Poll: Exit Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Results discussion and OcUK Exit Poll - Closing 8th July

Exit poll: Who did you vote for?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 302 27.5%

  • Labour

    Votes: 577 52.6%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 104 9.5%

  • Green

    Votes: 13 1.2%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 19 1.7%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 30 2.7%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 6 0.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 46 4.2%
  • Total voters
    1,097
Status
Not open for further replies.
Woden said:
We have been told time and time again, mainly on here, that it wasn't about immigration.
Click to expand...

I have been listening to LBC a lot during the run up to the election and the amount of Ex-Labour UKIP/Leaver callers who said they were going to vote for Corbyn because Brexit was a done deal and that immigration was going to dry up was, well, astonishing.
 
Robi said:
The fact you're judging an entire costed manifesto on a single radio interview, yet ignoring the fact that the Conservative manifesto wasn't costed and the "party elite" continually failed to describe where the figures came from, shows just how delusional you and all of the other Tory voters are.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

They didn't cost the £250 billion of infrastructure spending as they said that would just flow back into the economy through increased economic activity. If that were true, then why doesn't every government spend £250 trillion and all our money worries would be a distant memory..?
 
RDM said:
Did she lose votes? I thought the Conservative Vote share went up? Just not as much as the Labour vote share. The Cons are about 1% of Tony Blair in 1997 as far as votes go but with considerably less seats.
Click to expand...

Well, she lost the expected votes from the 20pt lead she had in the polls prior to the election....the whole reason she called it in the first place
 
danielanthony said:
They didn't cost the £250 billion of infrastructure spending as they said that would just flow back into the economy through increased economic activity. If that were true, then why doesn't every government spend £250 trillion and all our money worries would be a distant memory..?
Click to expand...
That's a £250billion (your figure, I've not checked it) for a £250billion asset. No net loss.

E: apologies, thought you were referring to privatising rail. Nonetheless, it's an investment for growth. That's what governments do
 
danielanthony said:
They didn't cost the £250 billion of infrastructure spending as they said that would just flow back into the economy through increased economic activity. If that were true, then why doesn't every government spend £250 trillion and all our money worries would be a distant memory..?
Click to expand...
and your point being?

what may was trying to pull was so bad, people decimated the other parties to back an alternative to ensure May didn't have a mandate,, So yes May has utterly failed and it is very much to do with her, as much as people try shifting the blame to labour.
 
danielanthony said:
Its what the people voted for. Or would you prefer some sort of selection process which qualifies people to vote based on your own criteria?
Click to expand...
Not really. No one voted for conservatives propped up by the dup, that's not how the election works. People voted for their local MPs etc but that hasn't generated a satisfactory conclusion at a country level, and so now they have to make the best of it.
 
Robi said:
The fact you're judging an entire costed manifesto on a single radio interview, yet ignoring the fact that the Conservative manifesto wasn't costed and the "party elite" continually failed to describe where the figures came from, shows just how delusional you and all of the other Tory voters are.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I read all of the manifestos. The Labour one wasn't costed. It didn't have any details on where the money was coming from for the re-Nationalisation programmes nor did it have costings for the write off of student debt. The amounts it said it would raise from Tax raises were unrealistic and wouldn't have covered the things in the manifesto. So it has nothing to do with radio interviews but more with the fact that Labour were being somewhat optimistic with their tax raises and not including costs such as nationalisation.
 
Vonhelmet said:
Not really. No one voted for conservatives propped up by the dup, that's not how the election works. People voted for their local MPs etc but that hasn't generated a satisfactory conclusion at a country level, and so now they have to make the best of it.
Click to expand...
i'm sorry but if you think people ONLY vote locally then you're wrong. Most voters probably don't have a clue who they're voting for locally and they're voting for a PM really.

B@
 
Freakbro said:
Err...you obviously don't remember that all the prominent LEAVE campaigners said it was utterly inconcievable that we would leave the Single Market....and remainers saying we would was just Project Fear...

Like Glaucus said....you're just making **** up
Click to expand...

No I'm not, the EU made it clear we couldn't have single market access without accepting freedom of movement. The public despite that still voted a majority for brexit which was clearly fought on the grounds of regaining control of immigration and not therefore having freedom of movement. It therefore follows if the majority didn't want freedom of movement they were accepting a high probability that we would have to leave the single market to achieve the former. It just shows remainers just can't accept that was the outcome of the referendum.
 
RDM said:
I read all of the manifestos. The Labour one wasn't costed. It didn't have any details on where the money was coming from for the re-Nationalisation programmes nor did it have costings for the write off of student debt. The amounts it said it would raise from Tax raises were unrealistic and wouldn't have covered the things in the manifesto. So it has nothing to do with radio interviews but more with the fact that Labour were being somewhat optimistic with their tax raises and not including costs such as nationalisation.
Click to expand...

Still it's better to have an optimistic costed manifesto that people can scrutinize, than a fully uncosted one with the answer "We'll have a consulation on that after the election"..
 
Narj said:
I said that a while back in casual conversation - he's a toff but I had the impression that he's forthright so people generally quite like him.

Seems I was wrong if reaction to that idea amongst friends and colleagues is anything to go by!
Click to expand...

I think his extreme toffness might alienate them further though. People hated Cameron et. al. because they were out of touch toffs, Rees Mogg is much of the sameness. Although at least he does have a spine.
 
Freakbro said:
Well, she lost the expected votes from the 20pt lead she had in the polls prior to the election....the whole reason she called it in the first place
Click to expand...

Yes but she did gain votes rather than lose votes.

Her campaign was awful and I hope she goes pdq.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom