2017 UK General Election - 8th June

4068ac1elhodqr · 20-04-2017 09:59PM

aled wrote: »

So no matter what happens in the election Brexit will happen. It is signed and sealed. There is no going back? Is that the case? If so Teresa May has pulled a master-stroke.

Ah ha, now this is where it gets very interesting. Indeed what would happen if say a coalition of Labour, SNP, LD, Greens etc went head to head against Con and their current obligations, started with a fresh page.

Whilst I was very clear saying Brexit was obliged to happen after the vote etc. (lets not dwell)....

...If you wanted another theory with an interesting twist, do also think a coalition can win in June, and can (slowly) wriggle out of Brexit.

Not this year, not next, but not long after. (Obviously you can't have annual referendums with such importance) but every 4yrs or so is much more acceptable, like Scotland is aiming for.

Maybe also she was told to call it, maybe what's at stake carries too much value. Maybe this will the only real final and slim chance to derail it.

devnull · 20-04-2017 10:04PM

BoatMad wrote: »

I dont agree, There are considerable risks in this election for May, 7 weeks is a long time. There is a risk that Remainers will protest vote.

I would be a remainer if I was still living in the UK and I would vote for Lib Dems, not as a protest vote but because they are pretty much the only party that were anywhere near the center which is quite something.

As I'm sure you're aware from my posts in C+T I could never be accused of being a left winger so I couldn't vote for the current political viewpoint standing of the Labour Party, but I'm certainly not a Conservative either so that is all I am left with.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Fresh but irrelevant. The SNP have a mandate for an independence vote from the Scottish Parliament elections last year and they have a mandate from the GE 2 years ago. Even if the SNP only get 30 seats in the next GE, that will still be a mandate

Realistically though, if they have a mandate or not, Theresa May with a huge majority doesn't have to do anything she doesn't want to and if she says no, sure they could moan like hell but at the end of the day they cannot force her hand.

Or do you really think if May does't give her the IndyRef 100 of her own MP's are going to vote no confidence in her, bearing in mind that she's going to have half a dozen MP's in Scotland at most and pretty all of the England and Wales Tory MP's are going to be pro Union or simply not care anyway.

A mandate is all well and good, but nobody can force May with a massive majority to allow another IndyRef.

catbear · 20-04-2017 10:15PM

devnull wrote: »

A mandate is all well and good, but nobody can force May with a massive majority to allow another IndyRef.

If the SNP retain a clear mandate for IndyRef2 and May frustrates it, I reckon things will take an ugly turn.

devnull · 20-04-2017 10:18PM

At the end of the day May will just trot out that usual line about an IndyRef will be too divisive and with brexit ongoing and the arrangements attention needs to be fully focused on that rather than distractions and a bunch of nationalists who want to divide the union.

I'm not saying I agree with it and May isn't being hypocritical, but you know what she's like.

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-04-2017 10:20PM

BoatMad wrote: »

Thats not the way politics works.

the SNP has clearly nailed its colours to its mast in regards the EU and Independence. This is will the defining policy of their election platform, even if they themselves dont want it to be so.

a fall in MPs will be clearly seem as a weakening of that " mandate " by all and sundry and will undermine the SNP position, ( especially if the Tories make some ground in Scotland )

You are right, politics is about getting an overall majority on 37% and then complain that another party does not have a mandate

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-04-2017 10:22PM

devnull wrote: »

Realistically though, if they have a mandate or not, Theresa May with a huge majority doesn't have to do anything she doesn't want to and if she says no, sure they could moan like hell but at the end of the day they cannot force her hand.

Or do you really think if May does't give her the IndyRef 100 of her own MP's are going to vote no confidence in her, bearing in mind that she's going to have half a dozen MP's in Scotland at most and pretty all of the England and Wales Tory MP's are going to be pro Union or simply not care anyway.

A mandate is all well and good, but nobody can force May with a massive majority to allow another IndyRef.

May does not have to do anything now because she has an overall majority. She does not need an election to reconfirm that she does not have to do anything

BoatMad · 20-04-2017 10:25PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

May does not have to do anything now because she has an overall majority. She does not need an election to reconfirm that she does not have to do anything

She has many reasons to call an election now

(a) She personally has no mandate , thats always a factor
(b) She doesnt want a GE falling at the same time as a brexit completion
(c) She knows labour is at its weakest and politicians cant resist giving their opponents a hammering
(d) She wants to remove any Brexit dissent and also hand her a whip over certain radical Brexit factions in the Tory party.
(e) The SNP is probably at its Zenith , anything is now downwards, she may see any material change in SNP MPs as a vindication that Scotland will toe the line

Bit cynical · 20-04-2017 10:28PM

Lemming wrote: »

However, the salient point in observing the logical fallacy about being so cock-sure about 52% is this; 27% of the electorate, for varying reasons, voted to leave the EU. That leaves 73% of the voting population either as remain, or unknown (ergo 'status quo' until clarified).

But by this same reasoning Britain should not have joined the EU in the first place since an even greater proportion (again using the same reasoning) apparently were in favour of the status quo.

I think the reasoning would have some merit if the non-voters were in some way prevented from voting, but that was not the case. And the assumption that the non-voters are in favour of the status quo and should be regarded as such is also questionable.

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-04-2017 10:30PM

BoatMad wrote: »

She has many reasons to call an election now

(a) She personally has no mandate , thats always a factor
(b) She doesnt want a GE falling at the same time as a brexit completion
(c) She knows labour is at its weakest and politicians cant resist giving their opponents a hammering
(d) She wants to remove any Brexit dissent and also hand her a whip over certain radical Brexit factions in the Tory party.
(e) The SNP is probably at its Zenith , anything is now downwards, she may see any material change in SNP MPs as a vindication that Scotland will toe the line

I am referring to Devnull's post that May does not have to do anything about Indyref2 as the Tories have an overall majority today. She is doing this election stunt for vanity and to consolidate her position within the Tories by getting a bigger majority so party politics are higher priority than negotiating with the EU!

feargale · 20-04-2017 10:32PM

The Labour Party is so torn apart between Blairites and Corbyn's followers that never the twain shall meet and a divorce is the only sensible option. Then they would still have the option of coalescing with each other. The only thing that prevents this is Britain's twisted FPTP electoral system. And Labour can change that only when they have power, if ever again. But when in power they are happy to maintain the cosy electoral monopoly they share with the Tories. Therefore it's difficult to escape the conclusion that Labour deserves its fate.

devnull · 20-04-2017 10:36PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I am referring to Devnull's post that May does not have to do anything about Indyref2 as the Tories have an overall majority today.

Her majority right now is too thin - it only takes a relatively small number of rebels to mean she can lose a vote, another election will strengthen her hand and mean that she will not have to tone down as many policies as she has been forced to in the last few months like she had to, in order to get things through the budget.

She is doing this election stunt for vanity and to consolidate her position within the Tories by getting a bigger majority so party politics are higher priority than negotiating with the EU!

By having an election now, she'll be able to increase her numbers to stave off rebels in her own party meaning she doesn't have to water down policies and procedures through fear of them being voted against, she'll be able to weaken the oppositions numbers to the point where they will become irrelevant, she'll be able to kick an election to 2022 when she will be less vulnerable to the brexit deal failures that happened a couple of years earlier, and she'll have had time to steady the ship so to speak after it.

catbear · 20-04-2017 10:40PM

By the looks of it the only thing that can change the current dynamic is obvious signs of economic change.

The recent import inflation isn't enough as it's a slow motion displacement and they're used to seeing a positive side to devaluations as previously it helped deflate private debt, but wages haven't kept up with inflation and people are slowly starting to twig this.

It's a slow theft and when property prices fall and unemployment increases people will be looking for answers and having trumpeted Brexit as a positive May will not be able to rely on it as an excuse.

devnull · 20-04-2017 10:45PM

feargale wrote: »

The Labour Party is so torn apart between Blairites and Corbyn's followers that never the twain shall meet and a divorce is the only sensible option. Then they would still have the option of coalescing with each other. The only thing that prevents this is Britain's twisted FPTP electoral system. And Labour can change that only when they have power, if ever again. But when in power they are happy to maintain the cosy electoral monopoly they share with the Tories. Therefore it's difficult to escape the conclusion that Labour deserves its fate.

The problem is that fundamentally a lot of the Labour Party would now be closer to the Lib Dems policy wise than they would be to their own leader, this is illustrated by the number who voted no confidence in Corbyn because they felt that his policies were too left wing and never going to appeal to a broad enough section of the public to ever win an election.

This is further compounded by the fact that almost all of the center Labour supporters have abandoned them for the SNP in Scotland, and the Tories and the Lib Dems in England and Wales because they deem Corbyn as a liability and could never vote for a candidate in a party which is led by him because they simply do not want him to become Prime Minister.

The end result is you have a Labour Party that is run by the most left wing leader they've had in decades, with a bunch of MPs who overall would be closer to the center, however all the center voters have abandoned them because of Corbyn, whilst all that is left (no pun intended!) is a group of hardcore Corbyn supporters who cheer his every move and would rather be in opposition and moaning than in power whilst abusing and moaning at their own MPs every chance they get.

It's just completely dysfunctional on so many levels.

4068ac1elhodqr · 20-04-2017 10:48PM

catbear wrote: »

By the looks of it the only thing that can change the current dynamic is obvious signs of economic change.

And in relation to it's EU policy, what happened (earlier tonight) in France may bear some weight if it benefits LePen. An independent France is another dynamic for the one of the UK's closest neighbours to consider.

BoatMad · 20-04-2017 10:51PM

feargale wrote: »

The Labour Party is so torn apart between Blairites and Corbyn's followers that never the twain shall meet and a divorce is the only sensible option. Then they would still have the option of coalescing with each other. The only thing that prevents this is Britain's twisted FPTP electoral system. And Labour can change that only when they have power, if ever again. But when in power they are happy to maintain the cosy electoral monopoly they share with the Tories. Therefore it's difficult to escape the conclusion that Labour deserves its fate.

Not really , if the drubbing that is predicted occurs, then Corbyn and his followers will be queuing up at for unemployment assistance

The rise of the SNP has been the nail in Labours coffin and it simply doesnt get it. It cant no longer challenge the Tories by betting on taking Scotland and parts of the working class English

to get back into power, it must broaden its appeal and begin to encompass middle ground politics. Unless it does that it will for all intents and purposes be consigned to the dustbin of history.

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-04-2017 10:54PM

devnull wrote: »

Her majority right now is too thin - it only takes a relatively small number of rebels to mean she can lose a vote, another election will strengthen her hand and mean that she will not have to tone down as many policies as she has been forced to in the last few months like she had to, in order to get things through the budget.

By having an election now, she'll be able to increase her numbers to stave off rebels in her own party meaning she doesn't have to water down policies and procedures through fear of them being voted against, she'll be able to weaken the oppositions numbers to the point where they will become irrelevant, she'll be able to kick an election to 2022 when she will be less vulnerable to the brexit deal failures that happened a couple of years earlier, and she'll have had time to steady the ship so to speak after it.

The fixed term act was meant to stop this kind of power grab, it is very surprising that Labour allowed it to be over ridden so meekly

BoatMad · 20-04-2017 11:03PM

catbear wrote: »

By the looks of it the only thing that can change the current dynamic is obvious signs of economic change.

The recent import inflation isn't enough as it's a slow motion displacement and they're used to seeing a positive side to devaluations as previously it helped deflate private debt, but wages haven't kept up with inflation and people are slowly starting to twig this.

It's a slow theft and when property prices fall and unemployment increases people will be looking for answers and having trumpeted Brexit as a positive May will not be able to rely on it as an excuse.

wishful thinking Im afraid, Brexit is becoming like Londoners in the Blitz. Any amount of suffering can be inflicted when you are sure of future glory , even if that future seems to recede as fast as you approach it . Economics will not impact on Brexit , it has now become an "article of national pride "

devnull · 20-04-2017 11:10PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The fixed term act was meant to stop this kind of power grab, it is very surprising that Labour allowed it to be over ridden so meekly

That's because the Labour Leadership is clueless.

Theresa May put up the argument on TV and in public that if they didn't vote for the election they are running scared and after objecting to everything they didn't want to put their money where their mouth was knowing that Corbyn would want to show her to be wrong, regardless of what is best for his party. Corbyn took the bait just as she expected him to and he's essentially voted in a way that is akin to a Turkey voting for Christmas.

The simple thing that Corbyn should have done was say that now was not the time for the election and simply state what Theresa May had said about it on multiple occasions and quote her, quote the reasons for the Fixed Term Parliament act, say how it would get in the way of the Brexit deal that she claimed was so important and used her own words against her and accused her of political game playing and lying to the public in what is a power grab at the expense of the country, brexit and honest politics.

If May really wanted to have an election then she'd have to engineer a vote of no confidence in herself, which Corbyn could then point to as being another way of trying to get around the rules of the Fix Term Parliament act and another example of political game playing and showing that she cannot be trusted on her word and she will lie and do anything for power and that Labour will not be part of it and will not play games and risk a good deal for Brexit.

In the No Confidence vote Labour and the other parties abstain from voting saying that they are not going to be part of this political game playing, which means that she needs to get a large number of her own MP's to vote against her to force an election and for every single time May says that Labour MPs have no confidence in Corbyn, Corbyn could easily negate that by reeling out how many of them voted no confidence in her.

Instead now May has Corbyn on the ropes because he is hopeless.

BoatMad · 20-04-2017 11:29PM

devnull wrote: »

That's because the Labour Leadership is clueless.

Theresa May put up the argument on TV and in public that if they didn't vote for the election they are running scared and after objecting to everything they didn't want to put their money where their mouth was knowing that Corbyn would want to show her to be wrong, regardless of what is best for his party. Corbyn took the bait just as she expected him to and he's essentially voted in a way that is akin to a Turkey voting for Christmas.

The simple thing that Corbyn should have done was say that now was not the time for the election and simply state what Theresa May had said about it on multiple occasions and quote her, quote the reasons for the Fixed Term Parliament act, say how it would get in the way of the Brexit deal that she claimed was so important and used her own words against her and accused her of political game playing and lying to the public in what is a power grab at the expense of the country, brexit and honest politics.

If May really wanted to have an election then she'd have to engineer a vote of no confidence in herself, which Corbyn could then point to as being another way of trying to get around the rules of the Fix Term Parliament act and another example of political game playing and showing that she cannot be trusted on her word and she will lie and do anything for power and that Labour will not be part of it and will not play games and risk a good deal for Brexit.

In the No Confidence vote Labour and the other parties abstain from voting saying that they are not going to be part of this political game playing, which means that she needs to get a large number of her own MP's to vote against her to force an election and for every single time May says that Labour MPs have no confidence in Corbyn, Corbyn could easily negate that by reeling out how many of them voted no confidence in her.

Instead now May has Corbyn on the ropes because he is hopeless.

As I said to a friend , " labour will support the legislation to enable a snap election , because Corbyn is so deluded , he believes that there are actually people out there that will vote for him " ...

a ride awakening is coming, very rude indeed .

Leonard Hofstadter · 20-04-2017 11:45PM

BoatMad wrote: »

As I said to a friend , " labour will support the legislation to enable a snap election , because Corbyn is so deluded , he believes that there are actually people out there that will vote for him " ...

a ride awakening is coming, very rude indeed .

Indeed, if there is one benefit that will come from this shambles, it is that we might finally have a sensible Labour party.

Sadly the Lib Dems (who of course are getting my vote, as they did in 2015 although I almost voted for the Tories back then as I liked Cameron and I didn't anticipate that such a large proportion of the British electorate wanted to vote for economic suicide to hark back to the days of the empire) are just not strong enough.

The last thing I want to see is May increase her majority, but look at the polls, those who voted to leave don't regret it despite the blatant lies they were told (and people say there are families in Ireland who are brainwashed into voting FF or FG - they ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to tunnel vision), look at the state of Labour and it is clear that the Tories will clean up.

I would dearly love to see the Lib Dems do well but even if they managed to double their vote compared to the last time it would only be 16% so realistically they're not going to get any more than 30 seats (even 20 would be a big improvement on 9), now maybe the things that people like Gina Millar are organising on social media like the tactical voting will make an impact - I really want to believe it will and maybe the young (who at least understand how the real world works and wanted to stay in the EU) will actually bother to vote in the same proportion as the geriatrics who wanted to turn the clock back 60 years, and maybe all the people who thought they didn't need to vote in the referendum because remain was going to win (or voted to leave as a protest because they thought remain was going to win) will turn out in force and vote for anti-Brexit parties or candidates and give a bloody nose to all the idiots in the Tories (and Labour), but that is very much based on hope rather than any evidence or optimism.

What May is trying to do (and she even says it herself) is bury any criticism of her and the way she acts - which is totally dictatorial. It is her way or the highway. She's like the Republican party in the US - lies after lies and it's OK for her to do an about turn but if the SNP wants a referendum it creates division. For a vicar's daughter, and someone who was pontificating about Britain being a 'Christian' country only last weekend she really should know about what telling the truth means.

I do not buy the market view that this means a slightly softer vote, it means whatever May wants it to mean and she's made it abundantly clear she wants to take Britain out of the world's largest economic block and out of the ECJ.

Well if the UK are dumb enough to take this fool hardy approach then we on the EU side shouldn't hesitate to stop them, the EU has an awful lot less to lose than the UK does.

feargale · 20-04-2017 11:47PM

BoatMad wrote: »

to get back into power, it must broaden its appeal and begin to encompass middle ground politics. Unless it does that it will for all intents and purposes be consigned to the dustbin of history.

It is simply unrealistic to expect Jeremy Corbyn and his followers to embrace middle ground politics, as it is equally unrealistic to expect Blairites to swing to the far left. (Of course, that has never stopped either wing from making a power grab for the whole party, oblivious or uncaring about tomorrow.) Divorce is the only answer. The sooner the better before the house comes crashing down.

BoatMad · 20-04-2017 11:56PM

captainspeed wrote: »

Indeed, if there is one benefit that will come from this shambles, it is that we might finally have a sensible Labour party.

Sadly the Lib Dems (who of course are getting my vote, as they did in 2015 although I almost voted for the Tories back then as I liked Cameron and I didn't anticipate that such a large proportion of the British electorate wanted to vote for economic suicide to hark back to the days of the empire) are just not strong enough.

The last thing I want to see is May increase her majority, but look at the polls, those who voted to leave don't regret it despite the blatant lies they were told (and people say there are families in Ireland who are brainwashed into voting FF or FG - they ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to tunnel vision), look at the state of Labour and it is clear that the Tories will clean up.

I would dearly love to see the Lib Dems do well but even if they managed to double their vote compared to the last time it would only be 16% so realistically they're not going to get any more than 30 seats (even 20 would be a big improvement on 9), now maybe the things that people like Gina Millar are organising on social media like the tactical voting will make an impact - I really want to believe it will and maybe the young (who at least understand how the real world works and wanted to stay in the EU) will actually bother to vote in the same proportion as the geriatrics who wanted to turn the clock back 60 years, and maybe all the people who thought they didn't need to vote in the referendum because remain was going to win (or voted to leave as a protest because they thought remain was going to win) will turn out in force and vote for anti-Brexit parties or candidates and give a bloody nose to all the idiots in the Tories (and Labour), but that is very much based on hope rather than any evidence or optimism.

What May is trying to do (and she even says it herself) is bury any criticism of her and the way she acts - which is totally dictatorial. It is her way or the highway. She's like the Republican party in the US - lies after lies and it's OK for her to do an about turn but if the SNP wants a referendum it creates division. For a vicar's daughter, and someone who was pontificating about Britain being a 'Christian' country only last weekend she really should know about what telling the truth means.

I do not buy the market view that this means a slightly softer vote, it means whatever May wants it to mean and she's made it abundantly clear she wants to take Britain out of the world's largest economic block and out of the ECJ.

Well if the UK are dumb enough to take this fool hardy approach then we on the EU side shouldn't hesitate to stop them, the EU has an awful lot less to lose than the UK does.

Nothing you say here , Id fundamentally disagree with , arguably however May , backed by the technocrats will have to dream up a compromise , such a compromise might mean accepting a 4,5,6,7 years disengagement from the customs union and single market . Even changing accounting systems to accommodate the VAT changes will take 1-2 years and because nobody understands until the last minute what will be agreed, no advance planning can be done.

Hence I think May needs to silence radical Brexiters when the time comes , which with her current majority is far too slim,

There is every evidence she's a cool , calculating and ultimately a pragmatist.

However , I do think that talking the electorate for granted is a very very dangerous game in the current state of British politics.

Theres a lot of sore remainers, that may seek a degree of temporary revenge .

( I was listening to punditry on that subject and its an interesting perspective )

devnull · 21-04-2017 12:00AM

feargale wrote: »

It is simply unrealistic to expect Jeremy Corbyn and his followers to embrace middle ground politics, as it is equally unrealistic to expect Blairites to swing to the far left. (Of course, that has never stopped either wing from making a power grab for the whole party, oblivious or uncaring about tomorrow.) Divorce is the only answer. The sooner the better before the house comes crashing down.

Divorce and the left joins the socialist party and the middle ground join lib dems would be what i would like to see.

Obviously you would probably look at renaming both parties.

aled · 21-04-2017 04:23AM

If I read what Theresa May has done correctly, what she has done is probably the smartest thing i have ever seen a politician do. In one stroke she has ensured the absolute decimation of all political opposition and guaranteed her own future and the future of the Tories until at least 2022. And come 2022, after the Tories having worked through all the complexities of Brexit, not one British person would trust another party to take over. As such she has just guaranteed the Tories a generation of power. If so she is one very smart girl

Zubeneschamali · 21-04-2017 05:14AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

It was the Act of Parliament that was binding - even if it was no longer than a tweet.

Nope - Parliament is sovereign and can vote to change it's mind if it wants, it is not bound by the last vote on this.

Sam Russell · 21-04-2017 07:08AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Nope - Parliament is sovereign and can vote to change it's mind if it wants, it is not bound by the last vote on this.

Well, yes - but this is getting to level of angels on pinheads.

However, the UK Supreme Court judged that the referendum was not binding, but it could not say the same about an act of parliament. So while parliament can change its mind, the UK SC cannot change it for them, but it can override a non-binding referendum.

murphaph · 21-04-2017 07:50AM

feargale wrote: »

It is simply unrealistic to expect Jeremy Corbyn and his followers to embrace middle ground politics, as it is equally unrealistic to expect Blairites to swing to the far left. (Of course, that has never stopped either wing from making a power grab for the whole party, oblivious or uncaring about tomorrow.) Divorce is the only answer. The sooner the better before the house comes crashing down.

Indeed. If Corbyn was a German politician he would lead Die Linke (emerged out if former East German SED), not the centre left SPD. It's time for Labour and indeed the Conservatives to split into their natural factions and introduce PR so most of the people are represented accordingly. We're a very long way from that though. It will take economic disaster to cause such a change to be contemplated.

Zubeneschamali · 21-04-2017 08:58AM

Labour and the Tories will never introduce PR, it is not in their interests.

The Lib-Dems were the only hope, and they ballsed it up.

ancapailldorcha · 21-04-2017 09:00AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Labour and the Tories will never introduce PR, it is not in their interests.

The Lib-Dems were the only hope, and they ballsed it up.

What do you mean, "They ballsed it up?" They brought in a referendum at great personal cost and fewer than half the electorate could be bothered to vote on it.

catbear · 21-04-2017 09:48AM

aled wrote: »

If I read what Theresa May has done correctly, what she has done is probably the smartest thing i have ever seen a politician do. In one stroke she has ensured the absolute decimation of all political opposition and guaranteed her own future and the future of the Tories until at least 2022. And come 2022, after the Tories having worked through all the complexities of Brexit, not one British person would trust another party to take over. As such she has just guaranteed the Tories a generation of power. If so she is one very smart girl

You're giving her way too much credit.

As goalie of the opposition corbyn is away in the stands preaching to his fans about the evils of football and all May is doing is tapping the ball over the line.

2017 UK General Election - 8th June

Comments