General Election, June 8th

[Guest MattP]

45 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

It would be good to see polling figures broken down by region, since the polls tightened. If Labour has mainly gained votes in London, SE and big cities, that might secure very few seats.

Likewise, though, if much of the increase in the Tory vote since 2015 is in Labour safe seats, those might not yield many seats.

My best guess is we're still looking at a Tory majority of at least 50-100, despite the rise in Labour support. There's still a Lab->Con swing since 2015 due to the collapse of UKIP.

Whose voters turn out on the day will be another factor, though. Generally Tories turn out more, but that might not be the case this time. A lot of Tories uninspired by May & co, I'd imagine.

 

The Lib Dems must be panicking at those poll figures - especially as the Tories are their main opponents in most seats where they stand a chance.

They could conceivably end up with fewer seats than now - 5 or fewer, possibly? Their poll rating is the same or lower than for the 2015 election (7.9%), while the Tories are up.....

Just imagine if Clegg was the only Lib Dem MP elected?! There are almost as many question marks over the future of the Lib Dems as over UKIP just now....

 

I didn't see Abbott's interview, but have read about it. If she was going to say that "her views had changed like her Afro" or whatever, I don't understand why she didn't just say: "Yes, I regret those comments".

She could quite easily have said: "I supported Troops Out. I was young and made some stupid comments. Those were stupid comments. I regret them. I didn't and don't support terrorism. I support the Peace Process led by our great Labour MP Tony Blair, and my main concern now is over border arrangements post-Brexit". If all she had to offer was comparisons to her hairstyle, she should have stayed at home.

 

That Tory attack video might seem good to someone on the Right with a strong interest in politics. But I wonder how it will be seen by uncommitted voters, possibly paying little attention or with little interest in politics?

The response might just be: "There are the politicians throwing mud at one another again. Let's switch off". Also, the punchline doesn't work as well as it would have done a few weeks back. The video essentially sets Corbyn up as a complete arse, then offers you the alternative of Theresa May. That would have seemed a good idea 4 weeks ago. Not sure it is now. They're now essentially asking: "Look at this pile of shit here. Do you really want that pile of shit? Instead, we're offering you......this other pile of shit!!". Corbyn might still be a liability for Labour (if marginally less than before), but May might no longer be an asset to the Tories. 

The Lib Dems may have fell into the trap that UKIP couldn't get out of, being seen as a single issue party for something already settled. 

 

Why they put Abbott back out again I have no idea, she could reply as you said but she won't, I'd imagine praising Blair would be seen as worse than praising Tories in North London now.

 

May is still an asset with the public looking at the polls though not by much, so still use her at this point - I think most are already seeing this election between two shits so it might be the way to go. How depressing.

 

17 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I think, whatever the result, theresa may well be coming out of the election in a worse position than she went in. Perhaps a landslide will save her but a slim majority will put her in trouble imo.

The long term damage for her is probably among her own backbenchers, they know now she isn't a campaigner and if she does win she has five years tops. 

 

No way do they let her go in 2022 - the fact it even got close against this shambles of an opposition is disgraceful. 

 

12 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

A quick attempt to explain, as someone who was involved in Labour politics in the 1980s....

 

A lot of people on the Left supported aims espoused by the Republican movement: a united Ireland and troops out of the North. When I was about 18-21, I would have been one of them myself (though I wasn't involved in any campaigns).

Once I'd grown up a bit, I realised that such ideas were simplistic: you couldn't just withdraw the troops overnight and, whatever the history, a united Ireland would only ever be possible, if at all, via negotiations and with majority consent in the North and South - including with the consent of, and guarantees for Northern unionists. That became part of the Good Friday Agreement.

 

It's certainly fair to say that Corbyn was not "promoting peace", he was promoting Troops Out and a united Ireland (there was no peace process back then). It is fair to say that Corbyn and allies supported Republican aims. It is also fair to argue that Corbyn and others on the left should not have shared platforms with people with IRA connections (though Govt representatives did likewise in the years prior to the Peace Process)....that's a matter of opinion. But, without more evidence, it is not fair to say that Corbyn "supported the IRA" - a lot of people, rightly or wrongly, supported Republican aims without supporting the IRA.

 

Some context is also required: this was a time when anti-Catholic discrimination was still widespread in N. Ireland, when many innocent Irish people were banged up for terrorist murders they'd not committed after corrupt investigations - and when Gerry Adams, an elected MP, had his voice banned from TV broadcasts. None of that excuses terrorism by the IRA or anyone else. Personally, I'm not a nationalist of any kind (Irish or British) and I loathe the atrocities carried out by the IRA (& others) - in my lovely, peaceful Dad's name?! He didn't want any of that! I hope that explains a bit.

Nothing really wrong in that, support a United Ireland is justified, I'm sure I'd have been a supporter myself where I born two generations ago in Mayo rather than Leicester. 

 

The problem for Corbyn isnt the things you describe here, it's the stuff he did that went beyond the call of duty - standing in silence to "honour" the bombers, the invites to the HoC at the most insensitive time possible - it's the things like that create the belief he supported them. 

 

It's not going away either, a story breaking now and gathering some pace on Twitter is that he attended a wreath laying for a PLO member involved in the Munich massacre.

 

P.S Rearranged fixture at 6 tonight, Neill v Sturgeon.

 

No idea when Nuttall is on but I imagine the pools panel already scored it a home win.

[Carl the Llama]

I approve of our public servants being progressive enough to make alterations to their hairstyle.

 

 

 

Hang aboutttttttt

[Claridge]

2 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Tell you what the Tory and Labour campaigning is doing a great job of convincing me that Tim Farron isn't such a terrible option after all.

A sentence I never expected to hear from anyone, but labour and the tories are both running awful campaigns

[Alf Bentley]

Just now, Claridge said:

A sentence I never expected to hear from anyone, but labour and the tories are both running awful campaigns

 

Yet they're both higher in the polls than in 2015, which doesn't say much for the others.

 

I bet there are a lot of people still not fully decided - many of whom might not vote.

Wouldn't surprise me if there's a low turnout.

[BlueSi13]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

Finally a decent attack video from the Tories.

 

 

"Except the Army, where we could do with a few more cuts" - that should be on billboards along with Abbott's claim of the British state being defeated being a victory for all of "us" - whoever "us" is.

FINALLY going for the jugular.  How any British patriot could seriously contemplate voting for this quisling is utterly beyond me.  Country before party allegiance.

[Alf Bentley]

 

Deleted

[The Floyd]

Outstanding own goal for Labour scored by Abbott, not sure who at Labour HQ thought it was a sensible idea to let her loose whilst they're still climbing some polls.

[Rincewind]

That video clip reminds me of a Smith and Jones sketch. I wonder if anyone can guess which one?

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, BlueSi13 said:

FINALLY going for the jugular.  How any British patriot could seriously contemplate voting for this quisling is utterly beyond me.  Country before party allegiance.

Equally though how could any British patriot seriously contemplate voting for someone who wants to put vast restrictions on internet privacy in the name of 'counter-terrorism' despite cutting funding to the police officers who help prevent terrorism and selling weapons to a state which has an awful human rights record and which allegedly backs those terrorists?

[Carl the Llama]

9 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Deleted

 

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

 

 

If you do Google Images for Theresa May, there's a photo of her as a student looking quite attractive in a Home Counties, girl-next-door way......but it wouldn't copy to FT.

 

There's also a photo of her as a kid, looking a right horrible, snotty brat!

[Guest MattP]

13 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Equally though how could any British patriot seriously contemplate voting for someone who wants to put vast restrictions on internet privacy in the name of 'counter-terrorism' despite cutting funding to the police officers who help prevent terrorism and selling weapons to a state which has an awful human rights record and which allegedly backs those terrorists?

You would hope recent events would see policy change. 

 

Although as bad as that is its still not on a par with electing someone who believed (and judging by the interview this morning still does) the British state being defeated is a good thing. The person who could in charge of our security this, once called for MI5 to be disbanded. 

 

I mean when you actually think about it, what the actual ****? How have this lot managed to take over a major party?

[Buce]

12 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

If you do Google Images for Theresa May, there's a photo of her as a student looking quite attractive in a Home Counties, girl-next-door way......but it wouldn't copy to FT.

 

There's also a photo of her as a kid, looking a right horrible, snotty brat!

 

You and I must have wildly differing opinions on what 'attractive' means, Alf.

 

I did, however, find a picture that could spawn a conspiracy theory: is she a secret Muslim?

 

[Facecloth]

28 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

If you do Google Images for Theresa May, there's a photo of her as a student looking quite attractive in a Home Counties, girl-next-door way......but it wouldn't copy to FT.

 

There's also a photo of her as a kid, looking a right horrible, snotty brat!

If you meant this one of her as a student (and it's the only one I found), she looks like Paul McCartney in drag

 

[LiberalFox]

A three figure Tory majority based on nothing but "The other guy's a terrorist sympathiser" would be a disaster for British democracy.

 

Can't stand the hypocrisy on Northern Ireland either. The Major and Blair governments put the IRA into power and released masses of convicted terrorists but that's okay.

 

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

30 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

If you do Google Images for Theresa May, there's a photo of her as a student looking quite attractive in a Home Counties, girl-next-door way......but it wouldn't copy to FT.

 

There's also a photo of her as a kid, looking a right horrible, snotty brat!

 she's a dog mate 

 

 

[LiberalFox]

9 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

If you meant this one of her as a student (and it's the only one I found), she looks like Paul McCartney in drag

 

 

Weird to see not a single non-white face in the photo.

[Alf Bentley]

4 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

If you meant this one of her as a student (and it's the only one I found), she looks like Paul McCartney in drag

 

Tend to agree about that one. There's another one, black and white, in which she looks OK.

I'll try the link: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=theresa+may&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjal6mC1pLUAhVoJsAKHZ1xBn4Q_AUIBygC&biw=1920&bih=950#tbm=isch&q=theresa+may+1980&imgrc=W95i5wvursidHM:

 

 

2 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

 she's a dog mate 

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, mate......and certainly not in her visage now. 

 

I might have weird taste, mind. I've already confessed my lust for Baroness Warsi, and would like 2 counts of Davina McCall and Kirsty Allsop to be taken into consideration in sentencing....

[Buce]

15 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

If you meant this one of her as a student (and it's the only one I found), she looks like Paul McCartney in drag

 

 

Jesus.

 

And they criticise JC for his sartorial inelegance..

 

She couldn't even look good on her wedding day..

 

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

 

Weird to see not a single non-white face in the photo.

 

I think the gingers are representing the minorities..

[BlueSi13]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

Equally though how could any British patriot seriously contemplate voting for someone who wants to put vast restrictions on internet privacy in the name of 'counter-terrorism' despite cutting funding to the police officers who help prevent terrorism and selling weapons to a state which has an awful human rights record and which allegedly backs those terrorists?

Considering the fact that these monsters are predominately being poisoned online I don't personally see these new laws as being a bad thing at this early stage.  Having more bobbies on the beat won't make a damn bit of difference frankly.

 

Meanwhile you'll happily go and vote for people who have actively supported and befriended individuals that have, and continue to wage war against our people, our values and our way of life.  Agents of our enemies indeed.

 

But then again I know I'm not talking to someone that's proud of his country so I'm sure it won't matter. 

 

 

[BlueSi13]

37 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

A three figure Tory majority based on nothing but "The other guy's a terrorist sympathiser" would be a disaster for British democracy.

 

Can't stand the hypocrisy on Northern Ireland either. The Major and Blair governments put the IRA into power and released masses of convicted terrorists but that's okay.

 

 

It would, makes you wonder why the opposition couldn't field a candidate without personal links to anti-British/Western terrorist organisations.  Maybe this wouldn't happen?

[Webbo]

The reason Abbott keeps appearing is because there are very few Labour MPs who back Corbyn and were prepared to be in his front bench team. Apart from Jezza, there's her, McDonnell and a man with a beard and a wispy voice whose name escapes me and that's about it for TV.

[Alf Bentley]

6 minutes ago, Webbo said:

The reason Abbott keeps appearing is because there are very few Labour MPs who back Corbyn and were prepared to be in his front bench team. Apart from Jezza, there's her, McDonnell and a man with a beard and a wispy voice whose name escapes me and that's about it for TV.

 

Is Barry Gardiner the man with the beard?

 

I've spotted Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Nia Griffith & Rebecca Long-Bailey.....though Thornberry Rayner are both unimpressive.

 

Keir Starmer presented Labour's Brexit policy at the start, but haven't seen him since (but then Brexit has barely been mentioned).

Haven't seen Tom Watson or Clive Lewis, but both of them have quite marginal seats so they might be concentrating on their constituencies.

I'd hope to see a bit more of them in the next 10 days - plus Jon Ashworth, as Shadow Health Secretary.

 

Mind you, which Tories have been prominent, apart from Theresa? 

We've seen a bit of Amber Rudd (unimpressive), Boris (loose canon), Damian Green & Priti Patel (competent-ish) & Michael Fallon (duffer).

I can't remember seeing Philip Hammond, Sajid Javid, Jeremy Hunt, David Davis, Andrea Leadsom or Liam Fox

 

 

[Strokes]

22 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

Considering the fact that these monsters are predominately being poisoned online I don't personally see these new laws as being a bad thing at this early stage.  Having more bobbies on the beat won't make a damn bit of difference frankly.

 

Meanwhile you'll happily go and vote for people who have actively supported and befriended individuals that have, and continue to wage war against our people, our values and our way of life.  Agents of our enemies indeed.

 

But then again I know I'm not talking to someone that's proud of his country so I'm sure it won't matter. 

 

 

I'm not sure a privacy infringement and yet another removal of civil liberties, is an ideal way to fight terrorism. Even if the end does justify the means.

What else would we be prepared to give up to fight these pricks? Someone was suggesting the right to a fair trial in another thread, we have to fight against these silly ideas, else we risk lowering our society standards, which is ultimately their aim anyway.

This government, previous governments and potential governments, have given me no faith they will use this data responsibly and we should not let them have it.