the snap general election thread

hallmark

CKhalvashi wrote: »

That's been impression you've explicitly given, is it not?

No if you check you'll see the impression I've given is that the rich are still rich & delighted that the Tories won.

Anything beyond that is your own assumption.

Masomnia

It's easy to forget in this debate that the Conservatives did increase their share of the vote by over 5%, so this isn't some mass rejection of their policies.

They ran a very bad campaign, bottling the debates, not costing their policies and not challenging Labour's fantasy economics. They let them get away with it and this was the result.

BobQ

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2017/06/our-snap-survey-two-in-three-conservative-party-members-say-that-may-should-announce-her-resignation.html

Time to go say two thirds on Conservative Home

bobbymotors

BobQ wrote: »

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2017/06/our-snap-survey-two-in-three-conservative-party-members-say-that-may-should-announce-her-resignation.html

Time to go say two thirds on Conservative Home

Yes, she should go: certainly by the time of the conference in the autumn.

hallmark

StevieJ wrote: »

Maybe we don't have it because we don't have high enough tax rates? The Scandinavian countries seem to have stuck a nice balance between respect for their people and raising funds through taxes.

Well now. If Corbyn had stood on a ticket of lets say an across-the-board rise in income tax of 5% (e.g. something approaching what would have been required to pay fora reasonable chunk of his spending) & had won a majority, or even his actual miserable 262 votes, off the back of it, then I'd have said fair enough.

However he tried to pretend you could fund £250 billion of spending by just kicking the richest 5% & some corporations with zero effect on the other 95%. A massive insult to all but the very thickest, or most tribal of voters.

Consequently he deserved his heavy loss.

bobbymotors

Masomnia wrote: »

It's easy to forget in this debate that the Conservatives did increase their share of the vote by over 5%, so this isn't some mass rejection of their policies.

They ran a very bad campaign, bottling the debates, not costing their policies and not challenging Labour's fantasy economics. They let them get away with it and this was the result.

Only because of Ukippers with no where to go except her or labour.

And a majority of those went to labour.

Filo25

chucknorris wrote: »

IMO the conservatives dire election campaign was mainly down to:

- May's total lack of effort in doing anything to help the campaign.
- May's dithering over the care situation.
- Not challenging Labour over their campaign (e.g. who is going to pay for free tuition etc.), they got a free ride.
- May's arrogance of trying to force a hard Brexit on the public (completely ignoring the fact that 48% of the population voted Remain).
- May's dogmatic approach to politics, she needs to take on board her cabinet's opinions, she isn't Margret Thatcher (she doesn't know better than everyone else )

If she had had a wider range of advisers, that election would have never happened, and it shouldn't have.

They should have been able to go after the Labour manifesto using the IFS analysis of it, the problem was that they were also scathing about the Tory manifesto, which was ludicrously short on detail of any kind.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

hallmark wrote: »

You see, I give you the credit of a serious reply & your response is to use the Daily Mail insult. Interestingly, almost nobody who uses that insult even understands it's origins

So now I'll just go back to laughing in sheer joy that Corbyn is out & his hopeless agenda is just so much more landfill :j:j:j

Ah right so your last post was a serious reply..... I think that's where I made a mistake.

What do you mean Corbyn is out? that last paragraph makes me think that English isn't your first language.

Can I ask you a serious question now? which parts of Mays non-costed manifesto floated your boat?

P.S I didn't realise you were so sensitive, after all, you've been unsuccessfully goading people on this forum for some time. I assumed you could take it without throwing a little paddy.

bobbymotors

no matter which way it is spun, it was an awful night for TM and the Cons, and a decent night for labour - not a good night, they did, after all, lose.

May should do the decent thing and go, but I suspect she will try to hold on. The grandees won't let her though.

BobQ

hallmark wrote: »

Haha add Shami "thanks for my peerage" Chakrabarti to the list of delusional people who think Corbyn won:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/815385/Labour-MP-Jeremy-Corbyn-left-wing-election

Even the QT audience boo her! haha how the Shami has fallen.

It's nearly drink time, I feel another night of wild celebration coming on :j:j:j

I agree its delusional to think he won but I think many of his supporters can be forgiven for thinking that it is a sort of moral victory when he and his party began 20 points behind in most polls, faced a very biased press and was vilified in a very personal way by his opponents.

I still doubt he is electable but he deserves some credit for stopping the landslide that May commanded the electorate to give her. He did not win but neither did the Tories. May has no credibility in the party, the nation or with those she must negotiate with.

Your blind loyalty to May is misplaced, she has damaged the nation in an act of political and personal hubris.