General Election, June 8th

[Guest MattP]

8 minutes ago, toddybad said:

You haven't really done any research have you?

 

An economy goes into recession when too little money is going round. The government has had 7 years of taking money out of the economy resulting in falling wages, 20,000 less police officers, an nhs in crisis, schools needing parental help to pay normal costs, an army reduced by 20%, significant numbers needing food banks, and record levels of personal debt. 

 

In relation to student debt, the country had some of the best universities in the world before student loans were brought in. Student debt is, as some of our right wing friends on here have pointed out, effectively a 9% tax on graduates. That's a 9% tax on, for example,  nurses entering a poorly paid profession. No wonder that applications into nursing have dropped like a stone. 

 

This country is falling apart under tory rule. Another 5 years of this and we'll be lucky to have any public services - or public service workers - left. 

A rcession occurs when the GDP diminishes for two consecutive quarters, inflation flies up and the rate of unemployment rises and housing prices fall. Many things can make this happen - not just less money flying around.

 

Student tuition fees are not effectively a tax as if you go into a poorly paid job you'll never pay it, we used to have good universities? We still have three in the World's top ten mow including the best in Oxford, we have more in the top twenty than the rest of the EU combined. Our universities are far superior to any nation in the World apart from the USA - stop talking your own nation down.

 

Regarding the project fear bit at the end, can you or anyone tell us how Labour intends to tackle the national debt and deficit?

[Guest MattP]

Good interview, Corbyn was briefed well but still struggled. 

 

Left public in no doubt he supports the IRA and he has no real solution to anything though. I honestly find the Irish stuff hard to watch, stood in silence to honour many bombers, numerous meetings with hardliners, condemned the British Army on many occasions, never once condemned an IRA bomb until now as he courts the votes of the wider public, I know it can never be proved but I can't believe how gullible you would have to be seriously think he didn't want the IRA to win and instead was there to play a role in the peace process.

 

The Trident question was vdry interesting, he's needs to clarify this very quickly about whether the defence review could change policy on Trident. 

 

The last ten minutes were embarrassing, he didn't answer a single question and it was laughable at times.

 

"Do you still believe NATO is obselete?" 

 

"Well Andrew NATO was formed in......"

 

I think Andrew wanted to hang himself by that point.

 

Idealist guy, sure he's lovely for a sandwich and a cup of tea but imagine that as the leader of the country. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

A rcession occurs when the GDP diminishes for two consecutive quarters, inflation flies up and the rate of unemployment rises and housing prices fall. Many things can make this happen - not just less money flying around.

 

Student tuition fees are not effectively a tax as if you go into a poorly paid job you'll never pay it, we used to have good universities? We still have three in the World's top ten mow including the best in Oxford, we have more in the top twenty than the rest of the EU combined. Our universities are far superior to any nation in the World apart from the USA - stop talking your own nation down.

 

Regarding the project fear bit at the end, can you or anyone tell us how Labour intends to tackle the national debt and deficit?

We've had these sorts of argument before matt.

Tbh with the 9% tax i actuslly agree to a point but the reality is that £21k is a low wage and most graduates will be paying 9% for their entire adult life. 

 

Re the deficit we need growth. We need public spending to make growth happen.

 

We've had debates around the last part before and you've ended up running out of arguments so let's not do it again.

[Guest MattP]

Well just answer the question, what are you going to do about? Is there an intention to clear it by 2022 if McDonnell?

 

Just saying "we need growth" doesn't really cut it - the IFS have said that the Labour manifesto  (and the Tories for that matter) is likely to increase taxation on everyone and stuntil growth.

 

At least the Tories are admitting they'll be cuts, Labour is expecting us to believe they can keep public spending at its current rate, raise taxes to the highest levels since the 40''s, then borrow even more whilst maintaining economic growth, it's not serious. 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

12 minutes ago, MattP said:

Good interview, Corbyn was briefed well but still struggled. 

 

Left public in no doubt he supports the IRA and he has no real solution to anything though. I honestly find the Irish stuff hard to watch, stood in silence to honour many bombers, numerous meetings with hardliners, condemned the British Army on many occasions, never once condemned an IRA bomb until now as he courts the votes of the wider public, I know it can never be proved but I can't believe how gullible you would have to be seriously think he didn't want the IRA to win and instead was there to play a role in the peace process.

 

The Trident question was vdry interesting, he's needs to clarify this very quickly about whether the defence review could change policy on Trident. 

 

The last ten minutes were embarrassing, he didn't answer a single question and it was laughable at times.

 

"Do you still believe NATO is obselete?" 

 

"Well Andrew NATO was formed in......"

 

I think Andrew wanted to hang himself by that point.

 

Idealist guy, sure he's lovely for a sandwich and a cup of tea but imagine that as the leader of the country. 

I thought Neil let him off the hook.

 

Everyone has heard the IRA stuff many times before so people already have an opinion on him for that and the same with Trident.  

 

Personally, I would have liked him

to spend less time on that and instead, pick the policies apart and really get him to explain the costing in detail.  

 

Both his and the May interview with him have been a waste.  Both just not answering questions that really we already know the answers to but not being asked anything that we actually need to know about.

[Guest MattP]

15 hours ago, LiberalFox said:

 

What is great about Rod Liddle? He just comes across as a pure troll. What's his idea of a solution, casual bigotry and cynicism? What's great about that?

 

15 hours ago, leicsmac said:

That's exactly what he is. Exhibit A being his attitude towards women who actually want to do something with their lives other than staying in the kitchen (and encouraging other women to do so too.)

Liddle is hilarious, it's worth the £2.50 just to read his column in The Sunday Times - I've lost count of the times I've laughed over breakfast. 

 

His satire is often brilliant, the one on a second referendum was great - you could match up a few posters on here to the characters. 

 

 

[Guest MattP]

24 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

I thought Neil let him off the hook.

 

Everyone has heard the IRA stuff many times before so people already have an opinion on him for that and the same with Trident.  

 

Personally, I would have liked him

to spend less time on that and instead, pick the policies apart and really get him to explain the costing in detail.  

 

Both his and the May interview with him have been a waste.  Both just not answering questions that really we already know the answers to but not being asked anything that we actually need to know about.

He is never as forceful as he is on the Daily Politics in these interviews.

 

He must have done something right though as a lot of the Corbynistas online are accusing it accusing it of being another BBC hatchet job. 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

He is never as forceful as he is on the Daily Politics in these interviews.

 

He must have done something right though as a lot of the Corbynistas online are accusing it accusing it of being another BBC hatchet job. 

They would have done that however it went.  Its one narrative that'll never change.

[matty98]

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, matty98 said:

Anyone know how they are actually going to do this in any detail? 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

11 minutes ago, MattP said:

Anyone know how they are actually going to do this in any detail? 

We'd never find out.  People

will only ever ask why he loved the IRA so much.

 

I'd love to know though because as a pledge obviously we'd all be for it.

[Guest MattP]

Whilst we are on Rod Liddle he's done a decent piece in the spectator today about this is possibly the worst Tory campaign ever, hard to disagree with.

 

(Copied and pasted rather than linked as it's subcription)

 

 am trying to remember if there was ever a worse Conservative election campaign than this current dog’s breakfast — and failing. Certainly 2001 was pretty awful, with Oliver Letwin going rogue and Thatcher sniping nastily from behind the arras. It is often said that 1987 was a little lacklustre and Ted Heath had effectively thrown in the towel in October 1974. But I don’t think anything quite matches up to this combination of prize gaffes and the robotic incantation of platitudinous idiocies.

 

To have suggested that the hunting with dogs legislation might be subject to a free vote in the House of Commons was, whether you are pro hunting or against, a move of quite stunning stupidity. Why alienate that 84 per cent of the electorate opposed to fox-hunting (Ipsos-Mori, 2016), especially when some of them (including me) are quite passionately anti-hunting and might be tempted to change their vote? And when you already have the pro-fox-hunting votes in your grasp? It makes no electoral sense.

 

Still more remarkable was the decision to force demented people to sell their own houses, if they can remember where they are, to pay for their own care. Followed very shortly by an embarrassing U-turn.

 

This was passed off by the Tories as an example of pristine honesty, of nettles being grasped in an admirably transparent manner. But, like much of the current Tory campaign, it smacked to me of two things — complacency and arrogance. It suggested yet again that Theresa May called this election convinced that almost nothing she could do or say would prevent the inevitable landslide.

 

I think she was horribly wrong about that. I just pray to the Lord Jesus Christ that she was not so horribly wrong that we wake up on 9 June to find that Diane Abbott is the Home Secretary, Emily Thornberry in charge of Trident, all part of a Labour-Lib Dem-Tartan Munchkin Alliance, aided by that sinister reptilian Green woman, Lucas, and Natalie Wood or whatever her name is from Wales, look you.

 

That scenario is still unlikely, but I will bet it is not half so unlikely as many of you, or Theresa May, believed when the election was called. Back then the headlines were talking of a Labour and Ukip wipeout and a landslide for the Tories.

 

I never remotely bought that notion, no matter what the polls said. I have been banging on for ages about how the Labour vote, especially in the north, is a lot ‘stickier’ than the pollsters think. My guess was that May would win a majority of 30 or so, but that was before Conservative Central Office took out its hardy shotgun and began blowing off both of its feet. I may have to revise that figure downwards. Either way, and those gaffes excluded, here’s why I think the Tory lead in the polls has been halved — yes, halved — despite the fact that the Labour party is led by Chauncey Gardiner out of Hal Ashby’s wonderful satire Being There.

First, the election was not wanted and is deeply resented beyond the Westminster bubble. The only people who actually enjoy elections are journos and the politically active: that leaves 97 per cent of the population who are somewhat averse, especially after a bruising referendum last year. May is resented for having foisted the election upon us, and people may be inclined to punish her for it, either by staying at home or voting against. The most salient comment of this election may have been made on the day it was called, by Brenda of Bristol: ‘Oh no, what’s she done thatfor?’ People suspect that their lives are being disrupted for Theresa May’s political and personal gain. And they’re not wrong, are they?

 

Second. Jeremy Corbyn is not notably less popular in the Midlands and north of the country than Ed Miliband was. And he has had a good election so far. The Labour vote remains buoyant and is growing. Don’t forget that the populist revolution we have seen here and in the US and in Europe does not come exclusively from the right. Corbyn presents an anti-establishment populist left-wing agenda, much as did Syriza and Five Star (and the SNP, come to that) and he offers it to an electorate which has a certain appetite for such radicalism. If he changed his tune on immigration he could conceivably win.

 

Third. Theresa May has the personal warmth, wit, oratorical ability and attractiveness of an Indesit fridge-freezer which has been faultily connected by a man called Trevor for five quid, cash in hand, and which is now full of decomposing Findus Crispy Pancakes. There is no vision, there is no chutzpah. Just the bland repetition of meaningless phrases. Corbyn is a far better campaigner.

 

Fourth. Yes, the Labour front bench has the collective IQ of a fairly small bowl of krill. But the Conservative front bench is pretty thinnish, too, isn’t it? Would you book Amber Rudd or Philip Hammond to deliver a rousing speech at your company’s annual shindig? I’d rather listen to a tape of Greylag geese squabbling over mating rights.

 

Fifth. The Ukip vote will migrate to the Tories en masse — but in the south, where they don’t need it. Far less so in the north and Midlands, where they do need it. There, many will remain with Ukip, especially if Paul Nuttall ramps up the anti-Islam rhetoric in the wake of the Manchester atrocity. Of the rest, a fair few will go back to the habitual berth of the Labour party.

 

Sixth. I had not expected the Lib Dem vote to disappear. But given that it does seem to be disappearing, it won’t turn up in the pockets of Conservative candidates. Almost anyone but — and most likely Labour.

 

I’ve always thought that calling the election was a mistake predicated on misplaced confidence. Today, I’m even more convinced of that view.

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

We'd never find out.  People

will only ever ask why he loved the IRA so much.

 

I'd love to know though because as a pledge obviously we'd all be for it.

So would I, just looks like meaningless platitudes - wtf even is "football for all"

 

The stuff he wants to do there would take some serious legislation. 

[Sharpe's Fox]

@MattP shared that 2 pages back ya dunce and I formatted it better than you n'all

[Dr The Singh]

8 hours ago, Rincewind said:

Yes I believe he is. Reads the financial Sun.

Better then reading Des Pardes

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

@MattP shared that 2 pages back ya dunce and I formatted it better than you n'all

Apologies. 

[Dr The Singh]

Any party with Dianne Abbott is a joke, that's probably the biggest reason I'm not voting labour.

[Dr The Singh]

Just now, MattP said:

Apologies. 

Say it like you mean it Matt

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Dr The Singh said:

Any party with Dianne Abbott is a joke, that's probably the biggest reason I'm not voting labour.

The current polling really doesn't make sense, in the same poll that had Labour only 5% behind they had the question of whether they would make a good PM - May scored mid 40's and Corbyn was still on less than 30, something strange is going on, the Labour vote could be being exaggerated again as it is by the pollsters in most elections. For the first time now expectation is on Corbyn, 30% was probably enough to keep him in a job when the campaign started, it isn't now. 

 

When asked which Home Secretary they trusted to keep safe Amber Rudd scored a dismal 20 odd and Diane Abbott got 9% - I don't know who those people are but they need recapturing as quickly as possible.

[davieG]

Election candidates line up for 'high octane' BBC Radio Leicester debate
Read more at http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/election-candidates-line-up-for-bbc-radio-leicester-debate/story-30356534-detail/story.html#j8lBHCYSui7IDFtU.99

 

image: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/276308/Article/images/30356534/16019589-large.jpg

BBC candidates

 

Election candidates will clash in the run up to polling day in a special debate organised by BBC Radio Leicester.

 

 

Candidates from all the major parties have agreed to participate in the 60-minute exchange on June 6.

The radio station is hosting the Question Time-style debate where members of a 50-strong audience will put questions to the panel.

Loughborough candidate and former education secretary Nicky Morgan will represent the Conservatives.

 

Former diplomat Chris Kealey, who is contesting the Bosworth seat, will speak for Labour.

Health campaigner and Harborough candidate Zuffar Haq will represent the Lib Dems.

UKIP's energy spokesman and East Midlands, MEP Roger Helmer, will take part as candidate for South Leicestershire and Green Leicester South candidate Mags Lewis, the party's disability spokesman, will complete the panel.

BBC Radio Leicester presenter Ben Jackson will oversee the debate.

He said: "This snap election has taken us all by surprise.

"Although it's only two years since the last one, it's clear from speaking to voters across Leicestershire and Rutland that this is being treated as a serious election with serious consequences for all our futures.

 

BBC Radio Leicester's Ben Jackson

"We know many of you have issues you want answers to from those who want your vote on June 8 so I can't wait to host BBC Radio Leicester's live Election Debate at our city centre studios on the evening of Tuesday, June 6.

"We have a panel of high-profile candidates who should expect to be robustly challenged by an audience of voters keen to interrogate the parties' pledges and promises.

"We all want to be better informed before casting our ballot two days later.

"Come join me for what I expect to be a high-octane election debate."

The BBC wants Mercury readers to be part of the audience and is inviting them to apply for a place.

It intends to have a politically-balanced audience so is asking people to answer a number of questions linked to the election.

The form needed to apply can be found by following links about the Radio Leicester and the General Election at: http://bbc.in/2r4B6lO

Read more at http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/election-candidates-line-up-for-bbc-radio-leicester-debate/story-30356534-detail/story.html#j8lBHCYSui7IDFtU.99

[Nick]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

The current polling really doesn't make sense, in the same poll that had Labour only 5% behind they had the question of whether they would make a good PM - May scored mid 40's and Corbyn was still on less than 30, something strange is going on, the Labour vote could be being exaggerated again as it is by the pollsters in most elections. For the first time now expectation is on Corbyn, 30% was probably enough to keep him in a job when the campaign started, it isn't now. 

 

When asked which Home Secretary they trusted to keep safe Amber Rudd scored a dismal 20 odd and Diane Abbott got 9% - I don't know who those people are but they need recapturing as quickly as possible.

Doesn't necessarily imply foul play - the two issues are not mutually exclusive. There's plenty of people who will vote conservative but may not think TM is the best choice or will make a particularly good PM.

[Buce]

2 hours ago, toddybad said:

You haven't really done any research have you?

 

An economy goes into recession when too little money is going round. The government has had 7 years of taking money out of the economy resulting in falling wages, 20,000 less police officers, an nhs in crisis, schools needing parental help to pay normal costs, an army reduced by 20%, significant numbers needing food banks, and record levels of personal debt. 

 

In relation to student debt, the country had some of the best universities in the world before student loans were brought in. Student debt is, as some of our right wing friends on here have pointed out, effectively a 9% tax on graduates. That's a 9% tax on, for example,  nurses entering a poorly paid profession. No wonder that applications into nursing have dropped like a stone. 

 

This country is falling apart under tory rule. Another 5 years of this and we'll be lucky to have any public services - or public service workers - left. 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, MattP said:

A rcession occurs when the GDP diminishes for two consecutive quarters, inflation flies up and the rate of unemployment rises and housing prices fall. Many things can make this happen - not just less money flying around.

 

Student tuition fees are not effectively a tax as if you go into a poorly paid job you'll never pay it, we used to have good universities? We still have three in the World's top ten mow including the best in Oxford, we have more in the top twenty than the rest of the EU combined. Our universities are far superior to any nation in the World apart from the USA - stop talking your own nation down.

 

Regarding the project fear bit at the end, can you or anyone tell us how Labour intends to tackle the national debt and deficit?

 

I think you may have misinterpreted what was meant, Matt.

 

I read it as a rebuttal of the suggestion by @gcxttle that abolishing student loans would lead to a falling in standards (ie @toddybad was pointing out how well our unis were performing previously, before fees were introduced).

[Spiritwalker]

25 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

Any party with Dianne Abbott is a joke, that's probably the biggest reason I'm not voting labour.

Sacrilege, she is Labour's pin up girl.

[Guest MattP]

16 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Doesn't necessarily imply foul play - the two issues are not mutually exclusive. There's plenty of people who will vote conservative but may not think TM is the best choice or will make a particularly good PM.

Not implying foul play, just that it doesn't make sense. Usually that question along with National Security and Economic competence reflect national polling - Labour are miles behind on all three of those and yet within 5pts. That's just so different to any other election I have seen.

 

I genuinely think anything could happen on June 8th from a Tory landslide to a hung parliament. 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

41 minutes ago, MattP said:

So would I, just looks like meaningless platitudes - wtf even is "football for all"

 

The stuff he wants to do there would take some serious legislation. 

Plus its unlikely to happen for 5 years at least as a new deal has just been signed by the Premier league.