Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MattP

FT General Election Poll 2019

FT General Election 2019  

501 members have voted

  1. 1. Which party will be getting your vote?

    • Conservative
      155
    • Labour
      188
    • Liberal Democrats
      93
    • Brexit Party
      17
    • Green Party
      26
    • Other
      22


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, MattP said:

I'm voting for Ed Argar, not Boris.

 

Seriously though, I'm shocked Boris didn't do the interview, but I also can't look myself in the mirror if we wake up with a government on Friday that causes members of a minority community to flee the country.

 

Evils prospers when good men do nothing and all that.

Aren't the Tories guilty of this too? we've had plenty of people leave the country since the referendum as a result of the Xenophobic nonsense Johnson et al are spouting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FerrisBueller said:

Aren't the Tories guilty of this too? we've had plenty of people leave the country since the referendum as a result of the Xenophobic nonsense Johnson et al are spouting.

 Can you show me evidence for this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MattP said:

I'm voting for Ed Argar, not Boris.

 

Seriously though, I'm shocked Boris didn't do the interview, but I also can't look myself in the mirror if we wake up with a government on Friday that causes members of a minority community to flee the country.

 

Evils prospers when good men do nothing and all that.

It does even better when 'good' men vote for it.


Can't believe you're not going to keep your word in a seat where it doesn't even matter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

Because Labour left a note saying no more money left. 150 billion a year deficit.

 

If you think that was bad wait till the clear up after Corbyn and has magic money free.

 

There would be joblessness and poverty on a level never seen in a major developed nation if you introduced 3rd rate south American socialist policies.

...but Labour were not in charge for any of that, nor is it likely they will be come Friday, either. They didn't put a gun to the head of whoever the Conservative leader was at the time and force them to take that policy decision.

 

Is it a case of the above all "having to be done" and those people inevitably caught up in it being simply "collateral damage" in the name of tightening the belts, then?

Edited by leicsmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

Because Labour left a note saying no more money left. 150 billion a year deficit.

 

If you think that was bad wait till the clear up after Corbyn and has magic money free.

 

There would be joblessness and poverty on a level never seen in a major developed nation if you introduced 3rd rate south American socialist policies.

First point - it was a joke which has been done multiple times before. Lib Dems/Tories decided to use it to score political points.

 

The rest of your comment is ridiculous conjecture and has no evidence. The one thing that is clear is that you aren't an economist. The only evidence we have (as there isn't that great a counterfactual) is that inequality and poverty are on the rise as things are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MattP said:

 Can you show me evidence for this?

Couple of articles here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-citizens-nhs-crisis-migration-boris-johnson-hospital-health-a9239791.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/20/racism-on-the-rise-since-brexit-vote-nationwide-study-reveals

 

One showing the number of Eu nationals leaving (along with Boris' latest dog-whistle) and another showing the rise in racism and hate crime since the referendum.

I'm sure it's not the standard of scientific analysis you require but It's a case of putting two and two together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FerrisBueller said:

Couple of articles here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-citizens-nhs-crisis-migration-boris-johnson-hospital-health-a9239791.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/20/racism-on-the-rise-since-brexit-vote-nationwide-study-reveals

 

One showing the number of Eu nationals leaving (along with Boris' latest dog-whistle) and another showing the rise in racism and hate crime since the referendum.

I'm sure it's not the standard of scientific analysis you require but It's a case of putting two and two together.

None if that is evidence it's related to Johnson. 

 

We've been through the "hate crime" statistics before as well, they record them differently now, bike theft has been reported as hate crime. Even if police don't believe it is one it has to be recorded as so.

 

People have reported burglaries as possible hate crimes so the police have to come around an investigate.

 

How many of those hate crimes are towards Jews? I doubt Boris is the leader responsible for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MattP said:

 Can you show me evidence for this?

I think it's more a case of the public openly being Xenophobic after the Brexit result:, there was a surge of it and immigrants did decide to leave not just because of job security but of the way the public turned:-

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-romanian/an-immigrants-tale-leaving-britain-to-escape-brexit-hostility-idUSKCN1R11GM

 

I'm surprised anyone is pushing the 'vote for this party because if you don't immigrants will leave' - there's no question both Labour and Tory have problems with racism/anti-Semitism. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MattP said:

None if that is evidence it's related to Johnson. 

 

We've been through the "hate crime" statistics before as well, they record them differently now, bike theft has been reported as hate crime. Even if police don't believe it is one it has to be recorded as so.

 

People have reported burglaries as possible hate crimes so the police have to come around an investigate.

 

How many of those hate crimes are towards Jews? I doubt Boris is the leader responsible for that.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not labour. 

I'm not excusing the problems in the Labour party, but the sort of language and hate stirring being used by Boris and the Tories is no better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, MattP said:

I'm voting for Ed Argar, not Boris.

 

Making the assumption the population stayed the same and those who voted last time didn't change, I calculated that if the 29.3% who didn't vote last time all voted Labour then the Conservatives would still win Charnwood by 175 votes. Additionally, the 1800 votes shared by UKIP and the BNP will surely go towards the Conservatives and suspect the 17k majority won't change much.

 

There really is no need for you to go back on your word. 

 

 

 

Edited by Bobby Hundreds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

I think it's more a case of the public openly being Xenophobic after the Brexit result:, there was a surge of it and immigrants did decide to leave not just because of job security but of the way the public turned:-

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-romanian/an-immigrants-tale-leaving-britain-to-escape-brexit-hostility-idUSKCN1R11GM

 

I'm surprised anyone is pushing the 'vote for this party because if you don't immigrants will leave' - there's no question both Labour and Tory have problems with racism/anti-Semitism. 

Same with the election of Trump in the US - I simply cannot understand how people don't think that xenophobia (at least at the casual level) became more of a problem in both places since those events in 2016.

 

Edit: Mind you, there are still people who believe in a Young Earth that was created, believe that LGBT folks are an affront to their religion/personal morality/whatever and believe that almost all the worlds climate scientists are either incompetent or on the make, so perhaps I'm expecting too much.

Edited by leicsmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Making the assumption the population stayed the same and those who voted last time didn't change, I calculated that if the 29.3% who didn't vote last time all voted Labour then the Conservatives would still win Charnwood by 175 votes. Additionally, the 1900 votes shared by UKIP and the BNP will surely go towards the Conservatives and suspect the 17k majority won't change much.

 

There really is no need for you to go back on your word. 

I'm well aware it's a safe seat - it's the symbol of what not voting would mean though. So I either go back on my word or not vote whilst the most malevolent opposition in my lifetime attempts to take control of my country.

 

I think the former is more preferable. At least I'm being honest, would be so easy for me to just claim I'm not voting and do it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MattP said:

I'm well aware it's a safe seat - it's the symbol of what not voting would mean though. So I either go back on my word or not vote whilst the most malevolent opposition in my lifetime attempts to take control of my country.

 

I think the former is more preferable. At least I'm being honest, would be so easy for me to just claim I'm not voting and do it.

'At least I'm being honest'... about my previous lie.

Have you considered becoming a Tory MP? I reckon you might get the main gig once Boris hangs up his boots.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Foxin_Mad said:

Why?

 

I think he is spot on.

 

The NHS is not fit for purpose in the modern age.

 

Until we admit that we could throw endless amounts of money at it and it wont improve. There is a bigger older population with more complex needs than ever. It needs serious reform.

 

No mainstream politician will ever admit that but it's true.

Well for a start, increasing spending does improve the NHS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MattP said:

According to the Yorkshire post that is what happened, he was in a bed, then had to move, was put in a consultation room and then felt tired so his Mum put him on the floor, not pull chairs up, put him on the fllor - then obviously take a photo.

 

A journo on Twitter thinks we'll get some CCTV soon anyway, hopefully we do and we can find out exactly what happened.

Sorry to take it back to this but the hospital came out and said it was true about the kid not being able to have a bed. As in, a member of the hospital hierarchy said this. An official person working there.

 

But you chose to believe a journo from the Yorkshire Post? Odd from you as I thought you'd have waited for facts to be presented before casting assertions on what happened. Especially given what happened with journalists and the 'punching' protestor... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, I'm not quite sure why we can't want majorly increased funding for the NHS with longer term reforms to meet the increasingly complex needs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mark_w said:

'At least I'm being honest'... about my previous lie.

Have you considered becoming a Tory MP? I reckon you might get the main gig once Boris hangs up his boots.

Couldn't think of anything worse, imagine the greasing pole climbing, back stabbing and then spending your weekends meeting constituents and leafleting etc

 

I decided to join the Henry Jackson society rather than any political party for the same reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...but Labour were not in charge for any of that, nor is it likely they will be come Friday, either. They didn't put a gun to the head of whoever the Conservative leader was at the time and force them to take that policy decision.

 

Is it a case of the above all "having to be done" and those people inevitably caught up in it being simply "collateral damage" in the name of tightening the belts, then?

But it is disingenuous to say "look at the debt the Tory's added!" then saying "Labour had no control over the deficit they left". They are directly related.

Obviously inheriting a £150bn+ deficit is going go be problematic and cause an increase in the debt, no matter if Labour caused it (they didn't cause it) or not.

 

Let's not forget Labour pledged themselves to a very severe austerity plan as well, to the tune of ~£80bn to £100bn of cuts and tax increases in the 2010-2015 Parliament during the election.

Edited by Beechey
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

I think it's more a case of the public openly being Xenophobic after the Brexit result:, there was a surge of it and immigrants did decide to leave not just because of job security but of the way the public turned:-

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-romanian/an-immigrants-tale-leaving-britain-to-escape-brexit-hostility-idUSKCN1R11GM

 

I'm surprised anyone is pushing the 'vote for this party because if you don't immigrants will leave' - there's no question both Labour and Tory have problems with racism/anti-Semitism. 

True.

 

I don't understand how you could hold the view that Johnson's views and quotes don't condone xenophobia and prejudice. Watermelon smiles, picanninnies, letter boxes, tank-topped bum boys etc. The way he says them in a way which could be seen as humorous almost encourages prejudice even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Beechey said:

But it is disingenuous to say "look at the debt the Tory's added!" Let's not forget Labour pledged themselves to a very severe austerity plan as well, to the tune of ~£80bn to £100bn of cuts and tax increases in the 2010-2015 Parliament during the election.

Something that has been forgotten by many.

 

The idea we were going to have no cuts at all running a deficit of 150billion was insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bmt said:

True.

 

I don't understand how you could hold the view that Johnson's views and quotes don't condone xenophobia and prejudice. Watermelon smiles, picanninnies, letter boxes, tank-topped bum boys etc. The way he says them in a way which could be seen as humorous almost encourages prejudice even more.

Boris shouldn't have used those terms even in satire as a elected representative, but it's still not in the same league. 

 

Lifted from another site but just imagine this the other way - because that's exactly what Jews are seeing with Corbyn.

 

For the institutional and sanctioned antisemitism in the Labour Party and the alleged Islamophobia in the Tory party to be equivalent, the following would have to have happened.

 

Boris Johnson would have to have laid flowers at the grave of Baruch Goldstein, who murdered 30 Palestinians in Hebron in 1994. And described the Kach party as his friends. Much like Mr Corbyn paid tribute to those who massacred the Israeli Olympic team in Munich.

 

The Prime Minister would also have campaigned for Darren Osborne, who drove a truck into crowds of worshippers at a mosque, that he should not have charged, found guilty or sentenced for his actions. Like Jeremy Corbyn campaigned for Samar Alami and Jawad Botmeh - who were convicted for a car bomb attack on a Jewish charity in London in 1994.

 

So far as I can tell, no senior Conservative has made a point of defending anti-Muslim bombers. Until they do, I find this deflection utterly detestable.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Beechey said:

But it is disingenuous to say "look at the debt the Tory's added!" then saying "Labour had no control over the deficit they left". They are directly related.

Obviously inheriting a £150bn+ deficit is going go be problematic and cause an increase in the debt, no matter if Labour caused it (they didn't cause it) or not.

 

Let's not forget Labour pledged themselves to a very severe austerity plan as well, to the tune of ~£80bn to £100bn of cuts and tax increases in the 2010-2015 Parliament during the election.

I agree on this however the conservatives pinned everything on being fiscally secure and being able to wipe the deficit quickly, and consequently reduce the debt in the long run. That was what they claimed to be the party of, fiscal stability and responsibility. The debt is now double, which shows they were wrong regardless of the situation they were left in.

 

And fine, but firstly that would have been a more temporary measure and secondly that isn't the same Labour party as what currently exists. For me, large scale austerity was unneccessary and would have been wrong whoever the party was in charge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bmt said:

I agree on this however the conservatives pinned everything on being fiscally secure and being able to wipe the deficit quickly, and consequently reduce the debt in the long run. That was what they claimed to be the party of, fiscal stability and responsibility. The debt is now double, which shows they were wrong regardless of the situation they were left in.

 

And fine, but firstly that would have been a more temporary measure and secondly that isn't the same Labour party as what currently exists. For me, large scale austerity was unneccessary and would have been wrong whoever the party was in charge.

I don't think the Tories ever planned to reduce the debt - to reduce debt you need to run a surplus and that wasn't happening anytime soon running a deficit of that percentage to GDP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Beechey said:

But it is disingenuous to say "look at the debt the Tory's added!" then saying "Labour had no control over the deficit they left". They are directly related.

Obviously inheriting a £150bn+ deficit is going go be problematic and cause an increase in the debt, no matter if Labour caused it (they didn't cause it) or not.

 

Let's not forget Labour pledged themselves to a very severe austerity plan as well, to the tune of ~£80bn to £100bn of cuts and tax increases in the 2010-2015 Parliament during the election.

 

2 minutes ago, MattP said:

Something that has been forgotten by many.

 

The idea we were going to have no cuts at all running a deficit of 150billion was insane.

Well, to be honest I was referring to the cuts and the consequences thereof rather than the debt added by the Conservatives.

 

I don't disagree that a deficit of over 150 billion quid is going to be problematic but my question, as it was before, is if that amount of money - or indeed any other amount - justifies the lack of opportunity, suffering and (very occasionally) death of those who had next to no part in it to begin with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...