I'd be interested in understanding the reasons behind the split in the UKIP vote. If it's simply proportional return to each party, then nothing to be understood. But if ex Tories/UKIPers voted Labour, it's worth understanding why. At least from a political point of view.
General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yeah I know, I just asking where you putting Trident and the pledge for more police under defence ?
Although it doesn't really matter, as I agree with you on the policing point(Actually didn't like how pro policing Corbyn was, it was politics but felt odd)
On the whole, while I wouldn't say that Corbyn's manifesto in general was centrist as such, I do think the branding of it as some far-left socialist manifesto showed how far we've come in regards to economics. A lot of the industries he was planning to nationalise have been nationalised in the past, and a lot of his tax rises would be returning to levels of the past. In that respect he's a standard democratic socialist...and of course left-wing figures like Foot and Benn who are often considered far-left were government ministers back in the 70s.
I reckon a lot of UKIP voters are people who are just perpetually unhappy with the state of politics in the country and go for an interesting option that offers them change. Corbyn had that appeal this time.
You're probably not far off. It would make me skeptical of any Labour lead in the polls, if this is the block with potential to swing it.
Labour Alternative Models Of Ownership is really interesting - http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/PDFs/9472_Alternative Models of Ownership all_v4.pdf
Also a breakdown/review of it -
. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/06/labour-corbyn-general-election-nationalization
.https://newsocialistblog.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/labours-alternative-models-of-ownership-report/
The right wing media have been trying hard to push the status quo back to the right, so labeling anything and everything Corbyn does as extreme or Marxist is more a means to an end that anything based in reality. In fairness, both the left and right have played off this. It probably hasn't helped that a lot of wannabe Che's on our side have lapped this notion up in the belief that they're some kind of quasi-revolutionaries.
Decades of neoliberalism has pretty much fecked up the political kaleidoscope on both sides of the Atlantic. Nixon for example was in many respects more left wing than Obama.
I wouldn't be surprised if even seemingly minor things worried people enough to vote against the Conservatives. I mean smallish stuff like Rudd believing she had the right to shut down speakers without the authority to do so; May's people presuming they can check text messages of people whose workplaces she visited etc etc. That arrogant, alarming behaviour smacks of authoritarianism, and might've been viewed by voters as the sinister shape of things to come in May's Britain.
To be fair I still think that it's fair to say that while we've become more socially liberal as a country over the years, the economic paradigm has generally shifted to the right during the Thatcher years. Centrist policy has been about as left as the country have been willing to go economically for a considerable while.
I still think May treating her rivals as inferior was her biggest downfall (aside from her general incompetence). Backing out of the debates was calculated to appear presidential (above the process), but it just appeared arrogant and out of touch.
Also, as under Cameron, there seems to have been an air of not wanting to bother campaigning (seeing as victory was assumed to be a given). An air of "just vote for business as usual, and don't ask about our policies and plans."
Yeah, that's fair. Social and economic liberalism are very different things. But then where left and right align is in both having very strong social convictions, and absolutely no one having any real idea how the economy works.
Yeah, but I think this was the least substantive of any campaign I can remember. Theresa May wanted to play the most vacuous form of personality politics imaginable. People are sick of that, I think. Corbyn may be a populist but there's a sense of policy underneath it. With May it's all slogans and soundbites. Nothing else on show.
THERESA MAY TO LAUNCH WIDE-RANGING INTERNET REGULATION AND SECURITY CHANGES DESPITE NOT WINNING MAJORITY
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...downing-street-speech-manifesto-a7783186.htmlIndependent said:
Britain deserves her.
He talked to terrorists you know? An some terrorists are marxists. So ............. QED
In fact i can imagine her next speech:
"Ladies and gentlemen of Great Britain, you have (sort of) chosen me as the leader of the government for the next five years and thus given me a mandate to begin my negotiations for Brexit.
It is here that I intend to set out my vision and determination to get the best possible deal for Britain, but I will stress once again that no deal is better than a bad deal. I will return following these negotiations and continue to guide the nation as your strong and stable leader.
Finally, Susan Smith from Bootle, my intelligence team have asked me to inform you that Bob won't be home for dinner as he has a late meeting. We have spotted that you haven't been active on whats app for 7 hours and we didn't want you to worry"
"Ladies and gentlemen of Great Britain, you have (sort of) chosen me as the leader of the government for the next five years and thus given me a mandate to begin my negotiations for Brexit.
It is here that I intend to set out my vision and determination to get the best possible deal for Britain, but I will stress once again that no deal is better than a bad deal. I will return following these negotiations and continue to guide the nation as your strong and stable leader.
Finally, Susan Smith from Bootle, my intelligence team have asked me to inform you that Bob won't be home for dinner as he has a late meeting. We have spotted that you haven't been active on whats app for 7 hours and we didn't want you to worry"
"Enough is enough" is enough for me to believe that she will ..... erm .... not be a terrorist supporting marxist. Or something.
Muslims ....
We will fight them on the beaches ...
Dole bludging leeches and single mothers ...
Splutter in outrage .......
We aren't really the UKIP but close enough so can we have their votes please?
Surely there'll be enough opposition to this from within the Tory party to block it. Hopefully, anyway.
Usually, it would have been David Davis. Now that he's a minister, I don't know.
Theresa May strikes me like the kind of person who thinks Minesweeper is a computer virus.
I would be worried about the number of Labour MPs who might potentially back it. Would Corbyn block it (likely) and would his New-Labour/Blairite/Tory-lite/gaggle-of-cnuts MPs fall in line (me no likely)?
The context being that Labour went into the election in poor shape because everyone thought their leader was unelectable? And that gives extra kudos to Corbyn why, exactly?
Because he pulled this off despite having the establishment against him both outside and inside Labour
Well he'll need to find a way to get "the establishment" onside if he wants to actually win an election one day. Just like any other genuinely succesful opposition leader.
You mean like Tony 'Tory Tribute Act' Blair by buying off The S*n?
Certainly the ones in his party will be onside from now on, so it should be enough
No, he should find his own way to broaden his appeal. Just like every other labour Prime Minister that has ever led the country.
You'd think so. Time will tell. Obviously, it would have been better for everyone if he had won them round when it mattered most, before the election. I doubt he'll ever come up against someone as inept, aloof and dislikable as Theresa May ever again.
I know two ukip voters in real life, one is an ex smackhead who has never worked a day in his life, the other is the kind of guy who posts Britain first shite all over Facebook. I am also currently on holiday in Majorca, and got up to go downstairs and watch the coverage the other morning. The only other guy up that early was a Chelsea supporter who said he never ever voted because it didn't matter who got in, they're all the same but if he did it'd be ukip because none of the others know what they're doing, and that there was something actually mentally wrong with corbyn.
I think ukip supporters, on the whole, are thick arseholes.
Because they were wrong and he seems to have been right.
Lets be honest here though.
He could promise and be able to deliver free oral sex from the pornstar of your choice, £2000 a week wages for everybody and everything else people desire and it won't matter a damn while he is still fighting the papers.
The people he reached despite the leftover blairites in his own party, the cnut media and the idiots the read that media and believe it was nothing short of incredible.
He still hasn't won an election.
How long before the power of the redtops and the Heil starts dropping off. I haven't read a physical paper in a decade and soon the majority of voters won't get their news that way either.
So? He ran a campaign that obviously worked and turned what everyone and the polls thought would be the worst rout in electoral history into a hung parliament. A phenomenal result. If the SNP hadn't been nearly as arrogant as the Tories he could well have been PM by now.