General Election June 8th

Who will you vote for at the General Election?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 189 28.8%

  • Labour

    Votes: 366 55.8%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 37 5.6%

  • SNP

    Votes: 8 1.2%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 23 3.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 33 5.0%
  • Total voters
    656
Status
Not open for further replies.
ColinBellsjockstrap said:
keqHEXJ0.jpg


No comment needed.
Click to expand...

Brokering indeed
 
inbetween said:
I was a remainer and I am in that third group because I completely agree we have to leave and if that means a hard brexit then so be it. I have warmed to the idea of being out, it closes opportunities yes but it will potentially open exciting new ones. Working in defence we have more or less drained European opportunities and we have to start looking elsewhere but it is incredibly difficult to do so currently. The problem is we have to work in ridiculously unfavourable trading conditions compared with the US and their massive defence industry who dominate around the world. The reason why is the US has an export regulatory system that suits the US and it does not have to account for the wishes of many other countries whom it also competes with.

Go on the WTO website and check how many trade disputes the US raises, there are hundreds and have a look how many we have raised, 0. We are not allowed nor able to stand up for UK business and trade abroad because of EU membership. Obviously the EU stands for us but they will do that in the interests of everyone, not us.

The big power brokers in our industry are certainly not in Europe although collaboration has been a big thing but there is no reason that cannot continue. Being able to sign deals and make legislation which favours the UK will represent a massive competitive advantage. Even in the internal market as of now if anyone started a defence company in a European country they are able to trade on equal terms with a UK company and that means potentially work for us and our people ends up going elsewhere.

What many don't realize is that if the EU was open to reform and did actually reform we would be knocking on the door not closing it and there is still nothing to stop that in the far future. I can't see that ever happening though which is why we just need to get on with leaving and start pursuing new opportunities for the better of the UK.
Click to expand...

As that latest poll shows there will be a good number that are able to accept that there has been a democratic process with a clear result and that the need is for us to get behind the nation and seek the best future.

The EU leaders show no inclination towards reform only more and more integration. It is best that we all just move on - in as positive a manner as possible. There will always be those, no matter what the subject, that are unable to do that
 
SWP's back said:
Complete bullocks from cigar as usual.

Read Corbyn's quote. Hardly a middle man nor friend of the Lotalists was he.
Click to expand...

It's bollocks this. His record in Ireland is being used by the Dacre-led attack dogs so that headline readers will jump to false conclusions and will be forgotten about exactly 30 seconds after May wins the election. Like the idea that a UK MP genuinely supported anti-UK terrorism isn't blisteringly stupid enough, this transparent as fuck agenda setting is ruining politics.

"Here's a policy from my manifesto that I will implement"

"Yeah well, here's a completely out of context quote from a complicated situation that points to the idea that PERHAPS you MIGHT have thought something that MAYBE was seen as bad thirty years ago".

And dickheads talk about the second one. I believe in democracy greater than any force because I believe to my deepest breath that people get the Government that they deserve.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Sounds like Labour's modus operandi

1p221h.jpg
Click to expand...

Yet under the last Labour Government, the country and most of the people in it were richer than they are now. Massive coincidence I'm sure.

Because geopolitical economics is just like your shopping bill and when you've not got any money you should try to save it all instead of investing in services and infrastructure that, you know, makes the economy and consumer spending grow.
 
Just watched her facebook live, gotta say peston looked more bored than I was listening to her.
Claiming canabis cannot be legalised because it causes mental health issues??
 
not my quote - but a good read.

''I don't think Corbyn's the best leader ever. I appreciate that he's not the best at appealing to a lot of demographics. he's crap with soundbites; not good at speaking straight to camera. Better in real situations with real people. I appreciate that he's not got a great deal of, what would you call it, zing. I don't agree with him on everything by any means.

Still, you know something I know? If Labour lose the election, Jeremy Corbyn will probably go back to being a local MP. He'll carry on holding speakers up for people at meetings, and helping people with their chairs, and thanking people for making the sandwiches. He'll carry on having talks and doing constituency surgeries and attending debates and asking questions and campaigning on various issues and staying behind to carry on talking about stuff with ordinary people after the event's finished. If he weren't the leader now, he'd be campaigning on behalf of the party. He'd be standing at the back helping.

He's not going to swan off to a career of after-dinner speaking and corporate events and non-executive directorships and consultancies. He's not going to edit the Evening Standard. It's not his personal ambition that's brought him here.

he wasn't ever that keen on being a leader. The only reason he stood when he did was that, to paraphrase another Labour front-bencher, every other remaining left-wing MP in the party had already stood as the token socialist candidate in a previous leadership election, and it was basically his turn.

And here's the thing: his apparent lack of charisma notwithstanding (and what is this charisma that apparently Tim Farron and Theresa May possess? It's like nothing I've ever seen described using that term before), he's the exact opposite of what everyone seems to agree they're sick of in politicians. The meaningless soundbites and stock phrases and glib dog-whistle oversimplifications don't sit naturally with him. He's better at sitting down calmly and talking about things like a grown-up. He's visibly irritated when interviewers push him to answer stupid, meaningless or leading questions, and, to me, that irritation seems remarkably restrained considering that I'd probably be unable to put up with such bollocks without flying into an expletive-laden rant. He reminds me of a Scandinavian politician, and that's nothing but a compliment. Politicians aren't supposed to be evangelists or salespeople; they're supposed to be people of substance, not just a mass of superficially appealing tics, right? Right?

In short, he's a real human person, like you get in real life, not whatever kind of thing most politicians are where you just cannot imagine them existing in any normal situation alongside real people without getting punched in the face. I've seen people like him, working in various capacities, usually doing something socially responsible, sometimes voluntary. They help. They support. They sympathise. They don't usually get to the top of organisations because they're not naturally competitive. And here he is, in a position he probably never expected to be in, and his expression is, for me, the right one: he's grim; a touch uncertain; perhaps somewhat daunted. Quite right too. Anyone who's not daunted by the prospect of being Prime Minister shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the job. I want whoever leads the country to feel the responsibility as keenly as possible. The Prime Minister is the servant of millions of masters, not the master of millions of servants, as Theresa May seems to think she is. It's a horrible job, but if nobody else is going to do it, he'll have to. Because someone's got to. You can't just stand there and do nothing. You have to try to help; to do what you can. That's what he's like. And if the election's lost as the last two were, he'll go back to helping in whatever other ways are available. And if he loses his seat (which he won't), he'll go and try to help somewhere else.

The fact that this man is considered unelectable when the alternatives are as they are is itself an indictment of our society. ''
 
Damocles said:
Yet under the last Labour Government, the country and most of the people in it were richer than they are now. Massive coincidence I'm sure.

Because geopolitical economics is just like your shopping bill and when you've not got any money you should try to save it all instead of investing in services and infrastructure that, you know, makes the economy and consumer spending grow.
Click to expand...

Because Labour spent much more than they had - hence the deficit the Tories inherited.

Keynesian economics suggests that you should save while the going is good and spend those savings through recession periods to invest in infrastructure and services and maintain jobs. I'm sure the Tories would love to be spending through the recession, but Labour spent instead of saving whilst the going is good.

Nothing about Corbyn's manifesto and costings convinces me that Labour have any solid plans other than money tree proposals. It's a real shame as I do believe we need investment (particularly in education), I wouldn't mind being taxed for it and I don't think Corbyn necessarily has bad ideas (although he's previously crossed some red lines for me, such as Trident). I just don't trust Labour to manage to increase the tax take or spend what they squeeze out effectively.
 
Damocles said:
Yet under the last Labour Government, the country and most of the people in it were richer than they are now. Massive coincidence I'm sure.

Because geopolitical economics is just like your shopping bill and when you've not got any money you should try to save it all instead of investing in services and infrastructure that, you know, makes the economy and consumer spending grow.
Click to expand...
I can't say i've noticed any difference inmy spending habits to be honest. The only one I can say is that these days I don't have to work as many hours to get by as I had to 10 years ago though.
 
CityStu said:
Because Labour spent much more than they had - hence the deficit the Tories inherited.

Keynesian economics suggests that you should save while the going is good and spend those savings through recession periods to invest in infrastructure and services and maintain jobs. I'm sure the Tories would love to be spending through the recession, but Labour spent instead of saving whilst the going is good.

Nothing about Corbyn's manifesto and costings convinces me that Labour have any solid plans other than money tree proposals. It's a real shame as I do believe we need investment (particularly in education), I wouldn't mind being taxed for it and I don't think Corbyn necessarily has bad ideas (although he's previously crossed some red lines for me, such as Trident). I just don't trust Labour to manage to increase the tax take or spend what they squeeze out effectively.
Click to expand...

The Tories have taken the national debt from £700bn (after the crash) to £1500bn.

And under the Blair Government, Labour eradicated the budget deficit and remains the only Government to have ever do so in the past quarter of a century. The Brown Government ran a deficit at 1% of GDP, compared with the Tories who are running it between 2-6% of GDP and dropping. This idea of "Labour = bad for economy" is peddled by simpletons who can't read line graphs.

And finally, for the very last time, an economy isn't a shopping bill with a spend/gain. You spend money specifically to INCREASE future tax income, public spending is investment. Austerity is an economic failure

It's funny that when you ask Tories if we should invest in other countries, they say Yes because it will stimulate their economy and give us a strong trading partner in the future but if you ask them if we should invest in our country they say no and we should save money instead. Could it be because their cuts are ideological rather than economical?

Think of it this way. Things need to be paid for. Either public debt grows or private debt like credit cards and loans grows. You pick one.
 
SWP's back said:
Complete bullocks from cigar as usual.

Read Corbyn's quote. Hardly a middle man nor friend of the Lotalists was he.
Click to expand...

I am amazed at the level some will go to to back their man. Like it makes any difference. It's not hard to admit he was/is an ira sympathiser and say you will vote for him anyhow.

Embarrassed by strangers on a football forum.
 
Damocles said:
The Tories have taken the national debt from £700bn (after the crash) to £1500bn.

And under the Blair Government, Labour eradicated the budget deficit and remains the only Government to have ever do so in the past quarter of a century. The Brown Government ran a deficit at 1% of GDP, compared with the Tories who are running it between 2-6% of GDP and dropping. This idea of "Labour = bad for economy" is peddled by simpletons who can't read line graphs.

And finally, for the very last time, an economy isn't a shopping bill with a spend/gain. You spend money specifically to INCREASE future tax income, public spending is investment. Austerity is an economic failure

It's funny that when you ask Tories if we should invest in other countries, they say Yes because it will stimulate their economy and give us a strong trading partner in the future but if you ask them if we should invest in our country they say no and we should save money instead. Could it be because their cuts are ideological rather than economical?

Think of it this way. Things need to be paid for. Either public debt grows or private debt like credit cards and loans grows. You pick one.
Click to expand...

The Tories have increased the debt because the deficit they inherited was so high and the conditions were terrible for trying to decrease it (you'd normally run up a deficit in a recession and then a surplus through good years).

Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg


Labour essentially put a brick on the accelerator and now moan at the Tories that the car is going faster and faster and bleat austerity when they try to apply the brake.

And yes, I'd love to see more public investment, but not at the risk of the size of the resulting debt mountain we'll end up with (and have to pass on to the next generation). The debt's already enormous and had that 2006 - 09 trend continued in the graph above, the debt now would be absolutely colossal.

I think that there's a real lack of personal responsibility at the moment and it's only growing. Everyone has to have the latest thing with no regard to the cost. For many, that's a good alternative to private debt - don't buy shit you can't afford and don't need. @Mëtal Bikër has spoken about it before; there's no concept of luxury any more, just people thinking that because someone they know has the latest phone, car long haul holiday, that they deserve or need the same.
 
Damocles said:
It's bollocks this. His record in Ireland is being used by the Dacre-led attack dogs so that headline readers will jump to false conclusions and will be forgotten about exactly 30 seconds after May wins the election. Like the idea that a UK MP genuinely supported anti-UK terrorism isn't blisteringly stupid enough, this transparent as fuck agenda setting is ruining politics.

"Here's a policy from my manifesto that I will implement"

"Yeah well, here's a completely out of context quote from a complicated situation that points to the idea that PERHAPS you MIGHT have thought something that MAYBE was seen as bad thirty years ago".

And dickheads talk about the second one. I believe in democracy greater than any force because I believe to my deepest breath that people get the Government that they deserve.
Click to expand...
Ah. So he's not always been sympathetic to the cause of a united Ireland?
 
Damocles said:
Yet under the last Labour Government, the country and most of the people in it were richer than they are now. Massive coincidence I'm sure.

Because geopolitical economics is just like your shopping bill and when you've not got any money you should try to save it all instead of investing in services and infrastructure that, you know, makes the economy and consumer spending grow.
Click to expand...
Weird. When Germany saw 20 years of record growth do you know what they did? They didn't increase the fucking deficit.

There's a difference between using a pay rise to fund an extension and using a pay rise to mortgage the property at 110% just because you can.
 
Damocles said:
The Tories have taken the national debt from £700bn (after the crash) to £1500bn.
Click to expand...
Because one cannot reduce the debt without first turning the deficit into a fucking surplus.

If Ed had Labour in power then you could probably double that figure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top