General Election - December 12th, 2019

[Metal Biker]

You guys should set up a victim support group.

The endless ‘poor me’ whinge fests. Relax. Take a day off. Get laid.

 

[Chippy_boy]

That would be the pointless article a month ago which somehow expected Labour to go against its constitution and ditch its elected leader.

Same author this week:

It doesn’t matter that the psephological sage John Curtice rates Labour’s chance of winning a majority at close to zero, because Corbyn doesn’t need to win a majority. If he can just do enough to deny the Tories an overall majority, he could turn to the SNP, Plaid Cymru and others to push him across the line. He might not need to gain many seats; he might not even need the help of the Liberal Democrats. Put simply, Labour, too, has a steep and narrow path to Downing Street – steeper than the Tories’, given the polls, but smoother in the sense that while Johnson needs to win at least 321 seats to stay in No 10, Corbyn could get there with as few as 270.

He’s being helped in that effort by some jaw-dropping, unforced Tory errors. Slow to act on floods in Yorkshire, the Tories once again showed their compassionate side this week when Dominic Raab defended a government decision to seek legal costs from the parents of Harry Dunn, who was killed in a collision allegedly involving the wife of a US diplomat. And the dishonesty and deceptions keep coming.

Meanwhile, twice as many young people have registered to vote this time as in 2017 and the NHS has pulled ahead of Brexit as the most important issue for voters – both of which should make the terrain more favourable to Labour.

Fascinating Vic, really fascinating.

Still doesn't justify Labour not getting rid of the ****, and then we wouldn't be having this discussion at all, because a Labour victory would be a total shoe-in.

And BTW, if you think Swinson would rather put Corbyn into No. 10 instead of Boris, you may be in for a bit of a surprise when Boris offers her a second referendum.

 

[inbetween]

Apparently the report on Russian interference in the referendum cant be released because they wont give Johnson a security clearance.... so he cant sign off its release

boris johnson and his security clearance

People in glass houses eh?

I'm pretty sure that MP's are exempt from security clearances so not sure if that is true.

Either way, I don't think Johnson is suitable to be PM either so we can agree on that.

Why don't they just give the report to Corbyn? I'm sure he can wave it around and hand it to get it out there. It would do worlds of good for Labour.

 

[inbetween]

That would be the pointless article a month ago which somehow expected Labour to go against its constitution and ditch its elected leader.

Same author this week:

It doesn’t matter that the psephological sage John Curtice rates Labour’s chance of winning a majority at close to zero, because Corbyn doesn’t need to win a majority. If he can just do enough to deny the Tories an overall majority, he could turn to the SNP, Plaid Cymru and others to push him across the line. He might not need to gain many seats; he might not even need the help of the Liberal Democrats. Put simply, Labour, too, has a steep and narrow path to Downing Street – steeper than the Tories’, given the polls, but smoother in the sense that while Johnson needs to win at least 321 seats to stay in No 10, Corbyn could get there with as few as 270.

He’s being helped in that effort by some jaw-dropping, unforced Tory errors. Slow to act on floods in Yorkshire, the Tories once again showed their compassionate side this week when Dominic Raab defended a government decision to seek legal costs from the parents of Harry Dunn, who was killed in a collision allegedly involving the wife of a US diplomat. And the dishonesty and deceptions keep coming.

Meanwhile, twice as many young people have registered to vote this time as in 2017 and the NHS has pulled ahead of Brexit as the most important issue for voters – both of which should make the terrain more favourable to Labour.

I am in the young bracket (18-35) and I won't be voting Labour?

At recent showings the polls showed that Corbyn's vote had dropped with young people.

I'm amazed that Labour aren't encouraging people not to vote because if 42% of them vote Tory as the polls suggest then they are stuffed!

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

It’s going to get a lot dirtier in the next few weeks !

it’s like a bloody battle this.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Voters are shunning Labour and even the Lib Dems for one reason: the fear of putting him in No 10

Who'd have thought it???

 

[Len Rum]

Looking forward to seeing BoJo on the climate debate tonight.
Also people accused him of chickening out of the BBC interview, whereas the word on the street is that he is going to do an interview. ( with Andrew Marr).

 

[MeatnSpudsMCFC]

Looking forward to seeing BoJo on the climate debate tonight.
Also people accused him of chickening out of the BBC interview, whereas the word on the street is that he is going to do an interview. ( with Andrew Marr).

Oh dear. If the BBC couldn't get both leaders to agree to an Andrew Neil interview then they shouldn't have gone through with it. They've landed themselves in a political mess now.

 

[Ban-jani]

 

[Metal Biker]

"The cult of Magic Grandpa"

 

[BlueAnorak]

With the Momentum grip on the party, there's a very real possibility they would seek to replace Corbyn with someone equally unelectable. Not sure they have anyone who can fill those boots quite so well - apart from Marxist McDonnell of course - but there's a couple who would give it a good shot, and she is definitely one of them.

From the Foot catastrophe, It took Labour 9 years to get an electable leader (John Smith) and a further 4 years to get to a point where the voters were comfortable with the possibility of a Labour government. I have no doubt that John Smith would have won the 1997 general election had he not died, though not with the massive majority that Tony Blair got.
Incidently the two mess ups that really killed the Tories were EU related with membership of the EMU and Maastricht, both of which decimated Tory support with DE type voters, a fact that Remainers seem to forget!

 

[Metal Biker]

From the Foot catastrophe, It took Labour 9 years to get an electable leader (John Smith) and a further 4 years to get to a point where the voters were comfortable with the possibility of a Labour government. I have no doubt that John Smith would have won the 1997 general election had he not died, though not with the massive majority that Tony Blair got.
Incidently the two mess ups that really killed the Tories were EU related with membership of the EMU and Maastricht, both of which decimated the Tory vote with DE voters, a fact that Remainers seem to forget.

Knowing little about this period of politics, being a mere sprog at the time, does that mean John Smith was behind the New Labour idea, or is that still uniquely Blairs?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Having never been a Brexit supporter, I've never bothered to read anything from Dominic Cummings, but just now, I did. From his blog, I read this:

"I know why many are tempted to vote for Corbyn. Under Cameron and May, there were some big decisions about priorities that were wrong. Most importantly, from summer 2016 Hammond repeatedly blocked cash for the NHS and other services. In 2016 people voted for change — the Conservative Party didn’t hear that properly before the referendum and they didn’t hear it properly after the referendum.

But Boris did hear the demand for change and he will deliver it.

Those of us from the Vote Leave team would never have gone to No10 to help if Boris hadn’t told us that he is determined to change the Conservative Party — change its priorities and change its focus so it really serves the whole country. Most of us were not ‘party people’. For us, parties are a means to an end — a means to improve lives.

If we win a majority, we will do all we can to improve this country — and especially for those who don’t have lots of money, who are surrounded by bad choices of school, who can’t afford a private doctor if their family is sick. Westminster has let the whole country down for many years. As VL said during the referendum — it’s time for change.

If we get a working majority, the Conservative Party will be very different. Grieve and similar characters will be gone. We will have seats in the Midlands and North that have been neglected by all parties. The party and the government will have to change radically."

Who knows whether the above is true, but I hope it is. It is a vision of hope of a better Britain under the Tories. I hope we can deliver it.

 

[inbetween]

From the Foot catastrophe, It took Labour 9 years to get an electable leader (John Smith) and a further 4 years to get to a point where the voters were comfortable with the possibility of a Labour government. I have no doubt that John Smith would have won the 1997 general election under him, though not with the massive majority that Tony Blair got.

It is the extreme protestive nature of Corbyns Labour that people find most unpalatable.

It's almost like putting a CND protestor at the heart of nuclear policy and then telling them to do what is best for the country and not themselves.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Knowing little about this period of politics, being a mere sprog at the time, does that mean John Smith was behind the New Labour idea, or is that still uniquely Blairs?

Kinnock started it with the purge of Millitant but it was a combination of Smith/Blair/Brown & Mendleson that produced the New Labour idea.
The Labour party today is basically Millitant though, so they're stuffed for a generation if Boris wins and gets it remotely right. Do well with the DE voter demographic and you win an election.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Kinnock started it with the purge of Millitant but it was a combination of Smith/Blair/Brown & Mendleson that produced the New Labour idea.

Which produced the most successful Labour governments ever, which (although I am not their biggest fan) did very many good things for poorer people and for public services.

And which Corbyn then regarded with total disgust, and voted against at every opportunity. Says a lot, doesn't it.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Knowing little about this period of politics, being a mere sprog at the time, does that mean John Smith was behind the New Labour idea, or is that still uniquely Blairs?

Smith struck me at the time as really genuine and it's a tragedy that he died when he did. I always found Blair a bit plastic by comparison.

 

[Metal Biker]

Smith struck me at the time as really genuine and it's a tragedy that he died when he did. I always found Blair a bit plastic by comparison.

I'm admittedly an advocate of the concept; take a little from column A and B and find a middle ground. Most of the country did too.

Glad to know that Blair was just a proponent and not the sole orginator.

 

[Metal Biker]

Which produced the most successful Labour governments ever, which (although I am not their biggest fan) did very many good things for poorer people and for public services.

And which Corbyn then regarded with total disgust, and voted against at every opportunity. Says a lot, doesn't it.

"BuT tHe IrAq WaR...!"

I'm expecting it to come up at some point. In some cases I saw a lot of Cameron's Conservatives with a small c trying to emulate it and to be fair, it appeared to be working.

Made me take notice anyhoo. It's the position where I think the majority of our country wants it to be, not the extremes on either side.

 

[Metal Biker]

“Working class men are feckless, hopeless and likely to be drunk”
children raised by single mothers are “ill raised, aggressive, ignorant & illegitimate”
Just a few of today’s unearthed quotes from Boris!

"In a column in The Spectator in 1995, the Prime Minister said "blue collar" men in Britain were probably "drunk, criminal, aimless, feckless and hopeless, and perhaps claiming to suffer from low self-esteem"

The comments were made in a rant in The Spectator magazine in 1995 about the number of single mums in Britain.