General Election, June 8th

[Beliall]

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Beliall said:

Excellent! They don't coincide with anything on my schedule 

[The Doctor]

Great, hope this is the start of metric time.

[davieG]

The Tories went into yesterday's election with 31 councillors and after Thursday's poll they had stretched that number to 36 giving them an increased majority of 17.
 

 

The Tories took a major scalp by unseating Labour group leader Robert Sharp from his seat in Loughborough South.
 

Mr Sharp said: "I am personally disappointed but we saw it coming.

"I have said before that it has been tough on the doorstep we have struggled to get local issues noticed.

"All we have had back at us is Brexit and 'Bloody Corbyn'.

"I don't want to sound like a bitter candidate who has just lost his seat and is trying to blame someone else but we can't hide behind it any more.

"It's a fact Jeremy Corbyn has had a negative impact on us in this campaign."

Read more at http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/tories-retain-control-of-leicestershire-council-as-unseated-labour-leader-blasts-jeremy-corbyn/story-30315092-detail/story.html#kzxsQ0bgx2mcciYM.99

[Jon the Hat]

Labour now must all know now that Corbyn gives not one flying fck about Winning the general election, and his only objective is to have Labour control in the hands of the hard left of the party. I sincerely hope this will result in the medium term in a strong liberal opposition, ridding us of this socialist shit.

[Wymsey]

It's the first time I never voted locally and doubt I will on June 8th.

 

Used to be for the conservatives but have been a bit put off by them recently and voting for labour would be like choosing a backwards, radical movement for short-term benefits imo.

 

Have been quite unconvinced generally with it all; with most of the parties thinking they're something they're not, often breaking their promises and not taking themselves seriously.

Am quite appalled about the quality of candidates out there currently and just seems full of desperation.

[Nalis]

Question, when you vote in a general election how much weight do you give to the following?

 

A) the party (and their policies)

B) the leader of the party

C) the candidate in that constituency

 

For me percentage wise, its probably 50/40/10. 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

9 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

It's the first time I never voted locally and doubt I will on June 8th.

 

Used to be for the conservatives but have been a bit put off by them recently and voting for labour would be like choosing a backwards, radical movement for short-term benefits imo.

 

Have been quite unconvinced generally with it all; with most of the parties thinking they're something they're not, often breaking their promises and not taking themselves seriously.

Am quite appalled about the quality of candidates out there currently and just seems full of desperation.

The voter turnout has been generally poor so many probably agree with you.

[davieG]

A Liberal Democrat government would raise income tax to help fund the NHS and social care, the party has pledged.

It said a penny-in-the-pound rise on all income tax bands and on dividends would raise around £6bn a year.

The Tories said 30 million people would be hit by the tax rises. Labour said its NHS plans would be in its manifesto.

The Lib Dem pledge is complicated by devolution, such as Scotland having its own tax-raising powers.

The NHS is facing one of its toughest-ever financial challenges as it struggles with a growing and ageing population.

In the UK, £140bn was spent on health last year and around £25bn on social care.

Ten charts that show why the NHS is in trouble

Ten charts that show what has gone wrong with social care

The proposed tax rises are the Lib Dem's first significant policy announcement of the general election campaign.

Party leader Tim Farron said: "We are prepared to be honest with people and say that we will all need to chip in a little more."

Higher taxes

A Lib Dem government would raise all tax bandsby one percentage point.

The party estimates someone earning £15,000 would pay an extra £33 a year in tax, with someone on £50,000 paying an extra £383.

This would not apply in Scotland as income tax levels are devolved to the Scottish Parliament, where the Lib Dems are the fifth largest party.

The plans also include a UK-wide rise of 1p on dividend income taxes if you hold shares in a company.

In the 2018/19 financial year, the party says the extra taxes would raise:

£4.9bn for England

£280m for Wales

£165m for Northern Ireland

£35m for Scotland (as it benefits only from a share of the money raised by dividend tax)

The total raised is projected to reach £6.6bn-a-year by the end of the parliament.

The money would be guaranteed for the NHS and social care in England, but it is up to the devolved governments in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland to choose whether to spend the money on health or elsewhere.

Mr Farron added: "Theresa May doesn't care about the NHS or social care. People are lying on trolleys in hospital corridors and she has done nothing. The truth is you can't have a strong NHS with a hard Brexit."

The Liberal Democrats say the money raised will primarily be invested in social care which will get £2bn a year, as well as care outside of hospital, mental health and public health.

But it says its ultimate ambition is a dedicated health and care tax.

Norman Lamb, for the party, added: "Simply providing more money on its own is not enough and that's why this is just the first step in our plan to protect health and care services long-term.

"We also need to do much more to keep people fit and healthy and out of hospital, and that is why this new funding will be targeted to those areas that have the greatest impact on patient care such as social care, general practice, mental health and public health."

The outgoing Conservative government has promised to increase funding for the health service by £8bn by 2020 and £2bn for social care. The Lib Dems say their extra £6bn a year would be in addition to these plans.

'Record funding'

Conservative Jane Ellison said: "Now we know - a vote for anyone other than Theresa May means you will pay more tax.

"Jeremy Corbyn, the Lib Dems and SNP will hit 30 million people in the pocket with higher income taxes.

"Only a vote for Theresa May on 8 June can provide the strong and stable leadership we need to get a good deal in the Brexit negotiations, keep taxes low, and secure our growing economy.

"It is the only way we can build on the record funding we've given the NHS."

Labour said its plans for funding the NHS would be in the party's manifesto although it has already said it would halt hospital cuts.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39822306

[DJ Barry Hammond]

1 hour ago, Nalis said:

Question, when you vote in a general election how much weight do you give to the following?

 

A) the party (and their policies)

B) the leader of the party

C) the candidate in that constituency

 

For me percentage wise, its probably 50/40/10. 

 

Depends what the local candidate is like... if they can make an impact on you the last percentage will rise, but normally it's the first two that have the biggest impact.

[Rincewind]

A What they stand for

C If they do a good job within the constituency and live in it.

B See A

 

I would say it is close between A and C  A lot of people will vote according to how the party/MP represents them. For instance a disabled person would not want to vote for someone that voted for a cut in ESA (any party) as they would unlikely to receive help from that MP or hae them raise it in the HOC.

Jon Ashworth has regular surgery hours for people to see him and has one of the best attendance records in the HOC. To me that is important rather than have an MP that Lies nowhere near the area they represent. To me that smacks of taking any easy seat just to be voted in.

The Leader does not matter because as we have seen with May the leader can change and not be the one people want or oted for. She only represents the ideals of the party as Corbyn does. Any policy still has to be opted in and passed.

[Alf Bentley]

6 hours ago, Nalis said:

Question, when you vote in a general election how much weight do you give to the following?

 

A) the party (and their policies)

B) the leader of the party

C) the candidate in that constituency

 

For me percentage wise, its probably 50/40/10. 

 

I'd go with 75/20/5.

 

A leader would have to be exceptionally good or bad for me not to focus mainly on party/policies (possibly the case this time).

A local candidate would have to be even more exceptionally good or bad to have significant importance.

[davieG]

I see party and policies as 2 separate options. Some people will vote for a specific party whatever their policies are. I'd never do that I'd look for the party that was offering the most important policies that would likely affect me the most. If I couldn't  find a main party and a reasonable independent was on offer I'd more than likely choose them almost on principle as I'm not overly sold on party politics especially at local level.

[Izzy]

13 hours ago, Nalis said:

Question, when you vote in a general election how much weight do you give to the following?

 

A) the party (and their policies)

B) the leader of the party

C) the candidate in that constituency

 

For me percentage wise, its probably 50/40/10. 

I wonder what average answer you'd get if you asked the entire electorate in this country?

 

With the introduction of televised debates it feels more and more like a US presidential race to me every time.

 

Although most people probably won't admit it, I bet the real truth is something like:

 

A) 25%

B) 70%

C) 5%

[The Doctor]

Pretty much entirely party and policies of the party, leadership doesn't matter to me that much - I'd not vote Tory if they actually had a strong leader, not when I fundamentally disagree with practically everything they stand for, and, beyond the exceptional (i.e. if I had a **** like Galloway as MP again) the local MP doesn't matter too much to me - I've never had to deal with my MP beyond being embarrassed to say they represented me.

[Strokes]

11 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

I wonder what average answer you'd get if you asked the entire electorate in this country?

 

With the introduction of televised debates it feels more and more like a US presidential race to me every time.

 

Although most people probably won't admit it, I bet the real truth is something like:

 

A) 25%

B) 70%

C) 5%

Na I've almost always voted conservative and I'd have never voted for Micheal Howard or Cameron the second time round. I voted conservative in the last election but was undecided between them and UKIP until Nicky Morgan won me over. 

[The Doctor]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

Na I've almost always voted conservative and I'd have never voted for Micheal Howard or Cameron the second time round. I voted conservative in the last election but was undecided between them and UKIP until Nicky Morgan won me over. 

That'd be agreeing with him that the party leader was most important would it not?

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

That'd be agreeing with him that the party leader was most important would it not?

No I voted for them despite the leader being weak. Sorry if that's not clear.

[Webbo]

If I'm honest it 98%( a )and 1% each for the other 2.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

By any chance, did anyone look in on Corbyn's echo chamber today? 

 

He's not resigned this morning, so he's clearly going to try and solider on for another 5 weeks at least. And I read something that suggested Corbyn's wing may not be that bothered with losing seats as the ones under threat are more likely to be centre left MPs, so ironically a bigger defeat could leave Corbyn and co in a stronger position... if that makes any sort of sense! 

 

It certainly seems as though the Labour Party needs to be saved from this absolute lunacy somehow, regardless of what side of politics fence you sit on.

[filthyfox]

Labour pledged no tax rises for me- that's a deal breaker for me. Hope the Tories do the same. Lib Dems want a penny per pound more= **** OFF!

[Buce]

12 hours ago, Webbo said:

If I'm honest it 98%( a )and 1% each for the other 2.

 

 

[The Floyd]

Quite incredible that these people never learn.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/watch-paul-mason-on-racist-tory-voters/#

[Spiritwalker]

17 hours ago, filthyfox said:

Labour pledged no tax rises for me- that's a deal breaker for me. Hope the Tories do the same. Lib Dems want a penny per pound more= **** OFF!

Obviously you wil still want to be looked after if you become seriously ill.

[Claridge]

4 hours ago, The Floyd said:

Quite incredible that these people never learn.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/watch-paul-mason-on-racist-tory-voters/#

That's why people have gone to the right. They are sick too death of the smug,we know best left.

The irony is that the left can't or won't except that it is their dopey policies that have created the decimation of labour