will remain, my England. .I dare say you might think that life then must have been as awful as it was hard, but to me my memories are worth more than gold..

 

 

You and I are poles apart politically but I enjoyed that post, DT. Even if you haven't got the time to write a book, you ought to write down your memories for younger generations of your family or whoever might be interested - or post some more like this on Foxes Talk. A few relations might appreciate it now or in the future, or a few posters on here might. Plus, you might enjoy expressing your memories (and values) through such writing. I say that as I've been doing it myself in fits and starts for years, and enjoy remembering and expressing myself....even if my daughter or whoever ends up throwing it all in the bin! 

 

I'm from the generation behind you (grew up late 60s & 70s) but many of your memories rang true to me: ice on the window, codliver oil (& those little bottles of NHS orange juice), flowery meadows, matchbox cars, dens, comics, chimney sweeps (& coal deliveries), even everyone being white (though I grew up in E. Kent, not Leicester) - when we drove through London en route to my grandparents up North, my brother and I would innocently try to spot some of those exotic Sikhs, a novelty to us! 

 

Having recently lost my parents at the age when you expect to lose them (still a major blow), I can't imagine what it must have been like suddenly losing your parents and sisters at such an early age, even if things worked out well with the adoption eventually. Must have been tough to deal with all that.

 

Some stuff is better these days, some is worse - and some is just different. Good post, though.  

[Guest MattP]

The bookmakers have the Tories as favourites to take Leicester West, that's unbelievable given the majority and that they have a popular local MP.

 

Is the Labour vote really going to collapse that badly in working class areas.

 

From family I've got in New Parks I know a lot won't vote Corbyn, but they mainly just won't at all, will that many really go over the Tories to turn a majority like that?

[Alf Bentley]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

The bookmakers have the Tories as favourites to take Leicester West, that's unbelievable given the majority and that they have a popular local MP.

 

Is the Labour vote really going to collapse that badly in working class areas.

 

From family I've got in New Parks I know a lot won't vote Corbyn, but they mainly just won't at all, will that many really go over the Tories to turn a majority like that?

 

Based on the polls, I'd assumed that Leicester West might be a Tory gain. The Tories won 2 out of 3 Leicester seats in 1983....

 

Just checked the 2015 figures for Leicester West:

- Lab 46.5%

- Con 25.6%

- UKIP 17.2%

 

So, if the Lab vote slips a bit, the Con vote rises a bit & a large slice of the UKIP vote switches to Con, it would certainly be close. 

A well-liked, well-established candidate and/or a well-organised local party can only do a certain amount to mitigate a national swing.

[Harry - LCFC]

21 minutes ago, MattP said:

The bookmakers have the Tories as favourites to take Leicester West, that's unbelievable given the majority and that they have a popular local MP.

 

Is the Labour vote really going to collapse that badly in working class areas.

 

From family I've got in New Parks I know a lot won't vote Corbyn, but they mainly just won't at all, will that many really go over the Tories to turn a majority like that?

I was walking about in my area yesterday and joked to my Dad that a group of Labour canvassers might actually need to knock on doors this time, not at all thinking they would.

 

To be honest that I still think they've got those odds wrong, so I'm gonna go a put a bit on Kendall still being my MP in six weeks' time.

[Guest MattP]

25 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Based on the polls, I'd assumed that Leicester West might be a Tory gain. The Tories won 2 out of 3 Leicester seats in 1983....

 

Just checked the 2015 figures for Leicester West:

- Lab 46.5%

- Con 25.6%

- UKIP 17.2%

 

So, if the Lab vote slips a bit, the Con vote rises a bit & a large slice of the UKIP vote switches to Con, it would certainly be close. 

A well-liked, well-established candidate and/or a well-organised local party can only do a certain amount to mitigate a national swing.

I've little doubt the Labour vote will collapse in Leicester West but I just can't see them going Conservative. 

 

If it does go I dread to think what the national result would be, Tories certainly 400+.

 

7 minutes ago, Harry - LCFC said:

I was walking about in my area yesterday and joked to my Dad that a group of Labour canvassers might actually need to knock on doors this time, not at all thinking they would.

 

To be honest that I still think they've got those odds wrong, so I'm gonna go a put a bit on Kendall still being my MP in six weeks' time.

She barely went out last time, just checked her Twitter and she is already out campaigning, so she clearly knows she'll have to fight for it this time.

 

She's one of the Labour MP's I certainly don't want to see lose her job.

[Guest]

If you can overlook the source, this is actually really quite an interesting article about what the New Labour team now feel about their positive and negatives. It really says why i feel a left leaning government is preferable. I'd prefer to spend more and attempt to achieve a more equal society.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/29/new-labour-20-years-on-tony-blair-david-miliband-peter-mandelson-alastair-campbell

[Buce]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

You and I are poles apart politically but I enjoyed that post, DT. Even if you haven't got the time to write a book, you ought to write down your memories for younger generations of your family or whoever might be interested - or post some more like this on Foxes Talk. A few relations might appreciate it now or in the future, or a few posters on here might. Plus, you might enjoy expressing your memories (and values) through such writing. I say that as I've been doing it myself in fits and starts for years, and enjoy remembering and expressing myself....even if my daughter or whoever ends up throwing it all in the bin! 

 

I'm from the generation behind you (grew up late 60s & 70s) but many of your memories rang true to me: ice on the window, codliver oil (& those little bottles of NHS orange juice), flowery meadows, matchbox cars, dens, comics, chimney sweeps (& coal deliveries), even everyone being white (though I grew up in E. Kent, not Leicester) - when we drove through London en route to my grandparents up North, my brother and I would innocently try to spot some of those exotic Sikhs, a novelty to us! 

 

Having recently lost my parents at the age when you expect to lose them (still a major blow), I can't imagine what it must have been like suddenly losing your parents and sisters at such an early age, even if things worked out well with the adoption eventually. Must have been tough to deal with all that.

 

Some stuff is better these days, some is worse - and some is just different. Good post, though.  

 

Pretty much this.

 

I think DT's post offers an insight into the genesis of his beliefs. I'm not saying that it excuses them, but it does explain them somewhat. My late father came from the generation before DT's generation, and seemed to have the same difficulty in adjusting to evolving attitudes, and language in particular. To the day he died, when he heard or used the word gay, to him it meant happy, carefree, or bright and colourful; what we now call gays were pooftas, people of mixed race were half-caste, and anyone with brown skin was a wog (though in later life he adopted the softer term coloured). Yet he meant no offence by it (he had Indian friends ) and was at the forefront of the fighting when Mosely's Black Shirts came to Leicester.

 

Not all nostalgia is misplaced; personally, I regret the pace of change in my lifetime, and agree with Alf that not all of that change is for the better.

[BlueSi13]

5 hours ago, MattP said:

I've little doubt the Labour vote will collapse in Leicester West but I just can't see them going Conservative. 

 

If it does go I dread to think what the national result would be, Tories certainly 400+.

 

She barely went out last time, just checked her Twitter and she is already out campaigning, so she clearly knows she'll have to fight for it this time.

 

She's one of the Labour MP's I certainly don't want to see lose her job.

I've honestly thought that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi could campaign for Labour in Leicester and be voted in comfortably.

 

The fact that we are honestly talking about a section of this city turning blue is testament to how terminal this could potentially be for Labour.

 

PS like you I don't think it will happen, but remarkable nonetheless.

[Kopfkino]

Sunday Telegraph poll looks a little different to the majority over the last few weeks, 42% Con and 31% Labour. However, it suggests its at 43-32 in London, I'd be surprised if London reflected the country so closely. If Corbyn is losing near 12% in London then I can't imagine he could get anywhere near 31% nationally. It also puts it at 27-16 in Scotland which they suggest would see the Conservatives take 7 seats off SNP.

[Alf Bentley]

10 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

Sunday Telegraph poll looks a little different to the majority over the last few weeks, 42% Con and 31% Labour. However, it suggests its at 43-32 in London, I'd be surprised if London reflected the country so closely. If Corbyn is losing near 12% in London then I can't imagine he could get anywhere near 31% nationally. It also puts it at 27-16 in Scotland which they suggest would see the Conservatives take 7 seats off SNP.

 

I wonder what the sample size per region is for that poll, as several of the regional figures looks seriously weird.

 

Labour is supposedly losing 42%-31%, yet is polling 31% in the East, 30% in the SW and 25% in the SE ?!?

Even in a good year, Labour only gets a smattering of seats in those 3 regions.

I suppose it could be the Brexit effect - Lab vote holding up much better in contented Remain areas, but getting decimated in discontented Leave areas.....but does look odd.

 

And how come Lab is getting 8% in N. Ireland (where it doesn't stand candidates) and Con 6%? 

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Is this not over yet??? 

 

Mean at least each of the EU Referendum, US Presidential Election, French Presidential Election (ongoing) Italian Referendum... even the recent Turkish referendum have been close and have some twists to them.

 

This one however is going to be one long dull slugfest as we hear "strong and stable leadership" mentioned 5 million, four hundred and seventy six thousand, one hundred and twenty two (5,476,122) separate times over the coming weeks.

 

 

[Stadt]

I've seen more moaning about "strong and stable leadership" than her actually saying it

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Wookie said:

I've seen more moaning about "strong and stable leadership" than her actually saying it

I haven't, it's properly doing my head in. Tory party don't seem to have anything to say except that and the entirely invented 'coalition of chaos' (ignoring that fact that the first tory term was the only coalition in history).

[Sharpe's Fox]

10 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I wonder what the sample size per region is for that poll, as several of the regional figures looks seriously weird.

 

Labour is supposedly losing 42%-31%, yet is polling 31% in the East, 30% in the SW and 25% in the SE ?!?

Even in a good year, Labour only gets a smattering of seats in those 3 regions.

I suppose it could be the Brexit effect - Lab vote holding up much better in contented Remain areas, but getting decimated in discontented Leave areas.....but does look odd.

 

And how come Lab is getting 8% in N. Ireland (where it doesn't stand candidates) and Con 6%? 

Ed Miliband got 30.4%. Can't see JC beating Miliband.

[Guest MattP]

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 44% (-1)
LAB: 31% (+2)
LDEM: 11% (+1)
UKIP: 6% (-1)
GRN: 2% (-1)

(via YouGov / 27 - 28 Apr)

 

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 47% (+2)
LAB: 30% (+4)
LDEM: 8% (-3)
UKIP: 7% (-2)

(via Opinium)
Changes with April

 

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 42%
LAB: 31%
LDEM: 10%
UKIP: 8%

(via ORB)

 

@Facecloth

 

Labour now hitting a consistent 30% so looking much better for them, although it's still a comfortable Tory majority on these polls.

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

I haven't, it's properly doing my head in. Tory party don't seem to have anything to say except that and the entirely invented 'coalition of chaos' (ignoring that fact that the first tory term was the only coalition in history).

They'll be some people who still haven't heard it, so they keep repeating it, that's what politicians do.

 

Problem for Corbyn is its true, even the most ardent of his fans will surely admit he's not going to win 326 seats so the election has only two outcomes, a Conservative government or a left wing coalition.

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 44% (-1)
LAB: 31% (+2)
LDEM: 11% (+1)
UKIP: 6% (-1)
GRN: 2% (-1)

(via YouGov / 27 - 28 Apr)

 

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 47% (+2)
LAB: 30% (+4)
LDEM: 8% (-3)
UKIP: 7% (-2)

(via Opinium)
Changes with April

 

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 42%
LAB: 31%
LDEM: 10%
UKIP: 8%

(via ORB)

 

@Facecloth

 

Labour now hitting a consistent 30% so looking much better for them, although it's still a comfortable Tory majority on these polls.

It's not the tories they are taking votes off though, by the looks of that the tories are about the same or gaining too. 

[Nick]

May on Marr not looking particularly convincing I thought.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

9 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

May on Marr not looking particularly convincing I thought.

She never looks convincing anywhere other than when she's surrounded by Tory party activists.

 

It's amazing how blind a nation can be to someone's obvious lack of substance.

[Guest MattP]

11 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

She never looks convincing anywhere other than when she's surrounded by Tory party activists.

 

It's amazing how blind a nation can be to someone's obvious lack of substance.

I don't think people are blind to it, it's just far better than any alternative offered. 

[Alf Bentley]

9 hours ago, Wookie said:

I've seen more moaning about "strong and stable leadership" than her actually saying it

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-election-campaign-north-england-banners-without-conservative-branding-general-election-thersea-a7708831.html

 

"The Conservatives have dropped their party name from some campaign materials in the north of England, images suggest.

Theresa May visited Leeds on Thursday and spoke to party supporters in front of banners reading "Theresa May: Strong, Stable Leadership in the National Interest" but including no mention of the Tories.

Party activists, meanwhile, held signs reading "Theresa May: Strong, Stable Leadership”. “The Conservatives” was only written in much smaller righting underneath, according to The Telegraph"

 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

I don't think people are blind to it, it's just far better than any alternative offered. 

I'm less and less convinced by that argument.

 

Since the election was called, there's only one candidate who's looked strong, engaging, put forward inclusive policies and looked to connect with the electorate and it aint Theresa May.

 

The 'Corbyn is just some protest leader' rhetoric isn't washing with me anymore.  I've not heard him say anything in the last 6 months I could honestly disagree with.  There's a danger for the Tories that the people are going to stop following what the mainstream media say and actually look into party policies for themselves.

 

That wont be good for May.

 

 

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-election-campaign-north-england-banners-without-conservative-branding-general-election-thersea-a7708831.html

 

"The Conservatives have dropped their party name from some campaign materials in the north of England, images suggest.

Theresa May visited Leeds on Thursday and spoke to party supporters in front of banners reading "Theresa May: Strong, Stable Leadership in the National Interest" but including no mention of the Tories.

Party activists, meanwhile, held signs reading "Theresa May: Strong, Stable Leadership”. “The Conservatives” was only written in much smaller righting underneath, according to The Telegraph"

 

So that's the polar opposite to labour then, who try and avoid mentioning their leaders name  

[Realist Guy In The Room]

9 hours ago, Wookie said:

I've seen more moaning about "strong and stable leadership" than her actually saying it

Watch Andrew Marr's show on the iplayer.