General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

How do you intend to vote in the 2017 General Election if eligible?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 80 14.5%
  • Labour

    Votes: 322 58.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 57 10.3%
  • Green

    Votes: 20 3.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 13 2.4%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 29 5.3%
  • Independent

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 11 2.0%
  • Other (UUP, DUP, BNP, and anyone else I have forgotten)

    Votes: 14 2.5%

  • Total voters
    551
  • Poll closed .
If Labour can't take your constituency, wouldn't a tactical vote for the nearest party to the Tories have made more sense? Too late now, mind!
It's an SNP seat now, was a Labour stronghold before that for yonks. No real trouble from the Tories to be fair (now watch them win my seat..... :lol::()
 
Whatever happens tonight, Corbyn's earned my respect.

I thought he was bit of a joke for a long time, but the way he has ran his campaign has been great. The way he has got so many young people energised and wanting to be involved in politics is admirable.
 
The state of you lot.. make fecking May look competent.
Who will you people trust? Raees, who has flip flopped on every decision and is definitely a bird. Or me, strong and staple Mr Pigeon who has never made a mistake and has definitely never said "thanks you too" when the server at KFC said "enjoy your meal"?
 
What time are we expecting the exit polls then?
 
The way the vote should have been constructed was 'do you want the government to start negotiations to leave the EU?'

Then a second referendum on the specific question of 'now you know the terms, do you want to leave?'

I don't disagree with you but Cameron thought the electorate voting remain was a foregone conclusion and the referendum was badly prepared and badly discussed.
 
Whatever happens tonight, Corbyn's earned my respect.

I thought he was bit of a joke for a long time, but the way he has ran his campaign has been great. The way he has got so many young people energised and wanting to be involved in politics is admirable.

Ha, it's tactical, nothing more.
 
Something weird happened tonight.

I've always been either Blue or Yellow. There's not an election, local or national where I haven't voted for Lib Dem or Conservative.

Stepped into the polling station, got my voting slip, and suddenly started thinking about all that plastic in the ocean. I voted Green, literally on a whim.
 
Ha, it's tactical, nothing more.

A LOT of youngsters are involved because they admire Corbyn and his kind of politics.

You're being biased if you think this level of engagement from the youth would happen with a traditional Labour leader.
 
Assuming you want Labour to win? If so then I'm not hopeful either. Brexit then Trump, this would go with that theme.
Yea i want Labour to win. I love elections to be honest so even if i wasn't working i would be watching regardless. But i'm working so i basically get paid to watch it.
 
whats tactical?

Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.
 
Scrolled through my facebook feed and I've seen nothing deratory towards Tory voters to my surprise. May well change come tomorrow, but all positive vibes..

But we've all been told that Labour voters are all nasty, especially on social media.
Your evidence must be wrong.
 
Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.
As apposed to I have no policies but I'm strong and Stable and could win a funny face contest.
 
Focusing on spend as a percentage or GDP is misleading. Why should spending grow at the same proportion as GDP? It's an easy political shield as those stats can be shown to highlight things are rosy. The big question is when you have a major GDP boom such as the advent of the Internet, why would you need to spend tons more on services. Better to get the debt down and get to a healthy position first.

Why spend more? Because people are suffering, schools were in a state, the NHS was in a state

For someone who bangs on about economics so much your views on debt are terribly parochial
 
Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.

This logic is the only thing that's simple.
 
Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.
You mean as oppose to the Tory 'yeah we yave plans, feck you, you can't vote for him, we'll tell you our plans after the election, strong and stable'
 
Can I just ask where you think Conservatives could have done things differently?

Dunno, I'd go with;

1) NOT Triple locked the pensions. It's harsh, but when you are already shrinking the state, you can't then triple lock income for the older folks requiring even more cuts elsewhere. You could even argue it should have been cut (ouch)

2) Not cut local governments as much. Spending is important.

3) As house prices recovered, restrict the amount people can borrow for a mortgage (say to 4x instead of 4.5x). This would have helped cut the average house price, giving more money to renters and first time buyers. (The high average house price is one thing that's stopping our economy from really thriving). Also, take away stamp duty for first time buyers to help first time buyers.

4) Instead of cutting JSA look to fund retraining programs.

5) Instead of raising the Personal Allowance ever higher, provide some Universal Income. (maybe)

6) Reduce the additional tax bracket

Basically... spend on growth. If spending in any areas gives growth, don't cut it.
 
Something that is continually forgotten about. They don't have a clue. Pretty sure your man works in a call centre with a number of times he's mentioned his qualifications.

Also when a government spend money it's always talked about from the opposition like they're going to a casino and running wild. Not that they've INVESTED money in the public services to improve society. Invested in healthcare, education etc. Perspective changes everything and I can't relate to eejits who think national level economics works like their bloody MS Excel sheet.

If you meant me working in a call centre, no I'm a qualified chartered accountant working in commercial finance, with experience across multiple industries including financial services, telecoms, software (NHS and military related), publishing, legal services and now asset management. It's basically my career to understand the ins and outs of finance. It's why I'm obviously quite passionate about it.

So yes the national economy is a different beast to straight finance of companies/ industries in isolation, but I also studied economics at uni so I have a fairly detailed background.

You are right certain investments are clearly worth it for the payback, but it depends where that money goes. What is clear is money to interest can't be spent on services. So a large government debt isn't particularly helpful. That being said low cost debt used to get financial returns beyond the value of interest, e.g. GDP increasing more than offsetting debt costs is worthwhile. At the moment the leverage doesn't look healthy hence the need for big cuts so however you look at things Conservatives shouldn't get beaten by a stick for the correct prudent approach.

A case can be made for most government spend having a positive impact on GDP, but it does get more tentative in certain areas. Benefits for example are needed to reduce crime (as well as humanitarian side to benefits), but beyond a certain level, e.g. Focusing on Labour it arguably becomes a waste and if supported by higher tax it will reduce the incentive to accelerate careers.

This is probably one of my core reasons for being Conservative. I didn't go to private school, didn't get help buying house or going to uni, etc. I worked hard to get to where I have, so I don't see why I should give a big chunk away to lazy idiots who couldn't be bothered in school or with life. I went to school with plenty of these types to know they chose acting cool, rather than doing well in school.

Education is again a tough debate. Get the right talent and facilities and GDP will thrive over time. But spend too much on salaries and it becomes economically inefficient. Increasing tuition fees is probably the right thing though. Put simply either the people that go to uni pay a bigger share, or those that don't do!

As much as I don't want to pay the benefits of the lazy, I shouldn't be getting my education paid for by the lower paid! So it's right I paid fees at uni. And currently demand is still high so the balance is seemingly about right. And those fees are repaid over a career so it has no impact on who can go to uni.

Anyway I go off on a tangent, but point is I have an emotional and economical reason to vote Conservative.

Do I question if some policies are too right wing and providing too many allowances to super rich, yes, but equally I understand the economics of financial freedom and that some tax income is better than none because their business is taken elsewhere. The balance is tough either way.
 
Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.

You can also win an election saying you'll build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it. People are big on politicians promising things with other people paying for it!
 
Youngsters are more easily led by simple manifesto's of 'throw money at everything and make the rich pay for it', hence Labour make massive efforts to encourage youngsters to vote.

The last Tory chancelor likened the economy to a household budget
 
As apposed to I have no policies but I'm strong and Stable and could win a funny face contest.
As opposed to a party actually concerned with keeping the country afloat with a potential shit storm over the horizon. Brexit negotiations start in 11 days, the idea of a Labour coalition going into that scares me.

This logic is the only thing that's simple.
Well yeh, true though.