2017 General Election thread

[Uncle Leo]

Corbyn's played her here, he's probably known for weeks he'd be showing up but by announcing it at the last minute it means May had no time to prepare for a 7 way debate, so unless she wanted to risk embarrassing herself on TV she couldn't show up in response.

Being played by Corbyn bodes well for the Brexit negotiations.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Paul Nuttall making a complete prat of himself. Mind you, binning the Barnet Formula ticks a box for me. Relocating the trident subs as well would get my vote as well but no ones suggesting that. I really dislike jocks at the mo.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Well what I saw of the TV debate, ratings out of 10.

Corbyn - done well imo, growing in convidence in front of the camera 7/10

Fallon - thought he did very well, best performer 8/10

Rudd - shouldn't have been there instead of May but fought her corner well. 7/10

Lucus- if she wants to live in the stone age then toddle off and stop bothering the rest of us. A generous 3/10

Robinson- you couldn't give a flying about anyone or anything outside of Scotland, it shined through, 2/10

Wood- see above. 2/10

Nuttall - poor but at least he stuck to his script. Oh, and do your top button up if you wear a tie. 3/10

Fallon edged it by a nose from Corbyn and Rudd done well considering the circumstances.

 

[number11]

The fact Fallon is getting so much praise for his scripted gag at the end shows how little merit there really is in these debates.

Though it did re-confirm my view that we have a sorry bunch of options and I fear for the next five (or more) years. Time to research into Woodley and see if he is worthy of a vote.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

The fact Fallon is getting so much praise for his scripted gag at the end shows how little merit there really is in these debates.

Though it did re-confirm my view that we have a sorry bunch of options and I fear for the next five (or more) years. Time to research into Woodley and see if he is worthy of a vote.

Other countries do them and do them well,as we have done before.

FWIW,I thought Caroline Lucas,Angus Robertson and Jeremy Corybn all did well in the debate.

 

[Ricky Otto]

I agree that Farron did well, I'm assuming that is who you are all talking about when you say Fallon?
I'm leaning towards lib dems, there are a couple of policies I don't like but they have no chance of winning overall so it would be a vote for a possible coalition to keep the tories in check a little bit.

 

[RHB]

Boris Johnson is live on BBC Breakfast right now, his only line of attack, it seems, is saying how bad the Labour Party are. Poor old Charlie Stayt is trying his best to get Boris to answer reasonable questions but without success. I know, what do you expect from a politician. What is sad is that this bloke is our Foreign Secretary, a post I always thought should be filled by the ,most able rather than the most pompous. Hey ho. I don't think I'll break my record of never voting Tory.

 

[Supernaut]

FWIW,I thought Caroline Lucas,Angus Robertson and Jeremy Corybn all did well in the debate.

I agree - they all came across as very credible indeed. I'm warming to Farron, but let's face it he's not remotely 'stately'.

 

[EastStandBlue]

Thought Rudd gave about as good an account of her party as she probably could've done, but was forced onto the defensive early on and never really came out swinging. She barely laid a glove on Corbyn who, I have to admit, is really coming into his own now. Corbyn came across as reasoned and balanced, gave detailed responses and spoke passionately about his manifesto and why it would be better for the country. All that said, I don't think he did nearly enough to attack Conservative policy and could've done that better.

I saw Nuttall described as a single bollock balanced on a shoddy tie. That about sums it up.

Robertson did what Robertson was sent to do. Speak for Scotland. I find it funny when people complain about Scottish MPs speaking about what's best for Scotland rather than the UK.

Lucas and Farron did very well, even if that bake-off line was the most cringeworthy moment of the debate so far. Lucas really is a fantastic politician and a very accomplished orator. She'd be a shining light in any other party.

Wood wooden.

 

[Supernaut]

Lucas really is a fantastic politician and a very accomplished orator. She'd be a shining light in any other party.

She did herself proud last night - the only one who didn't fluff her words at any point, and she never once referred to any notes. Nuttall couldn't even deliver his (presumably much rehearsed) opening statement without reading from notes.

 

[Uncle Leo]

Corbyn - aside from the numbers gaff on Woman's Hour* - is having a storming run-in to this campaign.

Essentially, it has played in to his hands because, like him or loathe him, what he has been about his entire career has been getting out there, engaging in debate, doing speeches, etc.

Whether that makes for sound policy making when locked away in a (shadow) cabinet meeting is another matter but put up against a PM who looks like she would literally rather be doing anything but talk to the public, he's looking very good.





*Which, predictably, resulted in a ********* tweet from @labourinsider

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Corbyn - aside from the numbers gaff on Woman's Hour* - is having a storming run-in to this campaign.

Essentially, it has played in to his hands because, like him or loathe him, what he has been about his entire career has been getting out there, engaging in debate, doing speeches, etc.

Whether that makes for sound policy making when locked away in a (shadow) cabinet meeting is another matter but put up against a PM who looks like she would literally rather be doing anything but talk to the public, he's looking very good.





*Which, predictably, resulted in a ********* tweet from @labourinsider

this is the crux - when the manifesto came out people were saying they like the policies but not the man. Now they are saying they like the man and the policies. The only battle is to get those that are disinterested is politics generally to actually take notice and actually vote

 

[Uncle Leo]

I've had a little flutter on a hung parliament. I still think the Conservatives will scrape home but at 6/1, there might be an opportunity to make a trade between now and next Thursday.

 

[rigsby]

Do some of you really decide who to vote for after watching any of these live embarrassing squabbles on the TV?

 

[Ricky Otto]

this is the crux - when the manifesto came out people were saying they like the policies but not the man. Now they are saying they like the man and the policies. The only battle is to get those that are disinterested is politics generally to actually take notice and actually vote

I disagree on the battle, I think the battle is making people believe that the manifesto can be achieved without crippling the country with debt. That is certainly my concern.

 

[Bielzibubz]

Taken from a friend;
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Corbyn's vision of socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Corbyn's ideological plan”. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A…. (substituting grades for £ 's )something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

It could not be any simpler than that.

There are five morals to this story:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation
Accredited to Billy Guy

And that is why Socialism the likes of which Corbyn and his cronies idealize hasn't been a viable political alternative to Conservatism/corporate and personal capitalism since the 70's. Sooner or later you run out of other peoples money. As I've said before and the last 40 years are testament to it. Capitalism always wins and always will. Personal greed and personal wealth will always take precedent over the greater moral good. Teresa May is going a long way to throwing this election away and handing it to Corbyn by default but mark my words here and now, and a £100 donation to Shrimperzone if I'm wrong. If, God forbid, Corbyn wins this election both he and his party will be out on their socialist ears in four years time when the great British public realise that for all his talk, for all his and his parties promises and because of his ultimately outdated ideological ideas for change he'll have achieved absolutely diddly squat for the people that put their belief in him. The unions will love him. What's left of the manufacturing North will love him. Old die hard lefties will love him but, and here's the rub, the people that bring the wealth to this nation won't. And that will cost him dear.

Still, that's all hypothetical at this stage.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I disagree on the battle, I think the battle is making people believe that the manifesto can be achieved without crippling the country with debt. That is certainly my concern.

we are the world's 5th / 6th richest nation - most of Labour's spending is bringing us back to service levels closer to what they were pre 2010 not even over that in most cases. The Tories trot out 'magic money tree' but Boris Johnson has a magic money tree as he still claims we will be getting back £350m a week from the EU, and the Tories generally have a magic money tree that they have used many times - quantitative easing. We can afford Trident and HS2 and to leave to EU with no deal and yet we can't afford a pay rise for nurses that will reduce our reliance on agency staff, can't afford a minimum wage of £10 an hour, can't afford to keep pensioners on the deal they are now? Every policy is costed, sure it is a manifesto that was put together at short notice so there will be some elements that will require change on close scrutiny - but that compares favourably to the Tory manifesto which is full of promises of green papers after we put our faith in numbers they haven't announced yet.
There is plenty of money in this country and getting tax dodgers to stop dodging and putting corporation tax up to a level still less than it was in 2010 and still less than most of the rest of Europe is not going to make the sky fall in.

The Tories want us to be grateful for maintaining the status quo - **** that, we deserve better.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I've had a little flutter on a hung parliament. I still think the Conservatives will scrape home but at 6/1, there might be an opportunity to make a trade between now and next Thursday.

That's a canny bet I think.:thumbsup:

 

[Uncle Leo]

*Which, predictably, resulted in a ********* tweet from @labourinsider

Suspended. Good.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...xcl-labour-member-suspended-following-zionist

 

[callan]

we are the world's 5th / 6th richest nation - most of Labour's spending is bringing us back to service levels closer to what they were pre 2010 not even over that in most cases. The Tories trot out 'magic money tree' but Boris Johnson has a magic money tree as he still claims we will be getting back £350m a week from the EU, and the Tories generally have a magic money tree that they have used many times - quantitative easing. We can afford Trident and HS2 and to leave to EU with no deal and yet we can't afford a pay rise for nurses that will reduce our reliance on agency staff, can't afford a minimum wage of £10 an hour, can't afford to keep pensioners on the deal they are now? Every policy is costed, sure it is a manifesto that was put together at short notice so there will be some elements that will require change on close scrutiny - but that compares favourably to the Tory manifesto which is full of promises of green papers after we put our faith in numbers they haven't announced yet.
There is plenty of money in this country and getting tax dodgers to stop dodging and putting corporation tax up to a level still less than it was in 2010 and still less than most of the rest of Europe is not going to make the sky fall in.

The Tories want us to be grateful for maintaining the status quo - **** that, we deserve better.

Has the costing for buying back the water companies, been fully explained yet?

Also what was the rationale for getting rid of the married persons tax allowance?