UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80

[CassiusClaymore]

All stories are reported in some manner. And we all now exist in highly calibrated media echo chambers. You will get the news that you want.

Labour lack the human empathy and media savvy to make Boris Johnson and Tory truths stick and get amplified, whilst seemingly incapable to shake off mistruths about themselves.

The UK electorate in 2019 is what it is. It's Labours own fault that they can't depose Boris Johnson, and not the electorate or the media. Primarily because its members prop up Corbyn, who has so many fundamental political and leadership weaknesses. But the yoof sing football hero type songs about him, so he must be mint.

Corbyn's failure to beat BJ will be similar to Hilary's debacle vs Trump: self inflicted due to hubris, arrogance and intransigence.

Disagree with the first part. It's not media savvy that they lack but media backing full stop. Anyone saying otherwise must be blind to the double standards and I'm not talking about social media echo chambers but formerly reputable outlets like the BBC.

 

[mark_a]

It's fascinating how the Tories are basically not mentioning their 9 years in power! It seems their platform is one of "making things better", but better than what? Better than the 9 years of austerity they decided was needed?
I see today they (with the help of their friends at the right-leaning press) are saying (lying) about how much tax people will have to pay to fund anything Labour does (well their publicity says Corbyn, not Labour as I guess they think they can turn people off Corbyn easier than Labour). Of course, back in 2011 the Tories raised VAT, which will have cost everyone a lot over the last 8 years!

 

[nickm]

Well you do understand the point.

'If you click the article' is a huge point in the digital world. The simple fact is that the BBC run unattributed quotes as headlines constantly; I don't think it's right that they do it, but they do. Attributing quotes as a matter of course, like they actually do in the second one, is far more honest, but if they allow attack lines to serve as headlines for one side, they should be doing it for the other too. They're not, and it's another example where their coverage hasn't been balanced.

They did attribute the quote in the example you gave. It's in the headline on the article here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50567271

Headlines are just devices to make people want to read further. A bigger problem is running unattributed quotes in the articles themselves, from background briefings or whatever, and that is wrong - and happens far too often.

 

[Cheesy]

I keep hearing this - how exactly would you propose him to be more ‘proactive’ when he’s already condemned anti-semitism quite strongly and openly as well as suspended councillors and barring candidates from standing in elections. How would he put it to bed? Apologising? What for exactly? Because from what I can see he’s not said anything that can be deemed objectively bigoted (unlike the Prime minister who remains unapologetic), and if he were to simply throw out a token apology for the sake of diffusion then you just know the papers will gleefully ship out headlines of “Corbyn apologies for anti-semitism” insinuating an acceptance of overt anti-semitism with him being the culpable ringleader.

I’ll give you that he doesn’t do himself any favours sometimes with how he handles himself in the public eye, but to simply accuse someone who’s lengthy political career has largely been about championing the fight against bigotry and equality of not being proactive enough while not extending the same scrutiny to the Tories is bordering on a targeted smear campaign, heck I’d argue it’s well beyond that now.

And honestly I don’t suspect anything he says or does will be “good enough”. He could do a monumental u-turn tomorrow and unequivocally back the Israeli illegal settlement program and the papers would then proceed to accuse him of being untrustworthy and indecisive.

But Neil pointed out last night there are cases being dealt with concerning members/candidates whose investigations are taking up to a year when the comments made are quite simple. His own comments in the past have saw him refer to blatantly anti-Jewish groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah as 'friends' and on occasion he's stood on a platform with individuals who've made some fairly offensive remarks. When it comes to moving on I almost get the impression part of Labour's problem is they want to be able to just succinctly dismiss this because it's more than anything else just a bit of a nuisance for them...and presumably Jewish people with concerns are tired of having their views casually dismissed or regarded like a casual complaint that can be dealt with in the form of a mere apology, or a comment saying that it'll be tackled or investigated.

Of course, your last paragraph may be right - I'm not sure the relationship between Corbyn and those within Britain's Jewish community is one that can probably ultimately be repaired. On the one hand people who thinks he's anti-Semitic will view any apology as a token attempt to get into office, and on Corbyn's side he doesn't seem to be particularly sure of what he's done wrong or what he's got to apologise for at all.

 

[mark_a]

I read the word order in the sense of magnitude, eg as a being of a different political magnitude. The Chief Rabbi weighing in on an issue that has been a running sore for Labour for years. It set the news agenda for the day. Yes, the tories do have an islam issue but it's not yet a running political sore for the Tories as antisemisim has been for labour - although I suspect if Labour could sort their own issue out, it could become one.

There's little mention of the 2 Tory & 1 Lib Dems who recently got sanctioned for Anti-semitism. With Anti-semitism, there's 2 issues:
The A-S itself, which is deplorable.
The fact that it has been weaponised against Corbyn.

I have jewish Labour supported friends who are bewildered by this all. But meanwhile various elements of the press talk of Jews being "terrified" of Corbyn! Are they?

 

[sammsky1]

Boris Johnson apologises for 'hurt' caused by Islamophobia in Tory party - having refused to apologise for his own 'letterbox' jibe

Boris Johnson has apologised for the “hurt and offence” that has been caused by Islamophobia within the Conservative party ranks. Speaking on a campaign visit in Cornwall, Johnson said:

"Obviously whenever we have an incident of antisemitism or Islamophobia or whatever in the Conservative party we take a zero tolerance approach ... We have a one bounce and we deal with it approach to this.

We are going to have an independent inquiry into Islamophobia, antisemitism, every manner of prejudice and discrimination and it will start before Christmas."

Asked if he apologised for the Islamophobia that has taken place in the Tory party, he replied:

"Of course and for all the hurt and offence that has been caused - of course we do.

And all that is intolerable and it’s so important as a country that we don’t allow that kind of thing and that’s why we’re going to have the independent inquiry."

Laying down the groundwork for his own upcoming Andrew Neil interview I think.

I think BJ's Neil interview will decide this election. Majority of people did not know about the Neil series of Leadership interviews, and would have caught yesterdays Corbyn interrogation after the viewing, via i-player or excerpts via news. Eg: I also then watched the Sturgeon interview after and spent time reading social media reaction after.

In doing so, it has established Neil's interviews as the most rigorous, and everyone now knows Neil vs Boris is yet to come; with Neil under huge pressure to maintain his belligerence on BJ, who is most well known for his bullshit and lies.

I expect BBC to massively promote the interview beforehand. Labour would do well to influence Neil questions and help increase viewership .... and then hope that BJ is horrifically exposed. There will definitely be some choice soundbites. Labour then requires the media savvy to amplify these soundbites and provide solutions through their own policies in the final week of the campaign.

 

[Cheesy]

There's little mention of the 2 Tory & 1 Lib Dems who recently got sanctioned for Anti-semitism. With Anti-semitism, there's 2 issues:
The A-S itself, which is deplorable.
The fact that it has been weaponised against Corbyn.

I have jewish Labour supported friends who are bewildered by this all. But meanwhile various elements of the press talk of Jews being "terrified" of Corbyn! Are they?

Why is Corbyn repeatedly being referred to by some as the victim in all this?

 

[SteveJ]

Laying down the groundwork for his own upcoming Andrew Neil interview I think.

I think BJ's Neil interview will decide this election. Majority of people did not know about the Neil series of Leadership interviews, and would have caught yesterdays Corbyn interrogation after the viewing, via player or excerpts via news. Eg: I also then watched the Sturgeon interview after and spent time reading social media reaction after.

In doing so, it has established Neil's interviews as the most rigorous, and everyone now knows Neil vs Boris is yet to come; with Neil under huge pressure to maintain his belligerence on BJ, who is most well known for his bullshit and lies.

I expect BBC to massively promote the interview beforehand. Labour would do well to influence Neil questions and help increase viewership .... and then hope that BJ is horrifically exposed. There will definitely be some choice soundbites. Labour then requires the media savvy to amplify these soundbites and provide solutions through their own policies in the final week of the campaign.

That is, if Johnson actually attends the interview.

 

[nickm]

There's little mention of the 2 Tory & 1 Lib Dems who recently got sanctioned for Anti-semitism. With Anti-semitism, there's 2 issues:
The A-S itself, which is deplorable.
The fact that it has been weaponised against Corbyn.

I have jewish Labour supported friends who are bewildered by this all. But meanwhile various elements of the press talk of Jews being "terrified" of Corbyn! Are they?

I dunno, they sure seem to find plenty of jews who say they are, and legal organisations who are happy to investigate further. Seems like there's no smoke without some fire.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

That is, if Johnson actually attends the interview.

He will and he will apologise to grab the 'bigger man' headlines. It's an open goal for him.

 

[sammsky1]

Disagree with the first part. It's not media savvy that they lack but media backing full stop. Anyone saying otherwise must be blind to the double standards and I'm not talking about social media echo chambers but formerly reputable outlets like the BBC.

insult anyone who disagrees with you!

Typical Labour schtick

 

[villain]

Since the last election there have been:
5.3 milion registrations applications from Under 25s,
5.7 million from 25-34s,
3.2 million from 35-44
and a combined 4.6 million of 45+.

It should be stressed that these are not new registrations a lot of people, especially older ones, will have moved etc, HOWEVER there has been an absolute record of 11 million applications from people under 34 and even if a quarter of them (I expect the figure to be more than half) are new voters then expect the Conservatives to be dished with another youthquake!

Spoiler: Cue Oh Jeremy Corbyn

This is great on paper, it just needs to materialise into actual votes.
Now that the younger voters have been mobilised into registering to vote, Labour need to turn their attention to making people aware of postal votes & vote by proxy if they are unable to make it to the polling station on the day because of university, work, accessibility, disability etc.

One of the reasons why older people are more likely to vote than younger people is because of accessibility and time - all elections are held on weekdays - therefore you need to get time off school/university, and while it's great that polling stations are open until quite late if you are relying on public transport to take you home, you'll be restricted to the bus/train timetable.

 

[Cheesy]

Disagree with the first part. It's not media savvy that they lack but media backing full stop. Anyone saying otherwise must be blind to the double standards and I'm not talking about social media echo chambers but formerly reputable outlets like the BBC.

Both can be true. The media in the UK is heavily biased against Corbyn and against leftist politics in general for the most part but it doesn't mean Corbyn isn't a fairly average speaker who's caused plenty of his own problems as well.

 

[sun_tzu]

That is, if Johnson actually attends the interview.

It's next week... I wouldn't be shocked if he sent gove

Andrew Niel will chew him up and spit him out either of them but nobody will bother to watch pob

I guess it depends if Johnson feels he can bluff his was through the interview trotting out pre prepared lines and trying to make some (probably awful) jokes

Given how the sturgeon and Corbyn interviews have gone (and I expect swinson to do as badly as they did) it might be decided that a bit of bad press for not attending is better than the risk of a full on Johnson balls up

 

[Sweet Square]

Inequality created a political generation gap. Which party will bridge it?
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...political-generation-gap-labour-conservatives

The most remarkable, and perhaps remarked upon, aspect of the 2017 general election was the political division between the generations. The young overwhelmingly voted Labour while the over-55s, particularly over-65s, voted Conservative. So far, this age-based political polarisation is getting more pronounced as the general election campaign goes on.

It’s a cliche that people get more conservative as they age, but this phenomenon is not natural or predetermined: the UK’s generational chasm has material causes that emerge from long-term trends. In the 1983 election more 18- to 34-year-olds voted Conservative than Labour, so what changed?

Margaret Thatcher’s sell-off of social housing in the 1980s started a rise in house prices, which was then turbocharged by the deregulation of finance. The post-2008 collapse in home ownership among younger people has helped produce a sharp divide in who owns property. Old and young are voting differently because they now have different material interests.

Those over 55, who own their own home and have pensions invested in stocks and shares, have found their interests increasingly aligned with the performance of finance and real estate. If the stock market booms then the value of their pensions increase; if property prices are high they will feel wealthier and can borrow more from their banks. This is not true for the young who, cut off from home ownership, are dependent on wages and welfare, which have stagnated and been cut over the last decade.

Post-2008, government policy has favoured finance and inflated asset prices, from the hundreds of billions spent bailing out the banks to the tsunami of free money (quantitative easing) produced by the Bank of England for the financial sector. Incredibly low interest rates have, by making it unattractive to keep money in the bank, added to a glut of liquid cash looking for a home. Yet business investment has been relatively flat. Why invest in new technology and job-producing industry when higher returns can be found speculating on real estate and stocks? It’s little wonder that older people are tending to vote for more of the same – but this low-growth, low-interest, high-asset price world we’re stuck in offers little hope for the young.

So should we rage against the elderly as selfish monsters feasting on the impoverished futures of their descendants? Of course not. In the absence of the prospect of structural change, voting to protect the inheritance you leave behind is a viable way of looking out for your grandchildren’s interests.

With this problem in mind I read the Labour and Conservative manifestos to see if they planned to bridge the generation gap. While pensioner benefits will be retained, Labour has promised a levy on holiday homes and a reversal of Tory cuts to the inheritance tax paid by the wealthiest pensioners. Even more importantly, the pledge to build a million homes in a decade will improve the supply of housing. Alongside increased rights for renters, this will inevitably lead to house price deflation. These policies would be fantastic for Generation Rent but would adversely affect the financial interests of many pensioners.

This might reaffirm many older people’s rejection of Labour – but the manifesto also contains the offer of a very different model of ageing. Reversing the state pension age to 66 will be attractive to the middle-aged, who were seeing their retirement retreating into the distance. Also, the increased spend on the NHS should be attractive to the elderly, who use it most. But the key proposal is free care for the over-65s and a £100,000 cap on personal contributions to other costs of a lifetime’s care. This directly attacks the idea that equity withdrawal from expensive homes is the only way to guarantee the care the elderly need in old age.

In contrast, the Conservatives’ Brexit-centric manifesto promises little and has the budget to deliver even less. In the medium and long term, the political age gap is an existential threat to the Conservative party. The concentration of property ownership is preventing the creation of new Tory voters to replace those who die. Brexit may temporarily paper over the cracks but, beyond this election, the manifesto offers only voter ID laws, which are likely to affect low-income and minority groups disproportionately, as the hint of a longer-term solution.

The Conservatives clearly do not aim to convert anyone new, so the fate of the election rests on the different age groups’ reaction to Labour’s offer. Will it tempt a large enough slice of the silver vote out from behind the walls of their overvalued properties into an alliance with the demands of the young? Will the green new deal and increased minimum wage enthuse enough under-35s to register and vote? The answer depends on the prevailing sense of political possibility – and that, in turn, will be decided, beyond all other things, by the number of young canvassers flocking to the doorstep on behalf of Labour. Young people have a world to win, but I hope they can bring the older generation with them.

 

[nickm]

Disagree with the first part. It's not media savvy that they lack but media backing full stop. Anyone saying otherwise must be blind to the double standards and I'm not talking about social media echo chambers but formerly reputable outlets like the BBC.

You think the BBC should provide media backing to Labour?

 

[Cheesy]

It's next week... I wouldn't be shocked if he sent gove

Andrew Niel will chew him up and spit him out either of them but nobody will bother to watch pob

I guess it depends if Johnson feels he can bluff his was through the interview trotting out pre prepared lines and trying to make some (probably awful) jokes

Given how the sturgeon and Corbyn interviews have gone (and I expect swinson to do as badly as they did) it might be decided that a bit of bad press for not attending is better than the risk of a full on Johnson balls up

Nah I reckon he'll go on - if everyone fares poorly it won't be seen as that much of a risk. His only concern will be if Neil eviscerates him to a greater extent than expected.

 

[nickm]

It's next week... I wouldn't be shocked if he sent gove

Andrew Niel will chew him up and spit him out either of them but nobody will bother to watch pob

I guess it depends if Johnson feels he can bluff his was through the interview trotting out pre prepared lines and trying to make some (probably awful) jokes

Given how the sturgeon and Corbyn interviews have gone (and I expect swinson to do as badly as they did) it might be decided that a bit of bad press for not attending is better than the risk of a full on Johnson balls up

Everyone (normal) knows Corbyn is useless and Johnson is a liar. This is baked in. These interviews will make no difference, unless Johnson says something so egregious it ends his career.

 

[Sweet Square]

Daily reminder that none of this stuff matters.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

Both can be true. The media in the UK is heavily biased against Corbyn and against leftist politics in general for the most part but it doesn't mean Corbyn isn't a fairly average speaker who's caused plenty of his own problems as well.

I know. That's why I specifically singled out the first part.

I don't disagree that he's an average speaker although I do disagree with the Americanisation of UK politics in general. I'm not voting for a person. I'm voting for a party and a set of ideals that I think will make this country a nicer place to live in.

 

[sun_tzu]

Everyone (normal) knows Corbyn is useless and Johnson is a liar. This is baked in. These interviews will make no difference, unless Johnson says something so egregious it ends his career.

exactly - there is a no upside but a relatively small downside in not going
but no upside but a potentially huge downside in going
Id chuck pob under the bus if it was me ... let him drop some more grime lyrics for the kids and be torn apart

 

[villain]

I know. That's why I specifically singled out the first part.

I don't disagree that he's an average speaker although I do disagree with the Americanisation of UK politics in general. I'm not voting for a person. I'm voting for a party and a set of ideals that I think will make this country a nicer place to live in.

This is where I stand with things.

Corbyn really isn't the ideal leader, but he stands for a lot of same ideologies I align with.

 

[Solius]

Daily reminder that none of this stuff matters.

People are insane.

I'm willing to be a lot of these people are racist/racially bias themselves but don't think they are. Therefore when they see similar rhetoric from politicians they like, they dismiss it as also not racist.

 

[NinjaFletch]

They did attribute the quote in the example you gave. It's in the headline on the article here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50567271

Headlines are just devices to make people want to read further. A bigger problem is running unattributed quotes in the articles themselves, from background briefings or whatever, and that is wrong - and happens far too often.

Sure, but you already have to click through onto that. The majority of people browsing do not click through, and if you're not attributing, or are only attributing for one side, you're colouring the debate.

 

[nickm]

I know. That's why I specifically singled out the first part.

I don't disagree that he's an average speaker although I do disagree with the Americanisation of UK politics in general. I'm not voting for a person. I'm voting for a party and a set of ideals that I think will make this country a nicer place to live in.

What matters more than idealism is the ability to deliver.

 

[RedSky]

This poor Jewish lady is terrified of a Corbyn government but has no idea why.

Why can't people just admit that they're talking bollocks.

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

The complete shit show that is British journalism

haven't the documents been on Reddit for a while

 

[Solius]

Why can't people just admit that they're talking bollocks.

I fully expect to have a conversation with my Mum when I go home along the lines of her asking who I'm voting for, me saying Corbyn, her saying oh really? not Corbyn! and then me asking her why not and her having no real answer other than she just thinks that because the news told her so.

 

[Raulduke]

It's next week... I wouldn't be shocked if he sent gove

Andrew Niel will chew him up and spit him out either of them but nobody will bother to watch pob

I guess it depends if Johnson feels he can bluff his was through the interview trotting out pre prepared lines and trying to make some (probably awful) jokes

Given how the sturgeon and Corbyn interviews have gone (and I expect swinson to do as badly as they did) it might be decided that a bit of bad press for not attending is better than the risk of a full on Johnson balls up

Ongoing discussions.....

 

[sun_tzu]

Ongoing discussions.....

Thought they had a date... In my mind this reduces the flack for not turning up (nothing was ever arranged... Busy schedule... Done lots of TV debates etc)

Pretty sure Johnson's team will keep him off there

 

[Solius]

How much you wanna bet they can't come to an agreement because of "scheduling conflicts"

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

13th December Johnson will be having his interview

 

[Raulduke]

Probably discussing if Laura K can do it instead of Neil.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

You trust Kuenssbergs due diligence?

I was posting facetiously but I certainly think her diligence is more on display when analysing a claim which benefits Labour than when informing the public of a Tory favourable.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

What matters more than idealism is the ability to deliver.

Quite. And the Tories have delivered the square root of feck all in the past 9 years so excuse me for fancying a change of direction.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

I fully expect to have a conversation with my Mum when I go home along the lines of her asking who I'm voting for, me saying Corbyn, her saying oh really? not Corbyn! and then me asking her why not and her having no real answer other than she just thinks that because the news told her so.

Try saying Labour instead of Corbyn as a starting point and then explaining why.

Won't even bother with mine as I know where their allegiances will be. My Dad is especially disappointing as he spent most of the year in intensive care so you'd think he be more appreciative to things like looking after the NHS.

 

[EwanI Ted]

Thought they had a date... In my mind this reduces the flack for not turning up (nothing was ever arranged... Busy schedule... Done lots of TV debates etc)

Pretty sure Johnson's team will keep him off there

Agreed. Their whole campaign has been about offering the lowest possible attack surface to Labour. At this point the Tories are at their theoritical maximum vote share in my view, it can only go down, not much to be gained even if Johnson went on Neil's show and absolutely smashed it. In fact, thinking about it, they'd be stupid to put him on there.

 

[Sassy Colin]

Since the last election there have been:
5.3 milion registrations applications from Under 25s,
5.7 million from 25-34s,
3.2 million from 35-44
and a combined 4.6 million of 45+.

It should be stressed that these are not new registrations a lot of people, especially older ones, will have moved etc, HOWEVER there has been an absolute record of 11 million applications from people under 34 and even if a quarter of them (I expect the figure to be more than half) are new voters then expect the Conservatives to be dished with another youthquake!

Spoiler: Cue Oh Jeremy Corbyn

How can there have been nearly 19m registrations? It's just not possible, the entire electorate is around 46m. 42% were not previously registered? That can't be right.

 

[SteveJ]

Try saying Labour instead of Corbyn as a starting point and then explaining why.

Won't even bother with mine as I know where their allegiances will be. My Dad is especially disappointing as he spent most of the year in intensive care so you'd think he be more appreciative to things like looking after the NHS.

Remarkable that the NHS still hasn't come to grips with the outbreak of endemic bloody-mindedness.

 

[Dobba]

Ongoing discussions.....