General Election, June 8th

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

I've not decided yet.

On a scale of 1 to Trump, how much of a fib is this Webs?

[Webbo]

Just now, leicsmac said:

On a scale of 1 to Trump, how much of a fib is this Webs?

[Alf Bentley]

It sounds as if a lot of Labour MPs oppose Corbyn's acceptance that there should be an election: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/it-could-be-disastrous-labour-mps-nervous-as-poll-countdown-starts

 

Worth remembering that May needs two-thirds backing in parliament to call an early election......so she does need the support of at least a sizeable proportion of Labour MPs.

Of course, a simple majority would be enough if she proposes a vote of no confidence in her own government but that would be a bit bizarre!

Maybe she'd push through an instant repeal of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act?!?

 

Labour could end up in a civil war over this even before tomorrow.

 

Anyway, time to concentrate on more important European events..........come on, LCFC, let's triumph against the odds once again!  

[Buce]

5 hours ago, Samilktray said:

Can't wait for Thracians personal thread on this in about 3 hours time 

 

4 hours ago, bovril said:

"having once been PM, I can safely say..."

 

".... I'm not a racist - I once had a jet black girlfriend. Did I ever mention how great I am at golf/squash/philanthropy/journalism/football punditry..?..Tony Blair is evil..Andy King would make a good PM... I'm not sure immigrants should be allowed to vote at all unless they can prove how white and Christian they are."

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

It sounds as if a lot of Labour MPs oppose Corbyn's acceptance that there should be an election: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/it-could-be-disastrous-labour-mps-nervous-as-poll-countdown-starts

 

Worth remembering that May needs two-thirds backing in parliament to call an early election......so she does need the support of at least a sizeable proportion of Labour MPs.

Of course, a simple majority would be enough if she proposes a vote of no confidence in her own government but that would be a bit bizarre!

Maybe she'd push through an instant repeal of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act?!?

 

Labour could end up in a civil war over this even before tomorrow.

 

Anyway, time to concentrate on more important European events..........come on, LCFC, let's triumph against the odds once again!  

 

This is sort of what I was mentioning earlier on - what mechanic is she going to use to call a snap election? Does two-thirds override the FTPA then?

 

I was initially thinking she might actually do as you suggested regarding the no confidence vote - but that would be strange! Can anyone clarify?

[The Guvnor]

4 minutes ago, Worthington said:

Just watched the reporting on BBC News.

What a bitter, bitter little cow that Kuenssberg is !

Each to their own, I think Laura is one of the best political commentators.

[The Guvnor]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

reThis is sort of what I was mentioning earlier on - what mechanic is she going to use to call a snap election? Does two-thirds override the FTPA then?

 

I was initially thinking she might actually do as you suggested regarding the no confidence vote - but that would be strange! Can anyone clarify?

I believe it does and apparently it wouldn't be too difficult to repeal the FTPA if she doesn't get the two-thirds vote

[Webbo]

How can Labour MPs vote to keep the Tories in power? They'd be a laughing stock.

[tom27111]

16 minutes ago, Worthington said:

Just watched the reporting on BBC News.

What a bitter, bitter little cow that Kuenssberg is !

Probably would though, little minx

 

 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

I believe it does and apparently it wouldn't be too difficult to repeal the FTPA if she doesn't get the two-thirds vote

Got it. Shows how ridiculous it was passing that Act in the first place then, really.

[Webbo]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Got it. Shows how ridiculous it was passing that Act in the first place then, really.

It was done at the insistence of the Libs. It's necessary in a coalition because either side can just wait for a change in the polls and call an election. I know that's what's happened here but in a coalition govt there needs to be guarantees.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Got it. Shows how ridiculous it was passing that Act in the first place then, really.

 

It was one of Cameron + Osborne's many gimmicks

[The Guvnor]

So our glorious leader has thrown down the gauntlet, the prospect of Farron and Corbyn as a coalition alternative has just sent a shiver down my spine.

 

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Your suggestion of reasoning behind the Lib Dems going with the Tories is way off.

 

There was no way they could go into coalition with Labour and prop up Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, who had in everyone's eyes lost the election. 

 

They had to go with the Tories (especially as the Labour position involved contrived sums with other party MP's and a slim majority).  

 

If they are guilty of anything, I dare say it was being very naive. No one in the party had ever been in government before and we hadn't had a coalition government for decades so there was no real experience or knowledge of what to expect. Additionally, Cameron was quite known as the snake oil salesman he was later on.

 

In my mind (because Nick Clegg is clearly not a bad man, whatever you think of him), the Lib Dems conceded too much ground with the honest intention of trying to make things work - the country was in a pretty dire position financially at the time if you remember... and given Osborne was trying to eradicate the deficit in that Parliment at that time, a costly measure such as abolishing tuition fees would never have been up for negotiation. 

 

 

That's a point, I'd forgotten they would have still needed to make the numbers up had they gone with Labour but the point still stands that it's utterly baffling to think that the most left-of-centre major party would prop up the most right-of-centre one when the latter has no interest whatsoever in supporting the former's key campaign promises.  Hindsight is 20/20 I guess so maybe at the time there was some naive belief that the Libs could act as a bulwark of sorts in a mainly Conservative cabinet.

 

But whatever it's in the past now, these days the Libs' reputation is in tatters in a topsy-turvy world where now the sort of person who would no doubt have been a Lib Dem voter 10 years back tells me how much they like Nigel Farage's no-nonsense approach to politics.  I'm getting bored of the open-mouthed horror on the faces of these do-good 'protest' voters when I explain his real life approach to politics beyond his 'charismatic' (ugh) interviews and general trolling of other politicians.  Things like how their saviour championed the cause of the British fisherman for votes in the Brexit campaign yet never showed up to fisheries meetings as an MEP to represent their interests when he actually had the power to do so.  I mean come on, he looks like a caricature of the word "dodgy", why is it always a surprise to these people when they find out he actually is dodgy?

 

And yeah sorry went off on a massive tangent there, what were we talking about?  

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, Webbo said:

It was done at the insistence of the Libs. It's necessary in a coalition because either side can just wait for a change in the polls and call an election. I know that's what's happened here but in a coalition govt there needs to be guarantees.

 

 

11 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

It was one of Cameron + Osborne's many gimmicks

 

Right.

 

Perhaps it should only have been made to apply when there are coalition governments, then. I mean, if one party has enough of a majority to call a general election anyway (through simple no confidence vote) then it just feels redundant.

[Strokes]

Are Osbournes days numbered? Surely he can't contest in an election and be editor of that newspaper?

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

Are Osbournes days numbered? Surely he can't contest in an election and be editor of that newspaper?

He ought not to, he's cheating his constituents if he does.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Quick march! Left right, right, right, right, right.  

 

R.A.I.N. is coming.   

 

Work that one out folks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

He ought not to, he's cheating his constituents if he does.

Totally agree.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Dammit!

 

As a postie, my first thought is of the multitude of leaflets, poll cards and postal vote forms that I had to deliver a mere farping two years ago. 

 

Thanks Theresa!

 

(Do you have a brother named Alan?)

[DJ Barry Hammond]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

It sounds as if a lot of Labour MPs oppose Corbyn's acceptance that there should be an election: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/it-could-be-disastrous-labour-mps-nervous-as-poll-countdown-starts

 

Worth remembering that May needs two-thirds backing in parliament to call an early election......so she does need the support of at least a sizeable proportion of Labour MPs.

Of course, a simple majority would be enough if she proposes a vote of no confidence in her own government but that would be a bit bizarre!

Maybe she'd push through an instant repeal of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act?!?

 

Labour could end up in a civil war over this even before tomorrow.

 

Anyway, time to concentrate on more important European events..........come on, LCFC, let's triumph against the odds once again!  

 

I've been wondering if there was any hope of Labour effecting a change of leader before the General Election of the back of damning local election results (in May)... but it feels a tad short and contrived based on a projected General Election date of the 8th June.

 

I can't help feel if Labour could some how jettison Corbyn and unit behind a centre left leader, even if the policy basis was quite narrow, they'd really put the frightners into the Tories - so it's almost worth doing.

 

It's only just been announced and we've had no end of Tory MP's going on TV and Radio, looking and sounding smug as feck (IDS being the most annoying example) safe in the knowledge the election is a forgon conclusion for them - it'd be nice to have something wipe that smugness off for a bit at least.

[Dr The Singh]

4 hours ago, Buce said:

 

 

".... I'm not a racist - I once had a jet black girlfriend. Did I ever mention how great I am at golf/squash/philanthropy/journalism/football punditry..?..Tony Blair is evil..Andy King would make a good PM... I'm not sure immigrants should be allowed to vote at all unless they can prove how white and Christian they are."

It's all lies...........He has never had girlfriend.

[Dr The Singh]

Clever move by baby doll, labour, lib Dems, bnp, MFI, and DFS are really weak.  She will win.  Why risk delaying, the worst thing that could haplen is for Corbyn to get kicked out

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Christ, the youth of today are clueless. Listening on 5live to the late night debate after the footy...

 

One student claimed she was voting Labour because Corbyn would be kinder towards students... but then added doubt to herself because she voted for Brexit (so why the doubt given Corbyn's underlying stance)!

 

Then another first time voter claimed he was voting Conservative and then gave the reason that this would result in Labour jettisoning Corbyn and result in a better democracy? Didn't come up with anything about Tory policy - what sort of logic is that! 

[Sharpe's Fox]

4 hours ago, Strokes said:

Are Osbournes days numbered? Surely he can't contest in an election and be editor of that newspaper?

A big Tory majority means the biggest threat to the Tories are themselves. He's setting himself up to be the next Heseltine.