What I want won't make a difference to the outcome. If May wins, she has to deliver Brexit, and the campaign she delivered suggests it will be a fuckup of biblical proportions.
I expected that in any case, but I didn't expect Tezza to screw up the prelims this badly
That story is someone from the Tories claiming it would lead to those fees! Ignore!
The trouble is I really don't trust McDonnell. I'm very ill at ease to find out what he'd do.
If Labour had normal political figures in the main jobs, it'd be one thing. I'd take Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor anyday over McMao.
hat thinks that way cannot be trusted.
Those are fair points, and as I said before I'll probably protest vote Green, in the end.
I seriously hope that Labour MPs would not entertain any crazy ideas by McDonnell and Corbyn. But I fear the threat of deselection may lead to some being pressured into voting for them if the worst happened.
Voting Green to evade the more crazy of Labour's policies is certainly a novel approach, I grant you.
Yes, I know. But they'll never get into power, and I'd like to vote for a left of centre party at this GE, ideally.
The LibDems under Farron are clearly left of centre, without Labour's crazy bits. Indeed in some areas, such as their tax policy, they are more redistributive (which used to be the key left/right differentiator) than Labour.
The LDs are WAY too Europhile for me. I
Very interesting you're a centrist and a bit of a eurosceptic, Apocalypse. I must confess I thought you were a very solid left-winger and very pro-EU.
I do hope we can do something to persuade you to lend us your vote this once over the next week or so.
I wouldn't call myself a centrist! I'm pro-EU overall but I don't think the EU is perfect by any means.
The LibDems are very strong supporters of EU reform, as is the ALDE group generally across Europe. That is what Tim was trying to communicate with his rather hamfisted self-reference as a Eurosceptic early in the campaign, which he should have been bright enough to foresee would be used against him. Strongly believing that our future should lie in closer relationships and pooled decision-making with our neighbours is not incompatible with dissatisfaction about the unaccountable way the EU currently operates.
Hmmm. I'll consider voting LD.
If you are in England and want a caring internationalist society with sane finances then there is no alternative.
Reds: Labour 39%, Corbyn as best PM 30% (difference of 9%) Blues: Conservatives 42%, May as best PM 43% (difference of 1%)
Why?
I think generally someone who is already prime minister can be expected to have some advantage over the leader of the opposition in the "best PM" stakes.
But landslide seems unlikely now. it seems like the IRA stuff hasn't cut through with enough people, and the initial Tory plan of giving Labour enough rope to hang temselves has failed as Corbyn has run a largely fuckup-free campaign.
They still have a week to go, and they might trip up as the polls boost their confidence.
I still suspect as the campaign goes on shy Tories who previously popped their heads above the parapet have gone into quiet head down silence.
The explanation for this is straightforward. Once you get into things, particularly around the Conservative manifesto launch the Conservatives start to look hard, harsh and giving feck all away, thus its socially less acceptable to say ' i get it, its harsh but its also reality'
Its a little bit of the old 'Tories' . The left, who often play this as if they are on a moral crusade, make it a morality issue, as if voting Conservative is somehow causing disabled children to be thrown of cliffs in midnight sacrifices by posh rich people wearing top hats, but it isn't, its democratic voting issue.
The average British bod just would rather not get into defending position
Sure, I always said from the get go back in April that there had to be a bit of soapy froth on the top end of the Conservative vote. There is, and they'll be, barring any mess ups at 43% and above on the day.
Labour, gut instinct suggests, are currently carrying froth on top.
There's quite a bit of evidence the Tories will be within the 41%-44% box.
What I don't see is how Labour stand. They could be anywhere from 30%-39%.
My assumption is it's the ex-lab, 2015 ukip, then brexit vote (that was blue a month ago) - which is boosting lab.
Any other theories?
I can't see why anyone fitting that description would vote for Corbyn. I am one of them, maybe not representative though. I live in a very Ukip area and have never heard anyone say one good thing about Corbyn, he is a laughing stock. In fact the only time two of my mates have ever brought up politics was to say 'wtf is that new labour weirdo all about'
I live in Nottingham North, which is overwhelmingly WWC and had an 18.5% UKIP vote in 2015. My ward (Bulwell) voted more than 2-1 to leave. I've helped in several canvasses and it seems quite solidly Labour now - quite a few voters say they went UKIP last time but want to get the Tories out.
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
I think the Tories are pathetic and their campaign has proved this. There is nothing to May, as far as I can see. They don't deserve to win. I argued from last summer that if May was serious about helping making a better society then taxes would have to rise. I agree that the Me Me Me society needs to stop and have said as much repeatedly in thread headers and below the line.
But your party has - shamelessly - argued against tax rises such as the equalisation of NI rates in the budget and has made a big play of wanting to protect the inheritances of the rich. Your party wants those who don't go to university to pay for those who do. If you really wanted to changed a rigged society you would agree that rich people should use their assets for rainy days not expect others to pay so that their children can get an unfair advantage through inheritance windfalls. You ought to be on the side of those who are least well off. Those people - in case you are unclear - are not the middle aged children of those with substantial assets or those who go to university. They are fortunate and in a better position than many others.
And having economic policies that have repeatedly been proved not to work will harm the poorest, those you claim to care about. Compassion is not about emoting. It is about coming up with practical measures that will actually help the worst off not penalise them in pursuit of some mythical fairness or failed political ideology.
So the idea that Tories are uniquely evil and Labour on the side of fairness is so much phooey.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
@AmberRuddHR - an ex-stockbroker and descendant of Charles II. This is the elite that wants Britain to stay rigged
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
I think the Tories are pathetic and their campaign has proved this. There is nothing to May, as far as I can see. They don't deserve to win. I argued from last summer that if May was serious about helping making a better society then taxes would have to rise. I agree that the Me Me Me society needs to stop and have said as much repeatedly in thread headers and below the line..
They ought to be better than this and we ought to have a better choice. But a Hobson's choice it is.
So it's the Lib Dems for me, I'm afraid. Largely because I like Norman Lamb and my local councillor.
Norman Lamb is great. I saw him speak on health and social care when he was Minister. I also bumped into him at a LD hustings in the carpark, while Farron did his bit. I did a double take, and stooped for a chat. Lovely bloke.
He got my vote for leader, but Farron was better live than he is on TV. He doesnt have the same gravitas.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
Given the speed at which @bigjohnowls is spinning, can I take it that Amber Rudd did rather well?
Started off quite strong, serious and sharp, dipped a bit toward the latter half, and the vocal part of the audience was definitely on Corbyn's side (at one point the crowd guffawed at her when she asked for the government to be judged on its record), but she seemed pretty capable.
My assumption is it's the ex-lab, 2015 ukip, then brexit vote (that was blue a month ago) - which is boosting lab.
Any other theories?
I can't see why anyone fitting that description would vote for Corbyn. I am one of them, maybe not representative though. I live in a very Ukip area and have never heard anyone say one good thing about Corbyn, he is a laughing stock. In fact the only time two of my mates have ever brought up politics was to say 'wtf is that new labour weirdo all about'
I live in Nottingham North, which is overwhelmingly WWC and had an 18.5% UKIP vote in 2015. My ward (Bulwell) voted more than 2-1 to leave. I've helped in several canvasses and it seems quite solidly Labour now - quite a few voters say they went UKIP last time but want to get the Tories out.
You do know we all ignore your canvass reports, right?
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Really? After he won an election against all odds the PLP would immediately throw him to the wolves?
That would be democratically outrageous.
If Corbyn wins this election he wins it and will deserve his five years.
This headline reveals all. Without even watching the debate I can gather from this that Corbyn 'won' and outperformed expectations. A desperate headline from the mail, trying to change the narrative. A floundering campaign from the tories.
They will still win a majority of 50-80 I think, people will still trust May as PM material more than Corbyn, especially for Brexit negotiations. But landslide seems unlikely now. it seems like the IRA stuff hasn't cut through with enough people, and the initial Tory plan of giving Labour enough rope to hang temselves has failed as Corbyn has run a largely fuckup-free campaign.
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
I think the Tories are pathetic and their campaign has proved this. There is nothing to May, as far as I can see. They don't deserve to win. I argued from last summer that if May was serious about helping making a better society then taxes would have to rise. I agree that the Me Me Me society needs to stop and have said as much repeatedly in thread headers and below the line.
But your party has - shamelessly - argued against tax rises such as the equalisation of NI rates in the budget and has made a big play of wanting to protect the inheritances of the rich. Your party wants those who don't go to university to pay for those who do. If you really wanted to changed a rigged society you would agree that rich people should use their assets for rainy days not expect others to pay so that their children can get an unfair advantage through inheritance windfalls. You ought to be on the side of those who are least well off. Those people - in case you are unclear - are not the middle aged children of those with substantial assets or those who go to university. They are fortunate and in a better position than many others.
And having economic policies that have repeatedly been proved not to work will harm the poorest, those you claim to care about. Compassion is not about emoting. It is about coming up with practical measures that will actually help the worst off not penalise them in pursuit of some mythical fairness or failed political ideology.
So the idea that Tories are uniquely evil and Labour on the side of fairness is so much phooey.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I agree with much of that. I just feel that not voting is somehow wrong and uncivic. But there's no criticism of you or any other non-voter in that.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
Oh, if he wins he will certainly last 6 weeks. The Summer recess isn't far away, and he will have to fly off to Europe too. Labour MPs won't touch him if there are real jobs on offer, they will just try and mitigate and influence him.
They won't succeed.
It's the voters who'll suss him out, very, very quickly, and probably by the Autumn.
But landslide seems unlikely now. it seems like the IRA stuff hasn't cut through with enough people, and the initial Tory plan of giving Labour enough rope to hang temselves has failed as Corbyn has run a largely fuckup-free campaign.
They still have a week to go, and they might trip up as the polls boost their confidence.
But doesn't Corbyn almost seem to have inherited Tony's Teflon Mantle?
I still suspect as the campaign goes on shy Tories who previously popped their heads above the parapet have gone into quiet head down silence.
But the Tories haven't slipped all that much, it's Labour who have risen.
Read the whole post....
I did, thank you, but I didn't think it adequately disputed that point.
Let me clarify because I didn't put it across well.
In a nutshell, some average punters will just say they will vote Labour just to move on. But they won't on polling day, they'll go Conservative or not vote. And it only has to be 2 or 3 off the top of those Labour figures..or 5 if its You Gov....and its going to look a hell of a lot different
The Conservatives look solid at at least 43% or so. Labour, I suspect, has froth to the tune of several points. Bear in mind, I'm backing on my instinct being better than the average. Its not science because if it was, I'd follow what is apparently scientific, which won't make me money.
I never believed the massive margins, I believed that Conservative vote was frothy at the start and simply wouldn't stack up. and reckoned on a Conservative majority, 35 on an ok day, 50 on a great day over the rest combined because I'm not sure if Conservative votes will stack up quite in the way they hope.
Best estimate Conservatives 43%+, Labour 33% or below.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
Oh, if he wins he will certainly last 6 weeks. The Summer recess isn't far away, and he will have to fly off to Europe too. Labour MPs won't touch him if there are real jobs on offer, they will just try and mitigate and influence him.
They won't succeed.
It's the voters who'll suss him out, very, very quickly, and probably by the Autumn.
But, by then, it will be too late.
If Corbyn actually won a majority nobody will be able to afford to go to Europe, the pound will hit parity with the Euro within hours.
Newsnight: Labour not ruling out a coalition with the SNP.
Here we go again....
It only worked last time because the tory campaign rammed the message home for weeks before polling day, it@s too late now.
I know people say this of every tory GE campaign but this one really is shit. The whole narrative is being controlled by Cobyn not May. If she can't have a resounding defeat of Corbyn maybe we don't want her carrying out Brexit. Maybe she doesn't want it?
Maybe this explains the crapness of the tory messaging. She doesn't want it.
My assumption is it's the ex-lab, 2015 ukip, then brexit vote (that was blue a month ago) - which is boosting lab.
Any other theories?
I can't see why anyone fitting that description would vote for Corbyn. I am one of them, maybe not representative though. I live in a very Ukip area and have never heard anyone say one good thing about Corbyn, he is a laughing stock. In fact the only time two of my mates have ever brought up politics was to say 'wtf is that new labour weirdo all about'
I live in Nottingham North, which is overwhelmingly WWC and had an 18.5% UKIP vote in 2015. My ward (Bulwell) voted more than 2-1 to leave. I've helped in several canvasses and it seems quite solidly Labour now - quite a few voters say they went UKIP last time but want to get the Tories out.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Southam, I hope your right.
Politics has been getting worse and worse since 2015. So many bad decisions....
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
Oh, if he wins he will certainly last 6 weeks. The Summer recess isn't far away, and he will have to fly off to Europe too. Labour MPs won't touch him if there are real jobs on offer, they will just try and mitigate and influence him.
They won't succeed.
It's the voters who'll suss him out, very, very quickly, and probably by the Autumn.
But, by then, it will be too late.
Being in power is very different to being in opposition - there is a lot more to gain. But I agree the voters would turn on Corbyn very quickly. He has shown over the last two years he is incapable of leadership, while his advisers are utterly poisonous.
I still suspect as the campaign goes on shy Tories who previously popped their heads above the parapet have gone into quiet head down silence.
But the Tories haven't slipped all that much, it's Labour who have risen.
Read the whole post....
I did, thank you, but I didn't think it adequately disputed that point.
Let me clarify because I didn't put it across well.
In a nutshell, some average punters will just say they will vote Labour just to move on. But they won't on polling day, they'll go Conservative or not vote. And it only has to be 2 or 3 off the top of those Labour figures..or 5 if its You Gov....and its going to look a hell of a lot different
The Conservatives look solid at at least 43% or so. Labour, I suspect, has froth to the tune of several points. Bear in mind, I'm backing on my instinct being better than the average. Its not science because if it was, I'd follow what is apparently scientific, which won't make me money.
I never believed the massive margins, I believed that Conservative vote was frothy at the start and simply wouldn't stack up. and reckoned on a Conservative majority, 35 on an ok day, 50 on a great day over the rest combined because I'm not sure if Conservative votes will stack up quite in the way they hope.
Best estimate Conservatives 43%+, Labour 33% or below.
I'm sticking with Cons on 41-42%, Labour on 34-35%. Differential turnout giving a majority of between 20-40.
Labour need to be careful with the whooping/jeering crowds - thoughts return of Kinnock's Sheffield rally. Youthful exuberance tends not to go down too well with the humbug-sucking blue-rinse brigade.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Southam, I hope your right.
Politics has been getting worse and worse since 2015. So many bad decisions....
If Labour MPs couldn't get Corbyn out in opposition when 90% declared no confidence in him, I don't understand how they could possibly get him out after he won an election!
This headline reveals all. Without even watching the debate I can gather from this that Corbyn 'won' and outperformed expectations. A desperate headline from the mail, trying to change the narrative.
That headline is precisely the equivalent of the "Fraud At The Polls" headline prepared as an alternative to "Kane Elected" by Kane's newspaper.
Newsnight: Labour not ruling out a coalition with the SNP.
Here we go again....
It only worked last time because the tory campaign rammed the message home for weeks before polling day, it@s too late now.
I know people say this of every tory GE campaign but this one really is shit. The whole narrative is being controlled by Cobyn not May. If she can't have a resounding defeat of Corbyn maybe we don't want her carrying out Brexit. Maybe she doesn't want it?
Maybe this explains the crapness of the tory messaging. She doesn't want it.
I did wonder if perhaps Theresa May is unwell, as even when we have seen her, she's looked a bit below par.
@JamesCleverly: @SamCoatesTimes You know who's really scared by that poll? Labour candidates, because they're worrried they'll be stuck with Corbyn for other 5 years.
I share Jezzas views in several areas. I left Labour because of the Iraq war and also NHS privatisation, and think Trident a pointless waste of money for an obselete weapons system designed for a Cold War that ended 25 years ago. Who do we even aim them at nowadays!
But his economic policy, nationalisations and finances are bonkers.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I know you wouldn't vote for Zacky G, and A N Other based on uni days. But is there something uniquely egregious about C L Leyland that the good voters of Hampstead & Kilburn should be aware of? (I know she stood in West Tyrone in 2015, which is perhaps the sign of a lover of lost causes, or desperate politico-wannabe keen to go anywhere and do anything required so the can start to clamber the greasy steps, but while both of these are bad, and gormless-looking publicity shots do not help either, neither seem disqualifying in their own right. I did wonder if her rather hippyish-sounding career in art therapy/psychotherapy, as I understand it, might hint at a worldview that clashes with your rational distaste for all forms of woo.)
@JamesCleverly: @SamCoatesTimes You know who's really scared by that poll? Labour candidates, because they're worrried they'll be stuck with Corbyn for other 5 years.
They keep saying this sort of thing, but it simply is more worrying for the Tories that they might not get a big majority.
To cyclefee at 10.50 The NI rise equalisation was withdrawn because labour and libdems et al campaigned against it alongside a few tory back benchers. The argument was that it was not on the manifesto or ratber it was a specific manifesto promise. So Labour and LDs were being quite disingenuous on this. Wheteas in fact they should have been cheering the govt on. So now we have Mr May and her manifesto which is specifically NOT making the same promises and taking inflation out of the pensioners benefits and limiting WFA and being clear on social care.
Based on this and what you have said I am surprised you are so easily dismissive of the tory offer.
The drivers that helped Brexit to win are helping Labour/Corbyn improve in the polls.
What?
It means that a major driver behind Brexit was an anti-establishment f*** the status quo vote. The argument that the same people can't be bothered to wait two years for Brexit and have spotted a fast track.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
Oh, if he wins he will certainly last 6 weeks. The Summer recess isn't far away, and he will have to fly off to Europe too. Labour MPs won't touch him if there are real jobs on offer, they will just try and mitigate and influence him.
They won't succeed.
It's the voters who'll suss him out, very, very quickly, and probably by the Autumn.
But, by then, it will be too late.
If Corbyn actually won a majority nobody will be able to afford to go to Europe, the pound will hit parity with the Euro within hours.
It would be worth someone in the Conservative Party pointing out what repeal of all the Trade Union legislation, mass nationalisation, huge tax rises and spending money like water would be like.
Have a look at the 1970s. Mass strikes, layoffs, drops in foreign investment, big rises in unemployment, appalling service, people plunged into negative equity, brain drains, and the IMF being called in.
And the poorest will suffer the most.
Maybe each generation has to learn that lesson for itself all over again.
But, perhaps this time too, on top of all that, we'll have a PM actively ignoring the warnings of MI5/MI6 and special branch, and running down our defences, out of "sympathy" for the enemy too.
The drivers that helped Brexit to win are helping Labour/Corbyn improve in the polls.
What?
It means that a major driver behind Brexit was an anti-establishment f*** the status quo vote. The argument that the same people can't be bothered to wait two years for Brexit and have spotted a fast track.
But the people supposedly now voting for Corbyn are the people who supported the establishment...
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
I think the Tories are pathetic and their campaign has proved this. There is nothing to May, as far as I can see. They don't deserve to win. I argued from last summer that if May was serious about helping making a better society then taxes would have to rise. I agree that the Me Me Me society needs to stop and have said as much repeatedly in thread headers and below the line.
Bat rich people should use their assets for rainy days not expect others to pay so that their children can get an unfair advantage through inheritance windfalls. You ought to be on the side of those who are least well off. Those people - in case you are unclear - are not the middle aged children of those with substantial assets or those who go to university. They are fortunate and in a better position than many others.
And having economic policies that have repeatedly been proved not to work will harm the poorest, those you claim to care about. Compassion is not about emoting. It is about coming up with practical measures that will actually help the worst off not penalise them in pursuit of some mythical fairness or failed political ideology.
So the idea that Tories are uniquely evil and Labour on the side of fairness is so much phooey.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I agree with much of that. I just feel that not voting is somehow wrong and uncivic. But there's no criticism of you or any other non-voter in that.
Not voting is a perfectly valid choice, when it is a choice and not just a symptom of apathy or indolence.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Southam, I hope your right.
What?
Sorry, if Corbyn wins then he wins. The Labour Party can't just kick him out within weeks of the country voting for him especially after he was expected to suffer a landslide defeat!
He'll actually be the most powerful PM for a VERY long time. His position would be unassailable.
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Really? After he won an election against all odds the PLP would immediately throw him to the wolves?
That would be democratically outrageous.
If Corbyn wins this election he wins it and will deserve his five years.
Indeed. If Corbyn wins*, wouldn't their whole argument (that he couldn't win,was electoral poison, etc.), go out of the window?
Given the speed at which @bigjohnowls is spinning, can I take it that Amber Rudd did rather well?
I think it is mainly the Tories spinning, isn't it? All those complaints about the biased BBC audience.
Well, @bigjohnowls was reduced to what repeating I imagine he thinks are personal insults, such as "an ex-stockbroker and descendant of Charles II. This is the elite that wants Britain to stay rigged "
I still suspect as the campaign goes on shy Tories who previously popped their heads above the parapet have gone into quiet head down silence.
The explanation for this is straightforward. Once you get into things, particularly around the Conservative manifesto launch the Conservatives start to look hard, harsh and giving feck all away, thus its socially less acceptable to say ' i get it, its harsh but its also reality'
Its a little bit of the old 'Tories' . The left, who often play this as if they are on a moral crusade, make it a morality issue, as if voting Conservative is somehow causing disabled children to be thrown of cliffs in midnight sacrifices by posh rich people wearing top hats, but it isn't, its democratic voting issue.
The average British bod just would rather not get into defending position
Sure, I always said from the get go back in April that there had to be a bit of soapy froth on the top end of the Conservative vote. There is, and they'll be, barring any mess ups at 43% and above on the day.
Labour, gut instinct suggests, are currently carrying froth on top.
Buy the Tory vote has been holding steady, up on the starting point even. It is all Labour surge. Why Tory doesn't explain that, lying DNVers does.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I know you wouldn't vote for Zacky G, and A N Other based on uni days. But is there something uniquely egregious about C L Leyland that the good voters of Hampstead & Kilburn should be aware of? (I know she stood in West Tyrone in 2015, which is perhaps the sign of a lover of lost causes, or desperate politico-wannabe keen to go anywhere and do anything required so the can start to clamber the greasy steps, but while both of these are bad, and gormless-looking publicity shots do not help either, neither seem disqualifying in their own right. I did wonder if her rather hippyish-sounding career in art therapy/psychotherapy, as I understand it, might hint at a worldview that clashes with your rational distaste for all forms of woo.)
There are exactly three Conservative candidatures I would not vote for: David Treddinick, Zac Goldsmith and Clare Louise Leyland. Of these, the first is because - as you say - he believes in woo. The second is more my general irritation at him for throwing away Richmond Park on a whim, and then having the gall to stand again. The last one is simply personal.
Or taking the pressure off might backfire. Also, not sure how it fits with the "coalition of chaos" angle they seemed to have set up for the final week.
On balance, I think she's misunderstood/miscalculated how a PM needs to act when seeking (re)election. Let your attack dogs go after the opposition - keep yourself clean and be relentlessly positive.
Dave never went around saying "have you heard about ed's dad?" and other such shite.
Hmm. Playing to the Mail audience, but is it a good idea to tell millions of people who didn't watch it that the audience loved Corbyn?
It's the Mail. How many of its readers are swing voters?!
My Mum reads the Mail, and she's usually a Labour voter... (not this time supposedly)
Nowt queer as folk.
My grandfather was similar, he always spoke highly of Tony Benn, gave me a copy of the works of Mao with the comment "there's a lot of good sense in here", and felt real solidarity with the coalminers of his Lancashire town. He took the Daily Telegraph as his paper, and voted Tory, at least until 83.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I know you wouldn't vote for Zacky G, and A N Other based on uni days. But is there something uniquely egregious about C L Leyland that the good voters of Hampstead & Kilburn should be aware of? (I know she stood in West Tyrone in 2015, which is perhaps the sign of a lover of lost causes, or desperate politico-wannabe keen to go anywhere and do anything required so the can start to clamber the greasy steps, but while both of these are bad, and gormless-looking publicity shots do not help either, neither seem disqualifying in their own right. I did wonder if her rather hippyish-sounding career in art therapy/psychotherapy, as I understand it, might hint at a worldview that clashes with your rational distaste for all forms of woo.)
There are exactly three Conservative candidatures I would not vote for: David Treddinick, Zac Goldsmith and Clare Louise Leyland. Of these, the first is because - as you say - he believes in woo. The second is more my general irritation at him for throwing away Richmond Park on a whim, and then having the gall to stand again. The last one is simply personal.
For the record, I would actively campaign against David Treddinick*. The others I would merely avoid voting for.
* If any of his opponents want a donation, please PM me. I can be very generous.
Or taking the pressure off might backfire. Also, not sure how it fits with the "coalition of chaos" angle they seemed to have set up for the final week.
On balance, I think she's misunderstood/miscalculated how a PM needs to act when seeking reelection. Let your attack dogs go after the opposition - keep yourself clean and be relentlessly positive.
Dave never went around saying "have you heard about ed's dad?" and other such shite.
Not in public, anyway.
The manifesto was so awful you have to ask what 'positive' things they have to say.
I agree with much of that. I just feel that not voting is somehow wrong and uncivic. But there's no criticism of you or any other non-voter in that.
Not voting is a perfectly valid choice, when it is a choice and not just a symptom of apathy or indolence.
Well done, RCS.
Oddly, I respect people more for spoiling their ballot than for not depositing a vote at all, though the end result is the same.
I suspect it is because I know ballot-spoiling doesn't happen out of laziness or apathy or lack of consideration of the candidates, and moreover that sufficiently high numbers of spoilt ballots may sting or shame the political class more than a low turn-out figure does.
Student politics is a terrible, terrible thing, and if it had any teeth it would be too gameable to be practical, but given the quality of candidates that parties insist on foisting upon us, I do sometimes wish that Re-Open Nominations was an option in Westminster and local elections.
My assumption is it's the ex-lab, 2015 ukip, then brexit vote (that was blue a month ago) - which is boosting lab.
Any other theories?
I can't see why anyone fitting that description would vote for Corbyn. I am one of them, maybe not representative though. I live in a very Ukip area and have never heard anyone say one good thing about Corbyn, he is a laughing stock. In fact the only time two of my mates have ever brought up politics was to say 'wtf is that new labour weirdo all about'
I live in Nottingham North, which is overwhelmingly WWC and had an 18.5% UKIP vote in 2015. My ward (Bulwell) voted more than 2-1 to leave. I've helped in several canvasses and it seems quite solidly Labour now - quite a few voters say they went UKIP last time but want to get the Tories out.
You do know we all ignore your canvass reports, right?
All that happens if Corbyn is elected is that he'll be "found out" to be even worse than May (in the eyes of the electorate) in their wildest dreams, in less than 6 months.
But we could be stuck with him for 5 years, unless all the other parties no confidence him.
Which is unlikely, because the Tories would then take office again.
Corbyn would not last six weeks, let alone six months. Labour MPs would have him out in no time and there'd be nothing anyone could do.
Southam, I hope your right.
What?
Sorry, if Corbyn wins then he wins. The Labour Party can't just kick him out within weeks of the country voting for him especially after he was expected to suffer a landslide defeat!
He'll actually be the most powerful PM for a VERY long time. His position would be unassailable.
Of course they can kick him out. The Tories kicked out Thatcher. How many Labour candidates even have Corbyn on their campaign literature?
This is all academic anyway, of course. The Tories will win comfortably.
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
I think the Tories are pathetic and their campaign has proved this. There is nothing to May, as far as I can see. They don't deserve to win. I argued from last summer that if May was serious about helping making a better society then taxes would have to rise. I agree that the Me Me Me society needs to stop and have said as much repeatedly in thread headers and below the line.
But your party has - shamelessly - argued against tax rises such as the equalisation of NI rates in the budget and has made a big play of wanting to protect the inheritances of the rich. Your party wants those who don't go to university to pay for those who do. If you really wanted to changed a rigged society you would agree that rich people should use their assets for rainy days not expect others to pay so that their children can get an unfair advantage through inheritance windfalls. You ought to be on the side of those who are least well off. Those people - in case you are unclear - are not the middle aged children of those with substantial assets or those who go to university. They are fortunate and in a better position than many others.
And having economic policies that have repeatedly been proved not to work will harm the poorest, those you claim to care about. Compassion is not about emoting. It is about coming up with practical measures that will actually help the worst off not penalise them in pursuit of some mythical fairness or failed political ideology.
So the idea that Tories are uniquely evil and Labour on the side of fairness is so much phooey.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
Hi all!, Lurked around for a while but decided to join the party. I have to say this is a pretty decent summary of my own position in this election. Never been more put off by the idea of voting Labour but
Playing around with Baxter - if Lab keep climbing but Con hold reasonably firm:
Con 42, Lab 41, LD 6, UKIP 2, Green 2 gives:
Con 324, Lab 249, LD 1, Green 1, SNP 56, PC 1, NI 18
(Assuming no special Scotland swing)
Whether that's right or wrong who knows - but it would imply that with both parties scoring very highly Con potentially has a very big votes to seats advantage.
Or taking the pressure off might backfire. Also, not sure how it fits with the "coalition of chaos" angle they seemed to have set up for the final week.
On balance, I think she's misunderstood/miscalculated how a PM needs to act when seeking reelection. Let your attack dogs go after the opposition - keep yourself clean and be relentlessly positive.
Dave never went around saying "have you heard about ed's dad?" and other such shite.
Not in public, anyway.
The manifesto was so awful you have to ask what 'positive' things they have to say.
I agree with much of that. I just feel that not voting is somehow wrong and uncivic. But there's no criticism of you or any other non-voter in that.
Not voting is a perfectly valid choice, when it is a choice and not just a symptom of apathy or indolence.
Well done, RCS.
Oddly, I respect people more for spoiling their ballot than for not depositing a vote at all, though the end result is the same.
I suspect it is because I know ballot-spoiling doesn't happen out of laziness or apathy or lack of consideration of the candidates, and moreover that sufficiently high numbers of spoilt ballots may sting or shame the political class more than a low turn-out figure does.
Student politics is a terrible, terrible thing, and if it had any teeth it would be too gameable to be practical, but given the quality of candidates that parties insist on foisting upon us, I do sometimes wish that Re-Open Nominations was an option in Westminster and local elections.
I share Jezzas views in several areas. I left Labour because of the Iraq war and also NHS privatisation, and think Trident a pointless waste of money for an obselete weapons system designed for a Cold War that ended 25 years ago. Who do we even aim them at nowadays!
But his economic policy, nationalisations and finances are bonkers.
Russia still have 8,000 nuclear war heads, Russia - western nation relations have rarely been as bad.
Whether we will have a nuclear war in the future who knows. I sleep better at night knowing we have a Nuclear deterrent and if we were unfortunate enough to get attacked at least we have the option of a counter attack.
I don't think giving up nuclear weapons is an option and the US wants European nations to pay for more defence not less.
Fair enough if you vote for Corbyn but be under no illusion that just because the cold war has ended some countries will still be hostile and want to influence or even attack us.
Playing around with Baxter - if Lab keep climbing but Con hold reasonably firm:
Con 42, Lab 41, LD 6, UKIP 2, Green 2 gives:
Con 324, Lab 249, LD 1, Green 1, SNP 56, PC 1, NI 18
(Assuming no special Scotland swing)
Whether that's right or wrong who knows - but it would imply that with both parties scoring very highly Con potentially has a very big votes to seats advantage.
SNP 56 is almost certainly wrong, as they are polling close to 10% less than in 2015.
Where's that graph of leadership rating to seat differential?
Normally during an election campaign the Don't Know percentage declines significantly as the campaign proceeds. For the same 27% to be undecided/neither as a week earlier isn't a compliment to either of them.
Or taking the pressure off might backfire. Also, not sure how it fits with the "coalition of chaos" angle they seemed to have set up for the final week.
On balance, I think she's misunderstood/miscalculated how a PM needs to act when seeking reelection. Let your attack dogs go after the opposition - keep yourself clean and be relentlessly positive.
Dave never went around saying "have you heard about ed's dad?" and other such shite.
Not in public, anyway.
The manifesto was so awful you have to ask what 'positive' things they have to say.
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich. That's how societies stay rigged.
But your party has - shamelessly - argued against tax rises such as the equalisation of NI rates in the budget and has made a big play of wanting to protect the inheritances of the rich. Your party wants those who don't go to university to pay for those who do. If you really wanted to changed a rigged society you would agree that rich people should use their assets for rainy days not expect others to pay so that their children can get an unfair advantage through inheritance windfalls. You ought to be on the side of those who are least well off. Those people - in case you are unclear - are not the middle aged children of those with substantial assets or those who go to university. They are fortunate and in a better position than many others.
And having economic policies that have repeatedly been proved not to work will harm the poorest, those you claim to care about. Compassion is not about emoting. It is about coming up with practical measures that will actually help the worst off not penalise them in pursuit of some mythical fairness or failed political ideology.
So the idea that Tories are uniquely evil and Labour on the side of fairness is so much phooey.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I agree with much of that. I just feel that not voting is somehow wrong and uncivic. But there's no criticism of you or any other non-voter in that.
I'm (probably) with rcs. Would you accept a spoiled ballot as evidence of civic engagement ... ?
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
I know you wouldn't vote for Zacky G, and A N Other based on uni days. But is there something uniquely egregious about C L Leyland that the good voters of Hampstead & Kilburn should be aware of? (I know she stood in West Tyrone in 2015, which is perhaps the sign of a lover of lost causes, or desperate politico-wannabe keen to go anywhere and do anything required so the can start to clamber the greasy steps, but while both of these are bad, and gormless-looking publicity shots do not help either, neither seem disqualifying in their own right. I did wonder if her rather hippyish-sounding career in art therapy/psychotherapy, as I understand it, might hint at a worldview that clashes with your rational distaste for all forms of woo.)
There are exactly three Conservative candidatures I would not vote for: David Treddinick, Zac Goldsmith and Clare Louise Leyland. Of these, the first is because - as you say - he believes in woo. The second is more my general irritation at him for throwing away Richmond Park on a whim, and then having the gall to stand again. The last one is simply personal.
There are a number of Tory MPs that I would vote for, but Tredinnick not only is bonkers, but also has spent his 30 years as an MP for Bosworth living in London and Sussex. He really is a donkey in a blue rosette. I am leafletting for LDs there as challengers.
I wouldn't vote for Alan Duncan either, having encountered him socially, while Edward Garnier was charming and helpful, and Nicky Morgan a very good constituency MP.
I share Jezzas views in several areas. I left Labour because of the Iraq war and also NHS privatisation, and think Trident a pointless waste of money for an obselete weapons system designed for a Cold War that ended 25 years ago. Who do we even aim them at nowadays!
But his economic policy, nationalisations and finances are bonkers.
Russia still have 8,000 nuclear war heads, Russia - western nation relations have rarely been as bad.
Whether we will have a nuclear war in the future who knows. I sleep better at night knowing we have a Nuclear deterrent and if we were unfortunate enough to get attacked at least we have the option of a counter attack.
I don't think giving up nuclear weapons is an option and the US wants European nations to pay for more defence not less.
Fair enough if you vote for Corbyn but be under no illusion that just because the cold war has ended some countries will still be hostile and want to influence or even attack us.
And they said a vote for Brexit would lead to instability, a Third World War and the end of Western Civilization. Hah, experts, what do they know.
You're the one who wants to protect the inheritances of the rich.
I'm going to not vote, for the first time in a long time. My wife (Conservative voter in 2015) has urged me to vote for anyone by Ms Leyland. But I can't - with all good conscious - vote for any of the options.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
Hi all!, Lurked around for a while but decided to join the party. I have to say this is a pretty decent summary of my own position in this election. Never been more put off by the idea of voting Labour but
Grrrr! Beaten by forum issues already! Original Post:
Hi all! Lurked around for a while but decided to join the party. I have to say this is a pretty decent summary of my own position in this election. Never been more put off by the idea of voting Labour but also never felt worse about the idea of voting Tory. Not having a decent out in the form of the Lib Dems this time kind of puts the cherry on it. I can't believe Clegg would have done worse had he stayed on certainly I would be a lot more likely to vote for them (not that my vote can help anyone in the deepest blue of Safe Seats). Lamb would have excellent as well though the real shame is the absolute wipe out of talent from 2015 (not that the Blues or Reds have any more of it lying around). I a fairly constant optimist but I must say I'm struggling on the to see the good 'possible' outcome of this election rather than just the less awful.
Comments
What I don't see is how Labour stand. They could be anywhere from 30%-39%.
Ignoring personal issues about our local Conservative candidate, I dislike Mrs May. I think she is strident where she should be flexible. And weak where she should be strong. I think she spends too long focusing on whether a policy should be popular, and runs at the first sign of opposition.
I dislike Mr Corbyn more. Permanent giveaways may excite the 'progressive alliance', but it is no way to run a country.
I met many people like Mr Farron in student politics. I have no time for them. Were Mr Lamb the LibDem candidate, and were the LibDems campaigning on a "respect the Eu referendum vote, but soft Brexit" platform, I would vote for them. They are not.
While I am personally green in my habits, I loathe the Green party as enemies of progress.
He got my vote for leader, but Farron was better live than he is on TV. He doesnt have the same gravitas.
In all honesty, I genuinely do not think the electorate has ever been presented with a worse set of choices than at this election. No-one deserves to win. Both candidates for PM give every impression of not being up to the task and, worse, of being willing to trash the UK economy.
That would be democratically outrageous.
If Corbyn wins this election he wins it and will deserve his five years.
They won't succeed.
It's the voters who'll suss him out, very, very quickly, and probably by the Autumn.
But, by then, it will be too late.
In a nutshell, some average punters will just say they will vote Labour just to move on. But they won't on polling day, they'll go Conservative or not vote. And it only has to be 2 or 3 off the top of those Labour figures..or 5 if its You Gov....and its going to look a hell of a lot different
The Conservatives look solid at at least 43% or so. Labour, I suspect, has froth to the tune of several points. Bear in mind, I'm backing on my instinct being better than the average. Its not science because if it was, I'd follow what is apparently scientific, which won't make me money.
I never believed the massive margins, I believed that Conservative vote was frothy at the start and simply wouldn't stack up. and reckoned on a Conservative majority, 35 on an ok day, 50 on a great day over the rest combined because I'm not sure if Conservative votes will stack up quite in the way they hope.
Best estimate Conservatives 43%+, Labour 33% or below.
I know people say this of every tory GE campaign but this one really is shit. The whole narrative is being controlled by Cobyn not May. If she can't have a resounding defeat of Corbyn maybe we don't want her carrying out Brexit. Maybe she doesn't want it?
Maybe this explains the crapness of the tory messaging. She doesn't want it.
Not the X-Factor.
Nowt queer as folk.
Politics has been getting worse and worse since 2015. So many bad decisions....
If he wins I won't be as dissappointed, if he doesn't I'll have something to cheer.
For now..
The drivers that helped Brexit to win are helping Labour/Corbyn improve in the polls.
I share Jezzas views in several areas. I left Labour because of the Iraq war and also NHS privatisation, and think Trident a pointless waste of money for an obselete weapons system designed for a Cold War that ended 25 years ago. Who do we even aim them at nowadays!
But his economic policy, nationalisations and finances are bonkers.
If they win - and I'm beginning to doubt it - it will be despite their campaign not because of it.
And it presages trouble in the next 5 years.
Anyway off to bed. Night all.
The NI rise equalisation was withdrawn because labour and libdems et al campaigned against it alongside a few tory back benchers. The argument was that it was not on the manifesto or ratber it was a specific manifesto promise. So Labour and LDs were being quite disingenuous on this. Wheteas in fact they should have been cheering the govt on.
So now we have Mr May and her manifesto which is specifically NOT making the same promises and taking inflation out of the pensioners benefits and limiting WFA and being clear on social care.
Based on this and what you have said I am surprised you are so easily dismissive of the tory offer.
Have a look at the 1970s. Mass strikes, layoffs, drops in foreign investment, big rises in unemployment, appalling service, people plunged into negative equity, brain drains, and the IMF being called in.
And the poorest will suffer the most.
Maybe each generation has to learn that lesson for itself all over again.
But, perhaps this time too, on top of all that, we'll have a PM actively ignoring the warnings of MI5/MI6 and special branch, and running down our defences, out of "sympathy" for the enemy too.
I think Corbyn could get people killed.
Well done, RCS.
Sorry, if Corbyn wins then he wins. The Labour Party can't just kick him out within weeks of the country voting for him especially after he was expected to suffer a landslide defeat!
He'll actually be the most powerful PM for a VERY long time. His position would be unassailable.
*Still think 100+ majority for May.
That's pretty desperate by any standard.
We'll be begging the EU to take us back under Corbyn.
Said voters: They also knew Brexit would cause economic harm but saw it as the only option to change the country.
Now replace Brexit with Corbyn in the previous sentence.
Or taking the pressure off might backfire. Also, not sure how it fits with the "coalition of chaos" angle they seemed to have set up for the final week.
On balance, I think she's misunderstood/miscalculated how a PM needs to act when seeking (re)election. Let your attack dogs go after the opposition - keep yourself clean and be relentlessly positive.
Dave never went around saying "have you heard about ed's dad?" and other such shite.
Not in public, anyway.
* If any of his opponents want a donation, please PM me. I can be very generous.
I suspect it is because I know ballot-spoiling doesn't happen out of laziness or apathy or lack of consideration of the candidates, and moreover that sufficiently high numbers of spoilt ballots may sting or shame the political class more than a low turn-out figure does.
Student politics is a terrible, terrible thing, and if it had any teeth it would be too gameable to be practical, but given the quality of candidates that parties insist on foisting upon us, I do sometimes wish that Re-Open Nominations was an option in Westminster and local elections.
This is all academic anyway, of course. The Tories will win comfortably.
Con 42, Lab 41, LD 6, UKIP 2, Green 2 gives:
Con 324, Lab 249, LD 1, Green 1, SNP 56, PC 1, NI 18
(Assuming no special Scotland swing)
Whether that's right or wrong who knows - but it would imply that with both parties scoring very highly Con potentially has a very big votes to seats advantage.
http://tinyurl.com/MayTheWorstToryLeaderSinceIDS
Whether we will have a nuclear war in the future who knows. I sleep better at night knowing we have a Nuclear deterrent and if we were unfortunate enough to get attacked at least we have the option of a counter attack.
I don't think giving up nuclear weapons is an option and the US wants European nations to pay for more defence not less.
Fair enough if you vote for Corbyn but be under no illusion that just because the cold war has ended some countries will still be hostile and want to influence or even attack us.
Then again, with Corbyn's manifesto....
Would you accept a spoiled ballot as evidence of civic engagement ... ?
I wouldn't vote for Alan Duncan either, having encountered him socially, while Edward Garnier was charming and helpful, and Nicky Morgan a very good constituency MP.
Just watch our intelligence with the yanks suffer.
Hi all! Lurked around for a while but decided to join the party. I have to say this is a pretty decent summary of my own position in this election. Never been more put off by the idea of voting Labour but also never felt worse about the idea of voting Tory. Not having a decent out in the form of the Lib Dems this time kind of puts the cherry on it. I can't believe Clegg would have done worse had he stayed on certainly I would be a lot more likely to vote for them (not that my vote can help anyone in the deepest blue of Safe Seats). Lamb would have excellent as well though the real shame is the absolute wipe out of talent from 2015 (not that the Blues or Reds have any more of it lying around). I a fairly constant optimist but I must say I'm struggling on the to see the good 'possible' outcome of this election rather than just the less awful.
How is it possible to say one model is better than the other when the results are not yet known?