General Election, June 8th

[Carl the Llama]

9 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Look like I'm the only one standing up for party hardliners here. Fair enough. I don't support the Labour Party in everything it does. The focus on identity politics, the internationalism and it'a warped view on the Middle East make me uneasy. However the broad aims of socialism through parliamentary means, the representation of workers and community infrastructure enthuse me very much and it's the reason although Labour may swing through its broad church I'll probably always vote for them. People shouldn't underestimate the power behind those founding principles of the Labour Party because that's what we'll always be fighting for against those with power.

I fully respect that, especially the bit in bold, and forgive me if the following is a bit reductive but I'd rather not see the country mismanaged into oblivion for the sake of preserving idealism.

 

That said Labour are by no means unique in being a repulsive prospect, hopefully it's just my natural pessimism but it seems every road leads off a cliff right now.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

That's one thing we can agree on. Probably a seriously nasty campaign, too. I usually get childishly excited about election campaigns, but not this one.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if we end up with a very low turnout, though who that would benefit I don't know.

 

 

Yep. As summed up neatly by Brenda in Bristol this morning. 

 

Just seen the Indy headline for tomorrow about Corbyn hanging on even after a crushing defeat (if that's what happens). What a time to be alive eh? 

[Claridge]

48 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Look like I'm the only one standing up for party hardliners here. Fair enough. I don't support the Labour Party in everything it does. The focus on identity politics, the internationalism and it'a warped view on the Middle East make me uneasy. However the broad aims of socialism through parliamentary means, the representation of workers and community infrastructure enthuse me very much and it's the reason although Labour may swing through its broad church I'll probably always vote for them. People shouldn't underestimate the power behind those founding principles of the Labour Party because that's what we'll always be fighting for against those with power.

Pompous prat

[Guest]

Just now, Claridge said:

Pompous prat

Nice to see the level of FT debate reaching it's usual heights. 

[Lionator]

48 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

A question...I having no feeling towards the feeling on the street. Is it possible we might see the

Lowest electoral turnout ever..

Could it be the UK , might feel lathargic, and be " voting tired"

Especially with local elections on the agenda...

Feeling also somewhat conned and cheated, when trying to sort out the deceit from

all corners of the political spectrum...No matter the mess within Labour, Conservatives

aint got anything to shout about, when it comes to in fighting and pulling together...

Both sides are coming over as smarmy salesman, using foot in the door tactics.

Women worse than the men..nobody has the high ground on or in any political debate corner.

Moral, motivation, manifests  empty shells.....

A lot of people won't vote conservative on principal (in my case I could never support a party in which Jeremy Hunt has a prominent role in), yet see nothing in any of the other parties to vote for them, so will simply stay at home.

There's absolutely nobody out there who can inspire. As a young person nobody resonates with me, there's a huge population of us who are here to be tapped into, to be inspired, to be offered hope for our futures and yet who's appealing to us? Absolutely none of them. If the opposition could get even 20% more young people to vote, then it may be election defining, but it's not to be.

[Voll Blau]

Usually find Owen Jones a bit pretentious, but enjoyed this...

 

Quote

We’ll hear a lot about Britain being a bitterly divided nation as we head into a general election. And it would be delusional to deny the referendum has created rifts. But having spent the last few months travelling between English communities that plumped for Brexit, I didn’t find much evidence of ordinary voters brimming with venom for each other. People who voted leave didn’t regard remainers as effete metropolitan elitist saboteurs; remainers didn’t see leavers as knuckle-dragging bigoted Neanderthals.

The appetite to turn neighbour against neighbour over the referendum – and to transform the aftermath into a full-blown culture war – certainly exists in certain media and political circles. My suspicion is that people are growing pretty weary of it. I found that most are too decent and busy to hate each other.

Take Laura and Dan: they are a couple in the South Yorkshire town of Doncaster in their early 20s who have just moved in together. Laura is a hairstylist who voted to remain: she thinks “people voted to leave because of immigrants” and bemoans the loss of her freedom of movement. Her partner Dan, who repairs domestic appliances, did indeed vote to leave because of “refugees”. I press him, and he actually means Romanians, rather than refugees – and he notes there was an expectation of “instant change”, not least over the promise of extra cash for the NHS.

But he said something that summed up how so many people I met seem to feel. “It’s not that I particularly needed it or wanted it to happen. We were asked to vote so I voted, and that was the answer I came up with, with the information I had.” Politicos live in a world where breathlessly scanning through Twitter for crumbs of gossip is one of the first and last rituals of the day. It is not a world most live in. Politics provokes little passion among most people, even if individual issues do. As I left them, remainer Laura and leaver Dan kissed and got on with their lives.

Or take 55-year-old Lynne, a communications manager for an IT company in Fareham, Hampshire. Her husband voted remain; she voted leave, but, like so many on both sides of the divide, was conflicted about her vote. We are not as polarised as the binary choice of “remain” or “leave”, she says. As it happens, she was motivated to vote leave because she felt there was a democratic deficit, yet she believes the post-referendum rhetoric on immigration “is a disaster”, and thinks “it’ll be a great pity if it damages positive migration and immigration policies”.

Politicos live in a world where scanning Twitter for political gossip is a daily ritual. It is not a world most live in.
In Stockport, Greater Manchester, it’s easy to find different democratic choices but little sign of bitter division. Karen, 43, is a proud, working-class Stopfordian who couldn’t get a council house. She’s on a weekly shop in Tesco when we speak. She was a passionate remainer, and worries about how the NHS will cope if foreign doctors and nurses leave. “Where will that leave us then?” she asks.

It’s an anxiety about the future that she shares with many who voted to leave. It is difficult to divorce the pessimism that 64-year-old Tony, for instance, feels about his hometown and his democratic decision. “It’s going downhill fast,” he says, pointing at the empty shops in a town centre that is undoubtedly struggling to thrive. A mother and daughter I met in its Merseyway shopping centre voted for remain, but they also feel the sense of abandonment that many leavers have felt for a long time.

Do small towns such as Stockport get a bit forgotten? “Definitely!” was their immediate response. But, again, with all the people I have spoken to, there’s no bitterness, no hatred, no contempt for the other side. We were asked a question, is the general gist, and we answered it.

From Doncaster and Sheffield in the north of England, down to Barking and Dagenham in London and South Thanet in Kent, I found an abundance of reasons why millions voted to leave. Low pay, a sense of decline, feeling abandoned or ignored, a housing crisis, immigration, a perceived democratic deficit, wanting to give the establishment a kicking. For some, their choice was based on a passionate inner belief; for others, their vote was made with a shrug of the shoulders.

So an embattled Labour party has an opening in June’s election – a call for unity to build a new Britain freed from the social blights and challenges holding the country back. Labour should say: whether we voted remain or leave, millions of us are united. We should invest in the economy and have a strategy to promote new industries to create new skilled and secure jobs. We believe the booming rich can afford to pay more so we can invest in and modernise our creaking public services. We believe the lowest level of housebuilding in peacetime since the 1920s is a chronic national failure, so we will build comfortable homes people can afford to live in. We believe multinational corporations should contribute more, so local businesses can pay less tax and have more rights.

Far more unites us – wherever we stand on our relationship to the European Union – than divides us. Let’s stop the demonising and the inciting of hatred by politicians and media alike. A cry for unity – to bring remainers and leavers together to build a new Britain – should be at the centre of Labour’s election campaign.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/20/brexitland-fractured-nation-politicians-unite-labour?CMP=soc_3156

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Corbyn's "establishment against the people" line this morning is quite a good one. If these are the themes he will run with, he may just consolidate Labour support.

 

And Newsnight was interesting last night, because it felt that the Conservatives were debating policy position with themselves. Discussions on the triple lock and the overseas aid budget - and it seemed like the concenus was they would go for removing the triple lock, but continue with 2% aid budget commitment. 

[stripeyfox]

Looking forward to six weeks or so of fake news on facebook etc. Bet the Russians are already fixing it so Corbyn wins....

 

[Buce]

44 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Corbyn's "establishment against the people" line this morning is quite a good one. If these are the themes he will run with, he may just consolidate Labour support.

 

And Newsnight was interesting last night, because it felt that the Conservatives were debating policy position with themselves. Discussions on the triple lock and the overseas aid budget - and it seemed like the concenus was they would go for removing the triple lock, but continue with 2% aid budget commitment. 

 

Fvcking our own pensioners over but still subsidising India's space program?

 

The Tory right will love that.

[Alf Bentley]

35 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Fvcking our own pensioners over but still subsidising India's space program?

 

The Tory right will love that.

 

 

I see Carswell's not going to stand again, but will vote for the Tory candidate....I wonder if that's a "come and get me" plea?

 

If he does leave, it's a bit of a shame. Not my sort of politics, obviously, but one of the more thinking right-wingers out there.

[Sharpe's Fox]

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Corbyn's "establishment against the people" line this morning is quite a good one. If these are the themes he will run with, he may just consolidate Labour support.

 

And Newsnight was interesting last night, because it felt that the Conservatives were debating policy position with themselves. Discussions on the triple lock and the overseas aid budget - and it seemed like the concenus was they would go for removing the triple lock, but continue with 2% aid budget commitment. 

Weird that they'd threaten the triple lock when its the only thing that ensures pension rise since Thatcher cut the link between pension and earnings back in the day. I would have thought it was a banker they were going to keep that policy.

[Buce]

9 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Weird that they'd threaten the triple lock when its the only thing that ensures pension rise since Thatcher cut the link between pension and earnings back in the day. I would have thought it was a banker they were going to keep that policy.

 

Yeah, particularly as the grey vote is such an influential demographic. Bizarre.

[Rincewind]

II doubt many will agree with me on here but my take on it is that we have had around 40 years of centre to right wing governments, Labour and Tory so most on here only have lived through thay. Jeremy Corbyn comes along with old style socialist values and he is perceived as a loony leftie. I see him keeping true to Labour values as they were originally intended. Whether it is viable in modern day Britain I do not know. There are though a lot of people fed up with the kind of politics we have had in recent years. The career politician from all parties. There are good MP's though. Jon Ashworth being one who does a lot of work in his roll as opposition spokesman on health. He also has one of the best attendance records to debates in the HOC.His seat is safe so for me there is no point voting against him unless as a protest vote. I will ether not vote or go for an Independent..

[Alf Bentley]

47 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Weird that they'd threaten the triple lock when its the only thing that ensures pension rise since Thatcher cut the link between pension and earnings back in the day. I would have thought it was a banker they were going to keep that policy.

 

I suppose it's the extra cost associated with the 2.5% element of the triple lock. Inflation has gone back up for now, but for a couple of years both inflation and average earnings were well below 2.5%......so, by getting a 2.5% rise, pensioners were getting a rise well above inflation and average earnings at a time of austerity. I've just checked and state pensions amount to £92.1bn annually. So, increasing them by, say, 1% above inflation or pay every year must be costing almost an extra £1bn per year.

 

On the whole, I'd tend to agree that it should be adjusted (e.g. get rid of the 2.5% element of the lock - just guarantee the higher of inflation and average pay).

But the funds freed up should go to other government spending, on young people, health, social care, infrastructure....not on funding the government's £50bn (?) bill for leaving the EU, offsetting loss to the Treasury due to Brexit or slashing deficit/debt to offset the higher interest we'll have to pay on UK sovereign debt. 

[Voll Blau]

17 hours ago, Lionator said:

A lot of people won't vote conservative on principal (in my case I could never support a party in which Jeremy Hunt has a prominent role in), yet see nothing in any of the other parties to vote for them, so will simply stay at home.

There's absolutely nobody out there who can inspire. As a young person nobody resonates with me, there's a huge population of us who are here to be tapped into, to be inspired, to be offered hope for our futures and yet who's appealing to us? Absolutely none of them. If the opposition could get even 20% more young people to vote, then it may be election defining, but it's not to be.

At least go out and spoil your vote. Make a statement. Sitting at home is tacit consent that you're happy with the current standard of politicians in general.

[Buce]

This reminds me why I supported Corbyn for leader:

 

“Much of the media and establishment are saying that this election is a foregone conclusion,” he said. “They think there are rules in politics, which if you don’t follow by doffing your cap to powerful people, accepting that things can’t really change, then you can’t win.

“But of course, they do not want us to win. Because when we win it is the people, not the powerful, who win. The nurse, the teacher, the small trader, the carer, the builder, the office worker, the student, the carer win. We all win.

“It is the establishment that complains I don’t play the rules – by which they mean their rules. We can’t win, they say, because we don’t play their game.”

A political system based around “yesterday’s rules” favoured the wealthy, Corbyn argued. He said: “It is these rules that have allowed a cosy cartel to rig the system in favour of a few powerful and wealthy individuals and corporations.

“It is a rigged system set up by the wealth extractors, for the wealth extractors. But things can, and they will, change.

“If I were Southern rail or Philip Green, I’d be worried about a Labour government. If I were Mike Ashley or the CEO of a tax-avoiding multinational corporation, I’d want to see a Tory victory.

“Why? Because those are the people who are monopolising the wealth that should be shared by each and every one of us in this country.

“Everyone, and I mean everyone, has a contribution to make and a life to lead. Poverty and homelessness are a disaster for the individual and a loss to all of us. It is wealth that should belong to the majority and not a tiny minority.”

[davieG]

1 hour ago, Rincewind said:

II doubt many will agree with me on here but my take on it is that we have had around 40 years of centre to right wing governments, Labour and Tory so most on here only have lived through thay. Jeremy Corbyn comes along with old style socialist values and he is perceived as a loony leftie. I see him keeping true to Labour values as they were originally intended. Whether it is viable in modern day Britain I do not know. There are though a lot of people fed up with the kind of politics we have had in recent years. The career politician from all parties. There are good MP's though. Jon Ashworth being one who does a lot of work in his roll as opposition spokesman on health. He also has one of the best attendance records to debates in the HOC.His seat is safe so for me there is no point voting against him unless as a protest vote. I will ether not vote or go for an Independent..

I think a lot of the negativity is down to how uninspiring Corbyn rather than his policies.

[Jon the Hat]

18 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

That's one thing we can agree on. Probably a seriously nasty campaign, too. I usually get childishly excited about election campaigns, but not this one.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if we end up with a very low turnout, though who that would benefit I don't know.

 

 

I doubt it well get particularly nasty, it is not going to be a close election after all.

[Jon the Hat]

4 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Corbyn's "establishment against the people" line this morning is quite a good one. If these are the themes he will run with, he may just consolidate Labour support.

 

And Newsnight was interesting last night, because it felt that the Conservatives were debating policy position with themselves. Discussions on the triple lock and the overseas aid budget - and it seemed like the concenus was they would go for removing the triple lock, but continue with 2% aid budget commitment. 

The triple lock helps wealthy pensioners as much as poor ones, just like international aid (0.7% i believe not 2% - you are thinking of NATO military spending?) benefits richer countries as well as poorer ones.  My probelm with international aid if we seem to through money at rather dubious internal aid foundations so we can tick the box that we hit the target, and that  frankly is not a great plan.

[deep blue]

18 hours ago, Lionator said:

A lot of people won't vote conservative on principal (in my case I could never support a party in which Jeremy Hunt has a prominent role in), yet see nothing in any of the other parties to vote for them, so will simply stay at home.

There's absolutely nobody out there who can inspire. As a young person nobody resonates with me, there's a huge population of us who are here to be tapped into, to be inspired, to be offered hope for our futures and yet who's appealing to us? Absolutely none of them. If the opposition could get even 20% more young people to vote, then it may be election defining, but it's not to be.

 

Why don't you get off your arris and go out and do something positive, instead of just sitting back and expecting other people to work to govern the country.  If a few more got actively involved in politics, especially the young, who have more energy and whose futures are at stake, we might get better politicians than we have at prsent.  Wasn't if JFK who said something like "think not of what the country does for you, but what you do for the country" (rough approximation, but you get the drift).

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

The triple lock helps wealthy pensioners as much as poor ones, just like international aid (0.7% i believe not 2% - you are thinking of NATO military spending?) benefits richer countries as well as poorer ones.  My probelm with international aid if we seem to through money at rather dubious internal aid foundations so we can tick the box that we hit the target, and that  frankly is not a great plan.

 

0.7% of Gross National Income, which equates to £13.3 billion for 2016.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39658907

[Claridge]

2 hours ago, Buce said:

few powerful and wealthy individuals and corporations.

Like len mccluskey and Unite or don't they count?

[Lionator]

6 hours ago, Voll Blau said:

At least go out and spoil your vote. Make a statement. Sitting at home is tacit consent that you're happy with the current standard of politicians in general.

 

To be fair, not voting is the worst thing to do. I will be voting, I just have no idea who for at this stage.

[Spiritwalker]

7 hours ago, Buce said:

This reminds me why I supported Corbyn for leader:

 

“Much of the media and establishment are saying that this election is a foregone conclusion,” he said. “They think there are rules in politics, which if you don’t follow by doffing your cap to powerful people, accepting that things can’t really change, then you can’t win.

“But of course, they do not want us to win. Because when we win it is the people, not the powerful, who win. The nurse, the teacher, the small trader, the carer, the builder, the office worker, the student, the carer win. We all win.

“It is the establishment that complains I don’t play the rules – by which they mean their rules. We can’t win, they say, because we don’t play their game.”

A political system based around “yesterday’s rules” favoured the wealthy, Corbyn argued. He said: “It is these rules that have allowed a cosy cartel to rig the system in favour of a few powerful and wealthy individuals and corporations.

“It is a rigged system set up by the wealth extractors, for the wealth extractors. But things can, and they will, change.

“If I were Southern rail or Philip Green, I’d be worried about a Labour government. If I were Mike Ashley or the CEO of a tax-avoiding multinational corporation, I’d want to see a Tory victory.

“Why? Because those are the people who are monopolising the wealth that should be shared by each and every one of us in this country.

“Everyone, and I mean everyone, has a contribution to make and a life to lead. Poverty and homelessness are a disaster for the individual and a loss to all of us. It is wealth that should belong to the majority and not a tiny minority.”

I think Corbyn has had a good start and more of this type of speech 

might swing me back. I'm still really pissed at the way he didn't turn up

for the Brexit debate though.

[Sharpe's Fox]

9 minutes ago, Spiritwalker said:

I think Corbyn has had a good start and more of this type of speech 

might swing me back. I'm still really pissed at the way he didn't turn up

for the Brexit debate though.

Did more than Theresa May and he didn't even like the EU.