the snap general election thread

Moby

Fella wrote: »

Jeremy Corbyn:

Following the Grand Hotel bombing, a far-Left magazine on whose editorial board Corbyn served as general secretary reiterated its backing for the Irish republican movement, adding: ‘Let our “Iron Lady” know this: those who live by the sword shall die by it. If she wants violence, then violence she will certainly get.’

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/labour-party-knew-corbyn-made-leader-now-country-knows/




John McDonnell:

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, has apologised “from the bottom of my heart” for suggesting in 2003 that the IRA should be honoured for the bombings which brought the British government “to the negotiating table” during the Northern Ireland peace process.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/18/john-mcdonnell-apologises-for-ira-comment-labour



Dianne Abbott:

The Shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, has refused to say she "regrets" calling for the IRA to defeat the British state.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-ira-regret-jeremy-corbyn-defeat-british-state-a7759926.html

So you have nothing new then....just trotting out the same old tired memes!

Fella

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The problem is the electorate is a bit smarter than she anticipated and is seeing through the smoke and mirrors

No its the opposite. The Tories made no attempt to hide the fairly bleak stuff they were intending to do & the public is treating it as surprisingly unpleasant news.

By contrast Corbyn has offered a Smörgåsbord of giveaways, none of which will apparently cost (95% of them) a penny & they appear to be falling for it hook, line & sinker.

westernpromise

Moby wrote: »

So you have nothing new then....just trotting out the same old tired memes!

Or as morally competent people call it, "the facts".

Fella

Moby wrote: »

So you have nothing new then....just trotting out the same old tired memes!

You asked for proof & I've just provided it. Do you think calling it a meme is any kind of answer?

None of it is disputed and if it wasn't true it Corbyn & his team would certainly have challenged it legally.

So if you want to debate like a grown-up at least have the decency to accept when you lose.

Conrad

These manifesto commitments will help us reduce housing demand;


Immigration

• No commitment to reduce numbers.
• Labour "believes in fair rules and reasonable management of migration" and will not resort to "bogus" immigration targets.
• Scrap income thresholds for spouses of migrants who want to come to the UK

Carl31

westernpromise wrote: »

There were two problems with the £350 million claim as I see it, one trivial and one crucial.

The trivial one was that £350 million is our gross not net payment, so arguably they should have said £200 million not £350 million. Arguably though the £350 million was justifiable because you'd choose where to spend the whole, which might indeed be on the NHS.

The crucial one is that to claim any number could be spent on anything was actually nonsensical because neither Leave nor Remain was in power. Hence there was no way that post a Leave vote the £200 million was going to be spent on anything. Any such claim was stupid regardless of the ££ attached to it. It would be just as likely to be used simply to pay down the deficit, for example.

I am not sure how much difference it made in the end, because as far as I can tell, most people who voted Leave did so because of

• sovereignty
• the absence of democracy in the EU (what difference has any MEP ever made and why is there no Opposition?)
• a wish to escape the dead hand of European socialism, or
• them immigrants comin' over 'ere.

- or some combination thereof.

I didn't vote because I thought both sides' arguments were rubbish, but I never heard anyone say the £350 million had swayed them.

there was a poster somewhere that said "lets spend the £350m on the NHS instead", which I took to be a suggestion, not a statement of intent, I'm not really sure why anyone would

Quite often my friends say "lets go to the pub", it doesn't always mean we end up there, it was just a suggestion

IveSeenTheLight

Fella wrote: »

No its the opposite. The Tories made no attempt to hide the fairly bleak stuff they were intending to do & the public is treating it as surprisingly unpleasant news.

I have a different view.
They were trying to push through undesirable policy while pushing that this GE was all about providing a strong hand for Brexit negotiation.
Its only because they are being pulled up on their policy and having to do u-turns because it was not hidden behind the Brexit slogan smokescreen

Conrad

I like this commitment, great for enterprise, a charter for the cunning adept at making claims (see it happen first hand);


Workers' rights

• Creation of a Ministry of Labour to deliver investment in enforcing workers' rights.

I trust all you mmoneysavers will relish prices going up on things like Couriers, when this one comes in;


Zero hours contracts outlawed.

Conrad

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34401412


Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who lived in Jamaica for two years in his youth, said that, as prime minister, he would be ready to apologise for the slave trade.


National commissions have calculated the sums could run into trillions of dollars.

Fella

Conrad wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34401412


Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who lived in Jamaica for two years in his youth, said that, as prime minister, he would be ready to apologise for the slave trade.

Didn't realise the b*stard was a Slaver too.