General Election, June 8th

[Rincewind]

5 hours ago, Webbo said:

I've not decided yet.

( think you hae. 5 years ago.

6 hours ago, Swan Lesta said:

 

Reported for being Thracian in disguise.

Mattp is closer to being a Socialist though.

[Foxxed]

An early election smacks of a frightened leader. Not frightened of Labour. But of her chances in 2020.

 

Labour are a wounded and toothless animal. I mean, the Labour heartlands of Middleborough voted in a Conservative council last week. Labour are so badly led and divided in Parliament the Tories already have free reign. The Tories hardly need a bigger majority to defeat Corbyn.

 

And an increased Tory majority will not strengthen her Brexit negotiations. The EU countries will not care if her majority is 20 or 200. And she needs a general election mandate for Brexit? What the hell was the referendum for?

 

She doesn't need this election to further defeat Labour and she doesn't need this election to better negotiate Brexit - she's having it now because she knows now will be the best time to win it. Better than in three years time.

 

She knows there'd normally be an election in 2020. But she's also seen a storm brewing, a storm she's in no way confident of weathering. She knows now, not then, will be the best time to win an election. Her confidence does not reach as far as 2020: she's frightened.

[Rincewind]

4 minutes ago, Worthington said:

Totally agree, though I think this is true of older members of 'the electorate' too!

When I vote I take two things into consideration...

1): Which of my LOCAL candidates would I prefer/trust to approach with any issue I might have. ( Don't give a flying fook about who 'resides' in No10..they don't represent me)!

2): On a general note, during my life, have I been wealthier and more secure under a Conservative government or a Labour one?

Don't listen to any pre-election rhetoric, nor take notice of manifesto 'promises and oaths'!

Too many vote on a 'general' scale, believing that 'their' vote is a direct influence on who ends up as PM.! 

True. My vote will be based on my local candidate. My MP is Jon Ashworth. He is the opposition spokesman on the NHS. He has done good work in that area and does a lot of work in the the community. He has also one of the best attendance records at the HOP and lowest expenses records. The fact that he is a supporter of Corbyn is irreleant. He is an MP that is approachable and helps the ulnerable. Is that not what we all want from our MP?

[Webbo]

17 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

An early election smacks of a frightened leader. Not frightened of Labour. But of her chances in 2020.

 

Labour are a wounded and toothless animal. I mean, the Labour heartlands of Middleborough voted in a Conservative council last week. Labour are so badly led and divided in Parliament the Tories already have free reign. The Tories hardly need a bigger majority to defeat Corbyn.

 

And an increased Tory majority will not strengthen her Brexit negotiations. The EU countries will not care if her majority is 20 or 200. And does she need a general election mandate for Brexit? If she does, why did we bother with the referendum?

 

She doesn't need this election to further defeat Labour and she doesn't need this election to better negotiate Brexit - she's having it now because she knows now will be the best time to win it. Better than in three years time.

 

She knows there'd normally be an election in 2020. But she's also seen a storm brewing, a storm she's in no way confident of weathering. She knows now, not then, will be the best time to win an election. Her confidence does not reach as far as 2020: she's frightened.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/mays-real-reason-for-calling-election-to-show-eu-that-brexit-really-means-brexit

 

Of the many reasons Theresa May supplied for calling a general election, the Conservative leader provided one particularly important one. She believes she still needs to convince her European counterparts that Brexit does indeed mean Brexit.

A Brexit mandate, delivering a large Conservative Commons majority, would sweep away the last hope that that the UK’s referendum decision last June could be reversed.

 

On this basis, a resounding majority for May would remove any motive for the EU negotiators to make the UK’s Brexit terms as unpalatable as possible in the belief that it would help UK voters realise the terms of Brexit are just too painful to accept.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

5 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

True. My vote will be based on my local candidate. My MP is Jon Ashworth. He is the opposition spokesman on the NHS. He has done good work in that area and does a lot of work in the the community. He has also one of the best attendance records at the HOP and lowest expenses records. The fact that he is a supporter of Corbyn is irreleant. He is an MP that is approachable and helps the ulnerable. Is that not what we all want from our MP?

 

Thats the advantage of being a sitting MP, because you are able to prove your worth to the local electorate... but if you're looking to win a seat for the first time as an MP, you really need a good party leader / machine behind you to get you their. 

 

This is why, in a nutshell, Labour are doomed here unless something drastically changes.

[Foxxed]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/mays-real-reason-for-calling-election-to-show-eu-that-brexit-really-means-brexit

 

Yeah it's rubbish though.

 

Quote

On this basis, a resounding majority for May would remove any motive for the EU negotiators to make the UK’s Brexit terms as unpalatable as possible in the belief that it would help UK voters realise the terms of Brexit are just too painful to accept.

The EU would have a motivation to make terms unpalatable: it would dissuade other EU countries from leaving the EU.

 

If the EU says "Okay, Britain left, and they got a great deal" then the other anti-EU parties in Europe would suddenly go "Look! Everything worked out okay for Britain! Let's leave too!"

 

Palatable terms for Britain would be a existential threat to the EU.

[Webbo]

Just now, Foxxed said:

 

Yeah it's rubbish though.

 

The EU would have a motivation to make terms unpalatable: it would dissuade other EU countries from leaving the EU.

 

If the EU says "Okay, Britain left, and they got a great deal" then the other anti-EU parties in Europe would suddenly go "Look! Everything worked out okay for Britain! Let's leave too!"

You talk as if they've got nothing to lose from us leaving. This is the Guardian, not the Mail or Express but a pro remain paper and they can see the obvious.

[Foxxed]

Just now, Webbo said:

You talk as if they've got nothing to lose from us leaving. This is the Guardian, not the Mail or Express but a pro remain paper and they can see the obvious.

I don't care what paper it is. I don't care I'm remain and Guardian is remain. Their logic missing an essential motivation the EU has in the negotiations.

 

The EU is trying convince other EU countries to stay in the EU. Trying to convince EU countries they're better working together.

 

If the EU does something that allows it detractors to say "Look! Leaving the EU would not be a bad thing" they are threatening their existence.

[Rincewind]

42 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

An early election smacks of a frightened leader. Not frightened of Labour. But of her chances in 2020.

 

Labour are a wounded and toothless animal. I mean, the Labour heartlands of Middleborough voted in a Conservative council last week. Labour are so badly led and divided in Parliament the Tories already have free reign. The Tories hardly need a bigger majority to defeat Corbyn.

 

And an increased Tory majority will not strengthen her Brexit negotiations. The EU countries will not care if her majority is 20 or 200. And she needs a general election mandate for Brexit? What the hell was the referendum for?

 

She doesn't need this election to further defeat Labour and she doesn't need this election to better negotiate Brexit - she's having it now because she knows now will be the best time to win it. Better than in three years time.

 

She knows there'd normally be an election in 2020. But she's also seen a storm brewing, a storm she's in no way confident of weathering. She knows now, not then, will be the best time to win an election. Her confidence does not reach as far as 2020: she's frightened.

I was thinking the same. ATM the media and his own party are on his back. By 2020 the public may have become tired of it and wise to the affect the Tory policies have on the vulnerable and maybe themselves when they move to hit those further up the ladder. If the Tories have a bigger majority in June they will have carte blanche to do as they please thus hitting the low payed vulnerable self employed and not having to touch their friends in overseas tax havens.

There may no doubt be a few in other parties but fewer of them which is why I am cynical about politicians in general. 

There are good ones about but when I see there are some that claim 50p for a bottle of water it puts me off. 

On the other side when an MP pays out of his salary to travel economy class on a train rather than claim from the taxpayer I respect them more.

[Buce]

7 hours ago, Foxxed said:

An early election smacks of a frightened leader. Not frightened of Labour. But of her chances in 2020.

 

Labour are a wounded and toothless animal. I mean, the Labour heartlands of Middleborough voted in a Conservative council last week. Labour are so badly led and divided in Parliament the Tories already have free reign. The Tories hardly need a bigger majority to defeat Corbyn.

 

And an increased Tory majority will not strengthen her Brexit negotiations. The EU countries will not care if her majority is 20 or 200. And she needs a general election mandate for Brexit? What the hell was the referendum for?

 

She doesn't need this election to further defeat Labour and she doesn't need this election to better negotiate Brexit - she's having it now because she knows now will be the best time to win it. Better than in three years time.

 

She knows there'd normally be an election in 2020. But she's also seen a storm brewing, a storm she's in no way confident of weathering. She knows now, not then, will be the best time to win an election. Her confidence does not reach as far as 2020: she's frightened.

 

You're partly right, I think.

 

I agree that there is a shit-storm brewing; leaving the EU is - and was always going to be - an economic disaster for this country. But May doesn't give a flying fvck about that, neither does any Tory, it's all about domestic power. With the opposition in complete disarray, they see a once in a lifetime chance to stage a power-grab, so overwhelming that they will be able to impose their brand of politics on society with impunity. Say goodbye to the Welfare State. Say goodbye to the NHS as we know it. Say goodbye to any notion of social mobility. She will ride the shit-storm easily enough. The Brexit campaign showed us how easily the average voter is manipulated by spin and lies. The economic downturn will be blamed on the EU, the immigrants, Jeremy Corbyn, the feckless and the workshy, all ably abetted by the Tory poodle press. And not just for a generation, like some pessimists believe. To paraphrase Orwell: If you want a picture of the future, imagine a Tory boot stamping on a human face, for ever. For with the boundary changes, and Scotland lost to them, we will never see a Labour government again.

 

 

7 hours ago, Webbo said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/mays-real-reason-for-calling-election-to-show-eu-that-brexit-really-means-brexit

 

Of the many reasons Theresa May supplied for calling a general election, the Conservative leader provided one particularly important one. She believes she still needs to convince her European counterparts that Brexit does indeed mean Brexit.

A Brexit mandate, delivering a large Conservative Commons majority, would sweep away the last hope that that the UK’s referendum decision last June could be reversed.

 

On this basis, a resounding majority for May would remove any motive for the EU negotiators to make the UK’s Brexit terms as unpalatable as possible in the belief that it would help UK voters realise the terms of Brexit are just too painful to accept.

 

7 hours ago, Webbo said:

You talk as if they've got nothing to lose from us leaving. This is the Guardian, not the Mail or Express but a pro remain paper and they can see the obvious.

 

It's only obvious because you agree with it, Webbo.

 

Here's another Guardian article that'll put you on more familiar ground:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/dead-eyed-theresa-may-puts-the-tories-interests-first

[Facecloth]

Annoyed by it already. 

 

Just had John McDonell on BBC breakfast when asked about a current Labour mp saying he wouldn't stand for election this time under Corbyn. In response he started whittering on about how united the party is.  

 

Then you had David Davis who said the reason there couldn't be another Scottish independence referendum because we only had one a couple of years ago. When it was pointed out we only had a general election a couple of years ago he responded with the answer that thing have changed massively since the last election. Then failed to give a proper answer when it was pointed out that things had changed massively for Scotland too.

 

FFS, I don't even mind if they lie, but just tell convincing lies, don't mumble contradictions, or just trot out the party line even when evidence is staring you in the face. ****ing politicians.

[Sharpe's Fox]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696

 

Pound Shop Thatcher saying she won't debate. Bit weird when she says the election is about leadership. She'll probably cave when they threaten her with an empty chair.

[Buce]

8 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696

 

Pound Shop Thatcher saying she won't debate. Bit weird when she says the election is about leadership. She'll probably cave when they threaten her with an empty chair.

 

An empty chair is no kind of threat.

 

The result is a foregone conclusion, regardless, and the only people who watch the debates are people with an interest in, and an understanding of, politics. The rest will vote based on the spin and soundbites coming from their favourite Tory rag. She will treat the electorate with contempt, and the only ones who care wouldn't vote Tory anyway.

 

Welcome to Big Sister.

[Foxxed]

I've read another theory on her motivation: she fears her own party.

 

She wants, for economic reasons, a softer Brexit. A Brexit that gives us the Norway deal: trade and immigration through the Single Market but no say on Single Market laws through no membership of the EU.

 

But the powerful hard Brexit part of the Tory party do not want this. They want an exit of the EU, an exit of the European Economic Area and an exit of the Single Market. They wants this because - pow - world free trade with Britain on top is bound to result...

 

So she's calling up an election now to draft in new Tory recruits in the hope they will support her against her own party. This assumes May doesn't in fact want a hard Brexit which I've seen no evidence for and assumes the new MPs will support her and not the hard Brexit lobby.

 

The "she wants it now because she's not confident about things in 2020" theory seems to fit Occam's Razor though.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Read reports of May's Radio 4 interview this morning, where she seemed reluctantl to inform anyone on a clear policy on anything. 

 

One suggestion made by some commentators was in line with what @Foxxed touched on above - she's trying to give herself scope to agree a soft Brexit within her own party, but clearly wouldn't want to explicitly state this to the Conservative electorate that would lead to a proportion potentially splintering back to UKIP.

 

It certainly feels to me like the Conservatives are trying to sneak this election win through with minimal of time and fuss, but I ponder whether further down the line this act would stick sufficiently in the publics memory to result in a backlash should the election after this one actually provide some sort of contest.

 

[Facecloth]

Osbourne to stand down, he had no other choice surely.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

23 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Osbourne to stand down, he had no other choice surely.

 

Makes me ponder how long this plan was known behind the scenes - not only from Osborne's decision not to stand down, but from the fact he was clearly actively touting for new jobs.

[Facecloth]

Just now, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Makes me ponder how long this plan was known behind the scenes - not only from Osborne's decision not to stand down, but from the fact he was clearly actively touting for new jobs.

Good point. Makes it even worse that May said no election just a few weeks back if that's the case.

[IrememberBobHazell]

I am a confirmed political  geek but I don't really like the whole palava of elections (as in the campaigning not the voting). It can get pretty distasteful at times.

 I'm voting for Andew Bridgen (Cons NW Leics). Mainly because I consider myself a Conservative but also because Jeremy Corbyn frightens the bejeezus out of me and because my feelings towards the LibDems are too vitriolic to print.

 Its sad a British election has come down to a one party show but we can only hope sanity of opposition will return when Mr Corbyn has to see sense and resign. His tenure is the closest thing I have seen to a political cult in Britain and I really don't like it.

[Jon the Hat]

15 hours ago, Foxxed said:

An early election smacks of a frightened leader. Not frightened of Labour. But of her chances in 2020.

 

Labour are a wounded and toothless animal. I mean, the Labour heartlands of Middleborough voted in a Conservative council last week. Labour are so badly led and divided in Parliament the Tories already have free reign. The Tories hardly need a bigger majority to defeat Corbyn.

 

And an increased Tory majority will not strengthen her Brexit negotiations. The EU countries will not care if her majority is 20 or 200. And she needs a general election mandate for Brexit? What the hell was the referendum for?

 

She doesn't need this election to further defeat Labour and she doesn't need this election to better negotiate Brexit - she's having it now because she knows now will be the best time to win it. Better than in three years time.

 

She knows there'd normally be an election in 2020. But she's also seen a storm brewing, a storm she's in no way confident of weathering. She knows now, not then, will be the best time to win an election. Her confidence does not reach as far as 2020: she's frightened.

She needs a bigger majority becuase some of her back benchers want a harder Brexit than she is planning, and they will vote against it.  100 more will help her no end.

[Sharpe's Fox]

imagine being frightened by an old man with a beard and an allotment

 

 

never mind

[Jon the Hat]

3 minutes ago, IrememberBobHazell said:

I am a confirmed political  geek but I don't really like the whole palava of elections (as in the campaigning not the voting). It can get pretty distasteful at times.

 I'm voting for Andew Bridgen (Cons NW Leics). Mainly because I consider myself a Conservative but also because Jeremy Corbyn frightens the bejeezus of me and because my feelings towards the LibDems are too vitriolic to print.

 Its sad a British election has come down to a one party show but we can only hope sanity of opposition will return when Mr Corbyn has to see sense and resign. His tenure is the closest thing I have seen to a political cult in Britain and I really don't like it.

How do you possibly get upset by the LibDems?  They are soooooooo dull.  

[IrememberBobHazell]

Ooooh I feel a tidal wave of ranting building up, please don't be the Barnes Wallace to unleash it. It will start with those propoaganda 'Focus' leaflets and personal anedcotes of lies and dishonest campaigning. I'll froth at the mouth so much you will think I need a Rabies shot.

[RobHawk]

25 minutes ago, IrememberBobHazell said:

I am a confirmed political  geek but I don't really like the whole palava of elections (as in the campaigning not the voting). It can get pretty distasteful at times.

 I'm voting for Andew Bridgen (Cons NW Leics). Mainly because I consider myself a Conservative but also because Jeremy Corbyn frightens the bejeezus out of me and because my feelings towards the LibDems are too vitriolic to print.

 Its sad a British election has come down to a one party show but we can only hope sanity of opposition will return when Mr Corbyn has to see sense and resign. His tenure is the closest thing I have seen to a political cult in Britain and I really don't like it.

You're a political geek but voting for a man who is an appauling politician! 

[Finnaldo]

Tactically voting Liberal Democrats. I wouldn't vote for them usually after a performance that was so limp-wristed the only comparable is going to the City Ground at 3pm on a Saturday, but it's just to get David Tredinnick out. Not necessarily because he's a Tory (that's just an unfortunate footnote) but because, in my fair opinion, he's an anti-gay, anti-human rights creature who believes the positioning of the fvcking stars should affect your prescription. He's almost neck to neck with good old Vaz in terms of under-qualified, totally incompetent fools to take office. He's the one man study case into how FPTP can totally fail a constituency. In his 30 year reign his career highlights was votes to repeal the smoking and hunting bans, votes against any kind of gay rights vote. I pray he at least steps down soon because I don't see him being voted out.