General Election June 8th

[mcfc1632]

So why call an election she knows will subject her to brexit questioning, especially when she says she called it to seek a brexit mandate, if she doesn't want to talk about brexit. Makes no sense.

To secure the conditions at Westminster that will allow her to mitigate the risks and issues she has faced in recent months.

She will have been advised that there will be a lot of 'noise' about debates etc. but also that if she and all her core team, just weather that for a while and say as near to nothing as possible - it will not amount to anything that will stop her increasing her controls in terms of seats and timeline.

I know it will cause a lot of people a lot of frustration - but it makes perfect sense.

 

[Magicpole]

She'll debate if Sacre and Murdoch tell her to.

No-one's really interested anyway. No-one is going to change their mind based on policy and the press won't let this be a policy driven debate. It's about personality and she will continue to be projected as strong (despite her obvious cowardice on this) and Corbyn weak because he is a bigger threat to the aforementioned.

She can't be portrayed as strong then take a whitey.

If she does she will look weak and frightened. And she would have cause to be as she isn't a natural debater.

It's like the Britons telling the Romans how tough Boudica is and how she will sort them out. The Romans offer a square go and she said she can't as she's having a period and besides she has nothing to gain and everything to lose.

She's a coward and all the hero worship coming from the right wing press, will be swirling about the toilet bowl with one of her shites if she bottles it.

Strong leader, brave, blah blah.

Prove it May. It walk away with a white feather in your hair.

 

[law74]

The last thing anyone that has the best interests of the UK at heart should want would be for May to be the head of the negotiating team

Fixed that for you.
& the last thing May would want would be to go head to head with Corbyn on her parties record in government or vision for the future with regards to health, education, security (prisons, police etc etc), the economy, housing etc etc.
That is why she is bottling a debate.

 

[mcfc1632]

Brexit is, according to her, the main reason for calling this election so why should they? Personally I'm happy to let her and the Three Stooges Johnson, Fox & Davies get on with it but all she has to say, as she's already been saying, is that she has no intention of giving away our potential negotiating position.

Why should they? - there is no reason why they should and we all know that they won't

That is why it simply follows that she will have been advised to play a dead bat to everything and just keep repeating the same old agreed platitudes - best deal etc.

You will probably hear the platitudes start to include comments about not disclosing negotiating detail.

She will be taking a hit, but it will die down in a short while. The biggest hit would be if the media organisations that love these events and want them to become part of the process, decide to go ahead without her. So therefore expect to see some agreements on attendance at some 'interviews' by May and at programmes like Question Time and Sunday Politics by her key team members - where they can control the content and despite the frustrations of Sophie Ridge, Andrew Neil etc. they can just keep dead-batting.

The end result is that she will have increased her majority and timeline and post-June enter into the negotiations - with reduced risks.

If the deal in the end is a shambles she is toast anyway, so any frustrations people felt in May 2017 do not matter and if they are not seen as a disaster then any frustrations people felt in May 2017 do not matter.

 

[law74]

Why should they? - there is no reason why they should and we all know that they won't

That is why it simply follows that she will have been advised to play a dead bat to everything and just keep repeating the same old agreed platitudes - best deal etc.

You will probably hear the platitudes start to include comments about not disclosing negotiating detail.

She will be taking a hit, but it will die down in a short while. The biggest hit would be if the media organisations that love these events and want them to become part of the process, decide to go ahead without her. So therefore expect to see some agreements on attendance at some 'interviews' by May and at programmes like Question Time and Sunday Politics by her key team members - where they can control the content and despite the frustrations of Sophie Ridge, Andrew Neil etc. they can just keep dead-batting.

The end result is that she will have increased her majority and timeline and post-June enter into the negotiations - with reduced risks.

If the deal in the end is a shambles she is toast anyway, so any frustrations people felt in May 2017 do not matter and if they are not seen as a disaster then any frustrations people felt in May 2017 do not matter.

The CPS report, the revival of the libdems in the west Country mean that an increased majority isn't the foregone conclusion you think it is, & if she isn't willing to discuss her Brexit plans, then her parties record in the economy will come under increasing scrutiny, and she really can't afford to take that risk.

 

[mcfc1632]

Fixed that for you.
& the last thing May would want would be to go head to head with Corbyn on her parties record in government or vision for the future with regards to health, education, security (prisons, police etc etc), the economy, housing etc etc.
That is why she is bottling a debate.

That was pretty clever of you - works well.

With regard the head to head with Corbyn, I am guessing that the 'platitudes' that you will hear will be on the theme that she has debated every week with him in PMQs and generally embarrassed him.

These are not my specific views - I am not just trying to champion May, as MP does Sturgeon - I am just stating what will obviously happen whether I , you or anyone else on here agrees with it.

 

[Kazzydeyna]

If you read it properly you'll see some bits about reversing tax cuts and getting companies to pay what they owe in tax. That might be a clue. Plus as debt is still rising yet we're getting less and less for that, it may as well rise and we get some benefit from it.

Is the correct answer.

What the tories do very well, and always have, is make the debate about the weakest in our society being "scroungers" etc. In effect they turn the binman against the dinner lady, and do it so successfully that we end up not noticing that our public services could be properly funded if only people and corps that already have more money than they could spend were only made to pay a fair amount in tax.

However as a committed brexiteer I will struggle to vote labour this time as I believe they would overturn Brexit and that's more important in the short term.

Next GE, after full Brexit, is the time to vote labour in my opinion.

That said I'd rather die than vote conservative.

 

[mcfc1632]

r

The CPS report, the revival of the libdems in the west Country mean that an increased majority isn't the foregone conclusion you think it is, & if she isn't willing to discuss her Brexit plans, then her parties record in the economy will come under increasing scrutiny, and she really can't afford to take that risk.

".......isn't the foregone conclusion you think it is........"

I am not thinking anything is a foregone conclusion. The trouble on here is that generally people do not debate 'objectively' they just bang on about their particular preferences, beliefs and prejudices. I think that you are assuming my comments are all just because I voted leave and have a 'desperate love' for May.

I am just seeking to speak objectively as someone experienced with large scale negotiations and thereby inform the discussion of the thread.

I would say the same if I had been an ardent Remain voter - as I said previously I come from Eccles and have voted Labour more than any other party.

 

[hgblue]

She can't be portrayed as strong then take a whitey.

If she does she will look weak and frightened. And she would have cause to be as she isn't a natural debater.

It's like the Britons telling the Romans how tough Boudica is and how she will sort them out. The Romans offer a square go and she said she can't as she's having a period and besides she has nothing to gain and everything to lose.

She's a coward and all the hero worship coming from the right wing press, will be swirling about the toilet bowl with one of her shites if she bottles it.

Strong leader, brave, blah blah.

Prove it May. It walk away with a white feather in your hair.

If you had the choice of appearing on stage with a bunch of serial losers like Corbyn, Sturgeon, Farron, Nuttall, and that no mark from Wales, or not doing it and still winning the election, what would you do?

 

[cibaman]

I actually felt sorry for Jack Dromey on the Daily Politics. He was skewered by Neil who kept asking him to define who were the wealth extractors referred to by Corbyn and how could they be expected to suffer under Labour. "Wait for the manifesto" became his stock answer, as if the manifesto will contain a comprehensive list of Labour's target companies.

If Corbyn keeps speaking in student slogans and leaves it to the foot soldiers to take the flak, he might find it difficult to find MPs who are prepared to put themselves forward to rationalise his "policies".