the snap general election thread

setmefree2

On foreign policy it will be troops out of Syria, Iraq Afghanistan. But what about Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and the Eastern European countries????

The media is doing a real !!!! job in finding out what he actually stands for imho.

Filo25

wotsthat wrote: »

A hung parliament will be bad for the economy as the UK will have to engage further in it's now most popular pastime - navel gazing.

There could be a unity government between Labour and the Tories designed to last until the UK leaves the EU. Doesn't sound very likely I know but seems more likely than any coalition with the SNP in it.

The SNP's reason to be is independence - I don't believe Labour or the Tories would be so desperate.

I could imagine the SNP's price for support being something like a second Brexit referendum on the terms of the deal and clearance to get a second Indy referendum after Brexit terms are settled.

There are quite a few in the PLP who probably wouldn't have a huge issue with that price for their support.

setmefree2

Fella wrote: »

By contrast, Labour are paying lip-service to it at best, because they think it's political suicide to do otherwise. I have zero confidence they would go through with it at all if actually in power (most of their MPs & pretty much all SNPs are against it). If they did I think it would be Brexit in name only, probably delayed for years & years & ultimately nothing remotely like "leaving the EU" which is what people voted to do.

But surely if people really want to leave the EU they wouldn't be voting with regard only to their own wallets?

Fella

Moby wrote: »

The problem for May is that the people she'll be negotiating with have had an armchair seat observing her crash and burn in the campaign. Instead of being 'strong and stable' she's been exposed as 'weak and wobbly'. The 27 will have her for breakfast. The problem she has as well is she's already made enemies of them so it seems a 'no deal' exit is a real possibility. That will have huge consequences for us as a country.

May would be a figurehead in the talks. The bulk of the real negotiating will be done by people none of us have ever heard of.

I've always been of the belief that the 27 are far more likely to damage their own position (they can't agree on anything) than argue as an effective cohesive team against us.

Personally I'm still chilled about Brexit negotiations. The unnerving bit is whether we'll actually see them happen if the Tories manage to mess up the election.

setmefree2

ukcarper wrote: »

Probably true but instead of harking on about the IRA they should be countering his planned spending with more detail and provide more detail on thier taxation and spending plans.

I agree. Poor effort from the Tories.

setmefree2

Moby wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/31/theresa-may-clear-unfathomable-finds-deflated-newshound The Herald: “Two visits in six weeks to one of the country’s most marginal constituencies – is she getting worried?” May: “I’m very clear that this is a crucial election for this country.” TH: “Plymouth is feeling the effects of military cuts. Will she guarantee to protect the city from further pain?” M: “I’m very clear that Plymouth has a proud record of connection with the armed forces.” TH: “How will your Brexit plan make Plymouth better off?” M: “I think there is a better future ahead for Plymouth and for the whole of the UK.” TH: “Will you promise to sort out our transport links?” M: “I’m very clear that connectivity is hugely important for Plymouth and the south-west generally.”

To be fair someone had to make the cuts after 2010 - everyone seems to have forgotten that.

Fella

setmefree2 wrote: »

But surely if people really want to leave the EU they wouldn't be voting with regard only to their own wallets?

Let's hope not!

And for completeness, despite the tone of the conversation on here just now, the election result is still up for grabs, it's not as if we're facing a likely Labour win or even a likely hung parliament as it stands (both can be backed at decent odds for anybody who fancies them). There is still the very real chance the polls are simply wrong again. I understand that after the pollsters got it so wrong in 2015 an overhaul of their systems was put in place to eradicate those errors. However that was due to take effect by 2019 & May calling the election early means that the pollsters are essentially using the same, likely flawed methods as in 2015, with just minor tweaks here & there.

So a large Tory win is still one of the very possible outcomes. However I would say even the one in a thousand chance of a Corbyn win should be enough to keep anybody sensible awake at night.

setmefree2

Filo25 wrote: »

There is practically no chance that Labour can win this election, a hung parliament is as good as they could hope for, whether that would have any moderating effect on their manifesto is open to debate though given the likely parties they would need to get the support of.

What a laughing stock we will be in Europe....

Conrad

Is the Tory lead demise a deliberate ploy by very clever strategists running a purposely lack lustre campaign?


Think about it - you work out you can take a hit on support, just enough to still allow a convincing victory, but not a mega-victory.


This in turn keeps Corbyn in charge of Labour ('our man done good, despite loosing').


This then leads to the big Labour split.


Long term strategy...........

kabayiri

All together now :
*Our manifesto is fully costed* !!

That's nice then. Here's some other things Labour "fully costed" :

- Olympics : ('costed' : £2.3bn ; 'actual' £12bn+)
- PFI refuelling tanker : ('costed' : £1.5bn ; 'actual' £10bn+)
- NHS IT : ('costed' : £3bn ; 'actual' £10bn+)

Hmm, I'm struggling with this 'costed' idea, especially when it's delivered by a bunch of charlatans with an appalling track record.

Using a 'costed'/'actual' ratio of 1:4 would make the £250bn investment Corbyn plans turn into an actual of £1,000,000,000,000. Luvvly jubbly (if you're a banker trading in debt)