By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
This will be the first election that I have no idea who to vote for, will never vote Tory again after the lies during covid where my dad lost his life, don’t trust starmer, would never vote for a bunch of racists like reform , anyone give me a clue?
This post has been edited by an administrator
favourite cheese mature Cheddar. FFS there is no such thing as the EPL
An early observation of this thread from me is that there are a lot of unhappy people who have been given absolutely everything they wanted in recent years.
8
General Election Thread on 10:21 - May 29 with 2369 views
General Election Thread on 09:49 - May 29 by BazzaInTheLoft
An early observation of this thread from me is that there are a lot of unhappy people who have been given absolutely everything they wanted in recent years.
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function - F. Scott Fitzgerald.
General Election Thread on 10:21 - May 29 by E17hoop
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function - F. Scott Fitzgerald.
Smells like a trout farm in here
0
General Election Thread on 10:56 - May 29 with 2270 views
General Election Thread on 09:27 - May 29 by hubble
"All those people who want to appear in the know or who want to believe they are 'independent thinkers' - for that read conspiracy theorists - lap up all this stuff."
I'm sure people who have alternative opinions to those of the mainstream orthodoxy feel exactly the same way about your opinions, Nix.
Yep, and good for them. Not saying they're not allowed to. Just that as soon as I read someone saying they are 'independent thinkers' I see it followed by some weird theory presented as fact.
I'm not presenting my opinions as fact. Reading something on FB is not evidence.
-1
General Election Thread on 10:56 - May 29 with 2241 views
General Election Thread on 09:49 - May 29 by BazzaInTheLoft
An early observation of this thread from me is that there are a lot of unhappy people who have been given absolutely everything they wanted in recent years.
Yeah, when we voted to keep your lot out in 2019, we all did so in the hope the Chinese communist party would release a biological weapon on us just to spice things up a bit. You caught us, Sherlock.
"Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius
4
General Election Thread on 15:05 - May 29 with 2025 views
General Election Thread on 16:56 - May 28 by SheffieldHoop
I've always expected we would be asked again. Standard EU tactic. A second referendum was always going to come eventually, regardless of whether anybody is seriously asking for it or not. And atm I can't see that many people seriously are.
I'm not sure this country has been sufficiently engineered and propagandized to prevent another "leave" vote, although it does seem to be in the works. I can't see that many people in Sunderland or Sheffield or any other Brexity town have changed their view on it. These people were abandoned while we were very much in the EU and nothing has changed since we left. The EU migrants have been replaced by Non-EU migrants. It's now time for those abandoned people to come to terms with a managerial elite that hates them (and basically wants them substituted for a more compliant slave class)
We would only be asked again if the UK parliament wants it - so not sure why that is an EU tactic? The EU has moved on from Brexit, it is our GDP that has taken a hit.
You say Sunderland, Sheffield etc were abandoned - you are right. But why do you say they were abandoned by the EU? The EU pumped huge amounts of money into poorer British regions but never got credit because the British govt liked to pass it off as UK money. Only 1.5% of our public spending went to the EU so surely it would be a bit unfair to expect the EU to turn round the decline in English northern towns on its own surely?
So you accept that EU migrants have been replaced by non-EU migrants? You are right - under this Conservative govt we have actually had record migration because the Conservatives wants cheap labour, but it comes out with vile anti-migrant rhetoric to try to win votes. Planes to Rwanda, "the boats" etc all account for a tiny number of migrants people compared to the number of immigrants this government welcomes in legally.
So given you got your Brexit, your town is still abandoned and you have got more immigration than ever (if you think that's a bad thing) how has the Conservative Brexit worked for you?
[Post edited 29 May 15:43]
3
General Election Thread on 16:06 - May 29 with 1872 views
General Election Thread on 15:41 - May 29 by Stainrod
We would only be asked again if the UK parliament wants it - so not sure why that is an EU tactic? The EU has moved on from Brexit, it is our GDP that has taken a hit.
You say Sunderland, Sheffield etc were abandoned - you are right. But why do you say they were abandoned by the EU? The EU pumped huge amounts of money into poorer British regions but never got credit because the British govt liked to pass it off as UK money. Only 1.5% of our public spending went to the EU so surely it would be a bit unfair to expect the EU to turn round the decline in English northern towns on its own surely?
So you accept that EU migrants have been replaced by non-EU migrants? You are right - under this Conservative govt we have actually had record migration because the Conservatives wants cheap labour, but it comes out with vile anti-migrant rhetoric to try to win votes. Planes to Rwanda, "the boats" etc all account for a tiny number of migrants people compared to the number of immigrants this government welcomes in legally.
So given you got your Brexit, your town is still abandoned and you have got more immigration than ever (if you think that's a bad thing) how has the Conservative Brexit worked for you?
[Post edited 29 May 15:43]
I don't really understand the thinking behind your post. Where have I said the Conservative Brexit vote has worked? It hasn't, for anybody, which is why they're about to go from the largest majority in my lifetime to (fingers crossed) Zero Seats. I thought I was being quite clear about that.
But - This is because they've just carried on Blairism for the last 13 years while pretending they aren't, or claiming it's too difficult to stop it now. I indicated this in my first post on this thread. The New Labour consensus has just been carried on, while people voted against it election after election. Why is that? Why is it that we explicitly vote to lower immigration and they stick 2 fingers up at us and increase it anyway? Why is it that no other party seems able or willing to capitalise on this highly popular "we've had quite enough Immigration for the time being" point of view?
Brexit was a rejection of Blairism. The EU is Blairism. Perhaps I'm giving the man too much credit - But why does everything wrong with this country appear to be the legacy of Tony Blair? There are several other inaccurate or completely false points in your post but let's save Clive from tit for tat
"Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius
I have read and heard many people say "They're all the same". I've seen countless instances of people saying they don't trust the Labour leader of the day, and it's always slightly done my head in.
Not digging at you - but what is it exactly that Starmer has said or done the means you don't trust him? What do you think he's lying about or hiding? On the flip side - what did Boris Johnson do to earn your trust when you voted for him last time? He seems to me to be entirely untrustworthy for lots of well publicised reasons, the list of which begins before he even became our Mayor.
I personally want a moderate, left of centre party with a serious person as the main representative of the country I live in. My sensibilites are a little more left leaning than the Labour Party currently are, but I understand they are trying to take traditional right of centre voters along for the ride too, and any step back towards the centre ground is a step in the right direction to me.
2
General Election Thread on 16:20 - May 29 with 1823 views
General Election Thread on 16:12 - May 29 by NW10Hoop
I have read and heard many people say "They're all the same". I've seen countless instances of people saying they don't trust the Labour leader of the day, and it's always slightly done my head in.
Not digging at you - but what is it exactly that Starmer has said or done the means you don't trust him? What do you think he's lying about or hiding? On the flip side - what did Boris Johnson do to earn your trust when you voted for him last time? He seems to me to be entirely untrustworthy for lots of well publicised reasons, the list of which begins before he even became our Mayor.
I personally want a moderate, left of centre party with a serious person as the main representative of the country I live in. My sensibilites are a little more left leaning than the Labour Party currently are, but I understand they are trying to take traditional right of centre voters along for the ride too, and any step back towards the centre ground is a step in the right direction to me.
Weather cock, nobody knows what he stands for. Huge risk voting for somebody like that whichever angle you're coming from. "Country first, Party second" - You fckin what mate? What does that mean? Boris at least indicated he had a backbone in him - Sadly it transpired he doesn't
[Post edited 29 May 16:22]
"Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius
1
General Election Thread on 16:30 - May 29 with 1776 views
General Election Thread on 16:06 - May 29 by SheffieldHoop
I don't really understand the thinking behind your post. Where have I said the Conservative Brexit vote has worked? It hasn't, for anybody, which is why they're about to go from the largest majority in my lifetime to (fingers crossed) Zero Seats. I thought I was being quite clear about that.
But - This is because they've just carried on Blairism for the last 13 years while pretending they aren't, or claiming it's too difficult to stop it now. I indicated this in my first post on this thread. The New Labour consensus has just been carried on, while people voted against it election after election. Why is that? Why is it that we explicitly vote to lower immigration and they stick 2 fingers up at us and increase it anyway? Why is it that no other party seems able or willing to capitalise on this highly popular "we've had quite enough Immigration for the time being" point of view?
Brexit was a rejection of Blairism. The EU is Blairism. Perhaps I'm giving the man too much credit - But why does everything wrong with this country appear to be the legacy of Tony Blair? There are several other inaccurate or completely false points in your post but let's save Clive from tit for tat
Apologies Sheffield I was only responding to your last post and have not read the first one. If I have misconstrued your arguments, I stand corrected. Certainly not seeking tit for tat.
I think you are right that the EU was BLAMED for a lot of what wasn't working in Britain, which included stagnating wages. But my point is I don't think it SHOULD have been blamed for that. Even when we were in the EU about half our immigration came from outside the EU. We had (and continue to have) loads of bi-lateral treaties with other countries allowing free movement.
Generally speaking, EU migration brought in people with above average skills who were net contributors to the economy; migrants from outside the EU were generally less skilled and were/ are slight drains on the economy measured by GDP contribution.
So if immigration was a problem - I'm not arguing that point either way - there were some relatively easy fixes the Conservatives could have implemented without the economic self-harm of Brexit.
To bring it back to the election, it depresses me that Brexit remains the elephant in the room. Sunak must know its been a disaster. Starmer definitely knows its been a disaster - but both of them are choosing to pretend its been a triumph, so are not addressing a key reason for our economic malaise. And so many towns in the UK are denied the economic investment they badly need.
Anyway, peace to you and naturally respect your opinions.
3
General Election Thread on 16:38 - May 29 with 1741 views
General Election Thread on 16:12 - May 29 by NW10Hoop
I have read and heard many people say "They're all the same". I've seen countless instances of people saying they don't trust the Labour leader of the day, and it's always slightly done my head in.
Not digging at you - but what is it exactly that Starmer has said or done the means you don't trust him? What do you think he's lying about or hiding? On the flip side - what did Boris Johnson do to earn your trust when you voted for him last time? He seems to me to be entirely untrustworthy for lots of well publicised reasons, the list of which begins before he even became our Mayor.
I personally want a moderate, left of centre party with a serious person as the main representative of the country I live in. My sensibilites are a little more left leaning than the Labour Party currently are, but I understand they are trying to take traditional right of centre voters along for the ride too, and any step back towards the centre ground is a step in the right direction to me.
Like a lot of these things we have the US to thank. There’s nothing positive for the Tories to campaign on so their cheerleaders in the media/social media pump out this ‘they’re all the same’ nonsense and people are mug enough to believe it or want to believe it. It gives the Galloway rabble a similar stick to beat Labour with and completely ignores the bloke’s record before and during politics. It’s boring and predictable but it works.
1
General Election Thread on 16:41 - May 29 with 1716 views
I'll give you some of my, and I know many others, reasons for not trusting Starmer.
When he ran for the Labour leadership, Starmer pledged to bring public services - rail, mail, energy and water - back into public ownership but has since u-turned on all of that.
One of Starmer’s other leadership pledges was stopping the creeping involvement of the private sector in the U.K.’s publicly-funded National Health Service. He's u-turned on that as well.
Starmer pushed for a second referendum on Brexit before the 2019 election. When he ran for the top Labour job, he didn’t renew that but did vow to “defend free movement as we leave the EU.” But he's since ruled out accepting the return of freedom of movement for EU citizens.
Starmer pledged to abolish university tuition fees when he ran for leader. U-turned on that
The first nine words of Starmer’s list of 2020 leadership pledges couldn’t have been clearer: “Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners.” He's not going to do that now.
I could go on as there are quite a few other pledges and promises Starmer has reneged on I'm sure it's getting a bit tedious. But I have to just mention how his position on Gaza has disgusted many labour supporters, myself included.
So, in short, it's impossible to trust a leader whose promises he never keeps and whose principles are as weak as piss water.
BTW, I was brought up in NW10 and still love the area.
4
General Election Thread on 17:38 - May 29 with 1608 views
I'll give you some of my, and I know many others, reasons for not trusting Starmer.
When he ran for the Labour leadership, Starmer pledged to bring public services - rail, mail, energy and water - back into public ownership but has since u-turned on all of that.
One of Starmer’s other leadership pledges was stopping the creeping involvement of the private sector in the U.K.’s publicly-funded National Health Service. He's u-turned on that as well.
Starmer pushed for a second referendum on Brexit before the 2019 election. When he ran for the top Labour job, he didn’t renew that but did vow to “defend free movement as we leave the EU.” But he's since ruled out accepting the return of freedom of movement for EU citizens.
Starmer pledged to abolish university tuition fees when he ran for leader. U-turned on that
The first nine words of Starmer’s list of 2020 leadership pledges couldn’t have been clearer: “Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners.” He's not going to do that now.
I could go on as there are quite a few other pledges and promises Starmer has reneged on I'm sure it's getting a bit tedious. But I have to just mention how his position on Gaza has disgusted many labour supporters, myself included.
So, in short, it's impossible to trust a leader whose promises he never keeps and whose principles are as weak as piss water.
BTW, I was brought up in NW10 and still love the area.
Real Politik though,
To win an election in your party you have to carry the left if you want to get elected, and then win over the centre right (because you have to win seats from the other side) to win a general election,
The opposite is the same for the Tories.
If you get elected to leader playing to your party activists and then continue that to the country you dont get elected.
Examples for Labour
Foot Kinnock Milliband Corbyn
For the Tories
Hague Duncan Smith Howard Sunak
Blair won leaning right but with some left populist meat (minimum wage, education etc) and the government moved left over time especially economically
Boris won through a combo of Brexit, Farage standing his party down and leaning left economically
Cameron won leaning left socially
3
General Election Thread on 17:41 - May 29 with 1600 views
You have a demographic problem. The post war baby boomers have a disproportionate number, they are ageing, they use more healthcare services and will not be economically productive. The younger generations passed wealth to the boomers through asset price rises namely property. In addition additional costs were added in the terms of education costs. The rise in the property market which makes many many things more expensive from rents to childcare to anything that needs land, has led to people having children much later in life and less of them.
In short you dont have enough people economically active to support the cost of a large ageing population living longer. You either drastically increase productivity, have people of working age come into the country, or be economically poorer.
You can encourage people to have more babies but that takes 25 years to flow through.
AI might impact productivity in a positive way but then you have to redistribute the wealth.
We've known this for 30 years and the same has happened at other points in history all over the world as well.
The problem is politicians are too scared to tell people the truth, and its all to easy for populists to sell the lie that immigrants are taking away when in truth they are maintaining our wealth
1
General Election Thread on 18:19 - May 29 with 1538 views
The official organisation that monitors trade for the government says trade over the longer term will fall by 15% as a result of Brexit. Our exports to the EU have fallen by 9% since Brexit and we have not made up for this (surprise, surprise) by exporting to countries further away. Our economy is now growing very slightly more than the EU average - having had a much longer and deeper recession - but were it not for Brexit there would be more trade still and we would therefore be richer as a result.
General Election Thread on 18:14 - May 29 by baz_qpr
I dont think there is any speculation to it.
You have a demographic problem. The post war baby boomers have a disproportionate number, they are ageing, they use more healthcare services and will not be economically productive. The younger generations passed wealth to the boomers through asset price rises namely property. In addition additional costs were added in the terms of education costs. The rise in the property market which makes many many things more expensive from rents to childcare to anything that needs land, has led to people having children much later in life and less of them.
In short you dont have enough people economically active to support the cost of a large ageing population living longer. You either drastically increase productivity, have people of working age come into the country, or be economically poorer.
You can encourage people to have more babies but that takes 25 years to flow through.
AI might impact productivity in a positive way but then you have to redistribute the wealth.
We've known this for 30 years and the same has happened at other points in history all over the world as well.
The problem is politicians are too scared to tell people the truth, and its all to easy for populists to sell the lie that immigrants are taking away when in truth they are maintaining our wealth
Debt maintains your wealth. Not immigration.
"Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius
2
General Election Thread on 18:59 - May 29 with 2466 views
General Election Thread on 17:38 - May 29 by baz_qpr
Real Politik though,
To win an election in your party you have to carry the left if you want to get elected, and then win over the centre right (because you have to win seats from the other side) to win a general election,
The opposite is the same for the Tories.
If you get elected to leader playing to your party activists and then continue that to the country you dont get elected.
Examples for Labour
Foot Kinnock Milliband Corbyn
For the Tories
Hague Duncan Smith Howard Sunak
Blair won leaning right but with some left populist meat (minimum wage, education etc) and the government moved left over time especially economically
Boris won through a combo of Brexit, Farage standing his party down and leaning left economically
Cameron won leaning left socially
I think Real Politik is turning a lot of people off. They're tired of it and want a far more genuine and principled approach to governing this country.
And do remember, Corbin came very close in 2017. It could be argued that if the Labour party even back then had supported him more, he'd have won.
1
General Election Thread on 19:19 - May 29 with 2428 views
I think Real Politik is turning a lot of people off. They're tired of it and want a far more genuine and principled approach to governing this country.
And do remember, Corbin came very close in 2017. It could be argued that if the Labour party even back then had supported him more, he'd have won.
Unlikely but possible. It's history, now. As a rule elections are won from the centre. Centre right or centre left. 2019 was made into virtually a single issue election. Tories seem to have moved a long way right, leaving the centre to Labour. Explains why they are roughly 20% higher in the polls.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky
0
General Election Thread on 19:42 - May 29 with 2398 views
Politicians generally make promises that they think are popular to get votes, I imagine that they would probably like to follow through with it if it was viable to make the next election easier. Fundamentally reducing immigration isn't the job of a moment, you need to keep public services running and try to avoid damaging the economy with inflation. Both of those risks would be a concern if you quickly stopped immigration. So once elected on these promises they are faced with the reality that if they follow through with it they'll have a load more problems and definitely won't get re-elected. So there best bet is to backtrack on the promises to cut immigration, no great mystery.
2
General Election Thread on 19:49 - May 29 with 2378 views
General Election Thread on 19:42 - May 29 by QPR_Jim
Politicians generally make promises that they think are popular to get votes, I imagine that they would probably like to follow through with it if it was viable to make the next election easier. Fundamentally reducing immigration isn't the job of a moment, you need to keep public services running and try to avoid damaging the economy with inflation. Both of those risks would be a concern if you quickly stopped immigration. So once elected on these promises they are faced with the reality that if they follow through with it they'll have a load more problems and definitely won't get re-elected. So there best bet is to backtrack on the promises to cut immigration, no great mystery.
If you look at how many of the new migrants actually work within the public services, its fair to say that you could pledge to cut migration hugely and still maintain the level of service.
1
General Election Thread on 19:58 - May 29 with 2365 views
General Election Thread on 09:05 - May 29 by loftboy
Diane Abbott banned from standing by labour due to her comments last year on race.
[Post edited 29 May 9:06]
A mark of the man. Breaking news, Starmer tried to hold back the result of the enquiry against Abbott until such a time it would be too late for her to stand as an independent. Someone inside leaked it to the media and now he is furious and ordering staffers to hand over their phones. He is a lying genocide enabler and I wouldn't be in the least surprised if somewhere down the line it transpires that he was parachuted into the Labour Party by the good folks inside 55 Tufton Street with a remit to purge the Labour Party of all aspects of socialism to make it appeal to traditional Tory supporters as the current Tories have made themselves unelectable and need a placeholder while they regroup.
[Post edited 30 May 8:50]
The grass is always greener.
2
General Election Thread on 21:43 - May 29 with 2232 views
General Election Thread on 19:58 - May 29 by Esox_Lucius
A mark of the man. Breaking news, Starmer tried to hold back the result of the enquiry against Abbott until such a time it would be too late for her to stand as an independent. Someone inside leaked it to the media and now he is furious and ordering staffers to hand over their phones. He is a lying genocide enabler and I wouldn't be in the least surprised if somewhere down the line it transpires that he was parachuted into the Labour Party by the good folks inside 55 Tufton Street with a remit to purge the Labour Party of all aspects of socialism to make it appeal to traditional Tory supporters as the current Tories have made themselves unelectable and need a placeholder while they regroup.
[Post edited 30 May 8:50]
Yes, he really is a c*nt. I don't know how anyone who is notionally on the left can vote for them. He's not even good at being duplicitous like Blair was, at least in the mid-90s. Just a charisma-free void who'll say anything (even blatantly contradicting things he's already said) to gain power.
1
General Election Thread on 22:12 - May 29 with 2186 views
Diane Abbott looked to be shaking quite a bit at times. Is she ok? Or is she just getting old? I didn’t realise she was 70. I admit I’ve never agreed with much of her policies but respect her a lot for what’s she achieved. She should be treated better but I also do think that at 70, why not just step down and take it easy.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
