the snap general election thread

BobQ

fun4everyone wrote: »

I didn't realise Amber Rudd's father had passed away on Monday until now. Yet weak and wobbly Therea May still sent her to face the music last night. Cowardly.

Yes an act of compassion that is worthy of a caring Tory Leader.

Filo25

setmefree2 wrote: »

I don't know. A lot of the 5% live in LDN. As do the 1%.

Do Turkeys really vote for Xmas?

Maybe they do! Liberal Elites vote labour - working class vore Tory - you couldn't make it up.

I know a few people who I'm surprised voted Labour down here.

Similar reasons for a few of them, Tories putting up pro-Brexit candidates in Remain areas, they do not like May at all, and don't think she has earned a landslide, they don't think Corbyn is getting near power however they vote so they would rather give the Tories a bloody nose.

BobQ

westernpromise wrote: »

What we know about Corbyn is that if you threaten him with bombs and bullets, he appeases you. He campaigns to disband the security services while sharing a platform with you. Black September hijacker Leela Khalid hijacked planes and Corbyn happily shared a platform with her.

The idea that capitulating to anyone who threatens you would make us safer is laughable. Terrorists the world over would know that if you plant a few bombs in London, Corbyn will side with you, blame the victims, and give you anything you want that's in his gift. The comparison with Russia's attitude to plane hijackers is instructive: Russia doesn't negotiate with you, they just storm the plane and you die. As a result, nobody hijacks their planes.

We would become an instant target for every nutjob who wanted an easy target.

He is also a man who has more lies told about him than any current politician.

Where has he campaigned to disband the security services?

westernpromise

setmefree2 wrote: »

However, it seems clear that the voter just wants the government wants to spend and spend, what can you do?

The average Labour voter wants a government that spends and spends on himself using other people's money. They are in effect voting to keep as much as possible of what they didn't earn.

While the logic and moral incompetence are both epic to observe, what is weirder is that these people see themselves as paragons of selflessness and virtue. Well, they would, wouldn't they? It would be hard to be proud of being a tapeworm so they kid themselves they aren't one.

kabayiri

setmefree2 wrote: »

I don't know. A lot of the 5% live in LDN. As do the 1%.

Do Turkeys really vote for Xmas?

Maybe they do! Liberal Elites vote labour - working class vote Tory - you couldn't make it up.

It's a weird old mix. I can't speak for London, I don't know the vibe there.

I've met a fair share of 1st generation migrants through my Indian work colleagues up here in NW.

They are more right of centre than you might imagine. They don't see EU migrants as an asset, but as competitors to more migrants from the subcontinent.

I suppose it's true in a way.

westernpromise

setmefree2 wrote: »

There aren't enough people like me and again the LP will end up with less tax not more.

Again - it's the Laffer curve



when Osborne lowered taxes from 50% to 45% he got more money not less.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/01/george-osborne-claims-cutting-50p-tax-rate-has-increased-take-by-8bn

If you are in favour of the 50% rate, it's not about whether the tax take from it goes up or down. It's about expropriating people you're envious of. As long as they're personally worse off, and a bit closer to your own level of impotent misery, that's a good result.

Remember, Labour shills would rather live a world where everyone had £1 than in one where everyone has £5 except for one bloke who has £50. It's about equality of misery.

kabayiri

My question is simple re: the Labour plans.

Suppose the income tax hike does not raise £6.4bn, only half of that.

Where do they get the additional £3bn from?

Or, are the ambitious spending plans dependent on all the savings delivering their expected targets?

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

My question is simple re: the Labour plans.

Suppose the income tax hike does not raise £6.4bn, only half of that.

Where do they get the additional £3bn from?

Or, are the ambitious spending plans dependent on all the savings delivering their expected targets?

Supposes it raises more ?

Speculation like that is pointless.

Fella

fun4everyone wrote: »

Thanks, found it

https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/870310676501278720

Weak and Wobbly.

Was this a scheduled interview though? If not it's hardly her being wobbly in this instance, you wouldn't expect her to necessarily change her schedule to do an interview at a day's notice?

(If it was scheduled that's different).

Thrugelmir

kabayiri wrote: »

Or, are the ambitious spending plans dependent on all the savings delivering their expected targets?

The UK will need to borrow heavily. That's when the fun starts. As existing debt will need to be refinanced. Every 100 bps is going to add considerably to the annual debt servicing bill.