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 .
ThierryHenry said:
I don't think it's fair to put all of the blame on the PLP, there were legitimate criticisms of Corbyn's leadership and performance to date (where was this level of campaigning in the Brexit referendum?).

Hopefully both sites can unite now and we'll see a stronger party.
Click to expand...
Alan Johnson was leading Labour referendum campaign. Corbyn position on the EU seemed to be a pretty standard Left position - Not a fan of it(It's actions against Greece and the forcing of austerity being a couple of reasons) but the racist campaign of leave meant it was important to vote to stay in.
 
Last edited:
ThierryHenry said:
I don't think it's fair to put all of the blame on the PLP, there were legitimate criticisms of Corbyn's leadership and performance to date (where was this level of campaigning in the Brexit referendum?).

Hopefully both sites can unite now and we'll see a stronger party.
Click to expand...

Not all of the PLP no, there were distinct groups though. Those who had concerns which could have been resolved behind closed doors and then those who just wanted him out at all costs, the latter tainted the party and brought the others with them.

Hopefully Labour can now work together while the Tories fight amongst themselves instead.
 
Oscie said:
My issue with proportional representation is that people vote, largely, based on party/leader rather than local MP or local issues. PR makes coalition far more likely. Now in theory the idea that a party that won 40% of the vote joining up with party that won 20% of the vote to form government that represents 60% of the electorate sound great.

In reality what happens is that the two parties hash out a post-election manifesto 'deal', like in 2010, that nobody ever voted for. So we end up with a government elected by a greater percentage share of the population but with a set of policies not one single vote was cast for.

Not sure how that's democratic. "Thanks for the votes, now we're off to discuss behind closed doors what policies we're deciding retrospectively you voted for."

That isn't to say FPTP isn't flawed either.
Click to expand...

Kinda, but then again, the majority of the UK right now do not vote for the party in power. In the case of 2005 General Election, you almost have a super-majority against the Labour Government. And yet they somehow have power for another 5 years, where is the logic in that?

So under FPTP you have the vast majority of people opposing the government we get, under STV/PR we get a coalition where no one gets the government we get?

Democracy is an experiment. Politics is a game. There is no perfect system, but if there was one, it wouldn't give one party complete power for 5 years, and then another party complete power too. People would vote for the party that represented them and then parliament would vote through the laws that the majority of MPS (and therefore the country) supported.

People wanted a vote on Brexit (2015: Conservatives: 36.8%, UKIP: 12.7%). Then it turned out they wanted to leave the EU (52% vs 48%). Democracy works.

If you look at what the Tories and Lib Dems got through, some of it was in both parties manifestos (or both parties were happy to do it)

- Reduce the deficit
- Increase the Personal Allowance.
- Cap pay rate rises for public workers (really)
- Scrapping ID cards
- Royal Mail privatisation
- Reform NHS Dentistry (both supported this, where was it???)
- Build houses

Etc

Probably we didn't get the government we wanted, but maybe we got the one we deserved
 
Ubik said:
Point of order - can people stop using the term "Blairites" inaccurately? Describing people like Tom Watson as a Blairite makes my logic circuits short out a little.
Click to expand...
Everyone on the right of Labour is a Blairite to me :nervous:
ThierryHenry said:
I don't think it's fair to put all of the blame on the PLP, there were legitimate criticisms of Corbyn's leadership and performance to date (where was this level of campaigning in the Brexit referendum?).

Hopefully both sites can unite now and we'll see a stronger party.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
 
Wibble said:
Not sure of your point?

I can't see any interpretation that doesn't mean anything other than Corbyn ran a great campaign and got a result better than anyone imagined.

If he had caved to the Blairites I doubt he would have done so well.
Click to expand...

My point is that this "great campaign" which went "better than anyone expected" involved not winning an election. And when I point this out, I'm told it's because it's a great result considering how badly Labour were polling beforehand. As though the bad polling beforehand was down to events beyond his control. Which is, of course, nonsense.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
Why is it crazy?
Apart from moral issues, their policies are very similar.
Click to expand...

Moral issues aren't something to just dismiss though. They'll rightly take a lot of flak for working with such people. The electorate won't forget it could be very damaging to them
 
Kentonio said:
You mean apart from it could destroy the peace process and bring back the violence and killing to Northern Ireland?
Click to expand...

Because 10 people are simply going to back Theresa May in important issues regarding the UK, and probably receive some financial support for doing so?
The IRA would be seen as being quite pathetic for understanding that as a breach of peace. They would have to use their common sense (as hard as it is for them) to understand that Theresa May will simply be using them as a last ditch attempt to form a minority government, with some benefits in return. Nothing more.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
Why is it crazy?
Apart from moral issues, their policies are very similar.
Click to expand...

DUP were against austerity (vocally anyway.) That's a pretty big difference.

The big issue that the DUP will try and get a good deal (financially) for Northern Ireland. That should be applauded speaking as someone who lives here. However, it removes Britain's position as an impartial entity and the rest of the U.K. will not be happy about a small area getting preferential treatment just to keep a lame duck PM in power.
 
Smores said:
Moral issues aren't something to just dismiss though. They'll rightly take a lot of flak for working with such people. The electorate won't forget it could be very damaging to them
Click to expand...

Most people of all faiths are against abortion and homosexuality, I am also against it, but these moral issues don't really carry much significance in British politics anymore. They are simply moral points of view.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
Most people of all faiths are against abortion and homosexuality, I am also against it, but these moral issues don't really carry much significance in British politics anymore. They are simply moral points of view.
Click to expand...

Sorry but no one with such views belongs in politics, they should not be mainstreamed. They're not harmless opinions even if kept mostly to themselves which the DUP do not.
 
Minimalist said:
DUP were against austerity (vocally anyway.) That's a pretty big difference.

The big issue that the DUP will try and get a good deal (financially) for Northern Ireland. That should be applauded speaking as someone who lives here. However, it removes Britain's position as an impartial entity and the rest of the U.K. will not be happy about a small area getting preferential treatment just to keep a lame duck PM in power.
Click to expand...

Who gives a shit about the others not liking it?
The DUP are a party that have much in common with the Tories. All they're doing is temporarily swapping seats in parliament supporting the tories only in matters where they agree.
 
Some of my best black friends are gay homobisexual made-up manc mates.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
Who gives a shit about the others not liking it?
The DUP are a party that have much in common with the Tories. All they're doing is temporarily swapping seats in parliament supporting the tories only in matters where they agree.
Click to expand...

It's this ruthless determination to walk all over principles and the clear disregard your policies have been rejected in order to stay in power is what is going to do the Tories in the end.

You are a very obvious embodiment of it. May's determination to walk all over civil rights online to supposedly catch some terrorists (even though she presided over the disastrous cuts in the HO) is another very stark example.

She and her voters will get what they deserve sooner rather than later.
 
Rightnr said:
It's this ruthless determination to walk all over principles and a clear rejection of your policies in order to stay in power is going to do the Tories in the end. You are a very obvious embodiment of it. May's determination to walk all over civil rights online to supposedly catch some terrorists (even though she presided over the disastrous cuts in the HO) is another very stark example.

She and her voters will get what they deserve sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

Well personally I think she should go, but obviously there are Brexit talks next week. It's a very bad situation, as everyone understands.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
I wouldn't prevent homosexuality, as it is everyones free moral choice. I disapprove gay marriage.
Click to expand...
Why are you trying to prevent gay marriage but not stop the root cause? Its a moral choice to murder someone and we try to prevent that. Do you not think we should be doing more?
 
Flamingo Purple said:
The polling success of Labour now probably means that the Tories won't risk another election, going to be absolute chaos.
Click to expand...
They'll do anything they can to avoid one for a while. It's not that easy though.
 
ThierryHenry said:
I don't think it's fair to put all of the blame on the PLP, there were legitimate criticisms of Corbyn's leadership and performance to date (where was this level of campaigning in the Brexit referendum?).

Hopefully both sites can unite now and we'll see a stronger party.
Click to expand...

The remain campaign didn't see him as an asset, much like they didn't before this campaign
 
Mozza said:
The remain campaign didn't see him as an asset, much like they didn't before this campaign
Click to expand...
Well if he did insist on going on TV shows to talk about his 7/10 enthusiasm for the EU...
 
Untied said:
Remember the reaction to this

Click to expand...


D1v1cLi.gif
 
Pogue Mahone said:
My point is that this "great campaign" which went "better than anyone expected" involved not winning an election. And when I point this out, I'm told it's because it's a great result considering how badly Labour were polling beforehand. As though the bad polling beforehand was down to events beyond his control. Which is, of course, nonsense.
Click to expand...

the biased media had a lot to do with the polling.
Corbyn stood by his principals against back stabbing members of his own party.
 
While it's nice to see the DUP's views on equality, climate change, abortion and the like get so much negative attention, they aren't really relevant in a deal with the Conservatives because all those issues are devolved in NI. Whatever the DUP's demands are they're not going use the only bit of clout they'll ever have in Westminster on anything they can already control in the local assembly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.