the snap general election thread

antrobus

Arklight wrote: »

Yes, according to the Daily Mail, Labour want to take us back to the 70s. ....

The Daily Mail isn't always right.

The Labour Party of the seventies was that of Callaghan and Healey. It wasn't until after the Great Defeat of 1979 that Mr Benn got into his stride and produced the Longest Suicide Note in History in 1983.

So I'm going for the 1980s.

People shouldn't denigrate the 1970s. We had T-Rex.:)

Conrad

Moby wrote: »

We are class ridden though. Accent, clothes, shopping habits, where you live, what you watch, how much money you have, what school/university you went to, what part of the country you live in, what part of London you live in, what your parents did etc etc. It's worse here than anywhere else I've experienced ........apart from India!

I agree with you 100%, class is deep in our DNA.


But be fair, snobbery comes from both progressives and the Tories.


Ever since Brexit the progressive / liberal crowd has poured scorn on the 'ignorant turkeys voting for xmas that are too stupid to understand the complexities of Brexit '(I can find you up to date comments saying this right now on The Guardian / Youtube / Independent) and I constantly hear this on LBC - James O'Brien almost daily says Leavers voted in spite of 'the facts', and that 'they turned their backs on evidence, experts and reason'.


The sanctimonious snobbery oozes out of posh progressives. Laurie Penny was roundly condemned for this dreadful pious arrogance on QT (it's all over Youtube)


HERE>>


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQS8Nkm47qo&t=71s

Fella

Joeskeppi wrote: »

I know a fair few Brexit voters that are now spreading pro-Labour stuff all over social media.

It's the "it's not my fault I'm unsuccessful, who else can I blame?" crowd that follow that pattern. Labour's promise to go after the rich is making them dribble in their pants.

Plus anyone that's a teacher, nurse, or sub 30.

Social media needs a politics filter button.

Must admit I don't know of any Brexit supporter who's promoting Labour. Obviously the teachers, nurses & sub-30s all usually do though. Extend that to most public sector workers.

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

This is the headline in our local freebie paper :
"Mayor pledges to fix NHS and Homelessness"

This is the new mayor of Manchester (other Mayors are available for equally empty soundbites).

There is absolutely no way on earth he will fix either. It seems almost an arrogant stance to suggest that he can do something which others have not been able to.

Is it any surprise that we don't trust what the political classes say, when they probably don't believe what they write anyway.

I want modest measurable goals, and a few achievable but good ideas. I don't expect homelessness to be fixed, because it never will be.

Well in his first day he has set up a homelessness fund and committed 15% of his personal mayoral salary to it and is acting to raise more funds. You may disapprove but at least he is doing something positive and concrete about an issue that National Governments have ignored for years.

What is the phrase,.... the greatest actual progress is better than the most magnificent promises....

BobQ

Conrad wrote: »

Is anyone else slightly concerned Corbyn might pull-off a miracle win?


His populist pennies from heaven policies could tempt a lot of gullible people. I understand the nationalised railway policy is a bit of a farce as the first opportunity wont come up for many years hence.

May cannot be that lucky. Losing the election to Corbyn would be humiliating personally but she would then escape from all the misery she is going to be forced to inflict over the next five years.

BobQ

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

It is a terrifying thought. I only hope that people in general are not the idiots he takes them for.

It would be the unions running the UK, that thought alone should put anyone off voting for him.

I seem to recall that calling UKIP supports thick and idiots and so on had some rather unexpected consequences last year. So be careful what you say!

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

Yep. He would have some significant expectations to meet. The unions don't support the Labour party for nothing.
.

Many unions do not support Labour at all. Only a few are affiliated.

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

Well in his first day he has set up a homelessness fund and committed 15% of his personal mayoral salary to it and is acting to raise more funds. You may disapprove but at least he is doing something positive and concrete about an issue that National Governments have ignored for years.

What is the phrase,.... the greatest actual progress is better than the most magnificent promises....

And the salary for the post is £115k a year. Still leaves over £97k a year to live on. The mayor of Teeside is getting £35k as a comparison.

Sorry but I'm cynical about such statements. As hardly a hardship for him. If you really wanted to help the homeless then 50% would set a real example.

gfplux

antrobus wrote: »

Somebody clearly did it for a reason. There appear to be two main options. (Although there might be others I haven't thought of.:))

(a) It might have been someone from team pro-Corbyn who hoped that the leak would allow the draft manifesto to get approved in its entirety.

(b) It might have been someone from team anti-Corbyn who hoped that the leak would wrong foot the Corbynite campaign and deny them the ability to drip feed all these exciting new polices on a daily basis to the media.

I am inclined to option B. Largely because there have been a number of Labour politicians in recent days who have gone on record stating that everything would be 'fully costed' in the manifesto, and it is clear that there is a ton of stuff that isn't costed at all.

I mean, there's a £10bn commitment to abolish student fees and introduce grants, !!!!!!, with no mention of where it's going to come from. £10 bn is 'serious money'. It's 2p on the basic rate. Maybe there's a very big sofa where Gordon Brown stuffed some emergency cash and he's ready to reveal where he's hidden the sofa.

I don't know. I struggle to understand what the Labour Party is up to these days. At least Benn had an alternative economic strategy. Granted it was a pretty stupid strategy, but it was a strategy. Now we seem to have the same objective with no strategy at all apart from spending more money.

I have a possible c) A mole!

The manifesto was to be approved and then sent to the printers. It would/will be unvailed next week. At the launch the "promises" would have been costed.
Leaking the draft (it was a word document) allowed the Labour Party to be attacked about crazy spending with no defence as the measures were yet to be costed. In addition this focused the media away from every other party.

Next week when both the Tory and Labour manifestos come out they will both be costed and then of course we will have both Party's costings being attacked and debated.

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

At the launch the "promises" would have been costed.

You are seriously out of touch with UK political affairs.

Also the divide within the Labour party. Be interesting to see who stands on such a manifesto. Might see a few more well known names distance themselves.