the snap general election thread

westernpromise

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Interesting.
Who (in your opinion) do you propose is the effective opposition?

Who says there has to be one?

Suppose the alternative to May was Pol Pot. If you don't support May, do you have to vote for Pol Pot?

There are no circumstances in which I'd vote for a racist party. Others may be fine with it, but should expect to be despised.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

Because they'd likely be run by more or less the same staff, and with the profits going back into the country than into private hands.

What were the aggregate profits of the nationalised industries before privatisation?

westernpromise

Spidernick wrote: »

The above has to be an early contender for 'Most arrogant post of the month' award!

As an aside (and my main reason for coming on this thread before I notice the nonsense I quoted): I have just been phoned by a telephone pollster for the first time ever.

If you vote for an anti-Semitic party, or a party that otherwise harbours racists, you're morally incompetent. The fact that racist or anti-Semitic parties exist and stand at elections doesn't get you off the hook.

IveSeenTheLight

westernpromise wrote: »

Who says there has to be one?

Suppose the alternative to May was Pol Pot. If you don't support May, do you have to vote for Pol Pot?

There are no circumstances in which I'd vote for a racist party. Others may be fine with it, but should expect to be despised.

Well Pol Pot is not standing as I understand.
Would you want 659 Conservative MP's?

chris_m

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Well Pol Pot is not standing as I understand.
Would you want 659 Conservative MP's?

I thought the Boundary Commission was tasked with reducing the number of seats, not increasing it

IveSeenTheLight

chris_m wrote: »

I thought the Boundary Commission was tasked with reducing the number of seats, not increasing it

How very pedantic, my fat fingers and the 0 being next to the 9 on my iPhone
.

You get my point though I guess?

Spidernick

westernpromise wrote: »

If you vote for an anti-Semitic party, or a party that otherwise harbours racists, you're morally incompetent. The fact that racist or anti-Semitic parties exist and stand at elections doesn't get you off the hook.

Well I'll be voting Labour (although I don't think much of Corbyn) and my moral compass is fine, thanks. A few bad apples does not make the whole party antisemitic and my local candidate will not fit your description.

What I personally (and this is the point) find morally reprehensible is what the Tories are doing to the NHS and the poor, whilst leaving the likes of Amazon and Google alone. As such, I could counter that in voting Tory one fails the 'character and morality' test, but wouldn't dream of pontificating in this derogatory manner, as it's not as simple as that. I do find it extremely odd when people live in a 'just black and white' world, as you seem to do.

gfplux

Looking at Britain from across the Channel I often wonder "where the money goes"
I read, and hear (from friends and family) that Britain has..

Poor infrastructure, roads, rail, airports bridges etc.
Bus and train travel is very expensive.
Educations is underfunded.
NHS is underfunded.

On the other side of the balance sheet.

Income tax is too high.
VAT is too high.
Corporation Tax is too high.

So I ask myself. "Britain is one of the richest Country's in the World, where does the money go.


Perhaps I am missing something.

westernpromise

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Well Pol Pot is not standing as I understand.
Would you want 659 Conservative MP's?

If the alternative was racists. anti-Semites or supporters of Pol Pot, yes. You?

westernpromise

Spidernick wrote: »

Well I'll be voting Labour (although I don't think much of Corbyn) and my moral compass is fine, thanks.

No, you're morally incompetent. You're voting for a party of anti-Semites and racists led by a terrorist sympathiser.

What I personally (and this is the point) find morally reprehensible is what the Tories are doing to the NHS and the poor, whilst leaving the likes of Amazon and Google alone.

Then you're deluded. Whatever the government is "doing to the NHS and the poor" is not equatable with racial hatred or support for terrorists. If you can't tell the difference between spending priorities versus racist supporters of political murder, you are indeed abjectly morally incompetent.