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

How do you intend to vote in the 2019 General Election if eligible?

  • Brexit Party

    Votes: 30 4.3%
  • Conservatives

    Votes: 73 10.6%
  • DUP

    Votes: 5 0.7%
  • Green

    Votes: 23 3.3%
  • Labour

    Votes: 355 51.4%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 58 8.4%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 3 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 9 1.3%
  • SNP

    Votes: 19 2.8%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 6 0.9%
  • Independent

    Votes: 1 0.1%
  • Other (BNP, Change UK, UUP and anyone else that I have forgotten)

    Votes: 10 1.4%
  • Not voting

    Votes: 57 8.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 41 5.9%

  • Total voters
    690
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

There's ani-semitism in the whole of society sadly, of course it's in the Labour party, as it is in the Tory party.

I've reported quite a bit of anti-semitic stuff on Twitter and most of it has been from people who certainly aren't Labour! They've usually been somewhere on the Brexit right of things. It's usually only been one click away from Leave.eu or the Brexit party, therefore views held by their followers. In some cases Tories.
 
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.
you automatically go off the voters register if you dont send the form back each year
So a lot of people naturally fall off when there is not a GE and then resubmit info when there is an election - so I could believe those figures
 
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

Would it be possible to take to BBC to court for not properly observing Purdah and what would happen if it did?

 
Insulting another member
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.

I'm struggling to use my words when I come across thick shit like this. Are you dyslexic or illiterate? You've quoted the answer you tool. They are not new registrations, they are applications to register. Lots of people move home and fall off the register.
 
”What more can Corbyn do?”

This from Yair Wallach (one of the most reliable and reasonable guides to this controversy IMO) would be a start:



 
half the problem seems to be that his supporters just say “he’s not as bad as the nasty Tories” and just ignore the issues that are front and centre.

Can you list some of these issues that are supposedly 'front and centre'? And referring to other parties' handling of the matter isn't deflection but rather a benchmark to assess how much is being done across the spectrum to tackle bigotry. Does the fact that Johnson and the Tories receive less scrutiny and condemnation over their own allegations suggest they’re doing a better job of handling it and hence should serve as a target starting point for Labour?

the other issue is that he really doesn’t appear to “do” very much.


Again, beyond his public condemnations of anti-semitism, sanctioning internal investigations, suspending members and barring culpable candidates, what else would you have him do that is deemed 'good enough'? This is something that is poorly elaborated by his most vehement accusers.

I can’t spell out what he should be doing - but I’d ensure that no stone was left unturned in investigating the issues that are ingrained into the party which he leads. He just doesn’t want to do that. The fact it keeps coming up time and time again, and he has no answers and no actions that he can come back with shows a lack of interest and leadership. For a man who campaigns on morals and integrity, this is a strange dichotomy

You said in your previous paragraph that he should be doing more but now you’re saying you can’t pinpoint what exactly it is he should be doing. He permitted investigations which concluded no evidence of there being an objective anti-Semitic epidemic in his party, definitely no more so than any other party. And would you not entertain the possibility that perhaps the reason it keeps coming up time and time again is because the media have decided they don’t want it gone any time soon?

in the very first line of my post I said I don’t believe he’s a racist, but he’s no longer a back bench MP with no responsibilities, he’s the leader of the opposition - unfortunately he’s a leader in name only. He’s a good protester and supporter of the underdog - but he has a party to manage, and he fails to do that.

You could make a case for him not being a strong leader, but couldn’t you also argue that a supporter of the underdog is exactly the empathetic change of direction in leadership this country needs? Because up until now we’ve largely had politicians hailing from elitist and privileged backgrounds who you could argue wouldn’t be able to resonate with the common struggles and hardships of the ordinary man.
 
Why is Corbyn repeatedly being referred to by some as the victim in all this?

Because he seems to have made an effort to get rid of anti-semitism in the party, where it's been found, and is not himself anti-semitic. It seems to be being used to attack him, but it was raised before under Miliband and Corbyn has stepped up dealing with it. The Party has adopted agreed definitions of Anti-semitism and I believe is working from them to discipline people. He's not denying it's a problem.

I suppose the fact that this gets in the press around election times is what makes Labour supporters feel like it's a party-political attack on him as much as anything. None of which helps anyone who has been the victim of anti-semitism.

As I said I have staunchly Labour friends who are Jewish, who don't see this as black and white as some people might like us to
 
The NHS story itself is seismic but it says a lot that it took someone outside of the media to call on the freedom of information act to expose the documents.

It’s not the first time we heard about it either, Corbyn first revealed it in the first election debate, which begs the question - why didn’t the media run their own due diligence then and attempt to shine more light on it instead of begrudgingly discussing it now that they have no choice? You’d think something as pivotal as the potential breakup of the NHS warrants them to actually do their jobs?

Even now they’re attempting to downplay it, that recent tweet from the BBC posted earlier sums it up.
The whole FOI process takes about six weeks tbf and whoever you're asking can delay it or even reject it on cost grounds. We make regular ones to HMRC, FCA, Treasury etc.,.
 
So is that Laura at the BBC not even pretending to be impartial anymore?
 
@nickeardleybbc

The Conservatives have suspended their candidate in Glasgow Central Flora Scarabello over "alleged use of anti-Muslim language"
 
mg_youthquake_comp01.png


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! :drool:



Surprising numbers given the total 18-24 population of the UK is only about 5.7M total.
 
”What more can Corbyn do?”

This from Yair Wallach (one of the most reliable and reasonable guides to this controversy IMO) would be a start:





Labour have accept the IHRA, ban members, made political educational video on fighting back against crank conspiracy theories. Chris Williams is literally standing against the party because it got rid of him on anti semitic grounds.

The party has over a quarter of million members, it can't spend all day checking Facebook. The level of standards some people want from Labour is simply impossible to reach. Not to mention the labour party at its best could be a educational tool for working class people, simply kicking anyone out the party for crank conspiracy theories does feck all in helping change the country.

Labour is trying to create socialism in Britain, it isn't trying to get someone on twitter fired.
 
The cynic in me says this is yet more immediate groundwork being laid down by the Tories to debunk claims that they are not dealing with Islamaphobia in any upcoming BJ Neil interview.

Scarabello is just a sacrificial lamb for the alter that is Prime Minister Boris Johnson. I expect a few more token sacrifices in coming days.



 
Last edited:
Labour have accept the IHRA, ban members, made political educational video on fighting back against crank conspiracy theories. Chris Williams is literally standing against the party because it got rid of him on anti semitic grounds.

The party has over a quarter of million members, it can't spend all day checking Facebook. The level of standards some people want from Labour is simply impossible to reach(Not to mention the labour party at its best could be a educational tool for working class people, simply kicking anyone out the party for crank conspiracy theories does feck all in helping change the country).

Labour is trying to created socialism in Britain, it isn't trying to get someone on twitter fired.

They can do that while simultaneously disowning prominent voices/outlets within the party who have peddled anti-Semitic nonsense. They aren't being asked to go through user by user - just call out fairly well-known voices and inform them when their behaviour isn't acceptable. Your last line there sort of creates an impression this is just an annoying aside for the party instead of a significant issue they need to tackle - and continue tackling - head on, not just something they can sorry for a couple of times and then dismiss and done and dusted.
 
Skinner losing his seat would be quite remarkable. Although the same model also has Swinson barely hanging on - any further drop in Lib Dem fortunes and she'll be out. Didn't expect that, but then expected the Libs to hold strong on around 15% or so and that's seeming unlikely now.

 
The cynic in me says this is yet more immediate groundwork being laid down by the Tories to debunk claims they are not dealing with Islamaphobia in any upcoming BJ Neil interview. Scarabello is just a sacrificial lamb at the for the alter that is Prime Minister Boris Johnson. I expect a few more in coming days.



Conservative candidate suspended over Islamophobia allegation
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2019-50569827
A Conservative election candidate has been suspended following an allegation of Islamophobic language.
Flora Scarabello, candidate for Glasgow Central, will have support for her campaign withdrawn by the party, said the Scottish Conservatives.
It comes after a complaint to the party’s central office about the alleged use of anti-Muslim language.
Her name will still appear on the ballot paper as the deadline for removing her as a candidate has passed.
A spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives said: “We take allegations like this extremely seriously.
“There is no place in the Scottish Conservatives for anti-Muslim language, or any other form of racial or religious discrimination.
“As such, we have immediately suspended the candidate and the complaint will be thoroughly investigated.”


Probably, especially considering they've got feck all chance of winning any seats in Glasgow anyway.
 
Casual anti-Semitism has long been a virtual badge of honour amongst the upper classes, the very people the Conservative Party best represents.
 
Labour have accept the IHRA,
in full?

Last summer, Labour found itself in a bitter row over antisemitism, with many Jewish leaders condemning the party for its handling of the issue.
Marie van der Zyl, President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, accused Jeremy Corbyn of “leading the Labour Party into a dark place of ugly conspiracy theories” and said the opposition had “become a home for overt antisemites and antisemitism”.
Labour adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in 2016.
The sticking point last year was whether to also incorporate the IHRA’s eleven examples of antisemitic behaviour.
After months of wrangling, in September 2018, the party said it had adopted “all of the IHRA examples of antisemitism”.
But FactCheck can reveal that there is no mention of the IHRA, its definition, or any of the eleven examples in the 2019 Labour Party Rulebook — or the section of their website that deals with Labour’s code of conduct.
What was promised?
On 4 September 2018, a Labour spokesperson said that the party’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) “has today adopted all of the IHRA examples of antisemitism, in addition to the IHRA definition which Labour adopted in 2016, alongside a statement which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression on Israel or the rights of Palestinians.”
The NEC has the power to update codes of conduct without waiting for approval from the party conference. But eight months after the announcement, it is not possible to find the IHRA definition or its examples anywhere in the 2019 Labour Party Rulebook.
Are the IHRA examples included in any other published party documents?
There’s a section on Labour’s website called “Code of Conduct: Antisemitism and other forms of racism”.
You might expect this page to include the IHRA definition and its examples — but it doesn’t.
At the bottom, there is a link to the now-defunct 2018 party rulebook, which the webpage says “contains all of Labour’s codes of conduct”. The 2018 rulebook does not include the IHRA definition or its examples either.
Labour’s website contains only one document that uses the IHRA definition of antisemitism: the 2017 Race and Faith Manifesto. But crucially, this doesn’t include the eleven IHRA examples.
In July 2018, the Jewish Chronicle published what they understood to be Labour’s internal guidelines on handling antisemitism.
This document, titled “NEC Code of Conduct: Antisemitism”, sets out “examples of conduct likely to be regarded as antisemitic” that were “in part derived from the IHRA working examples”.
As that language suggests, the guidelines don’t include the full suite of IHRA examples — in fact, they omit the following four:
  • “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations”
  • “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
  • “Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
  • “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
It’s not clear whether that Code of Conduct still applies, or whether it’s been superseded by the announcement that Labour has adopted all eleven IHRA examples.

We asked Labour to point us to a public document that includes the eleven IHRA examples. They were unable to do so.
https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...tion-ihra-antisemitism-definition-or-examples

Is there a new document?
 
They are the official statistics: https://www.gov.uk/performance/regi...=2017-06-01T00:00:00Z&to=2019-11-01T00:00:00Z

I guess it must be a combination of new folk registering and other folk moving house or amending/resubmitting their forms and whatnot.

I work in elections and a number of the registrations for our authority are duplications of people who are already registered but for some reason have gone on and registered again so this then results in a lot of work for us to sort these out.
 
Probably, especially considering they've got feck all chance of winning any seats in Glasgow anyway.
I was also going to suggest that, but my knowledge of competition within Scotland constituencies is zero! :lol:
 
Jeremy Corbyn says he has found proof that the NHS will be part of trade talks between the UK and US after Brexit. But the man who originally got hold of the document said there's even worse

Nick Dearden is the Director of Global Justice Now, who received the papers after putting in a Freedom of Information request.

The government originally refused to give any details, before sending a heavily-redacted version of the 451-page document. A whistleblower then sent the full version to both Global Justice Now and the Labour Party.

Mr Corbyn focused on the fact that it shows the US had demanded pharmaceuticals are on the table as part of any trade deal. But Nick pointed out that there are other elements that are just as concerning.

Speaking to James O'Brien, he said: "When we flicked through it, we were desperately concerned.

"Not just about the NHS and the health system, but about our food standards, about the kind of laws that may be brought in to regulate big tech - Facebook, Google and Amazon - under a US trade deal."

One thing mentioned is around food standards, stating the US is not keen on food warning labels - largely based on the fact that the more warnings something has, the less likely people are to buy it.

James added to his commentary, saying: "I note one Financial Times journalist is pointing out correctly that the NHS is only mentioned four times throughout all the leaked documents.

"But it's very interesting to see that you, as someone who got their hands on this document early, recognising that there is lots and lots of other stuff in there that is really interesting and important."

Nick pointed out a line in the document saying that the phrase NHS shouldn't be used because they recognise that it would cause controversy. He said: "Part of the reason the NHS is only mentioned four times is that we have told people not to use the phrase very much."

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/present...KFX67d85LyrieiwcA-VspU90s1wtL2xH3tqkUlmjNS4RI
 
I was also going to suggest that, but my knowledge of competition within Scotland constituencies is zero! :lol:

They're obviously far from popular up here in general but Glasgow especially is still a bit of a no-go zone for them.
 
I work in elections and a number of the registrations for our authority are duplications of people who are already registered but for some reason have gone on and registered again so this then results in a lot of work for us to sort these out.

Yeah that makes sense. I can see some folk being unsure they've registered. We're forever getting election reminders and leaflets asking us to register posted through the door even though we already have.

Would you say there was anything out of the ordinary regarding the number/age of the people registering for this election, or is it in line with what you would expect?
 
The cynic in me says this is yet more immediate groundwork being laid down by the Tories to debunk claims that they are not dealing with Islamaphobia in any upcoming BJ Neil interview.

Scarabello is just a sacrificial lamb for the alter that is Prime Minister Boris Johnson. I expect a few more token sacrifices in coming days.





And what would the cynic in you say if he wasn't suspended?
 
Your last line there sort of creates an impression this is just an annoying aside for the party instead of a significant issue they need to tackle - and continue tackling - head on, not just something they can sorry for a couple of times and then dismiss and done and dusted.
From my last post.
Labour have accept the IHRA, ban members, made political educational video on fighting back against crank conspiracy theories.
The Labour Party has done far more than just saying sorry a couple of times and they certainly haven't dismissed it. The party is in far better place with these changes but for some people there is

1)A complete denial that the party has taken steps to fight anti semitism.

2)To view these changes as nothing more than saying sorry.

3)Demand bizarre actions such as disowning Facebook groups and toxic social media accounts.

The data shows the labour party isn't full of anti semites, the party isn't in anyway a threat to British Jews etc. There is small element of semitism in labour and the party has taken action to fight against that. There can be serious discussion on anti semitism but asking labour to disown social media accounts is beyond stupid.
 
Last edited:
They can do that while simultaneously disowning prominent voices/outlets within the party who have peddled anti-Semitic nonsense. They aren't being asked to go through user by user - just call out fairly well-known voices and inform them when their behaviour isn't acceptable. Your last line there sort of creates an impression this is just an annoying aside for the party instead of a significant issue they need to tackle - and continue tackling - head on, not just something they can sorry for a couple of times and then dismiss and done and dusted.
Casual anti-Semitism has long been a virtual badge of honour amongst the upper classes, the very people the Conservative Party best represents.

It's likely that anyone with a UK socialist mindset would sympathise with Palestinians and is often outraged by actions imposed upon them by Israel. This will obviously lead to harsh criticism towards the Israeli Government. In that instance, some people conflate Government with the entire people. It can be an oversight or deliberate. Pro Israel folk will then deliberately muddy the definition between anti-zionist and anti-semite in an attempt to shut down all criticism. I've sure most of us have seen this entire process play out in less than 30 seconds. I suspect that a lot of the alleged 'anti semitic' noise within Labour party exists within this space. To their credit, Labour has spent passion and energy trying to clarify its position.

Of course there will be some across all society who despise the Jewish people for pure racist reasons, and those have to be found and harshly dealt with. But we also cant deny this subject is also complex, political and has many competing agendas at play.
 
Last edited:
Surprising numbers given the total 18-24 population of the UK is only about 5.7M total.

It's more than that about 6.7 million estimated last year. Many would have moved. With it being the end of term loads of students would have gone home so re-registering at their parents address. I estimate about a quarter being new voters but judging by the crazy registration campaign it could be as many as half. We won't know until lists are produced.
 
Given the seemingly indefatigable lead that the Tories have in opinion poll, is a Conservative/LibDem hung parliament the best way to get BJ out of no 10?

LibDems would insist on a 2nd referendum as the price for their coalition. Remain wins that coalition. Tories then implode into another brutal civil war, with BJ, Gove and JRM as early collateral damage.

Abit of a stretch I know, but I cant think of any other possible scenarios. Labour/SNP won't get enough seats.
 
I'm 28 and have had to register for basically every election in my adult life due to moving around. It could well actually be every election, I remember a fair few polling booths!
 
Given the seemingly indefatigable lead that the Tories have in opinion poll, is a Conservative/LibDem hung parliament the best way to get BJ out of no 10?

LibDems would insist on a 2nd referendum as the price for their coalition. Remain wins that coalition. Tories then implode into another brutal civil war, with BJ, Gove and JRM as early collateral damage.

Abit of a stretch I know, but I cant think of any other possible scenarios. Labour/SNP won't get enough seats.

I reckon so.



The BBC is fecked.


I'd say they should just empty chair him but nobody would watch it. That's really poor from the BBC though and no way of balancing it out if Johnson decides not to show up. Maybe they should suspend Laura K's twitter account for a day as a good will gesture.
 
It's more than that about 6.7 million estimated last year. Many would have moved. With it being the end of term loads of students would have gone home so re-registering at their parents address. I estimate about a quarter being new voters but judging by the crazy registration campaign it could be as many as half. We won't know until lists are produced.

Where did you get that stat from? Seems to be 5.7M based on the data from this page.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...tins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/mid2018
 
The Labour Party has done far more than just saying sorry a couple of times and they certainly haven't dismissed it. The party is in far better place with these changes but for some people there is

1)A complete denial that the party has taken steps to fight anti semitism.

2)To view these changes as nothing more than saying sorry.

3)Demand bizarre actions such as disowning Facebook groups and toxic social media accounts.

The data shows the labour party isn't full of anti semites, the party isn't in anyway a threat to British Jews etc. There is small element of semitism in labour and the party has taken action to fight against that. There can be serious discussion on anti semitism but asking labour to disown social media accounts is beyond stupid.

But the concerns of British Jews go beyond Labour members - it's a sense that the Labour leadership either don't care about this or have aided or abetted in it. Corbyn himself has described groups with extraordinarily anti-Jewish records as 'friends' in the past. Richard Burgon has called Zionism the 'enemy of peace' - granted, there's plenty of discussion to be had over Zionism and its benefits/drawbacks, but blanket statements like that reinforce the idea the Labour leadership doesn't really care about anti-Semitism or has aided it at times.

If the Tories were to within the next week apologise for anti-Islam elements within the party, while saying they'll follow protocols to ensure it doesn't happen again while also suspending party members responsible for such remarks, would you be completely fine with them, and willing to take them at face value?
 
From around 1961 to 1979 (my Youth to early Adult) I was a member of the Labour party and from 1983 until 1999 (In my prime, right up to when my knees started to knock) I was a member of the Tory party.

Whilst active In both parties I observed various forms of what today is recognised and called out for what it is, racism. In labour it had a predominantly anti-Jewish focus and in the Tory party mainly anti-Asian (rather than anti Islam) and had business connotations rather than personal ones. In both parties initially it was what might in those days have be called 'soft' racism, not direct 'in your face' examples, but behind closed doors or in certain company, racist jokes/stories etc. were told.

There was always an harder edge to things in the Labour party where it seemed to me that a dislike, often bordering on hatred of the State of Israel, became conjoined with the antagonism toward the individual, who was Jewish. It was only in the later stages of my time in Labour that the really nasty aspects emerged, although these were for the most part few and far between, but nonetheless they existed and were witnessed by many but no attempt was ever made to call them out by the party hierarchy, everything was glossed over. It was one (of several) reasons I left the party.

Three or fours years later and attracted by a politician who actually did what she said she would do (yes Mrs T) I joined the Tory Party. The racism here was much more subtle, only really surfaced in certain company, and was always more about ethnicity than religion. I do remember one incident where a senior member of the local party did take to task one of the members about his inappropriate jokes, "not acceptable and we don't want anymore like that" were the exact remarks issued, by the Party official.

I suppose in those days many of the acts of racism could be screened off, or ignored completely; people who were otherwise of the same political viewpoint, found it distinctly uncomfortable to realise their comrades had a bigoted/racist streak in them. "Swept under the carpet" is a phrase that springs to mind and surely we will all be better off when the carpets are finally lifted and the house properly cleaned? Not sure this election will necessarily advance that sweeping though!
 
Yeah that makes sense. I can see some folk being unsure they've registered. We're forever getting election reminders and leaflets asking us to register posted through the door even though we already have.

Would you say there was anything out of the ordinary regarding the number/age of the people registering for this election, or is it in line with what you would expect?

Im not really sure about breakdown as the team just process them as quickly as possible however there has definitely been an increase in people registering (albeit some duplications) compared to 2017. We definitely expect a spike for major elections and this then results in major workloads for us. Also a lot of people doing postal votes as well.
 
It's more than that about 6.7 million estimated last year. Many would have moved. With it being the end of term loads of students would have gone home so re-registering at their parents address. I estimate about a quarter being new voters but judging by the crazy registration campaign it could be as many as half. We won't know until lists are produced.

From here: http://www.agediscrimination.info/current-uk-population - it usese ONS statistics but I may be reading the 64-74 as 18-24 though you can't tell that well due to the colours being repeated :lol:
 
So the death of Gary Rhodes, investment into Manchester City and pictures of the Milky Way are all deemed more important by the BBC than the Tories' plan to have the NHS on the table in any trade talks.
Clive James - some Australian broadcaster - is the headline now.

It's so fecking obvious that the BBC want the Tories to win. Absolutely nothing can make me believe otherwise after the last few months of utter dross that's come from them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.