Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
n111ck said:
Its all in that article - what is biased? What is not true?
Click to expand...

Seriously? You mean the fact she is always referred to in a good light, praised and Juncker and Barnier are called Judas, mafia villains, monster (although google seems to come up with only the telegraph and express in last few days calling him the "monster" which is surprising of that is what he is known as in Europe) , mocking, stitch up, etc etc.

Hence it's hardly an impartial peice of journalism is it?
 
Angilion said:
Hezbollah means something like "Party of God", so they're definitely laying claim.
Click to expand...

May is getting all religious so she might count. Won't be long before she is calling the people of the uk to pray together with her for a good outcome of brexit
 
The reporting about this in the Mail, Telegraph etc is absolutely toxic and if you read it and come away thinking you're now informed then you need to broaden your sources. It's like they're trying to out-sycophant each other to be at the front of the queue for receiving rewards after the election.
 
Greebo said:
Seriously? You mean the fact she is always referred to in a good light, praised and Juncker and Barnier are called Judas, mafia villains, monster (although google seems to come up with only the telegraph and express in last few days calling him the "monster" which is surprising of that is what he is known as in Europe) , mocking, stitch up, etc etc.

Hence it's hardly an impartial peice of journalism is it?
Click to expand...

Neither are called monster in the article? Youve just made that up.

Its Selmayr that has that nickname:
http://www.politico.eu/article/mons...mayr-european-commission-jean-claude-juncker/

No newspapers are impartial - you are hopelessly naive if you think any are. But you have implied the article is wrong in some way - so how? The only mistake so far is yours.
 
Caged said:
The reporting about this in the Mail, Telegraph etc is absolutely toxic and if you read it and come away thinking you're now informed then you need to broaden your sources. It's like they're trying to out-sycophant each other to be at the front of the queue for receiving rewards after the election.
Click to expand...

I skim the guardian too (for free online of course), amongst others, and if you think reading that makes you better informed well just lol.
 
n111ck said:
I skim the guardian too (for free online of course), amongst others, and if you think reading that makes you better informed well just lol.
Click to expand...

That would be what broaden means, yes. This posturing for her supporters in the press is just building up a lot of promises/positions that can't be walked back on. So we're heading for a sub-optimal break with the EU which will come about because our PM cares more about the party than the country. And when it happens it will all be somebody else's fault.
 
I think a typical Guardian article is more factual than one appearing in the Telegraph (in the past few years), Mail or Sun. As in it's less likely to contain things that are plain untrue or are made up with the magical "allegedly" "a source said" etc. slapped in there to support a broader viewpoint. It's still worth keeping an eye on the other papers just to have a decent idea of where the outrage in 2019 will have come from. It still suffers from a fairly easy to spot bias, but there's a difference between bias and a lack of regard for accuracy.
 
This election is a bit of a weird one for me. I've been left leaning moving to a more moderate stance with my old age (31 now, where's me bus pass etc). Previously I've always voted lib Dem or Labour depending on the constituency I happened to be in. I'm a professional currently working in the public sector so logic and self interest dictate that I should be voting Labour, however the local candidate isn't up to much from what I can see and the party as a whole is in the process of eating itself, had Corbyn been given the support that he's earned maybe I might have thrown my weight behind them but whilst I commend him for his ideals he needs the backing of his party, and he just doesn't have it.

I could vote Lib Dem but I live in a Tory safe seat and again whilst I'm quite excited about their direction of travel at the moment on a national level the local candidate doesn't excite me.

Now here's the rub, my local MP is Heidi Allen and, in a rare twist of fate I genuinely like her as a politician (don't tell my public sector colleagues, it's probably a flogging offense at the very least). She appears to have a Tory light mentality, not as free spending as Labour but with more of a heart when it comes to supporting the vulnerable and avoiding savage cuts to public services and the welfare state.

What's giving me trouble is although I know that elections work on a local level in that you're voting for your local MP, and although I think the Tory candidate is the right choice for the local area, I somehow feel that voting Tory would make me complicate in regards to their national policy, which I consider to be incredibly damaging and regressive.

I suppose given that I'm in a Tory safe seat you could argue that it doesn't matter what I do but that's not how it should be and that's not how I view my input into democracy. It honestly is a crap period for the voting public IMHO, It's like choosing between unpleasant ways to be murdered.
 
FortuitousFluke said:
Snip
Click to expand...

If you're looking for some sort of justification to not treat this as electing a local MP then look to Theresa May, who seems to have forgotten she is in a party and is playing this like a presidential system.

Although in a safe seat it's a relatively pointless endeavour.
 
Caged said:
If you're looking for some sort of justification to not treat this as electing a local MP then look to Theresa May, who seems to have forgotten she is in a party and is playing this like a presidential system.

Although in a safe seat it's a relatively pointless endeavour.
Click to expand...

I'm not, just having a bit of a moan about the lack of good options really. I'm probably going to agonise over my choice more than any of the previous votes I've been involved in. Is my interest in the local candidate enough to overlook the fact the the party she represents effectively stands for damn near everything I hate? With my only other real options being a man who made Diane Abbot his shadow home secretary. Lib Dems are a potential, and I suppose there's always Indy and the smaller parties but most of them have big ticket manifesto pledges that are problematic for me.

May's walking an incredibly fine line at the moment and I think she doesn't have too much of a choice in terms of the need to grab the ball and run with it with scant regard for the party. If the election goes the way she's hoping then she'll have a stronger mandate and can start to reign in the opposing factions within the party on both sides of the fence, however if the Lib Dem or Labour upset the apple cart too much she could really find herself up the proverbial creek.

With Brexit looming it's a crap situation to be in. Look at the EU's approach over the last few days compared to ours. They're a loose conglomeration of nations and somehow they've dropped the petty politics and achieved a remarkably coherent united front, our guys on the other hand are expending all of their energy bickering among themselves. Theresa May is right, we need a strong government going into these negotiations, I just wish it wasn't so likely to be her government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom