the snap general election thread

Fella

Looks like Vince Cable will soon be in charge of the LibDems. I see this as exceedingly bad news for Corbyn's Labour. Cable is both inexplicably popular and very much on the left of the LibDems. For the first time since he got in control Corbyn is going to have somebody regarded as a credible left-winger attacking him & unlike when that happens from members of his own Party, Corbyn & his cultish followers won't simply be able to label Cable as a "Blairite".

Should split the socialist vote nicely.

Moby

Fella wrote: »

Looks like Vince Cable will soon be in charge of the LibDems. I see this as exceedingly bad news for Corbyn's Labour. Cable is both inexplicably popular and very much on the left of the LibDems. For the first time since he got in control Corbyn is going to have somebody regarded as a credible left-winger attacking him & unlike when that happens from members of his own Party, Corbyn & his cultish followers won't simply be able to label Cable as a "Blairite".

Should split the socialist vote nicely.

Ha ha Corbyn is getting more popular every day and Vince Cable is going to ride to the rescue:rotfl:
On another note I see David Cameron is getting paid 100 k for his speeches now and he's just used one to say public service workers are 'selfish' for wanting to break the 1% cap.

Fella

Moby wrote: »

Ha ha Corbyn is getting more popular every day

No I think you're confused. Corbyn is the guy who just got humped in the election & is back in opposition. If he had any decency he'd have resigned like every other party leader that takes a good whuppin' but he doesn't give a hoot about his own party so he's clinging on for as long as possible.

Meanwhile the Tories just get on with running the country, same as before.

Ballard

Fella wrote: »

No I think you're confused. Corbyn is the guy who just got humped in the election & is back in opposition. If he had any decency he'd have resigned like every other party leader that takes a good whuppin' but he doesn't give a hoot about his own party so he's clinging on for as long as possible.

Meanwhile the Tories just get on with running the country, same as before.

Labour have more MPs than they did before the election and outperformed just about every prediction. In some polls Labour are now ahead of the Tories. Interesting use of the 'word' 'whuppin''.

May, on the other hand, did exactly the opposite. She called an election to strengthen her hand and her party lost a significant number of seats.

Edit: People actually thank you for that nonsense. The mind boggles.

Thrugelmir

Ballard wrote: »

In some polls Labour are now ahead of the Tories.

I think next time the election won't be so such a smooth ride for JC. Already lost 3 front bench ministers. The veneer is peeling away layer by layer.

Ballard

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I think next time the election won't be so such a smooth ride for JC. Already lost 3 front bench ministers. The veneer is peeling away layer by layer.

The point that I was making is that it's weird to call for someone's head when they're doing far better than expected. The next election is, in my mind, likely to be some years away and anything can happen between now and then. For the record I think that the chances are that The Tories will win the next election.

Fella

Ballard wrote: »

Labour have more MPs than they did before the election and outperformed just about every prediction. In some polls Labour are now ahead of the Tories. Interesting use of the 'word' 'whuppin''.

May, on the other hand, did exactly the opposite. She called an election to strengthen her hand and her party lost a significant number of seats.

Edit: People actually thank you for that nonsense. The mind boggles.

The Conservatives are in Power. Labour have none. It's amusing that you care about the polls now they look good for Corbyn. Personally I couldn't care less, polls immediately before an election are almost worthless, let alone these.

If your definition of a victory is losing miserably & remaining in opposition that's fine. I think I'll stick with the more traditional definition of victory. Who's the Government? Ah that'll be the Tories. Who's making jam? Ah that'll be Corbyn.

GreatApe

The election was a disaster for May but not for the conservative party, they are still in government and have upto 5 years to get their act together by getting rid of May and putting in place someone more likable and less !!!!

If corncob holds on he will be 73 asking the country for a chance to lead them until he is 78.

He could win the next election. The tories cant hold onto power forever it just doesn't work like that. At some point it will swing to another party most likely labor. I hope the tories win the next one and corncob is kicked out but if he manages to hold on he will probably win the one after that.

TrickyTree83

Ballard wrote: »

I'll keep this simple for you so that you can hopefully understand. Labour were widely expected to lose miserably. They started from a low position. Under Corbyn they picked up several MPs whilst May lost enough MPs to lose her majority.

Labour did not win the election. The Conservatives did. I have never said otherwise.

The Conservatives, however, are in a far worse position than they were prior to the election. Labour are somewhat stronger.

Losing miserably is not a victory. Improving your position is a minor victory. Gambling by calling an election in order to improve your parliamentary majority but ending up needing help of another party to remain in power is not what many would call a great move.

I don't care about the polls. They've largely proven themselves to be untrustworthy but on the subject of resigning, why would the leader of any party resign if the feedback from a poll suggests that the public back them more than they back others?

I've tried my best to keep the words simple but please don't hesitate to ask if there are any that you don't understand and I'll explain them for you.

I suppose when your football team lose 1-0 when expected to lose 5-0 you tell your mates it's a "minor victory", right?

Can we please exorcise these perception based "facts" from society as soon as possible. Ta.

Ballard

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I suppose when your football team lose 1-0 when expected to lose 5-0 you tell your mates it's a "minor victory", right?

Can we please exorcise these perception based "facts" from society as soon as possible. Ta.

I don't follow football but if my team were in the second division and they lost 1-0 to Chelsea then I'd be delighted. I wouldn't be calling for the manager to go.

The fact is that Corbyn was widely expected to lead Labour to a massive defeat. He didn't. He was expected to become less and less popular but his popularity as measured by the polls has increased. It wouldn't make sense for him to resign or others to usurp him as that would almost certainly make the party less popular.

I'm not talking about party politics here. My posts have been solely about whether Corbyn should resign. I see no reason why he should based on the facts.

Please feel free to continue to be a one-eyed Tory. I can't be bothered going over the same ground continually with posters who are unable to grasp these basic facts.