the snap general election thread

System

What is this order-order website that's suddenly appeared out of nowhere? Are they just anti-government generally?

mayonnaise

Joeskeppi wrote: »

What is this order-order website that's suddenly appeared out of nowhere? Are they just anti-government generally?

Just a gossipy tabloid style blog, based in St Kitts & Nevis for tax and libel avoidance reasons, run by a serial drunk driver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines
Some on here get their 'news' from there. Bless.

Arklight

steampowered wrote: »

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.

Tories act in their own self interest first, the Conservative Party's second (as their chosen vehicle for promoting their own self interest), and the good of the country a long and distant third.

If they vote no confidence it'll be because they believe it personally benefits them in some way.

You can't trust a Tory. It seems the country is slowly waking up to this fact.

mayonnaise

Rinoa wrote: »

https://order-order.com/

The sooner May goes the better.

Stop flipflopping, it's making me dizzy. :rotfl:

Rinoa wrote: »

Theresa May will lead UK Brexit negotiations.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-may-idUKKBN17Y11X?rpc=401&

I'm happy with that.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72487651&postcount=19380

IveSeenTheLight

Joeskeppi wrote: »

What is this order-order website that's suddenly appeared out of nowhere? Are they just anti-government generally?

Rather than focus on the method, its far better to consider the merits.

Just quickly flashed up the site and the first thing I picked up on was that apparently May is reshuffling the Brexit team.

The question must be why?
Does this not set back the work done to date and be against the strong and stable mantra? It can't be stable if its being changed surely.

That said, could it be considered that this is an effort to listen to the electorate and the message sent via the polls on the type of Brexit desired.

There's probably a lot more to dig into

Out,_Vile_Jelly

mayonnaise wrote: »

Just a gossipy tabloid style blog, based in St Kitts & Nevis for tax and libel avoidance reasons, run by a serial drunk driver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines
Some on here get their 'news' from there. Bless.

They do get some good scoops, and are very hot on following up expenses scandals. The commentators below the line are a bunch of weirdos though.

System

mayonnaise wrote: »

Just a gossipy tabloid style blog, based in St Kitts & Nevis for tax and libel avoidance reasons, run by a serial drunk driver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines
Some on here get their 'news' from there. Bless.

Right. Suddenly makes sense!

Arklight

Meanwhile, Tory MPs decide what to do about appointing a new leader.

HornetSaver

Mistermeaner wrote: »

A great move by May IMO

Will give the tories the majority they need to crack on with sorting the defecit and managing Brexit (whether support it or not it needs doing)

I'd be a hypocrite to be smug about this prediction being wrong, given my view that smugness and confidence from those who felt Corbyn couldn't possibly win are directly responsible for the seat tally we currently see in the House of Commons

But as I see it, the difference between March and now is that in March building cross-party consensus was a fallback option in the event that near-unanimity within the Conservative party was not possible. It is now a necessity due to the lack of a majority, and in practise the DUP, Plaid and a minority of Labour MPs are the only ones who could be considered as potential sources of support, and even then only for a limited form of Brexit.

Fair enough, hindsight is a wonderful thing and all that. But if May's rationale for calling an election is that she did not believe she could build that cross-party consensus, then surely it follows - putting aside the politics about whether she has a moral right to continue - that she is not the person to build that consensus now?

EDIT: I'm of course not suggesting that Plaid or Labour MPs would ever support a Tory Government, simply that they might consider backing a Conservative-led Brexit bill under certain circumstances, in a way that the SNP and Lib Dems most certainly would not.

Chrysalis

hallmark wrote: »

Haha you really should try not to be sucked into using Labour's slogans.

Income Tax:
Top rate of income tax throughout Labour's 13 years in charge was 40%.

Top rate of income tax in the 7 years since is 45%.

Corp Tax:
Corp tax revenue levels at record highs since the Tories lowered the rate, much higher than under Labour.

So which tax giveaways for the rich were you talking about?:beer::beer:

How high do you think corp tax would be now if at the same level as 2010?

Simply deduct the difference and thats the giveaway, its basic maths.

If you are claiming that its higher because corporations were evading tax and decided to stop doing it with another party in power then that needs addressing forcefully.

What you dont realise is if a government is consistently lowering tax to satisfy a corporations demand for profits, then it will just keep going until it eventually hits 0%, they will never be happy.

Clearly tax is not at record levels, because if it was then there would be no need for spending cuts.