General Election - 4th July 2024

Who will you be voting for in the General Election?

  • Labour

    Votes: 266 56.8%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 12 2.6%

  • Liberal Democrat

    Votes: 40 8.5%

  • Reform

    Votes: 71 15.2%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 28 6.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 51 10.9%
  • Total voters
    468
Vic said:
I'm a bit confused by the cut at 1.47. Who died in 1938 and 1946? Not his dad and mum.
Click to expand...

They died aged 38 and 46.

Edward Davey was born in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire on 25 December 1965.[11][12] His father John (1932–1970), a solicitor, died when Davey was four years old in Mansfield General Hospital after a three-month illness.[13] His mother, Nina Davey (née Stanbrook), died 11 years later, after which he was brought up by his maternal grandparents in Eakring.[14] Davey acted as a carer for his terminally ill mother before her death, and also cared for his grandmother.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
They died aged 38 and 46.

Edward Davey was born in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire on 25 December 1965.[11][12] His father John (1932–1970), a solicitor, died when Davey was four years old in Mansfield General Hospital after a three-month illness.[13] His mother, Nina Davey (née Stanbrook), died 11 years later, after which he was brought up by his maternal grandparents in Eakring.[14] Davey acted as a carer for his terminally ill mother before her death, and also cared for his grandmother.
Click to expand...
Ah, I missed the "at" in at 38 and at 46.
 
I’ve thought about last night, and I’m actually reinforced in my view that Sunak was terrible, subjectively speaking. I think I speak with some authority on public speaking and I thought he came across as a right ****. Overly rehearsed opening and closing (no doubt delivered with the benefit of autocue) talking over/parroting wank questions at his opponent and making plenty of snide digs. Not a good look for a purported Statesman imo.

Owning a room is not about being truculent and rude. It is about exuding authority and confidence, being steady on your feet, knowing your brief, being humble when you need to be and demonstrating good humour from time to time. And always being polite, unless absolutely forced not to.

2/10 for me.

Thought I overmarked Starmer with a seven last night. 5/10 at best. He’s a right boring **** btw. They both are. I wouldn’t go for a pint with either of them. Life’s too short.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’ve thought about last night, and I’m actually reinforced in my view that Sunak was terrible, subjectively speaking. I think I speak with some authority on public speaking and I thought he came across as a right ****. Overly rehearsed opening and closing (no doubt delivered with the benefit of autocue) talking over/parroting wank questions at his opponent and making plenty of snide digs. Not a good look for a purported Statesman imo.

Owning a room is not about being truculent and rude. It is about exuding authority and confidence, being steady on your feet, knowing your brief, being humble when you need to be and demonstrating good humour from time to time. And always being polite, unless absolutely forced not to.

2/10 for me.

Thought I overmarked Starmer with a seven last night. 5/10 at best. He’s a right boring **** btw. They both are. I wouldn’t go for a pint with either of them. Life’s too short.
Click to expand...
Sunak’s shorter.
 
Chris in London said:
The vast majority of the population will be paying higher taxes full stop, whoever wins, because there is a massive and as yet unexplained black hole in the government finances that neither Conservatives nor Labour have even attempted to fill.

Either than or public services will be cut to even more unsustainable levels, which neither party is admitting to, or borrowing will increase significantly, which again neither party is admitting to.

If you think it's only Labour's figures on tax that don't add up, you might want to try taking your head out of your arse.
Click to expand...
I'm not disputing the fact that taxes will rise after the election, regardless of who is in power. For the record, every fiscal statement since November 2001 (bar November 2017, when it was seen as flat) has forecast a rising tax burden. My comment related to the tax rises planned by Labour in addition to those outlined in the March Budget, something which clearly went over your head.

The tax rises Labour are currently admitting to - essentially a rounding error in the context of fiscal projections - are obviously insufficient to fund the targeted improvement in public sector services, and that's before the fiscal black hole around unprotected departmental budgets you refer to is considered. And although the issue around
unprotected departmental budgets will remain regardless of which party forms the next government, it is undoubtedly a bigger issue for Labour than it is for the Conservatives, given that only Labour have committed to avoiding cuts here.

So, given that Labour have committed to avoiding falling departmental spending as per Starmer's comments last night - which will require around an extra c.£30bn in current expenditure by 2028-29 - and that Starmer is only willing to acknowledge small tax increases in private school VAT, and slightly different non-dom and windfall schemes, do you think Labour's tax figures add up? I think even somebody with their head up their arse can see that they don't.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I'm not disputing the fact that taxes will rise after the election, regardless of who is in power. For the record, every fiscal statement since November 2001 (bar November 2017, when it was seen as flat) has forecast a rising tax burden. My comment related to the tax rises planned by Labour in addition to those outlined in the March Budget, something which clearly went over your head.

The tax rises Labour are currently admitting to - essentially a rounding error in the context of fiscal projections - are obviously insufficient to fund the targeted improvement in public sector services, and that's before the fiscal black hole around unprotected departmental budgets you refer to is considered. And although the issue around
unprotected departmental budgets will remain regardless of which party forms the next government, it is undoubtedly a bigger issue for Labour than it is for the Conservatives, given that only Labour have committed to avoiding cuts here.

So, given that Labour have committed to avoiding falling departmental spending as per Starmer's comments last night - which will require around an extra c.£30bn in current expenditure by 2028-29 - and that Starmer is only willing to acknowledge small tax increases in private school VAT, and slightly different non-dom and windfall schemes, do you think Labour's tax figures add up? I think even somebody with their head up their arse can see that they don't.
Click to expand...
Reading not your strong point, then?
 
bluethrunthru said:
Is the right answer - the best attack mode

Click to expand...

Haven’t Labour watched the Press Preview on Sky? One of the biggest talking points is the ‘lies’ from last night yet the Sky News panel have not mentioned that but inferred that the Tories were closer to the truth.

They’ve even got a New Statesman influencer who somehow forgot to mention her own papers estimate of £3000.00 tax hikes if it was the Tories policies that won the election.

Easy to see where the editorial is there, try to keep the Tories in it so the stories keep coming.

Pitiful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top