I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
What kind of victory is it that you have to pay £1bn bribe to friends of terrorists ?
Are the people of NI all friends of terrorists? Because the money isn't actually going to DUP MPs, whether they're terrorists' friends or not. You know that, right?
As far as I am aware the funding only goes to Northern Ireland if Stormont is reconvened
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Wrong. I am passionate about creating a new generation of Tories, and I think the election result was healthy for democracy.
Homes, good jobs, entrepreneurs, individual freedom, passionate democrats.. that's how the Tories should win over the young.
But that won't help, because TudorRose will have persuaded them to go away and do music and art. Do keep up.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Clearly paying a £1bn bribe does not bother you in the slightest.
How about the £8.5 bn protection money bribe we pay to the EU each year? Not bother you in the slightest?
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
They matter a lot. Just not precisely in the way that you think.
Why else would the government have instructed departments to avoid as much secondary legislation and regulations going through Parliament as possible, and that any such legislation should be cleared with the Labour front bench informally before being progressed.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
A decent rearguard effort, probably had enough of an effect to make the next five years of Tory rule possible.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Clearly paying a £1bn bribe does not bother you in the slightest.
How about the £8.5 bn protection money bribe we pay to the EU each year? Not bother you in the slightest?
Oh, fuck off !
If I didn't already think that Southam's header was spot on, I could have deduced it from the tetchiness of the left in the comments. Corbyn came within inches of the most spectacular coup in recent UK political history, and deserves immense credit for it, but that was as good as it gets. Peak Corbyn. He is made for election campaigns rather than the boring bits between the campaigns. He is going to give May some spectacular kickings in PMQs for the foreseeable, but he probably won't fight another GE campaign and if he does the Tories will be forewarned and prepared and the manifesto will not be written by Nick and Fiona.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Clearly paying a £1bn bribe does not bother you in the slightest.
How about the £8.5 bn protection money bribe we pay to the EU each year? Not bother you in the slightest?
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
I didn't say I thought it was a good thing - that was your chosen interpretation (which I find rather sad); neither did I mention despair. I simply think that the longer-term outcome will cause young people to turn away from politics and back towards more traditional outlets for their energies, such as music and art.
But this election shows young people will vote. And they may vote even more.now for Corbyn or a politician who doesnt ignore thwm.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
Legally worth nowt !
Certainly if I were the DUP I would wait until the money already promised is committed and being spent, and then start looking for a new opportunity to become difficult....
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Wrong. I am passionate about creating a new generation of Tories, and I think the election result was healthy for democracy.
Homes, good jobs, entrepreneurs, individual freedom, passionate democrats.. that's how the Tories should win over the young.
But that won't help, because TudorRose will have persuaded them to go away and do music and art. Do keep up.
Better music and art than violent insurrection though Nick.
Here's an ironic thing -2, actually. 1. Leadsom would have been better than Theresa - we can deduce this from the fact that anyone would have been better than Theresa; 2. Leadsom's comment about TMay not being a parent was absolutely spot on - not in the sense in which it was taken at the time, that TMay wouldn't care about posterity generally, but in that she had less instinctive first-hand feel for the importance of issues like university fees, house prices, and the estates of the demented than a contemporary with young adult children would - and that lay behind the appalling blunder of the manifesto.
At the time when Leadsom gave that interview it appeared that she was using the Trump playbook ruthlessly against May. If she hadn't lost her nerve it would have worked and I think she could have won the members' vote. As we now know, May is hopeless in a campaign situation under pressure.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
They matter a lot. Just not precisely in the way that you think.
Why else would the government have instructed departments to avoid as much secondary legislation and regulations going through Parliament as possible, and that any such legislation should be cleared with the Labour front bench informally before being progressed.
Government by consent suits me
I agree.
Nevertheless government-by-paranoia-of-ever-being-outvoted-on-anything is unlikely to make very many bold calls or courageous decisions.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Here's an ironic thing -2, actually. 1. Leadsom would have been better than Theresa - we can deduce this from the fact that anyone would have been better than Theresa; 2. Leadsom's comment about TMay not being a parent was absolutely spot on - not in the sense in which it was taken at the time, that TMay wouldn't care about posterity generally, but in that she had less instinctive first-hand feel for the importance of issues like university fees, house prices, and the estates of the demented than a contemporary with young adult children would - and that lay behind the appalling blunder of the manifesto.
At the time when Leadsom gave that interview it appeared that she was using the Trump playbook ruthlessly against May. If she hadn't lost her nerve it would have worked and I think she could have won the members' vote. As we now know, May is hopeless in a campaign situation under pressure.
Leadsome was and is terrible.
I don't think you should ,make any predictions for a while...
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats. Labour not beating the Conservatives doesn't change the fact that the Conservatives in two out of the last three elections did not get to 326 seats.
"In order to win you need to get to 326 seats."
Con 318 + DUP 10 = 328 = confidence of a majority of MPs in the House of Commons.
Oh dear.
At the last GE the Conservatives did not get to 326 seats. They won 318, as you admit in your post.
That is why they had to arrange a confidence and supply with the DUP - because they didn't win the GE. If they had, you wouldn't be here adding the DUP and Conservative numbers together.
A hung parliament means that in effect no one has won the GE. That's why it's a hung parliament.
So I think it is I that ought to be saying 'oh dear' to you.
Who will form the new Government after the election? The Tories, or the commies?
Oh dear.
Forming the government and winning the GE isn't the same thing.
Oh dear.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
The face of May on election night, utterly destroyed. I imagine tonight she'll be feeling and looking a lot better.
Five years is a very long time and Corbyn will be found out. The first step is to unpick his Brexit doublespeak.
I don't think people have realised how important it is for the Corbyn/McDonnell project that he manages to get another election within the near future. The more time goes on the more the inadequacies of himself as a leader, and the inadequacies of the present Shadow cabinet will re-emerge. He will be forced to bring back more of his political opponents (within Labour) and he will become more hamstrung in what he can offer. Now this may ultimately be good for Labour, but not for Corbynxism.
Are the people of NI all friends of terrorists? Because the money isn't actually going to DUP MPs, whether they're terrorists' friends or not. You know that, right?
As far as I am aware the funding only goes to Northern Ireland if Stormont is reconvened
So DUP AND Sinn Fein then...
Some interesting dynamics there - the DUP depend on Sinn Fein to deliver, but it will be electorally unpopular for Sinn Fein if they undermine the bribe.
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
Legally worth nowt !
You are in a panic tonight
What has happened tonight is great for Labour. Who is in whose pocket now ?
You have to think of two political parties tonight:
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ? --------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
What's that over there? The dream of British socialism receding over the horizon for another Parliament while the old men in a hurry on the Labour front bench hobble after it?
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
Legally worth nowt !
You are in a panic tonight
What has happened tonight is great for Labour. Who is in whose pocket now ?
Wait for the release by the DUP of their papers from the labour party - hypocrisy in spades
So PB Tories get their victory, albeit nearly three weeks late.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Wrong. I am passionate about creating a new generation of Tories, and I think the election result was healthy for democracy.
Homes, good jobs, entrepreneurs, individual freedom, passionate democrats.. that's how the Tories should win over the young.
But that won't help, because TudorRose will have persuaded them to go away and do music and art. Do keep up.
Better music and art than violent insurrection though Nick.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Big fucking deal. Nothing can be worse than paying a £1billion bribe.
You have to think of two political parties tonight:
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ? --------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
England: It's England's tax!
If England didn't want these payments to be made to the DUP, then they could always have voted the Tories a majority. Instead, they made Con + DUP the only viable Government.
No sense for English voters to whine about it now.
Here's an ironic thing -2, actually. 1. Leadsom would have been better than Theresa - we can deduce this from the fact that anyone would have been better than Theresa; 2. Leadsom's comment about TMay not being a parent was absolutely spot on - not in the sense in which it was taken at the time, that TMay wouldn't care about posterity generally, but in that she had less instinctive first-hand feel for the importance of issues like university fees, house prices, and the estates of the demented than a contemporary with young adult children would - and that lay behind the appalling blunder of the manifesto.
At the time when Leadsom gave that interview it appeared that she was using the Trump playbook ruthlessly against May. If she hadn't lost her nerve it would have worked and I think she could have won the members' vote. As we now know, May is hopeless in a campaign situation under pressure.
Leadsome was and is terrible.
Didn't she suggest recently that the BBC should be more patriotic?
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Big fucking deal. Nothing can be worse than paying a £1billion bribe.
Let us wait and see - the DUP detest Corbyn with a passion
Are the people of NI all friends of terrorists? Because the money isn't actually going to DUP MPs, whether they're terrorists' friends or not. You know that, right?
As far as I am aware the funding only goes to Northern Ireland if Stormont is reconvened
So DUP AND Sinn Fein then...
Some interesting dynamics there - the DUP depend on Sinn Fein to deliver, but it will be electorally unpopular for Sinn Fein if they undermine the bribe.
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
'with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative'
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Big fucking deal. Nothing can be worse than paying a £1billion bribe.
The face of May on election night, utterly destroyed. I imagine tonight she'll be feeling and looking a lot better.
Five years is a very long time and Corbyn will be found out. The first step is to unpick his Brexit doublespeak.
I don't think people have realised how important it is for the Corbyn/McDonnell project that he manages to get another election within the near future. The more time goes on the more the inadequacies of himself as a leader, and the inadequacies of the present Shadow cabinet will re-emerge. He will be forced to bring back more of his political opponents (within Labour) and he will become more hamstrung in what he can offer. Now this may ultimately be good for Labour, but not for Corbynxism.
Yep. Curiously, McDonnell is the weak link in that relationship despite clearly being the intellectual superior.
Attack and expose McDonnell and watch it all fall apart. The Tories will clock this soon.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
Of course defeats matter. A minority govt without defeats will last longer than one with many. In the latter case the govt will call an election at the earliest possible moment, if it's not forced to sooner. It might for example be forced to if the DUP agreement ends up in the bin.
It is just not going to happen - it is a signed memorandum of agreement for five years
Legally worth nowt !
You are in a panic tonight
What has happened tonight is great for Labour. Who is in whose pocket now ?
Who cares? Election campaign gags are great in election campaigns, at other times not so much.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Yes I can imagine Corbyn's team will be terrified the perfidy of New Labour will be exposed.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Big fucking deal. Nothing can be worse than paying a £1billion bribe.
I thought that comment by Nigel Dodds to publish the from Labour, SNP and DUP was a real killer. I do think Labour are suffering from an extreme case of arrogance at the moment.
Yes, it will be as successful as that 50m who saw the video on Facebook saying that Corbyn was a terrorist. What happened to that video, by the way ? 100m viewings surely, by now.
It was funny to see the labour and SNP benches squirm when Nigel Dodds made his offer of publication of labour and the SNP's correspondence to them in 2010 and 2015
Do you think people who voted for Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbot care one whit about the machinations of minor Brownite eunuchs?
There is no evidence that PB comments has a good grip on Corbyn's popularity!
So PB Tories get their victory, albeit nearly three weeks late.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
So PB Tories get their victory, albeit nearly three weeks late.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
He is in a difficult position. Clever politics by tying in the deal to the Stormont agreement, if he rejects it he will be seen as hurting all the Northern Ireland population
Are the people of NI all friends of terrorists? Because the money isn't actually going to DUP MPs, whether they're terrorists' friends or not. You know that, right?
As far as I am aware the funding only goes to Northern Ireland if Stormont is reconvened
So DUP AND Sinn Fein then...
Some interesting dynamics there - the DUP depend on Sinn Fein to deliver, but it will be electorally unpopular for Sinn Fein if they undermine the bribe.
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
Johnny Mac was offering a great calm alternative this morning. Corbyn patiently stating he will be PM in 6 months. I think the Tories in marginal seats will fair slightly better in the next election as they could possibly get some support next time around.
Any word on whether Lady Hermon is supporting the deal?
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Since when has that been the definition?
So no party has ever won any election in most PR nations in Europe? Bizarre, generally the parties which form the government are considered to have won even if they don't make up a majority.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Some people think this deal means the govt's now secure till 2022 - that's either naivety or wishful thinking. It gives the govt an effective majority of 13 but the question isn't whether there'll be govt defeats but how soon the first one will be. The govt is already unpopular and unless it can turn its fortunes round there'll be a populist tendency among some of its own MPs to rebel. The NI situation is a big matzo ball. There's Grenfell. Terrorism. Austerity. And the big one... Will this deal built in Belfast come a cropper on the iceberg of Brexit?
Defeats do not matter as the government would then have to lose a no confidence vote in which the DUP will support the government
They matter a lot. Just not precisely in the way that you think.
Why else would the government have instructed departments to avoid as much secondary legislation and regulations going through Parliament as possible, and that any such legislation should be cleared with the Labour front bench informally before being progressed.
Government by consent suits me
I agree.
Nevertheless government-by-paranoia-of-ever-being-outvoted-on-anything is unlikely to make very many bold calls or courageous decisions.
They tried that during the campaign, but there were cries of the Tories stealing your gran's house.
We were told on PB by almost everyone that peak Corbyn was on day one of Corbyn and Labour would be on sub 200 seats. I believed it too until the campaign, some people kept believing it. Whatever the strengths and diversities of PB are, it's clearly not including people who have a clue about what people will vote for.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
You have to think of two political parties tonight:
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ? --------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
England: It's England's tax!
If England didn't want these payments to be made to the DUP, then they could always have voted the Tories a majority. Instead, they made Con + DUP the only viable Government.
No sense for English voters to whine about it now.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Since when has that been the definition?
So no party has ever won any election in most PR nations in Europe? Bizarre, generally the parties which form the government are considered to have won even if they don't make up a majority.
Any word on whether Lady Hermon is supporting the deal?
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
She is a unionist so I suspect the Tories can count on her more often than not.
Nevertheless the formal position, as reported by the BBC, is for a majority of 13. I am not sure why Mike ran with the technically incorrect figure of 15 in the last thread, but I don't think Lady S will be the reason, since if she was included the 328 figure in the lead would correctly have been either 329 or 327.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
Any word on whether Lady Hermon is supporting the deal?
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
She has a majority of 1,200 and gets about 2,500 tactical votes from the Green Party alone to keep the DUP out, never mind the Alliance or nationalists.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
Absurd is not the same as impossible. We might have elected 650 different independents.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
The Tories can figure out where they went wrong over the next five years, while they are governing. Plenty of time for that.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
The Tories can figure out where they went wrong over the next five years, while they are governing. Plenty of time for that.
In order to figure out where they went wrong, they have to accept that something went wrong in the first place.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
So PB Tories get their victory, albeit nearly three weeks late.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
So PB Tories get their victory, albeit nearly three weeks late.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
He is in a difficult position. Clever politics by tying in the deal to the Stormont agreement, if he rejects it he will be seen as hurting all the Northern Ireland population
Yes for the moment the unqualified victory is yours.
Superficially clever politics can ultimately be seen as well... not so clever! This deal may well have 'genius' written all over it. It still doesn't smell right to many within Conservative ranks.
Here's an ironic thing -2, actually. 1. Leadsom would have been better than Theresa - we can deduce this from the fact that anyone would have been better than Theresa; 2. Leadsom's comment about TMay not being a parent was absolutely spot on - not in the sense in which it was taken at the time, that TMay wouldn't care about posterity generally, but in that she had less instinctive first-hand feel for the importance of issues like university fees, house prices, and the estates of the demented than a contemporary with young adult children would - and that lay behind the appalling blunder of the manifesto.
At the time when Leadsom gave that interview it appeared that she was using the Trump playbook ruthlessly against May. If she hadn't lost her nerve it would have worked and I think she could have won the members' vote. As we now know, May is hopeless in a campaign situation under pressure.
Leadsome was and is terrible.
Didn't she suggest recently that the BBC should be more patriotic?
She said criticising the govt is unpatriotic, which is EVEN worse
You have to think of two political parties tonight:
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ? --------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
The next question is whether the Tories will take any UK (and especially Scottish and Welsh) poll hit from the promises it has made to NI?
Why would they be worried about polls?
All parties are, whatever they might pretend.
Nope 3 weeks after an election polls are utterly irrelevant.
I understand that some deluded people are drawing comfort from polls right now but this govt will stagger along for 5 years, some people need to calm down a bit.
Any word on whether Lady Hermon is supporting the deal?
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
She has a majority of 1,200 and gets about 2,500 tactical votes from the Green Party alone to keep the DUP out, never mind the Alliance or nationalists.
Lady Sylvia left the UUP when they briefly allied with the Tories for GE2010, so I presume she's pro-Labour.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
@stodge I don't think the 1992 comparison really works. In order for it to Kinnock would have had to have continued on, with it being him conveying hubrism after Black Wednesday instead of John Smith. As it happens, 1992 perhaps offers lessons on a leader of the opposition who had previously lost an GE being mistakenly hubristic and confident that he had the GE in the bag.
In 1992, Kinnock was trying to overturn a 100 seat majority. Corbyn has an easier job.
Labour leaders have had an easier task facing them than Kinnock did in 1992 in 2010, 2015, and 2017 yet in only one of those GEs the party made gains.
Labour made significant gains in both 1992 and 2017.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
The face of May on election night, utterly destroyed. I imagine tonight she'll be feeling and looking a lot better.
Five years is a very long time and Corbyn will be found out. The first step is to unpick his Brexit doublespeak.
I don't think people have realised how important it is for the Corbyn/McDonnell project that he manages to get another election within the near future. The more time goes on the more the inadequacies of himself as a leader, and the inadequacies of the present Shadow cabinet will re-emerge. He will be forced to bring back more of his political opponents (within Labour) and he will become more hamstrung in what he can offer. Now this may ultimately be good for Labour, but not for Corbynxism.
Yep. Curiously, McDonnell is the weak link in that relationship despite clearly being the intellectual superior.
Attack and expose McDonnell and watch it all fall apart. The Tories will clock this soon.
Because attacking Corbyn and Mcdonnel really worked well 2 weeks ago
I know. Attack them over them supporting the IRA. That'll wotk
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
The Tories can figure out where they went wrong over the next five years, while they are governing. Plenty of time for that.
In order to figure out where they went wrong, they have to accept that something went wrong in the first place.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
It would probably help the two of you to realise that winning and losing are not binary options but a sliding scale.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
It's not absurd.
No, it really is.
The Tories got most votes, most seats and their leader is PM.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
The only party that has come out smelling of roses is the DUP.
Actually, I am not that unhappy with the deal. The Tories have ditched much of the worst parts of their manifesto, and more importantly will have to roll back austerity. Labour gets a chance to convert its energy and idealism into a government in waiting. Brexit is going to have to be endlessly discussed and debated in parliament, not rammed through by frothing europhobes.
I reckon that it cannot last much into 2019, then election time.
You have to think of two political parties tonight:
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ? --------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
The next question is whether the Tories will take any UK (and especially Scottish and Welsh) poll hit from the promises it has made to NI?
Why would they be worried about polls?
All parties are, whatever they might pretend.
Nope 3 weeks after an election polls are utterly irrelevant.
I understand that some deluded people are drawing comfort from polls right now but this govt will stagger along for 5 years, some people need to calm down a bit.
If the Tories did plunge significantly in the polls because of the DUP deal, it would make May's position even more precarious within her party. So it is simply denial to say that polls are irrelevant.
Any word on whether Lady Hermon is supporting the deal?
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
She has a majority of 1,200 and gets about 2,500 tactical votes from the Green Party alone to keep the DUP out, never mind the Alliance or nationalists.
Lady Sylvia left the UUP when they briefly allied with the Tories for GE2010, so I presume she's pro-Labour.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
If you truly believe that you won then I hope that senior Conservatives are not thinking along your lines. Many Tories on here have aired their display and upset at the result, but that doesn't mean that they've learned the lessons of the GE. Many are blaming voters, particularly younger voters for a start.
Possibly the finest thread header written on here; lucid and full of common sense.
I might add one other element into the mix; the propensity of young voters to turn out. At the moment there is a glow of self-satisfaction amongst the young - they voted and it made a difference. The only problem is that the glow will wear off as days of Tory rule turn to months and then to years (putting to one side the question of leadership). Corbyn says he will be prime minister in six months; he won't. The reflection of the new voters in the long run might be that 'we didn't vote in 2015 and we lost, we didn't vote in 2016 and we lost, we did vote in 2017 but we still lost - so we might as well go back to not voting'. We won't see this yet, but come 2018 I think the patience of youth will be tested beyond the limit of its current enthusiastic participation.
It's a bit sad that Tories see their best chance in the possibility that young people may despair of voting. It's not a long-term formula for either healthy democracy or IMO party success. How about thinking of ways to appeal to them?
Is that why we won the last three elections and you didn't?
Well, you didn't win the last three GEs. You won only one of them.
No, Labour last beat the Tories in 2005...
That is irrelevant.
In order to win you need to get to 326 seats.
Wrong.
Nope.
Yup.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
It's not absurd.
No, it really is.
The Tories got most votes, most seats and their leader is PM.
They won.
Labour lost.
Let's all agree that GE2017 was a great *moral* victory for Labour, and that we all hope and expect they will continue to enjoy similar *moral* victories for many years to come.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Since when has that been the definition?
So no party has ever won any election in most PR nations in Europe? Bizarre, generally the parties which form the government are considered to have won even if they don't make up a majority.
4/1 Another GE this year 1/4 No further GE this year
I find that a bit surprising - there surely isn't time to lose many, if any by-elections (6 months to call one and have to be called when Parliament sitting). OK if someone dies you lose their vote immediately but that only reduces the majority by one.
Presumably odds reflect a new leader calling a GE but why on earth would they do that? The GE we've just had is a pretty big lesson against calling an early GE and this time Lab will be ahead in the polls.
And if Davis / Hammond / Johnson becomes PM this autumn surely just from a personal point of view they'll want to be PM for quite a while without risking being kicked out almost immediately.
The face of May on election night, utterly destroyed. I imagine tonight she'll be feeling and looking a lot better.
Five years is a very long time and Corbyn will be found out. The first step is to unpick his Brexit doublespeak.
I don't think people have realised how important it is for the Corbyn/McDonnell project that he manages to get another election within the near future. The more time goes on the more the inadequacies of himself as a leader, and the inadequacies of the present Shadow cabinet will re-emerge. He will be forced to bring back more of his political opponents (within Labour) and he will become more hamstrung in what he can offer. Now this may ultimately be good for Labour, but not for Corbynxism.
Yep. Curiously, McDonnell is the weak link in that relationship despite clearly being the intellectual superior.
Attack and expose McDonnell and watch it all fall apart. The Tories will clock this soon.
Because attacking Corbyn and Mcdonnel really worked well 2 weeks ago
I know. Attack them over them supporting the IRA. That'll wotk
Direct attacks on Corbyn won't work. It's like kicking a puppy. However, Corbyn will be vulnerable indirectly through McDonnell.
The Tories barely touched upon the scary shadow chancellor. They will soon and it will start to stick this time.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
If you truly believe that you won then I hope that senior Conservatives are not thinking along your lines. Many Tories on here have aired their display and upset at the result, but that doesn't mean that they've learned the lessons of the GE. Many are blaming voters, particularly younger voters for a start.
The lesson of the GE is not to write a godawful, depressing manifesto that punches your own voters in the face without offering serious incentives to any voters. If we hadn't done that, we would have won "outright" (a majority) as opposed to "technically" (largest party securing a majority via confidence and supply).
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
If you truly believe that you won then I hope that senior Conservatives are not thinking along your lines. Many Tories on here have aired their display and upset at the result, but that doesn't mean that they've learned the lessons of the GE. Many are blaming voters, particularly younger voters for a start.
The whole point of an election is to determine who forms the next Government. The Tories will, Labour-SWP won't.
Oh dear.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of winning a GE is winning an overall majority.
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
Here's a thought: you keep trying to persuade yourself that the party in power didn't win the election, and we'll carry on running the country. Then everyone's happy!
Here's a thought: you can keep trying persuade yourself that having gone into the election expecting to increase your majority, and then losing it, and ending up with only the DUP being able to stop the prospect of Corbyn government for the foreseeable future that you somehow 'won.' You carry on thinking the way you are, and it'll your party crying into their cornflakes when the next GE happens as Labour are either the largest party or win an overall majority. I'm no fan of Corbyn, and don't want him to be PM - but if Tories like you don't bother to learn anything from this election then it is you who is going to learn to hard way.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
I've been pretty vocal on here about my despair and dismay at the utter shitness of May and the Tories during this election campaign. Relative to the towering expectations produced by the polls, it was an absolute catastrophe, and we can never ever run a manifesto like that again and hope to survive as an electoral force. Labour / Corbyn will almost certainly "win" (most seats / majority) next time no matter what happens.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
If you truly believe that you won then I hope that senior Conservatives are not thinking along your lines. Many Tories on here have aired their display and upset at the result, but that doesn't mean that they've learned the lessons of the GE. Many are blaming voters, particularly younger voters for a start.
People are disappointed and upset because it was below prediction. If the party had won an overall majority of just 2 then that would have been disappointing still.
Bizarrely when the exit poll came out on almost the exact same figures in 2015 then that was not disappointing for Tory supporters.
Comments
Five years is a very long time and Corbyn will be found out. The first step is to unpick his Brexit doublespeak.
Nevertheless government-by-paranoia-of-ever-being-outvoted-on-anything is unlikely to make very many bold calls or courageous decisions.
Where are you from 619 out of interest?
The DUP have played a key part in determining who governs the country by choosing to back the Conservatives in a confidence and supply agreement.
Oh dear.
UUP: We thought we were your "unionist" partners.
Lib Dems: what did we get for shoring you up for 5 years ?
--------------
DUP: screw the Tories. Let's get our £1billion.
Some interesting dynamics there - the DUP depend on Sinn Fein to deliver, but it will be electorally unpopular for Sinn Fein if they undermine the bribe.
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
What a pity.
The DUP deal may end up being inspired politicking which allows a Tory resurgence and the ultimate demise of the Labour Party, as expressed in various forms here. Alternatively it could open a Pandora's Box which will lead to the exact opposite.
My initial surprise is that Gerry Adams seems infinitely more positive over the bung than I had expected!
As stated before forming the government and winning the GE are not the same thing.
Both parties lost the GE.
Oh dear.
https://youtu.be/7uAe4tkmSxU
No sense for English voters to whine about it now.
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
'with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative'
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLL!
(Extra OOOs provided in agreement with DUP)
Attack and expose McDonnell and watch it all fall apart. The Tories will clock this soon.
There is no evidence that PB comments has a good grip on Corbyn's popularity!
But in response to Ave It - from the purely partisan viewpoint, I think the current situation is fine. Two years of bribing, plotting, agonising, plotting, constant crisis, plotting, knife-edge votes, plotting,and economic risk, with Labour patiently offering a calm alternative. Sure, there are no certainties in politics, but I wouldn't like to be a Tory in a marginal seat.
Johnny Mac was offering a great calm alternative this morning. Corbyn patiently stating he will be PM in 6 months. I think the Tories in marginal seats will fair slightly better in the next election as they could possibly get some support next time around.
Re the previous thread it's actually a majority of 13 without Lady Hermon or 15 if Lady Hermon backs it.
I reckon the Government is reasonably stable down to and including a majority of 7 - if it goes down to 5 then they're really on a knife-edge but 7 or more they shouldn't lose a vote by accident.
So Lady Hermon is quite important - if 7 is regarded as the "cut-off" they can lose 3 by-elections without her or 4 by-elections with her.
So no party has ever won any election in most PR nations in Europe? Bizarre, generally the parties which form the government are considered to have won even if they don't make up a majority.
Don't set yourself up for a fall.
Winning a majority is not the only kind of win. A general election can't have no winner, that's absurd.
On the latter: yes.
Nevertheless the formal position, as reported by the BBC, is for a majority of 13. I am not sure why Mike ran with the technically incorrect figure of 15 in the last thread, but I don't think Lady S will be the reason, since if she was included the 328 figure in the lead would correctly have been either 329 or 327.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/876894066478329857
Superficially clever politics can ultimately be seen as well... not so clever! This deal may well have 'genius' written all over it. It still doesn't smell right to many within Conservative ranks.
It's also a nonsensical definition, as you have proved.
I understand that some deluded people are drawing comfort from polls right now but this govt will stagger along for 5 years, some people need to calm down a bit.
I've said repeatedly on here over the last few weeks that no party won the GE.
But we still won this time, because we form the Government and have the confidence of a majority of MPs in the Commons. A crappy, desperately disappointing win is still a win.
I know. Attack them over them supporting the IRA. That'll wotk
It's also not nonsensical definition.
A GE doesn't have to have winner - that's what happens when we have a hung parliament.
The Tories got most votes, most seats and their leader is PM.
They won.
Labour lost.
Actually, I am not that unhappy with the deal. The Tories have ditched much of the worst parts of their manifesto, and more importantly will have to roll back austerity. Labour gets a chance to convert its energy and idealism into a government in waiting. Brexit is going to have to be endlessly discussed and debated in parliament, not rammed through by frothing europhobes.
I reckon that it cannot last much into 2019, then election time.
A hung parliament means no party won a majority. It doesn't mean no party won - that would require a situation where no government could be formed.
Good advice that those who think Labour 'won' this election would do well to heed.
Yes they massively exceed expectations, yes they prevented a majority. Yes, my prediction was nowhere near accurate.
But win? No, they didn't do that.
4/1 Another GE this year
1/4 No further GE this year
I find that a bit surprising - there surely isn't time to lose many, if any by-elections (6 months to call one and have to be called when Parliament sitting). OK if someone dies you lose their vote immediately but that only reduces the majority by one.
Presumably odds reflect a new leader calling a GE but why on earth would they do that? The GE we've just had is a pretty big lesson against calling an early GE and this time Lab will be ahead in the polls.
And if Davis / Hammond / Johnson becomes PM this autumn surely just from a personal point of view they'll want to be PM for quite a while without risking being kicked out almost immediately.
https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/879432855323123712
The Tories barely touched upon the scary shadow chancellor. They will soon and it will start to stick this time.
Plenty of parties haven't won and yet formed the next government. Like the Cons and the LDs in 2010.
Bizarrely when the exit poll came out on almost the exact same figures in 2015 then that was not disappointing for Tory supporters.