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

[Mr Pigeon]

First you've got Priti Patel saying poverty isn't the government's fault, now this. Incredible that this is the party this country wants leading them.

Actually it was cnuts like him selling bogus mortgages that ultimately caused all of this shit so this makes it even worse.

 

[Ramshock]

You genuinely are fecked if you vote Tory again.

 

[P-Nut]

Rich societies throughout history have always been scornful, thinking that the devastation which happened in the past could never happen to them because they had figured things out. To date every single one of them, from the Greeks to the Romans to the Mongols to various Chinese dynasties have been proven wrong eventually.

We are lucky to live in the time of the richest societies there have ever been, but I don't think we should be so cocky as to throw what has proven to work for what intellectually makes sense. Corbyn and McDonnell are self-proclaimed revolutionaries, and revolutions always end horribly.

I'd say this is likely the problem on why you aren't seeing things in the same light.

For a hell of a lot of people things are almost as bad as they can get now. Sleeping rough, kids going hungry and living below the poverty line, having to sleep under coats because they can't afford to put the heating on along with food bank usage being sky high.

Yes, for some of us (myself included) life in our own little bubble isn't too bad, and maintaining a status quo would be quite alright.

However, we can't let the poorest in our country continue to suffer in the way that they are. Under a tory government there is no real plan for that to change, hence a lot of people feeling pure outrage at people voting for them.

 

[Sassy Colin]

I honestly don't know what the point of stuff like this is.

 

[Sassy Colin]

This is basically a propaganda thread, it's got little to do with the Election.

 

[esmufc07]

This is basically a propaganda thread, it's got little to do with the Election.

What would you like to discuss Colin.

 

[redshaw]

I think you'll find that Norway+ was a notion that got an awful lot of media coverage, you can look it up.

I don't see it as an awful lot.

What was clear and obvious about leave and remain was the notion of ending FoM, stopping paying into EU, stopping being under EU laws by leaving and remain talking about dire financial consequences we could face. This wasn't born out of shifting to a Norway deal or Norway+, hardly anything changes moving to a Norway deal.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

The process is clear.
The options were clearly laid out in previous posts. 1) Remain 2) Leave with deal. It goes to a confirmatory vote. Unless you would like a no deal brexit?

You're debating what Corbyn wants when you know very well the Labour position. That is exactly what I said earlier, you attempting to muddy the waters.

I could just as easily bring up the clip of Boris Johnson pre 2016 saying he wants to remain in the EU.

what on earth has an opinion from Boris of three years ago got to do with this? Again, this is the issue - you don’t tackle the glaring obvious in front of you, instead try deflect to Boris - politicians do this all the time, it doesn’t work for you and it doesn’t work for them.

the choice is now in 2019 - and both Boris and Swinson have very clear policies on Brexit.

it might be three succinct sentences that you have written, but they are full of ambiguity and I say it again, voters want a clear choice. At an ardent Labour supporter, I suppose I commend you defending this policy - but for most people it’s a farce, and that’s why they aren’t voting for him.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

This is basically a propaganda thread, it's got little to do with the Election.

Spoil sport

 

[Shamwow]

Spoiler: Boris wrote it

 

[Fingeredmouse]

what on earth has an opinion from Boris of three years ago got to do with this? Again, this is the issue - you don’t tackle the glaring obvious in front of you, instead try deflect to Boris - politicians do this all the time, it doesn’t work for you and it doesn’t work for them.

the choice is now in 2019 - and both Boris and Swinson have very clear policies on Brexit.

it might be three succinct sentences that you have written, but they are full of ambiguity and I say it again, voters want a clear choice. At an ardent Labour supporter, I suppose I commend you defending this policy - but for most people it’s a farce, and that’s why they aren’t voting for him.

People not voting for a position on the basis it is nuanced is a big part if the issue with current politics.

 

[nimic]

Corbyn and McDonnell are self-proclaimed revolutionaries, and revolutions always end horribly.

The world is much better off because of the French Revolution. Hell, the Napoleonic Code makes it worth it all on its own.

In any case, that's a blanket statement that has no historical basis. Revolutions are like people. Varied in purpose, method and outcome.

 

[Raven]

Spoiler: Boris wrote it

Who'd have thought that it was a societal problem not exclusive to Labour?

 

[Sassy Colin]

This is basically a propaganda thread, it's got little to do with the Election.

How does posting a load of Tweets saying "Look what he said, look what she said" add to the discussion? Yet the thread is littered with them.

How does constantly insulting other posters who disagree with you add to the discussion? Yet is goes on all day every day, only occasionally receiving warnings.

There are some interesting exchanges regarding certain policies, but it almost always descends into a slanging match.

Moderate my post if you feel it's appropriate, whoever it was, but a significant part of this thread is bile. Personalities are put before principles, you can almost feel the rage and tears of some people reading their posts. I have avoided posting in this recently because a torrent of abuse tends to upset after while.

Never mind Is The United Forum Safe To Go Into? Is The General Election Thread Safe To Go Into?

 

[Ultimate Grib]

I honestly don't know what the point of stuff like this is.

I for one am shocked.

Not really, it’s expected that you would fail to understand. There’s a certain capacity and objectivity required to comprehend it.

Watch it a few times you might get your Eureka moment...

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

People not voting for a position on the basis it is nuanced is a big part if the issue with current politics.

but in this example. If you vote labour, you are voting for uncertainty and lack of clarity over an issue that’s been at the forefront of British politics for 3 years.

 

[Grinner]

How does posting a load of Tweets saying "Look what he said, look what she said" add to the discussion? Yet the thread is littered with them.

How does constantly insulting other posters who disagree with you add to the discussion? Yet is goes on all day every day, only occasionally receiving warnings.

There are some interesting exchanges regarding certain policies, but it almost always descends into a slanging match.

Moderate my post if you feel it's appropriate, whoever it was, but a significant part of this thread is bile. Personalities are put before principles, you can almost feel the rage and tears of some people reading their posts. I have avoided posting in this recently because a torrent of abuse tends to upset after while.

Never mind Is The United Forum Safe To Go Into? Is The General Election Thread Safe To Go Into?

Stop whining. If you don't like it then stay away.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

what on earth has an opinion from Boris of three years ago got to do with this? Again, this is the issue - you don’t tackle the glaring obvious in front of you, instead try deflect to Boris - politicians do this all the time, it doesn’t work for you and it doesn’t work for them.

the choice is now in 2019 - and both Boris and Swinson have very clear policies on Brexit.

it might be three succinct sentences that you have written, but they are full of ambiguity and I say it again, voters want a clear choice. At an ardent Labour supporter, I suppose I commend you defending this policy - but for most people it’s a farce, and that’s why they aren’t voting for him.

It's not about deflecting. It's about you purposely conflating and confusing the clear Labour policy. Which is simple.

Again. 1) Remain 2) Leave with deal. It goes to a confirmatory vote.

With regards to the deal specifics. Do you understand that any opposition leaders potential deal could be called ambiguous because, surprise surprise, they haven't been in government to negotiate a specific deal with the EU yet. Although Labour have been in meetings with EU leaders they've not been in an official position to agree and publicise a specific deal.

Are you under the mistaken impression that brexit is not full of ambiguity in any of its guises?

The current options (under Boris Johnson) are no deal brexit or leave with his terrible deal. Which do you want?

Your position essentially seems to just accept that we are in a dead end with Boris Johnson and can only accept no delay brexit or his deal? Or an opposition leader can only claim to either revoke a50 or leave with no deal?

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Spoiler: Boris wrote it

Who would be surprised that this hasn't received more widespread coverage?

 

[hobbers]

Is The General Election Thread Safe To Go Into?

Won't be safe one week from today that's for sure.

 

[mad1max954]

I don't think they had a choice, the deficit was 7% of GDP and we'd lost a huge amount of the tax base thanks to the financial crisis. The debate in my mind was how fast they cut - they could have done it in a slower and less damaging way.

They wanted to cut it hard and fast but were unable to as the Lib Dem’s made them compromise. (Arguably hard and fast is actually better as you suffer early on but recover quickerRather than one long swirl of pain.) They should have gotten to the stage of drawing a surplus in my view, either through harder cuts or increased taxes.

even now with low interest rates, 8% of all govt taxable income goes on servicing the interest on debt. To put that In perspective The nhs costs roughly 20% of our spending power. I personally find that quite frightening, shows you go en much better off we would be.

then consider if interest rates go up.

Lib Dem’s are actually the onlyones that seems to be taking the deficit seriously interestingly.Tories have taken their eyes off it and labour are showing zero regard.

 

[RedChip]

By "deal" I guess I really mean the withdrawal agreement, which is what Labour mean when they talk about getting a good deal, rather than a trade deal down the line.

Labour say they'll put their withdrawal agreement (ie deal) to a referendum, but that assumes they can get a good one. They've actually downgraded their red lines in the manifesto - no more reference to "exact same benefits" as single market membership for example - but its still not certain they'll achieve what they set out to do. And if they dont, what then?

They are not threatening either no deal or revoke, so I presume they will compromise until they reach an agreement.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Well, if it's not a soft Brexit, but works through having close alignment to the single market and a customs union to protect British jobs, it's both softer and more workable than Boris' deal. Given that you've stated it isn't soft, this should satisfy leave voters and remain will be satisfied with their option of remain being represented in a referendum. Seems like a very reasonable way of negotiating the issue.

That is meaningless though. Close alignment to the single market is not in the single market, no country will get a trade deal unless they are closely aligned to EU standards or have similar workers rights , how does a UK customs union protect jobs, it's the EU customs union that protects jobs. It also means an end to freedom of movement and a hard border - no remainer is going to be happy with that and nor are businesses. It's gobbledygook and does not guarantee an agreement at the end of it nor a trade deal.
It's a game to make Remainers think it's like remain and to make Leavers think it's like leave.

Boris's deal is a disaster and it's not going to end up with a trade deal by the end of 2020. If only Corbyn had come up with a coherent plan.

 

[esmufc07]

It's not about deflecting. It's about you purposely conflating and confusing the clear Labour policy. Which is simple.

Again. 1) Remain 2) Leave with deal. It goes to a confirmatory vote.

With regards to the deal specifics. Do you understand that any opposition leaders potential deal could be called ambiguous because, surprise surprise, they haven't been in government to negotiate a specific deal with the EU yet. Although Labour have been in meetings with EU leaders they've not been in an official position to agree and publicise a specific deal.

Are you under the mistaken impression that brexit is not full of ambiguity in any of its guises?

The current options (under Boris Johnson) are no deal brexit or leave with his terrible deal. Which do you want?

Your position essentially seems to just accept that we are in a dead end with Boris Johnson and can only accept no delay brexit or his deal? Or an opposition leader can only claim to either revoke a50 or leave with no deal?

All deals are terrible deals though, as any deal other than Remaining within the EU damages us economically.

Do you not accept the argument that a Labour Referendum would effectively be Remain v Remain lite? And do you not think that alienates a large portion of the electorate who voted to leave the EU? (This is presuming Labour could even negotiate a new deal within 3 months).

 

[Raven]

That is meaningless though. Close alignment to the single market is not in the single market, no country will get a trade deal unless they are closely aligned to EU standards or have similar workers rights , how does a UK customs union protect jobs, it's the EU customs union that protects jobs. It also means an end to freedom of movement and a hard border - no remainer is going to be happy with that and nor are businesses. It's gobbledygook and does not guarantee an agreement at the end of it nor a trade deal.
It's a game to make Remainers think it's like remain and to make Leavers think it's like leave.

Boris's deal is a disaster and it's not going to end up with a trade deal by the end of 2020. If only Corbyn had come up with a coherent plan.

You're like a broken record. If he can't secure a better deal, it will Boris' deal vs remain. What it is you're not grasping here.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

It's not about deflecting. It's about you purposely conflating and confusing the clear Labour policy. Which is simple.

Again. 1) Remain 2) Leave with deal. It goes to a confirmatory vote.

With regards to the deal specifics. Do you understand that any opposition leaders potential deal could be called ambiguous because, surprise surprise, they haven't been in government to negotiate a specific deal with the EU yet. Although Labour have been in meetings with EU leaders they've not been in an official position to agree and publicise a specific deal.

Are you under the mistaken impression that brexit is not full of ambiguity in any of its guises?

The current options (under Boris Johnson) are no deal brexit or leave with his terrible deal. Which do you want?

Your position essentially seems to just accept that we are in a dead end with Boris Johnson and can only accept no delay brexit or his deal? Or an opposition leader can only claim to either revoke a50 or leave with no deal?

It is not clear, and even labour MPs have been unable to explain it.

If Corbyn can’t take a stance, he (and anyone with delegated authority) will get laughed out of negotiations with the EU. It’s been raised on numerous occasions - is it really credible to negotiate a deal with the EU and then (potentially, as we just don’t know), then campaign against it? Or will he just go AWOL like he did during the original campaign?

Even if you think this is clear and logical, millions don’t - and of course we will never get an answer to what he would have done, as he won’t win the election, and this is one of the reasons. Despite being up against first Theresa May and now Boris, Corbyn fails to present himself as a credible leader.

many position is that I’m voting for Boris’ deal. Voting labour is not even a consideration because I believe (here comes the personal abuse...)we will be worse off under this labour incarnation. Would be nice to have a credible alternative, we don’t.

 

[Fiskey]

Yea, this is where you fundamentally misunderstand how sovereign debt works. I don't blame you really, its not the simplest thing to get your head around.

There is close to zero chance that any G7 economy will default on sovereign debt. They have way too many levers of control for that. Our government debt is tiny anyway (Only Germany have less) and both our interest rate and repayments are at like, record lows; it is a total non issue that's used as a political football.

China is the by far the closest to some sort of meltdown (It's very hard to tell, but they are verifiably a mess and arguably already in meltdown), but we won't see any sort of default from them for sure. Lightning bolts no longer happen.

Haha, this is so patronising as to be amusing. Lightning bolts no longer happen until they do.

 

[sun_tzu]

If only Corbyn had come up with a coherent plan.

Meh if labour had Jess Phillips as leader I bet they would be on course for a big majority

If they can't smash the current conservative offering they really can only blame themselves for buying into this idea Corbyn is an amazing campaigner and people love him... The only reason they didn't get crushed last time was the maybot malfunctioned and this time they are waiting for Boris to trip himself up to have a chance (hey its Boris so it could still happen) but put a leader people find somewhat relatable and ensure policies have broad appeal and they would be miles ahead

 

[Fiskey]

The world is much better off because of the French Revolution. Hell, the Napoleonic Code makes it worth it all on its own.

In any case, that's a blanket statement that has no historical basis. Revolutions are like people. Varied in purpose, method and outcome.

Do you really think so? The reign of terror, the political instability that ended with the Franco - Prussian wars and two world wars? I'll have to disagree.

 

[Grinner]

Do you really think so? The reign of terror, the political instability that ended with the Franco - Prussian wars and two world wars? I'll have to disagree.

This isn't the thread for that discussion. Please keep the thread clear for election chat.

 

[MoskvaRed]

You're like a broken record. If he can't secure a better deal, it will Boris' deal vs remain. What it is you're not grasping here.

I understand Labour’s position from the perspective of the UK electoral map and I hope they get enough seats to deny Johnson a majority. But...put yourself in Barnier’s shoes (or Verhofstadt’s or Macron’s). You’ve already had 3.5 years of this unwanted drama and are thoroughly sick of it. Why would you expend substantially more time, energy and political capital renegotiating with a party when you know (1) they are offering a referendum with a remain option and (2) most of the leadership and a vast majority of its MPs and members are pro-Remain? In that position, given the underlying conditions remain the same (no Irish border, no slicing and dicing of the 4 freedoms), you’d just go through the motions, wouldn’t you?

 

[Paul the Wolf]

You're like a broken record. If he can't secure a better deal, it will Boris' deal vs remain. What it is you're not grasping here.

You mean I'm not saying what you want me to say.

Another extract from the manifesto- Labour supporters should read it and understand it.

We will rip up the deeply flawed deal negotiated by Boris Johnson.

Once we have secured this new deal we will put it to a legally binding referendum alongside the option of remaining in the EU. This will take place within the first six months of a Labour government.

So Corbyn will come back and say, "oh sorry I couldn't negotiate a better deal than Johnson which is deeply flawed and I've already ripped it up." Would he resign there and then? Couldn't be neutral then because he's already denounced Johnson's deal.

Should really think things through.

 

[MoskvaRed]

Haha, this is so patronising as to be amusing. Lightning bolts no longer happen until they do.

You seriously think the UK will end up like Argentina or late 90s Russia? A failed state because Corbyn wants to renationalise a few industries?

 

[Fluctuation0161]

It is not clear, and even labour MPs have been unable to explain it.

If Corbyn can’t take a stance, he (and anyone with delegated authority) will get laughed out of negotiations with the EU. It’s been raised on numerous occasions - is it really credible to negotiate a deal with the EU and then (potentially, as we just don’t know), then campaign against it? Or will he just go AWOL like he did during the original campaign?

Even if you think this is clear and logical, millions don’t - and of course we will never get an answer to what he would have done, as he won’t win the election, and this is one of the reasons. Despite being up against first Theresa May and now Boris, Corbyn fails to present himself as a credible leader.

many position is that I’m voting for Boris’ deal. Voting labour is not even a consideration because I believe (here comes the personal abuse...)we will be worse off under this labour incarnation. Would be nice to have a credible alternative, we don’t.

Oh sorry. I didn't realise you were speaking on behalf of millions. It always seems like you're only talking for yourself. Funny that. And you think Boris Johnson is a credible leader? Another funny.

Of course Labours position is clear. A confirmatory vote: remain or leave with a deal. But Corbyn will stay neutral in an attempt to unite the country as much as possible. Why does it matter to you what position he takes? 52% didn't follow Cameron in 2016 so it seems people can make their own minds up.

Ultimately it is the only way to give the people a vote on the reality of Brexit. Not the multiple impossible Brexits which 52% of people voted for in 2016. The real concrete options for leave.

Did you know you were voting for a Boris type deal back in 2016 ? You seem to want clear options. Did you criticise the leave campaign for a lack of clarity on their brexit plan? Or do you only do that when it suits your agenda.

What do you like about the Boris deal? Which is even worse than Theresa May's deal and threatens peace in Northern Ireland.

Not only have the reality of the brexit options changed. The population has changed. Since 2016 many more young people have become eligible to vote. As it will effect them the longest shouldn't they get a voice now?

Back in 2017 Theresa May didn't win either. She had to bribe the DUP £1.5bn to keep her in power. Part of that magic money tree and Tory stability hey?

 

[Fiskey]

You seriously think the UK will end up like Argentina or late 90s Russia? A failed state because Corbyn wants to renationalise a few industries?

Depends how far down the Socialist track we went and how the world economy performs in that time. As I said, no chance in the next 10 years. After that, who knows? It's not like it's ancient history, we had an imf bailout in 1976.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Meh if labour had Jess Phillips as leader I bet they would be on course for a big majority

If they can't smash the current conservative offering they really can only blame themselves for buying into this idea Corbyn is an amazing campaigner and people love him... The only reason they didn't get crushed last time was the maybot malfunctioned and this time they are waiting for Boris to trip himself up to have a chance (hey its Boris so it could still happen) but put a leader people find somewhat relatable and ensure policies have broad appeal and they would be miles ahead

Boris will just minimise public appearances and serious interviews to avoid uncovering his incompetence and dangerous plan for the future to the voting public. Bet they don't talk about that on Guido?

 

[MrPooni]

 

[Berbaclass]

Anyone watching Neil v Farage?

 

[owlo]

Haha, this is so patronising as to be amusing. Lightning bolts no longer happen until they do.

Yes, it's patronising because you're pushing a narrative based on zero knowledge and zero fact about a subject. Feel free to address the substance of the post.

It's far more polite than saying 'you're fecking clueless.'

And we've already seen they don't. Even in China. Unless you're suggesting that Corbyn is going to be starting a thermonuclear war or something.

Which is about as likely or more than a UK debt default honestly....

 

[Fosu-Mens]

Everyone with more than 20 years to live should vote Green.