the snap general election thread

Joe_Horner

kabayiri wrote: »

Far too modest ! We all know "Flash" saved the world
https://youtu.be/fWonv6qE5Co

I've never had to do interviews with a camera shoved in my face but I'd imagine it'd be quite easy to slip up (see the two professional reporters recently renaming our health secretary ;P )

Besides, the historical view of Brown's chancellorship is generally favourable outside the gutter press and it's a documented fact that the rest of the world ran to follow his lead in how to react to 2008.

So, saving the world? Maybe not. Effectively and decisively softening the effects? Almost certainly.

chucknorris

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40251999

It must be a little discomforting for those on here who claim that the Conservatives "won" for their leader to admit that she "got them into this mess"...

Can you not see a scenario (in fact the actual election result) where both the Tories win and TM gets them into a 'mess'? Because that is what happened.

I'm not personally discomforted actually, despite being a Tory voter ,I will tell you why I'm not:

1. They got a justified kick up the backside, but didn't pay the full price (losing the election).
2. They have learned about the limitations of May, again without paying the full price.
3. I voted remain, so I'd be quite happy if we end up staying in the single market, I'm not saying that is going to happen, but it is much more possible than before.
4. I sold half my holdings in the ftse (quite near the top, about 7,400) and re-invested in a UK REIT, and if we do stay in the single market I will most likely be much better off. If we don't well I felt that I had to diverse anyway.

antrobus

steampowered wrote: »

No, no they aren't.

This is a key point. We live in a capitalist society with a free market economy. Sometimes businesses fail.

The government isn't responsible for that - that's just what happens in the real world.

Admittedly there are lessons to be learned for regulators - but given that no regulator anywhere in the world really saw the crisis coming it seems extremely unlikely that leaving regulation with the Bank of England would have made any difference.

Also, regulation should not decide the business plan for private sector businesses. If you try to blame the government for private sector failures, you very soon have an economy which is massively over-regulated in which any innovation or risk-taking is stamped out.

Governments are responsible for regulation. Regulation is supposed to ensure that systemic banks do not go bust. RBS and HBOS went bust. Their failure was the responsibility of the Labour government at the time. There are no excuses.

The problem with New Labour's regulation model was that the FSA spent its efforts on consumer regulation rather than bank regulation. They are two very different things. At least the Coalition government understood that distinction.

hallmark

fun4everyone wrote: »

I prefer the lower chance of winning/higher reward of laying her (nudge nudge) @ 1.08 a few days ago to be the next pm (settled on royal ascent granted). Currently trading at 1.17 - well it was at 4pm not looked since. Something is going to give.

Haha, sounds like that something is going to be you giving your money away. You tip her as a good lay at 1.17 & shortly after her price has halved. Doesn't say much for your earlier prediction that
"There will be an election this year and Labour will easily win a majority."
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

hallmark

chucknorris wrote: »

Eh? No, he was explaining that there could be a successful vote of no confidence.

No, what he said was:

CKhalvashi wrote: »

It can be done on 50%, and all that will be needed is a few rebels to ensure it happens.

With Labour on course to be 5 from a majority under the last poll, I
can see it happening very soon.

He is saying that he thinks Tory MPs (rebels) are going to vote with Labour on a vote of no confidence, in circumstances where the polls suggest Labour might win.

As I said before, wishful thinking. Why would they rebel & trigger an election the polls suggested they would lose?

BobQ

hallmark wrote: »

A nice day to be outdoors

The DUP outrage from the left is amusing. Broon in 2010 & Miliband in 2015 tried to do a deal with them:

https://order-order.com/2017/06/11/labour-repeatedly-tried-to-do-deals-with-the-dup/

So a Conservative supporting website claims this happened. But the evidence is what? A story in the Daily Telegraph that refers to a Conservative supporting DUP politician quoting a letter about a Government promise to invest in NI. Plus an email referring to a more general meeting that contains no explicit information of a deal being discussed.

Very convincing!

ThinkingOutLoud_2

BobQ wrote: »

So a Conservative supporting website claims this happened. But the evidence is what? A story in the Daily Telegraph that refers to a Conservative supporting DUP politician quoting a letter about a Government promise to invest in NI. Plus an email referring to a more general meeting that contains no explicit information of a deal being discussed.

Very convincing!

So BobQ just to be clear - you are saying that Labour never considered a deal with he DUP? How much are you willing to stake on that? Where is some unequivocal proof this is sheer fabrication? Happy to see proof not conjecture...

CKhalvashi

chucknorris wrote: »

Can you not see a scenario (in fact the actual election result) where both the Tories win and TM gets them into a 'mess'? Because that is what happened.

I'm not personally discomforted actually, despite being a Tory voter ,I will tell you why I'm not:

1. They got a justified kick up the backside, but didn't pay the full price (losing the election).
2. They have learned about the limitations of May, again without paying the full price.
3. I voted remain, so I'd be quite happy if we end up staying in the single market, I'm not saying that is going to happen, but it is much more possible than before.
4. I sold half my holdings in the ftse (quite near the top, about 7,400) and re-invested in a UK REIT, and if we do stay in the single market I will most likely be much better off. If we don't well I felt that I had to diverse anyway.

Completely agree with this, as a swinging (when it comes to voting anyway) Remainer.

I explained already why I felt I couldn't back the Conservatives this time, and I stand by that. There appears to be a 10%ish movement to the centre or left in my own constituency once UKIP not running has been taken into account with Labour making most of the gains, so whatever Corbyn is doing seems to be working.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I voted Lib Dem due to the candidate being IMO the strongest non-Conservative candidate.

I voted Lib Dem in 2010 and Conservative in 2015. I am unlikely, as things stand, to ever vote Conservative again.

If Hallmark wants to find something in my numbers to disagree with (even though he won't), the constituency I live in is Hertford and Stortford.

69.5% of the vote went to Conservative and UKIP in 2015, 60.3% went to Conservative and UKIP (who didn't stand, so just Conservative) this time.

hallmark wrote: »

He is saying that he thinks Tory MPs (rebels) are going to vote with Labour on a vote of no confidence, in circumstances where the polls suggest Labour might win.

As I said before, wishful thinking. Why would they rebel & trigger an election the polls suggested they would lose?

I'm suggesting (without naming anyone) that a few might do so, if only to save their own careers if nothing else.

I don't think it takes any imagination if we're heading towards a hard Brexit who those few might be.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I'm suggesting (without naming anyone) that a few might do so, if only to save their own careers if nothing else.
.

But isn't this the whole point - if a few conservatives vote to bring down the government - how will that be saving their careers?

steampowered

hallmark wrote: »

He is saying that he thinks Tory MPs (rebels) are going to vote with Labour on a vote of no confidence, in circumstances where the polls suggest Labour might win.

As I said before, wishful thinking. Why would they rebel & trigger an election the polls suggested they would lose?

Not all of us are motivated solely by selfish self-interest. Most people and most politicians will support the best interests of the country when push comes to shove.

History suggests a no confidence vote is very possible. There are Tory MPs in safe seats who may be prepared to support or abstain from a motion of no confidence if they felt it in the best interests of the country. They could also feel it is a way to get rid of Theresa May, so that a different leader might have another crack at the following general election.

Also note that a vote of no confidence could be carried if the DUP voted in favour or abstained.

In 1977 Labour and the Liberals agreed the Lib-Lab pact by which the Liberals agreed to support the Government in return for pre-legislative consultation. By 1979, the Liberals supported the vote of confidence which brought down the Callaghan government. Who is to say the same thing couldn't happen with the DUP.