snap general election?

mrfpb

I watched Daily Politics yesterday. Suzanne Evans (UKIP) came across as witty, confident and open while all the others sounded evasive and fumbled questions. She didn't miss a beat when the news broke that Carswell wasn't standing, and even expressed dissapointment.

Labour in particular are sending MPs to news shows without a line to stick to, and with half thought out policies such as McDonnell's targetting of earners over £70k. McDonnell actually repeated Labour's policy on Brexit "we'll measure what is negotiated against our 6 tests" as if they are campaigning to stay in opposition. Emily Thornberry has repeated it too since the GE was announced.

I maintain that UKIP are a danger in this election, so long as Brexit tops the agenda. Labour don't have a policy at the moment. The simple arguement of "Who should hold the balance of power, UKIP or LibDems?" could become key.

bendertherobot

Jez mon wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

May promises to retain overseas aid. That's a no brainer isn't it? Labour must match that or increase the percentage. They won't win any votes by promising to slash it and would lose some. Easy policy.

It's quite an interesting tonal election so far. She wants to smash labour, which is obvious. I wonder when/if we'll see her trying to smash potential UKIP MP's on the basis that UKIP's raison d'etre has been achieved.

Not for the Britain First lot, or for UKIP.

Given they have so far refused to rule out raising taxes, I can see the right wing press moaning about the commitment to overseas aid. Especially when it all seems to go to setting up the developing world version of the Spice Girls

To be fair, she's promised to fix HOW it's spent.

kingstongraham

Has anyone from Labour enquired as to the availability of that chicken the Tories used in 1997 to highlight how Tony Blair was too scared to go on TV debates?

bendertherobot

The reaction to those debates will be interesting. I don't think it's registered just yet with most that TM won't appear. But, if the figures are correct, she's taken the right path there.

surrey_commuter

KingstonGraham wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

May promises to retain overseas aid. That's a no brainer isn't it? Labour must match that or increase the percentage. They won't win any votes by promising to slash it and would lose some. Easy policy.

It's quite an interesting tonal election so far. She wants to smash labour, which is obvious. I wonder when/if we'll see her trying to smash potential UKIP MP's on the basis that UKIP's raison d'etre has been achieved.

Good news - and double bonus, the Mail will hate it.

bizarrely i am against such an arbitrary number. I would like to see it aggregated over a longer period of time rather than a a use it or lose it mentality. As well as a desire to fudge the figures I can see the logic of using the over-lap between defence and aid as only the military have the resources to do the heavy lifting in an emergency

mamba80

Surrey Commuter wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

May promises to retain overseas aid. That's a no brainer isn't it? Labour must match that or increase the percentage. They won't win any votes by promising to slash it and would lose some. Easy policy.

It's quite an interesting tonal election so far. She wants to smash labour, which is obvious. I wonder when/if we'll see her trying to smash potential UKIP MP's on the basis that UKIP's raison d'etre has been achieved.

Good news - and double bonus, the Mail will hate it.

bizarrely i am against such an arbitrary number. I would like to see it aggregated over a longer period of time rather than a a use it or lose it mentality. As well as a desire to fudge the figures I can see the logic of using the over-lap between defence and aid as only the military have the resources to do the heavy lifting in an emergency

Much like immigration doesnt ring true with natural Labour supporters, i suspect that many in working class areas cannot understand why the UK is spending billions on overseas aid.

yep when the MOD assist, fair enough but how often does that happen? sending troops into war zones is very dodgy, DEC raised money for the Yemen but we didnt send in 3 Para!
most aid is in social, education and health care, a fair bit is tied to trade too, which is no doubt why May isnt cutting it.

bendertherobot

Gsk workers allegedly threatened with dismissal if they asked TM questions during her visit. Though that seems inconsistent with the reports that questions were asked..

bendertherobot

bendertherobot wrote:

Gsk workers allegedly threatened with dismissal if they asked TM questions during her visit. Though that seems inconsistent with the reports that questions were asked..

Hmm, seems to be they were allowed to ask her but couldn't give their views to journalists if asked.

surrey_commuter

mamba80 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

May promises to retain overseas aid. That's a no brainer isn't it? Labour must match that or increase the percentage. They won't win any votes by promising to slash it and would lose some. Easy policy.

It's quite an interesting tonal election so far. She wants to smash labour, which is obvious. I wonder when/if we'll see her trying to smash potential UKIP MP's on the basis that UKIP's raison d'etre has been achieved.

Good news - and double bonus, the Mail will hate it.

bizarrely i am against such an arbitrary number. I would like to see it aggregated over a longer period of time rather than a a use it or lose it mentality. As well as a desire to fudge the figures I can see the logic of using the over-lap between defence and aid as only the military have the resources to do the heavy lifting in an emergency

Much like immigration doesnt ring true with natural Labour supporters, i suspect that many in working class areas cannot understand why the UK is spending billions on overseas aid.

yep when the MOD assist, fair enough but how often does that happen? sending troops into war zones is very dodgy, DEC raised money for the Yemen but we didnt send in 3 Para!
most aid is in social, education and health care, a fair bit is tied to trade too, which is no doubt why May isnt cutting it.

I was thinking more of transport planes, ships and helicopters.

Spending £13bn on aid helps us punch above our weight and gives us global influence. How could somebody not understand that?

Matthewfalle

Well, I'm sticking to my guns and voting Plaid Cymru: the people's party. The rest of them are a load of tosh.

We all just have to make sure that the racist white collar BNP UKIP racists end up getting smashed out of the park.

mamba80

Surrey Commuter wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Much like immigration doesnt ring true with natural Labour supporters, i suspect that many in working class areas cannot understand why the UK is spending billions on overseas aid.

yep when the MOD assist, fair enough but how often does that happen? sending troops into war zones is very dodgy, DEC raised money for the Yemen but we didnt send in 3 Para!
most aid is in social, education and health care, a fair bit is tied to trade too, which is no doubt why May isnt cutting it.

I was thinking more of transport planes, ships and helicopters.

Spending £13bn on aid helps us punch above our weight and gives us global influence. How could somebody not understand that?

Military would be operating these craft and they would need protection via uk troops and air defence too

oh i see that and more importantly (i dont get the need to punch above our weight, why?) we are helping to save lives and help in ed projects, esp for women, no reason why the 0.7 shouldnt be a minimum spend, one of the richest countries in the world, why not, i d rather that than fritter it away on HS2.

but when Malala Yousafza gets hate for being fixed up in the UK and even more when she gets a scholarship to Oxbridge, then justifying this spending to many people is impossible.

Stevo_666

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

MoS says 11

Strange I would have thought her signalling to continue the triple lock on pensions and no tax rises mixed with ending the 0.7% overseas aid commitment would have played better.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

MoS says 11

Strange I would have thought her signalling to continue the triple lock on pensions and no tax rises mixed with ending the 0.7% overseas aid commitment would have played better.

I thought you didnt believe anythjng they wrote? Unless its the lead over the combined support for the coalition of chaos, aka New Old Labour, the Scottish Nationalists and the Lib Dem gang of nine

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

MoS says 11

Strange I would have thought her signalling to continue the triple lock on pensions and no tax rises mixed with ending the 0.7% overseas aid commitment would have played better.

I thought you didnt believe anythjng they wrote? Unless its the lead over the combined support for the coalition of chaos, aka New Old Labour, the Scottish Nationalists and the Lib Dem gang of nine

Didn't read it so no idea if valid. Presumably an attempt to avoid voter complacency

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

MoS says 11

Strange I would have thought her signalling to continue the triple lock on pensions and no tax rises mixed with ending the 0.7% overseas aid commitment would have played better.

I thought you didnt believe anythjng they wrote? Unless its the lead over the combined support for the coalition of chaos, aka New Old Labour, the Scottish Nationalists and the Lib Dem gang of nine

Didn't read it so no idea if valid. Presumably an attempt to avoid voter complacency

Complacent is probably the biggest risk to the Tories. I honestly can't see the shower of s**t that passes for opposition getting anywhere near them. Good to know my join the Labour party campaign is paying dividends

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

21 point gap at the last count:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm

Labour had better hope there are a few million shy Corbynists out there or else its total wipeout time for the lefties

MoS says 11

Strange I would have thought her signalling to continue the triple lock on pensions and no tax rises mixed with ending the 0.7% overseas aid commitment would have played better.

I thought you didnt believe anythjng they wrote? Unless its the lead over the combined support for the coalition of chaos, aka New Old Labour, the Scottish Nationalists and the Lib Dem gang of nine

Didn't read it so no idea if valid. Presumably an attempt to avoid voter complacency

Complacent is probably the biggest risk to the Tories. I honestly can't see the shower of s**t that passes for opposition getting anywhere near them. Good to know my join the Labour party campaign is paying dividends

Well the 0.7% aid budget has been indicated as staying, but not the triple lock or the no tax rises pledge. Now they are capping fuel bills. Is there some sort of reversal of Stevo's plan going on where New Labour have infiltrated the Tories?

Stevo_666

As mentioned in another thread, not generally in favour of price controls. Odd tactic from TM. But not enough to sway my vote.

(Edited for crap spelling).

bendertherobot

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Pross

I think it's more obvious than ever how the tabloids publish polls saying what they want their readership to believe. The Mail was full of praise for May and her lead was enormous one day, the next she refuses to commit to a hold on tax increases, the paper turns against her and the next day they have a poll commissioned showing a big drop in the lead. No wonder opinion polls are such a waste of time these days. Presumably the intention is to produce a poll that panics the policy makers into guaranteeing no tax rises again.

coopster_the_1st

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she loses the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

kingstongraham

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

An embarrassment to Britain? Oh, random other country, sorry about her, you know what she's like with her testing things in court hobby. And willingness to put her money where her mouth is.

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she loses the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

Matthewfalle

KingstonGraham wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

An embarrassment to Britain? Oh, random other country, sorry about her, you know what she's like with her testing things in court hobby. And willingness to put her money where her mouth is.

Her money where her mouth is or that of her backers/crowdfunders?

Just sayin' like.....

bendertherobot

Matthewfalle wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

An embarrassment to Britain? Oh, random other country, sorry about her, you know what she's like with her testing things in court hobby. And willingness to put her money where her mouth is.

Her money where her mouth is or that of her backers/crowdfunders?

Just sayin' like.....

Both. Of course, democratically, it's open to the opposition to do the same and identify those seats where strategically it's possible to achieve a hard Brexit candidate.

Lookyhere

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she loses the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

The justice system is a fundamental part of our democracy, Gina Millar can have as much money as she likes but unless she can prove her case, it will get no where.

Millar won in the Supreme court because the Government was acting illegally.

The UK government in acting in a high handed way, was the embarrassment.

kingstongraham

Matthewfalle wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

An embarrassment to Britain? Oh, random other country, sorry about her, you know what she's like with her testing things in court hobby. And willingness to put her money where her mouth is.

Her money where her mouth is or that of her backers/crowdfunders?

Just sayin' like.....

Both probably. And both metaphorically and literally.

bianchimoon

Lookyhere wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Gina Miller to run against May in Maidenhead?

Sound like the perfect way for Gina Miller to be put back into her box as she is an embarrassment to Britain

And when she loses the vote, will she also take it to the supreme court or accept democracy?

The justice system is a fundamental part of our democracy, Gina Millar can have as much money as she likes but unless she can prove her case, it will get no where.

Millar won in the Supreme court because the Government was acting illegally.

The UK government in acting in a high handed way, was the embarrassment.

well said Lookyhere, some people just don't get what democracy and freedom are, we know for a fact that the brexiteers/nationalists would be the last to accept the result of a referendum if it went the other way

wallace_and_gromit

Lookyhere wrote:

Millar won in the Supreme court because the Government was acting illegally.

The UK government in acting in a high handed way, was the embarrassment.

IIRC, 3 or the 11 judges sided with the government, so I think the case was a lot more marginal than you'd like to believe.

surrey_commuter

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Lookyhere wrote:

Millar won in the Supreme court because the Government was acting illegally.

The UK government in acting in a high handed way, was the embarrassment.

IIRC, 3 or the 11 judges sided with the government, so I think the case was a lot more marginal than you'd like to believe.

Why did they contest and appeal it? would have been a lot quicker to have put the necessary Bill through Parliament.