General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

How do you intend to vote in the 2017 General Election if eligible?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 80 14.5%
  • Labour

    Votes: 322 58.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 57 10.3%
  • Green

    Votes: 20 3.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 13 2.4%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 29 5.3%
  • Independent

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 11 2.0%
  • Other (UUP, DUP, BNP, and anyone else I have forgotten)

    Votes: 14 2.5%

  • Total voters
    551
  • Poll closed .
Thats got to be worth a watch, her trying to be 'relatable'. Hope they ask him about the dodgy deals.

Want to see Milliband on every news outlet today highlighting the tory hypocrisy. They've been trying to spin it with lies again this morning

On 'The One Show' ??!? :lol:
 
Where's Corbyn's One Show interview, fecking disgraceful bias yet again from the BBC. I bet it was that sneaky Kuenssberg having a word, that little agenda spinner doing her work as an undercover agent for the Tories.
 
Thats got to be worth a watch, her trying to be 'relatable'. Hope they ask him about the dodgy deals.

Want to see Milliband on every news outlet today highlighting the tory hypocrisy. They've been trying to spin it with lies again this morning

Something like this hopefully.

 
I used to laugh about people calling the BBC biased towards any particular party, but they've really been quite lax on the Tories this election cycle.
 
I used to laugh about people calling the BBC biased towards any particular party, but they've really been quite lax on the Tories this election cycle.

Why wouldn't they be bias? They're not independent of government influence and each reporter has their own agenda. They undertake 'fair coverage' measures but that only goes so far.

Even worse when people laugh off MSM as if the papers don't have their own agendas. They only do so because they agree with the attacks, confirmation bias for you.
 
I used to laugh about people calling the BBC biased towards any particular party, but they've really been quite lax on the Tories this election cycle.

Cameron put ex tories, including a murdoch man who attended cameron;s wedding, at the heart of BBC politics. Keussenburg is never on record as being a tory, but every other political editor at the BBC TV political team have all been paid up members of the tory party itself at one point or another. Given there are barely 100,000 tory party members at any time, that takes some doing in a country of 65 million.
 
Cameron put ex tories, including a murdoch man who attended cameron;s wedding, at the heart of BBC politics. Keussenburg is never on record as being a tory, but every other political editor at the BBC TV political team have all been paid up members of the tory party itself at one point or another. Given there are barely 100,000 tory party members at any time, that takes some doing in a country of 65 million.

I don't doubt you but do you have a source or list or anything?

Andrew Neil is obviously right-wing, but I think he does a pretty impartial job when interviewing. Can't say the same for Dimbleby, he's openly biased and shouldn't be in the job.
 
Jezza says Brexit is ''settled'' and that he's staying on as Labour leader even if they lose.
 
Didn't here that complaint when the Tories have already upped insurance tax by 10%

Oh there was talk, it just got lost in the typically larger stories that Osborne often saw his budgets dominated by.


Sounds an awful idea- surely people using private takes some strain off the NHS and where private does use NHS infrastructure, surely that provides an additional source of funding?

And in many instances, people are choosing to go private because the NHS is either too slow or cannot provide the certainty with appointments that people require.


If the Tories don't reign back on this strong and stable coalition of chaos repetition it's going to rebound on them. People with no interest in politics at all are already irritated by it, and there's a long way to go. Also I wonder how long it will be before people question what a strong mandate for negotiation means, I can't be the only one that wonders why Germany, France and Poland et al should give a toss what her majority is. Maybe crap campaign management will provide a chink of hope for those against them after all.

This strength of the mandate relates more to the second Commons vote and the certainty of what we claim when negotiating, at least that is my understanding. For while Labour MPs backed the triggering of A50, continental leaders would doubt their willingness to do so with a proper Brexit or if a No Deal was rumoured.


Want to see Milliband on every news outlet today highlighting the tory hypocrisy. They've been trying to spin it with lies again this morning

And present Theresa May with the welcome opportunity to highlight a difference between herself and Cameron/Osborne on the economy? She can talk about 'her' fairer vision, which will connect well with that Brexit Labour section of the electorate.
 
I don't doubt you but do you have a source or list or anything?

Andrew Neil is obviously right-wing, but I think he does a pretty impartial job when interviewing. Can't say the same for Dimbleby, he's openly biased and shouldn't be in the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/17/bbc-leftwing-bias-non-existent-myth

The BBC's political editor, Nick Robinson, was once chairman of the Young Conservatives. His former senior political producer, Thea Rogers, became George Osborne's special advisor in 2012. Andrew Neil, the presenter of the BBC's flagship political programmes Daily Politics and This Week, is chairman of the conservative Spectator magazine. His editor is Robbie Gibb, former chief of staff to the Tory Francis Maude.

You can go through all the others in a similar way. All the appointments that could be made by politicians have been given to tory party members or supporters as well.

Its definitely biased to right wing, but that is a symptom of the real problem, that the BBC tends to always be biased to the government. In a private media company, its a problem but par for the course, in a state broadcaster that sells itself, and is even mandated by law to be impartial, it should be unacceptable.
 
Thanks Noggy. I think the Guardian piece would have been more effective if it had stuck to the people and their history rather than 'the privatisation of the NHS' but the gist is there.
 
Quite, why does anyone in the EU care whether she's got a 10 seat or a 200 seat majority, it's not going to make any difference in the negotiations
Perhaps they are over-selling the point, but surely it matters if EU negotiators know she has strong political backing back home? For example, she is more likely to get away with a 'hard Brexit' given a huge mandate, which, somewhat, strengthens her hand in negotiations.
 
Perhaps they are over-selling the point, but surely it matters if EU negotiators know she has strong political backing back home? For example, she is more likely to get away with a 'hard Brexit' given a huge mandate, which, somewhat, strengthens her hand in negotiations.

The only thing an insistence of walking away and using only WTO agreements strengthens is the idea that the woman is insane.

The only other country in the world that trades under WTO rules exclusively with no bilateral agreements of any kind is North Korea.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps they are over-selling the point, but surely it matters if EU negotiators know she has strong political backing back home? For example, she is more likely to get away with a 'hard Brexit' given a huge mandate, which, somewhat, strengthens her hand in negotiations.

Yes it will be easier for her to get away with what she aims for in the UK ie have less opposition within the UK but don't see how that affects the EU point of view. Whatever deal is agreed has to be approved by 27 different countries in the EU and every government in each of those countries will have a different level of majority.
 
That Corbyn speech seemed to be preaching to the converted. Could be damage limitation perhaps? Lock down the vote we already have? Lots of stuff about cuts, bankers, big businesses and rigged systems. But unless I missed it there was no mention of the deficit/debt, immigration or security, areas where people have concerns about Labour. Maybe the manifesto will tell us more.

Launches are usually more vision than detail but yeah those areas do need detailing. We've had snippets but there needs to be policy otherwise the absence will be highlighted.

I have no idea where the party falls on immigration, for me it should appear tough whilst perhaps not being so. Claim an Australian style points system thats flexible to our needs but the asylum targets should go further.
 
Yes it will be easier for her to get away with what she aims for in the UK ie have less opposition within the UK but don't see how that affects the EU point of view. Whatever deal is agreed has to be approved by 27 different countries in the EU and every government in each of those countries will have a different level of majority.
Well, knowing how precarious or not her support is back home for whatever position she adopts surely does change how EU negotiators respond to that position? For one thing, it tells them how credible the (threat) position is.
 
fecking hell May is difficult to watch, ridiculously awkward, and basically saying the same shite over and over again.
 
The only thing an insistence of walking away and using only WTO agreements strengthens is the idea that the woman is insane.

The only other country in the world that trades under WTO rules exclusively with no bilateral agreements of any kind is North Korea.
True but besides the point. It is madness but a 'hard Brexit' could be useful threat in negotiations if the other side can believe that she will go ahead with it and can get away with it. These latter two depend largely on her support back home.
 
And in many instances, people are choosing to go private because the NHS is either too slow or cannot provide the certainty with appointments that people require.
True, but that surely still takes some pressure off the NHS.
 
Has Paxman commited to interviews this time round? Cant find anything.

May needs to be brought to task on so much of the bullshit she spouts. She says she doesn't need the TV debates as she's touring the country debating (to select candidates hiding from the proles), has no one asked why she can't do both? Why people should trust her to publically negotiate for Britain when she's too afraid to even publically debate and prove her resolve against Corbyn?

Cameron may have walked away from interviews prematurely, May doesn't even turn up.
 
Won't surprise me if she resorts to sound it in an interview about her family. She's awful. The David Moyes of politics.
 
Well, knowing how precarious or not her support is back home for whatever position she adopts surely does change how EU negotiators respond to that position? For one thing, it tells them how credible the (threat) position is.

But the EU have accepted that the UK is leaving, so what threat is there. If May doesn't want to accept the terms of remaining a part of the club even if only as an associate member and it is a hard brexit then the EU have already anticipated that this will be the case. No-one will win but the biggest losers will be the UK.
It makes little sense unless she still thinks she can have her cake and eat it which is why the EU are so bewildered by her attitude.
 
But the EU have accepted that the UK is leaving, so what threat is there. If May doesn't want to accept the terms of remaining a part of the club even if only as an associate member and it is a hard brexit then the EU have already anticipated that this will be the case. No-one will win but the biggest losers will be the UK.
It makes little sense unless she still thinks she can have her cake and eat it which is why the EU are so bewildered by her attitude.
Well, I am guessing that the whole point of negotiations is for both sides to try and lessen the pain for themselves. As such, the EU's position cannot be entirely inflexible whatever May says.
 
Well, I am guessing that the whole point of negotiations is for both sides to try and lessen the pain for themselves. As such, the EU's position cannot be entirely inflexible whatever May says.

I'm not sure she's said that. She says no deal is better than a bad deal, which is merely a statement of the bleeding obvious because the bad deal bit isn't specified. Paying £100b a year for very little would obviously be a bad one. But yeah, the hope must be that both sides will agree where things are mutually beneficial, and a deal on some things at least can be done. Fingers crossed and all that.
 
Well, I am guessing that the whole point of negotiations is for both sides to try and lessen the pain for themselves. As such, the EU's position cannot be entirely inflexible whatever May says.

Well yes, but there are certain rules of the EU that have to be adhered to, no matter what, and how many seats May gets makes no difference at all.
But on other possible sticking points, still don't see however strong her backing in the UK is , can it persuade the EU to back down on those points.

I still see it as yet another confidence trick, certain people will vote for her simply because they think she will lead a glorious route to Brexit and she says this will help her so the more votes the merrier. Whereas all I see it as is a safeguard against public anger if it all goes wrong.
She'll say to the voters later on down the line, well you wanted this, here it is, the will of the people.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Noggy. I think the Guardian piece would have been more effective if it had stuck to the people and their history rather than 'the privatisation of the NHS' but the gist is there.
There's another one from an academic rather than Owen Jones here - https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/14/bbc-political-bias-news-nick-robinson

Think I agree with the summation at the end
The current notion that there is obvious bias at the BBC – whether it be of the right or the left – that can be “investigated” and presumably purged, is troubling.

James Purnell is currently the director of radio, Andrew Marr is to the left, and Jones bringing up Kamal Ahmed just because he worked at the Sunday Tele is odd given he previously worked for the Guardian and Observer. Newsnight's economics editor used to be Paul Mason ffs.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/17/bbc-leftwing-bias-non-existent-myth



You can go through all the others in a similar way. All the appointments that could be made by politicians have been given to tory party members or supporters as well.

Its definitely biased to right wing, but that is a symptom of the real problem, that the BBC tends to always be biased to the government. In a private media company, its a problem but par for the course, in a state broadcaster that sells itself, and is even mandated by law to be impartial, it should be unacceptable.
The BBC is massively left wing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...BC-is-biased-toward-the-left-study-finds.html
Er, the research is by the CPS though