snap general election?

TheBigBean

mrfpb wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

What's the alternative?

Well Major went minority didn't he?

No he had a majority. 336 seats.

May is currently odds on to have a minority government i.e. no DUP in ministerial positions and no agreement.

Another general election or coalition are the other options, but no one is really expecting those.

Major's '92 majority was eroded by by-elections and having to suspend party rebels (John Redwood and co) who voted against him in a vote of no confidence. UUP (led by David Trimble) had 9 seats and agreed to back up the gov't on a confidence and supply basis. Major managed to get his final Queens speech through parliament, even in the "wash up" before the '97 election but at the cost of the NI peace process.

But that was only for a few months. It got very tight, but there was never a no confidence vote.

I think the most salient point about the Major government is that bielections can erode a majority

rick_chasey

Also am I right in thinking no deal has been made yet with the DUP - just a "we'll make one"

And yet she's formed a government with them?

Bodes well for Brexit ffs.

FocusZing

Cut her a bit of slack. I doubt I could even babble out my name after being kicked in the nuts and staying up half the night.

rick_chasey

FocusZing wrote:

Cut her a bit of slack. I doubt I could even babble out my name after being kicked in the nuts and staying up half the night.

In fairness you can't even post something without deleting it afterwards.

FocusZing

Ha, not to mention the amount of stuff I type and don't even post.

bendertherobot

Wonder what the temperature will be in the Lords in relation to the Salisbury Convention?

bianchimoon

I'll give her a week, then 2 more weeks before the 'coalition' collapses, the country won't stand for the disproportionate power and funding Northern Ireland will have

tailwindhome

Rick Chasey wrote:

Also am I right in thinking no deal has been made yet with the DUP - just a "we'll make one"

And yet she's formed a government with them?

Bodes well for Brexit ffs.

https://twitter.com/RuthDavidsonMSP/sta ... 3427142656

verylonglegs

Pross wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Pross wrote:

Also, did I hear May refer to the 'Conservative & Unionist Party'?

You did.

It's the party's official name - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)

Ah, makes more sense. I thought she'd managed some high speed merger deal with the DUP!

Stolen from a comments section elsewhere.

"I wonder when they will announce the Conservative and Unionist Negotiating Team that's headed to Brussels? Conservative and Unionist Negotiating Team is an awfully long mouthful, I wonder if there's a suitable acronym..."

kingstongraham

TailWindHome wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Also am I right in thinking no deal has been made yet with the DUP - just a "we'll make one"

And yet she's formed a government with them?

Bodes well for Brexit ffs.

https://twitter.com/RuthDavidsonMSP/sta ... 3427142656

They'd walk it with her in charge.

orraloon

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/el4jc/status/873188501990371330

Genuinely do watch that. Very clearly illustrates the problem with the DUP Tory alliance.

meanredspider

I understand all the concern about the DUP but haven't they been working together for years? And surely the DUP would prefer there wasn't a chance that Corbyn to get in (especially with his history) so it's in their interest too? Seems like a bit of media hype to me because the Tories could "pull the pin" too.

briantrumpet

meanredspider wrote:

I understand all the concern about the DUP but haven't they been working together for years? And surely the DUP would prefer there wasn't a chance that Corbyn to get in (especially with his history) so it's in their interest too? Seems like a bit of media hype to me because the Tories could "pull the pin" too.

There's a difference between "working together" and "being reliant on our votes to stay in government". So much for "taking back control", we'll be at the whim of 10 MPs of one party from a fairly extreme ideological corner.

bompington

Interesting how Jonathan Powell - the ultimate Blairite - is suddenly an authority for the type of Labour tweeters who openly accuse May of orchestrating the Manchester bombing, and who would normally excoriate him as the spawn of Satan. Got to love the leftie Twitter echo chamber.

Still, Powell is right - and I say that as someone who clearly understands NI and what makes unionists tick a lot better than some on here. However, it has to be said that right now it suits labourites to paint a terrible picture of the DUP: witness the hysterical shouts of "links with terrorists" - yes, surprise surprise, there are a few, not very strong ones - which is quite funny when Corbyn has always been a huge fan of the organisation directly responsible for the largest number of murders in the Troubles.

mamba80

meanredspider wrote:

I understand all the concern about the DUP but haven't they been working together for years? And surely the DUP would prefer there wasn't a chance that Corbyn to get in (especially with his history) so it's in their interest too? Seems like a bit of media hype to me because the Tories could "pull the pin" too.

Jonathan Powell isnt media and he is warning of the consequences of this, but since when has May taken heed of warnings eh?
https://twitter.com/EL4JC

Bomp he was a negotiator in the GF agreement, i dont know about you but i ll still listen to experts of any political persuasion, it doesn't make them wrong.

corbyn has been vilified over his links to Sinn Fein and the IRA, by whole sections of the media and the tory party, yet its ok for them to have an agreement with the DUP and when this hypocrisy is pointed out, you think thats wrong.... :roll:

rick_chasey

bompington wrote:

makes unionists tick a lot better than some on here. However, it has to be said that right now it suits labourites to paint a terrible picture of the DUP: witness the hysterical shouts of "links with terrorists" - yes, surprise surprise, there are a few, not very strong ones - which is quite funny when Corbyn has always been a huge fan of the organisation directly responsible for the largest number of murders in the Troubles.

This is entirely in reaction to the Tory campaign which focused on Corbyn's "links".

It is classic day-after-election hypocracy.

coopster_the_1st

Rick Chasey wrote:

bompington wrote:

makes unionists tick a lot better than some on here. However, it has to be said that right now it suits labourites to paint a terrible picture of the DUP: witness the hysterical shouts of "links with terrorists" - yes, surprise surprise, there are a few, not very strong ones - which is quite funny when Corbyn has always been a huge fan of the organisation directly responsible for the largest number of murders in the Troubles.

This is entirely in reaction to the Tory campaign which focused on Corbyn's "links".

It is classic day-after-election hypocracy.

I'm guessing you don't get irony after what you have been posting today :roll:

rick_chasey

What's that?

Pross

TailWindHome wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Also am I right in thinking no deal has been made yet with the DUP - just a "we'll make one"

And yet she's formed a government with them?

Bodes well for Brexit ffs.

https://twitter.com/RuthDavidsonMSP/sta ... 3427142656

Reading the replies to that, it's amazing how many people are too thick to understand the point of her Tweet and yet they seem to think they are political pundits.

letap73

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's that?

Ignore him Rick - I don't always agree with you - but you are generally a consistent poster.

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

I understand all the concern about the DUP but haven't they been working together for years? And surely the DUP would prefer there wasn't a chance that Corbyn to get in (especially with his history) so it's in their interest too? Seems like a bit of media hype to me because the Tories could "pull the pin" too.

Possibly, but I suspect this alliance won't go down well among the more moderate Tories, those who think there is nothing wrong in being gay and abortion is a step up from the middle ages and all of that.

It's another, maybe not too big, slice of electorate lost there

surrey_commuter

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I understand all the concern about the DUP but haven't they been working together for years? And surely the DUP would prefer there wasn't a chance that Corbyn to get in (especially with his history) so it's in their interest too? Seems like a bit of media hype to me because the Tories could "pull the pin" too.

Possibly, but I suspect this alliance won't go down well among the more moderate Tories, those who think there is nothing wrong in being gay and abortion is a step up from the middle ages and all of that.

It's another, maybe not too big, slice of electorate lost there

I am sure there are a lot more than 10 Tory MPs who share those thoughts

bendertherobot

https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/law ... lish-laws/

kingstongraham

bendertherobot wrote:

https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/bills/public/english-votes-for-english-laws/

They should try to repeal the law of unintended consequences.

bendertherobot

The next election will be interesting. It has to be run on similar grounds. But domestically.

Essentially, we can't run the country because of the last election. So, we need you to vote for us because in calling the last election we threw away the ability to run the country. Sorry about that, my bad.

TheBigBean

bendertherobot wrote:

The next election will be interesting. It has to be run on similar grounds. But domestically.

Essentially, we can't run the country because of the last election. So, we need you to vote for us because in calling the last election we threw away the ability to run the country. Sorry about that, my bad.

Theresa May won't be involved though which will make a difference to a lot of people.

briantrumpet

bendertherobot wrote:

The next election will be interesting. It has to be run on similar grounds. But domestically.

Essentially, we can't run the country because of the last election. So, we need you to vote for us because in calling the last election we threw away the ability to run the country. Sorry about that, my bad.

1) We're going to amputate your leg, despite the fact you've only got an ingrowing toenail.

2) We're the only people qualified to cut off your leg, as we're the only people with the strongest and stablest saw to do so. Don't listen to the surgeon who offers to just cut off your toenail, or who suggests that a hacksaw isn't the right tool for the job.

3) OK, so our saw is looking a bit rusty and wobbly now, but please stick with us, as we have an eBay account, and hope to find a good saw very soon, even though we're not quite sure what sort of saw we really need.

4) You definitely want us to chop that leg off anyway, and even if we're rubbish at chopping legs off, we'll do it enthusiatically, with whatever tool's lying around. Might have to make do with a screwdriver, though we havent got the instructions for it.

bianchimoon

briantrumpet wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

The next election will be interesting. It has to be run on similar grounds. But domestically.

Essentially, we can't run the country because of the last election. So, we need you to vote for us because in calling the last election we threw away the ability to run the country. Sorry about that, my bad.

1) We're going to amputate your leg, despite the fact you've only got an ingrowing toenail.

2) We're the only people qualified to cut off your leg, as we're the only people with the strongest and stablest saw to do so. Don't listen to the surgeon who offers to just cut off your toenail, or who suggests that a hacksaw isn't the right tool for the job.

3) OK, so our saw is looking a bit rusty and wobbly now, but please stick with us, as we have an eBay account, and hope to find a good saw very soon, even though we're not quite sure what sort of saw we really need.

4) You definitely want us to chop that leg off anyway, and even if we're rubbish at chopping legs off, we'll do it enthusiatically, with whatever tool's lying around. Might have to make do with a screwdriver, though we havent got the instructions for it.

and we have a hammer and nails and the "Dummies guide to making a crutch" so you needn't worry about anything after the operation

bendertherobot

TheBigBean wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

The next election will be interesting. It has to be run on similar grounds. But domestically.

Essentially, we can't run the country because of the last election. So, we need you to vote for us because in calling the last election we threw away the ability to run the country. Sorry about that, my bad.

Theresa May won't be involved though which will make a difference to a lot of people.

It may. But it may also look at why we've just spent £130 million and will spend another £130 million trying to get the right answer to something when we're not sure why the question was asked in the first place.

Of course, holding these elections outside term time might prove to be the answer............

But, on the involvement of the DUP it appears very clear, very clear I tell you, that a bad deal is better than no deal