General Election June 8th

[vonkeynotvenky]

At the moment we're faced with the option of an unelectable Labour Party, or an abhorrent Tory party. Not a great choice.

The interview is nearly over and I am no clearer as to what her views are, my main concern is Brexit which I voted for and now BOTH parties want to deliver that. I don't have a spare £100,000 to save to give to my children and I hope I don't get Alzheimer's in todays current climate of poor social care. A child of the 60's I remember the days when university education was free but I was still too poor to attend and had to go through other avenues, so when I hear the free education debate I think meh.
Mays stance on immigration is astonishing because she's had the power and failed, she's a liar and a political opportunist. Corbyns view on the IRA and Trident is ambiguous and obstructive at best. In short I am getting nothing from any political party I can't even vote for ukip because it's run by an illiterate lunatic.

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

A piece of paper is not evidence, please watch, from 2mins especially.

Nice video, words are powerful and eloquence wins the day.

 

[cibaman]

Corbyn's answers on Trident were bizarre. I can understand his opposition to it, I disagree with him but can see his point of view. But its been included as party policy in Labour's manifesto, which would seem to commit Labour to its renewal. But no, they're going to review it immediately after the election. So what's the point of including it in the manifesto? Its just completely disingenuous. "Here's our manifesto, but of course we can completely change it as soon as we're elected".

All governments break their election promises but I dont remember any party leader being quite so up front about it.

 

[urban genie]

Corbyn's answers on Trident were bizarre. I can understand his opposition to it, I disagree with him but can see his point of view. But its been included as party policy in Labour's manifesto, which would seem to commit Labour to its renewal. But no, they're going to review it immediately after the election. So what's the point of including it in the manifesto? Its just completely disingenuous. "Here's our manifesto, but of course we can completely change it as soon as we're elected".

All governments break their election promises but I dont remember any party leader being quite so up front about it.

They have been conducting a general defence review the last year, and that will continue it will not affect the decision to renew trident, but will look into other options to eventually replace trident with something more efficient and effective.

So labours position is yes we will renew trident, but is there better options to it for the future, ans should we consider them.

Personally I would scrap trident and invest in a new dual-role system for our nuclear deterrent could save money and, by investing in new aircraft carriers(which could be built at the same sites as trident so to save jobs) and using strike fighter jets to deliver our nuclear option they would be more mobile and could be based on land or sea, in addition the fighter would be able to be used in conventional operations something trident isn't adaptable to do.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

They have been conducting a general defence review the last year, and that will continue it will not affect the decision to renew trident, but will look into other options to eventually replace trident with something more efficient and effective.

So labours position is yes we will renew trident, but is there better options to it for the future, ans should we consider them.

Personally I would scrap trident and invest in a new dual-role system for our nuclear deterrent could save money and, by investing in new aircraft carriers(which could be built at the same sites as trident so to save jobs) and using strike fighter jets to deliver our nuclear option they would be more mobile and could be based on land or sea, in addition the fighter would be able to be used in conventional operations something trident isn't adaptable to do.

All very laudable, I'm sure, but the fact is Corbyn has stated that he wouldn't utilise any nuclear deterrent, however it's delivered.
So all this waffle and obfuscation from the PLP etc; does, is skirt around an enormous fucking elephant in the room.
It is totally pointless discussing nuclear deterrents with him, he's a paid up member of CND for god's sake.
The only way Labour can address this is by desperately trying to deflect this question onto other, unrelated issues.
It may work, people might not be bothered about defence, we'll see come June 9.

 

[cibaman]

They have been conducting a general defence review the last year, and that will continue it will not affect the decision to renew trident, but will look into other options to eventually replace trident with something more efficient and effective.

So labours position is yes we will renew trident, but is there better options to it for the future, ans should we consider them.

Personally I would scrap trident and invest in a new dual-role system for our nuclear deterrent could save money and, by investing in new aircraft carriers(which could be built at the same sites as trident so to save jobs) and using strike fighter jets to deliver our nuclear option they would be more mobile and could be based on land or sea, in addition the fighter would be able to be used in conventional operations something trident isn't adaptable to do.

I dont really understand what that means in the short term. Labour's manifesto simply says "Labour supports the replacement of the Trident nuclear deterrent". Clearly, once Trident has been replaced it makes sense to continually review its effectiveness and relevance. Nobody would argue with that. But at the moment there doesn't seem to be any clarity as to whether Labour would actually complete the programme to replace it. They seem to be saying one thing in the manifesto but then caveating it by reference to a defence review to be carried out following the election.

 

[law74]

Ground the country into the dirt ??- have you seen the unemployment data? The growth in the economy over the last years, the cranes in Manchester? They are re balancing the country from a bloated and unsustainable bloated public sector to a leaner and improving economy and most importantly for Manchester re balancing the economy to the North after the splendid efforts of our former chancellor. Our economy is doing well.

I don't really get your Monday Tuesday comments to be honest. Just seems a bit of a nonsense. Do you remember how tough things were from 2007 to 2011?

Anyway thats me done for the night - you wont change your view and nor will i.

IF the employment figures are so great how come revenue from taxation isn't rising?
How come the use of foodbanks continues to rise?
How come so many are living in poverty?
How come we have had the longest period of wage stagnation since the 1800's
Closing healthcare centres, rising mental health issues with a lack of provision, cutting police officers and increasing the risk of terrorism, borrowing more than EVERY LABOUR GOVERNMENT IN HISTORY
you might be doing better than 10 years ago, but very very many are much worse off & that's why JC is gaining such MOMENTUM

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I dont really understand what that means in the short term. Labour's manifesto simply says "Labour supports the replacement of the Trident nuclear deterrent". Clearly, once Trident has been replaced it makes sense to continually review its effectiveness and relevance. Nobody would argue with that. But at the moment there doesn't seem to be any clarity as to whether Labour would actually complete the programme to replace it. They seem to be saying one thing in the manifesto but then caveating it by reference to a defence review to be carried out following the election.

It means they will bin it, or Corbyn will do his level best to bin it, it's what he's preached and agitated for all his life.
They've been put in an intolerable position, with a leader who flat out refuses to say he'd use a nuclear deterrent,
but has had to bow to the unpalatable fact that the PLP know that won't wash, so comes out with his 'Acceptance of the party's wishes.'
Well, such dissembling nonsense may put the issue on the back burner, but to have a leader of the country who has no intention of using
its deterrent, makes renewing it totally pointless, if they had said exactly that, and gone with the saving £30 billion or whatever,
to be spent on more vote winning goodies, I could understand it.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

That woman's journey fascinates me.

 

[malg]

Are 13 people on here on the wum?