Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Alf Bentley]

53 minutes ago, Beechey said:

When will Labour ditch Corbyn? His handling of everything from the Salisbury nerve gas attack to his limp hand on antisemitism is clearly turning voters off.

 

Opinium (19th May): CON lead +4

YouGov (14th May): CON lead +5

ICM (13th May): CON lead +3

Survation (10th May): CON lead +1

BMG (4th May): TIE

 

For an opposition that is fighting a party that's been in government for 8 years, this is shockingly poor.

 

Has @MattP hacked your account with these "triumphant Tories" polls? 

 

Those certainly are shockingly poor polls for Labour given the time that the Tories have been in office, the many problems the nation faces and the chaotic, divided govt in office.

 

Some of that is certainly down to Corbyn & co (though so was much of the recovery at the last election). But I also wonder if there's also a bit of a "war mentality" among voters?

It's well known that, whatever they think of the cause, a large chunk of the electorate switches to support a war, and often the govt in power, once a war actually happens (e.g. Thatcher & Falklands, Blair & Iraq).

Our entire politics seems dominated by Brexit for now, and maybe some voters are thinking: "we must stand by our nation while it deals with these foreign powers"? I might be talking bollocks, though! 

 

I suppose we might find out once the Brexit deal is (or is not) finally negotiated. If people think it's a great deal, then maybe the Tory lead will stay strong or increase?. If it's a bad deal, maybe people will turn against the govt once that becomes a set reality? Or maybe not, maybe there'll be a nationalistic response of blaming the EU and "standing by our nation"? On the other hand, Churchill was fêted for victory in WW2, then immediately thrown out of office by voters who wanted their lives to improve now that the war was over.....

 

I haven't a clue, in other words! 

[Countryfox]

7 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Has @MattP hacked your account with these "triumphant Tories" polls? 

 

Those certainly are shockingly poor polls for Labour given the time that the Tories have been in office, the many problems the nation faces and the chaotic, divided govt in office.

 

Some of that is certainly down to Corbyn & co (though so was much of the recovery at the last election). But I also wonder if there's also a bit of a "war mentality" among voters?

It's well known that, whatever they think of the cause, a large chunk of the electorate switches to support a war, and often the govt in power, once a war actually happens (e.g. Thatcher & Falklands, Blair & Iraq).

Our entire politics seems dominated by Brexit for now, and maybe some voters are thinking: "we must stand by our nation while it deals with these foreign powers"? I might be talking bollocks, though! 

 

I suppose we might find out once the Brexit deal is (or is not) finally negotiated. If people think it's a great deal, then maybe the Tory lead will stay strong or increase?. If it's a bad deal, maybe people will turn against the govt once that becomes a set reality? Or maybe not, maybe there'll be a nationalistic response of blaming the EU and "standing by our nation"? On the other hand, Churchill was fêted for victory in WW2, then immediately thrown out of office by voters who wanted their lives to improve now that the war was over.....

 

I haven't a clue, in other words! 

 

Don't you worry Alf ...    Vlad the impaler will use all his cyber tricks to ensure that Comrade  Corbynski will get into No10 and then the fun will really start ...    

[Alf Bentley]

11 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

Don't you worry Alf ...    Vlad the impaler will use all his cyber tricks to ensure that Comrade  Corbynski will get into No10 and then the fun will really start ...    

 

If Vlad does as good a job as he did in Salisbury, the Tories have nothing to fear.

 

Poor old Vlad gets blamed for everything now: Trumpski, Brexitski, Corbynski, Skripalski...

 

Never mind Vlad the Impaler, it reminds me of Attila the Stockbroker...

 

 

[Beechey]

47 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Has @MattP hacked your account with these "triumphant Tories" polls? 

 

Those certainly are shockingly poor polls for Labour given the time that the Tories have been in office, the many problems the nation faces and the chaotic, divided govt in office.

 

Some of that is certainly down to Corbyn & co (though so was much of the recovery at the last election). But I also wonder if there's also a bit of a "war mentality" among voters?

It's well known that, whatever they think of the cause, a large chunk of the electorate switches to support a war, and often the govt in power, once a war actually happens (e.g. Thatcher & Falklands, Blair & Iraq).

Our entire politics seems dominated by Brexit for now, and maybe some voters are thinking: "we must stand by our nation while it deals with these foreign powers"? I might be talking bollocks, though! 

 

I suppose we might find out once the Brexit deal is (or is not) finally negotiated. If people think it's a great deal, then maybe the Tory lead will stay strong or increase?. If it's a bad deal, maybe people will turn against the govt once that becomes a set reality? Or maybe not, maybe there'll be a nationalistic response of blaming the EU and "standing by our nation"? On the other hand, Churchill was fêted for victory in WW2, then immediately thrown out of office by voters who wanted their lives to improve now that the war was over.....

 

I haven't a clue, in other words! 

It's pretty unprecedented for a government that appears to be struggling at every turn to be so healthy in the polls against an opposition after 8 years in government. This is no Theresa May mastermind plan, I think it's the failings of the Labour Party. I think you're overplaying the nationalism here, it's obvious a massive percentage of voters are not happy with the government's handling of Brexit, and so naturally the opposition should be gaining, but instead they're falling further behind despite their softer stance.

 

I personally think (and I admit I could be totally wrong) that if Labour had a leader and front bench more towards the centre ground of British politics, that they'd be far and away leading in the polls.

Edited 21 May 2018 by Beechey

[Sharpe's Fox]

38 minutes ago, Beechey said:

I personally think (and I admit I could be totally wrong) that if Labour had a leader and front bench more towards the centre ground of British politics, that they'd be far and away leading in the polls.

 

Which is contrary to every social democratic party in Europe. Marxists won 40% of the vote in this country while social democrats get about 16% on the continent.

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, Beechey said:

It's pretty unprecedented for a government that appears to be struggling at every turn to be so healthy in the polls against an opposition after 8 years in government. This is no Theresa May mastermind plan, I think it's the failings of the Labour Party. I think you're overplaying the nationalism here, it's obvious a massive percentage of voters are not happy with the government's handling of Brexit, and so naturally the opposition should be gaining, but instead they're falling further behind despite their softer stance.

 

I personally think (and I admit I could be totally wrong) that if Labour had a leader and front bench more towards the centre ground of British politics, that they'd be far and away leading in the polls.

 

 

It's undoubtedly true that Labour should be doing better - and that the Tory lead isn't down to the genius of T. May.

It would be interesting to see a survey of non-Lab voters who had previously voted Lab or would consider doing so, asking why they weren't voting Lab.

 

But the electoral facts don't support your comments about Brexit. Both in the general election and in the local elections, Labour made big gains in Remain-voting areas, but actually lost ground to the Tories in Leave areas:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43976539

"The Conservative vote is up by 13 points where more than 60% backed Leave. These are the areas where UKIP had performed best four years ago. However, the Conservatives have dropped by one point in areas where less than 45% voted Leave".

 

Other factors come into it, including age (much bigger disparity than usual between Lab-voting young and Con-voting old) and prosperity (Lab making unprecedented gains in Kensington, Canterbury & Trafford, but losing votes in Nuneaton, Walsall, Mansfield & Hull).

 

Is Corbyn alienating people in Nuneaton and Mansfield through anti-semitism, attitudes to Russia or radical economic policies....yet people in Kensington and Trafford are not bothered??

I'm sure some people are alienated by Corbyn (and others excited) but there are massive disparities depending on factors like age, prosperity - and attitude to Brexit, as John Curtice points out.

 

Labour has a lot of problems, but there's also a big question mark over what happens next in those not-so-prosperous, Brexit-voting areas that have drifted from Labour to Tory. If lives there improve under Brexit, maybe they stay Tory.

But what if lives don't improve? I don't know the answer to that. They'd presumably be disillusioned with the Tories, but wouldn't necessarily turn to Labour.....big opportunity for the Far Right, I'd say.

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, Foxin_mad said:

I do not think there is anywhere quite as bad as Venezuela and North Korea in terms of the above, I would say both are pretty fine examples of where socialism can lead. Its very much Animal Farm, All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others

 

Of course capitalism has its problems, very many. The real issue is that every person is different, we are never all going to fit into 1 box.

 

The current system may not be perfect but for me it is many times better than the alternative being suggested. 

In the case of North Korea I'd almost certainly agree - they are a veritable poster boy for repressive dictatorship. (However, again, at least they keep all their brutality in-house rather than exporting it to weaker nations.)

 

My point here is that the idea that these regimes - and by extension Corbyn - aren't criticised enough is not really correct, IMO. There's plenty of criticism available from a variety of sources.

 

4 hours ago, Sampson said:

What a strange post. It's nothing to do with wealth "disparity" - Capitalism always has more disparity, that's the point, but it also doesn't think Economic equality helps people out of poverty. And what does foreign policy have to do with Economic decisions.

 

Unless you're trying to say Capitalism only worked because of imperialism and Socialism only failed because of Capitalist imperialism allowing it to steal their resources - in which case you just be joking?

 

The different is Capitalism at least can work and help people out of poverty sometimes, whereas Socialism only keeps people in it/causes more of it.

 

It's a Utopian fantasy because humans still can't face the finality and pointlessness of life, so had to create a story of Utopia - a better life- to make it all worthwhile. Religion died in the 19th Century and Socialism replaces that- the grand movement than deified the worker rather than God and leads to the Communist nirvana on Earth - people are willing to believe in it despite it being so obviously silly and counter-intuitive because it makes them feel like their life was worth it and they were a help to lead mankins to a better place.

 

I can't understand how genuinely intellegent people still believe in that guff in 2018. At least religion has nice stories to it. I know we have a lame duck of a government but how people can genuinely want this man in charge of country's Economy utterly baffles me. There's plenty of other parties to vote for that can offer alternatives or ways to dustrinute capital difderently that have nothing to do with public ownership aren't just the living incarnation of everything the History books warns us against.

8

We've danced this dance before, Sampson, so I think I'll keep this pretty brief.

 

A large part of foreign policy is based on economic decisions IMO - think how important trade agreements between countries are and how sometimes trade wars through ideological differences lead to actual shooting wars as a result.

 

"Unless you're trying to say Capitalism only worked because of imperialism and Socialism only failed because of Capitalist imperialism allowing it to steal their resources - in which case you just be joking?" - not sure how much of a joke that is tbh given how open to interpretation that history is, but so it goes.

 

TBH, as I mentioned to foxin above, my intent here wasn't really to get into this particular debate but rather add some much-needed subjectivity to a post that was pretty much entirely objective. There's way too much polarisation going on and IMO black/white, good/evil or whatever dichotomies as applied to politics that don't involve something that affects all humans are lazy, reductive, simplistic and an insult to the kind of intelligence that humans have the potential for - "genuinely intelligent people", as you put it, shouldn't be thinking that way either.

[Buce]

28 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

In the case of North Korea I'd almost certainly agree - they are a veritable poster boy for repressive dictatorship. (However, again, at least they keep all their brutality in-house rather than exporting it to weaker nations.)

 

My point here is that the idea that these regimes - and by extension Corbyn - aren't criticised enough is not really correct, IMO. There's plenty of criticism available from a variety of sources.

 

We've danced this dance before, Sampson, so I think I'll keep this pretty brief.

 

A large part of foreign policy is based on economic decisions IMO - think how important trade agreements between countries are and how sometimes trade wars through ideological differences lead to actual shooting wars as a result.

 

"Unless you're trying to say Capitalism only worked because of imperialism and Socialism only failed because of Capitalist imperialism allowing it to steal their resources - in which case you just be joking?" - not sure how much of a joke that is tbh given how open to interpretation that history is, but so it goes.

 

TBH, as I mentioned to foxin above, my intent here wasn't really to get into this particular debate but rather add some much-needed subjectivity objectivity to a post that was pretty much entirely objective subjective. There's way too much polarisation going on and IMO black/white, good/evil or whatever dichotomies as applied to politics that don't involve something that affects all humans are lazy, reductive, simplistic and an insult to the kind of intelligence that humans have the potential for - "genuinely intelligent people", as you put it, shouldn't be thinking that way either.

4

 

I'm pretty sure that's what you meant to say.

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I'm pretty sure that's what you meant to say.

Nah, was the right way around first time. I think there's a lot of objective viewpoints being tossed around when the truth is much more subjective. Though I suppose you could switch them up and you'd sort of get the point then too.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Nah, was the right way around first time. I think there's a lot of objective viewpoints being tossed around when the truth is much more subjective. Though I suppose you could switch them up and you'd sort of get the point then too.

 

I don't think anything Foxin posts is objective.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

I don't think anything Foxin posts is objective.

No, it's subjective opinion being presented as objective fact, which is what I'm warning against...I probably should have made that clearer in my OP.

[Sharpe's Fox]

3 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I don't think anything Foxin posts is objective.

Which one do you think he is? @Foxin_mad

 

[Buce]

21 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Which one do you think he is? @Foxin_mad

 

 

I think they all look too young, tbh, but I bet he gesticulates like the one in the middle when he’s in full-on rant mode. 

[Webbo]

Polling boost for TMay as she takes a “best PM” lead amongst young voters for first time since GE2017

 

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/05/21/polling-boost-for-tmay-as-she-takes-a-best-pm-lead-amongst-young-voters-for-first-time-since-ge2017/

[Izzy]

I said ages ago that TM would turn it all around and end up being a great PM for this country.

 

You all laughed if I recall 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

1 hour ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Which one do you think he is? @Foxin_mad

 

Perhaps I am one of these despicable cvnts?

 

One of the good guys..bless im

 

 

OOOOOHHH JEREMY CORBYN

 

Or perhaps one of these 2 bellends?

 

 

[Sharpe's Fox]

39 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

I said ages ago that TM would turn it all around and end up being a great PM for this country.

 

You all laughed if I recall 

What's her domestic policy agenda mate has she got one the DUP have agreed a price on yet? She will undoubtedly go down as the worst PM in modern times 

[Buce]

42 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

I said ages ago that TM would turn it all around and end up being a great PM for this country.

 

You all laughed if I recall 

 

Mate, we're still laughing now.

 

It's only the tribal Tories who will agree with you, and they'd vote Tory even if they sent kids up chimneys.

[Strokes]

9 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Mate, we're still laughing now.

 

It's only the tribal Tories who will agree with you, and they'd vote Tory even if they sent kids up chimneys.

I’m furious we don’t send kids up chimneys, no wonder people voted for brexit.

[Guest]

David Davis finally learning what 'max fac' would actually mean.

 

Tracking lorries won't solve Irish border issue, hauliers say

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/21/tracking-lorries-irish-border-issue-hauliers-david-davis?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Edited 21 May 2018 by Guest

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

I’m furious we don’t send kids up chimneys, no wonder people voted for brexit.

 

I guess it's hard for we old 'uns to adjust to the modern world. I mean, look at the lack of prejudice at the Royal wedding for instance. How tolerant must the parents be to welcome a ginger into the family...?

Edited 21 May 2018 by Buce

[Izzy]

2 hours ago, Buce said:

 

I guess it's hard for we old 'uns to adjust to the modern world. I mean, look at the lack of prejudice at the Royal wedding for instance. How tolerant must the parents be to welcome a ginger into the family...?

 

Gingers have been in the royal family for centuries mate.

 

Henry II, Richard the Lionheart, Elizabeth 1, the list is endless.

 

Basically, we fvckin rule 

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Gingers have been in the royal family for centuries mate.

 

Henry II, Richard the Lionheart, Elizabeth 1, the list is endless.

 

Basically, we fvckin rule 

 

Yeah, but I was talking about the Markles, mate...

[Alf Bentley]

47 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Gingers have been in the royal family for centuries mate.

 

Henry II, Richard the Lionheart, Elizabeth 1, the list is endless.

 

Basically, we fvckin rule 

 

 

So Richard the Lionheart should have been known as Richard the Gingernut?

 

Mind you, to judge from Wikipedia, he should have been known as Richard the Bisexual Misogynistic Antisemitic Rapist.... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England#Character_and_sexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England#Coronation_and_anti-Jewish_violence

 

Puts Corbyn's public image problems into perspective. Though maybe he could learn from Richard and rename himself "Jeremy the Lionheart" 

[Dr The Singh]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

So Richard the Lionheart should have been known as Richard the Gingernut?

 

Mind you, to judge from Wikipedia, he should have been known as Richard the Bisexual Misogynistic Antisemitic Rapist.... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England#Character_and_sexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England#Coronation_and_anti-Jewish_violence

 

Puts Corbyn's public image problems into perspective. Though maybe he could learn from Richard and rename himself "Jeremy the Lionheart" 

In the pooonjab he was known as Richard the Ginger Twat, I thought it was useful info, no need to thank me