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

[mid_gen]

Youth support for Labour is about more than tuition fees. It's a generation growing up feeling like they're getting shafted to the benefit of an increasingly widespread wealthy elite and corporations.

The Conservatives don't offer anything to young people. More of the same.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Most obviously, because of electoral maths. The current result increases the risk of a messy hard Brexit, especially as most of the Tories that lost their seats were moderates. May is going to require the support of her hardest Brexit supporting mps to get anything done, so while voting against the conservatives may feel better, the outcome is going to be worse than if, on a case by case basis, those wanting a softer Brexit had supported Tories where they stood. Corbyn never stood a chance of a majority government.

I voted remain, but we lost the referendum. I don't support a rerun as part of the negotiation, because it massively weakens our negotiating position. Likewise I don't support the idea that the government should ignore the referendum and remain in the eu. In order to move forward, we need to negotiate a good leaving deal. That required strength and realism, and now we don't have either.

The election made a hard Brexit (or a complete breakdown in negotiations) more likely than it was before, and that is the fault of the electorate, because the electorate are the only people responsible for their voting choices.

No, it is emphatically the fault of the government, for calling an election when none was needed, without the foresight to see that this was a distinct risk.

 

[adolf hamster]

Competing against a political letter to Santa Claus with something grounded in reality is hard enough with older, more cynical voters, so you can't blame younger, less experienced ones for falling for it.

i'm sorry but if you're describing may as "grounded in reality" then you've just blown any semblance of an argument you had right out of the water.

 

[LOAM]

Most obviously, because of electoral maths. The current result increases the risk of a messy hard Brexit, especially as most of the Tories that lost their seats were moderates. May is going to require the support of her hardest Brexit supporting mps to get anything done, so while voting against the conservatives may feel better, the outcome is going to be worse than if, on a case by case basis, those wanting a softer Brexit had supported Tories where they stood. Corbyn never stood a chance of a majority government.

I voted remain, but we lost the referendum. I don't support a rerun as part of the negotiation, because it massively weakens our negotiating position. Likewise I don't support the idea that the government should ignore the referendum and remain in the eu. In order to move forward, we need to negotiate a good leaving deal. That required strength and realism, and now we don't have either.

The election made a hard Brexit (or a complete breakdown in negotiations) more likely than it was before, and that is the fault of the electorate, because the electorate are the only people responsible for their voting choices.

To claim May was aiming for a soft brexit is frankly laughable. The only evidence she's shown towards which direction she wanted to go, has been "as hard as possible"

To equally claim hard brexit is now more probable goes against every political commentator out there. Most consider it impossible because she hasn't got the support of Davidson's 13 or the DUP for it along with untold amounts of rebels.

 

[Dolph]

Youth support for Labour is about more than tuition fees. It's a generation growing up feeling like they're getting shafted to the benefit of an increasingly widespread wealthy elite and corporations.

The Conservatives don't offer anything to young people. More of the same.

The problem is, the newest voters don't really know anything else. This isn't a criticism, just a statement. We have had, generally, quite a benign environment across the world in the last decade. Outside of small amounts of Islamic terrorism, we haven't had much social disruption. We haven't been on a war footing with major powers, and by and large, we have been growing as an economy without major economics disruption (Remember, an 18 year old was only 9 or 10 when the bubble burst is 2007-2008).

Selling snake oil solutions is easier when the buyers lack the experience to realise that they actually have had it ok, it may not be as good as they want, but it's a lot better than it could be.

 

[Dolph]

i'm sorry but if you're describing may as "grounded in reality" then you've just blown any semblance of an argument you had right out of the water.

Do you disagree with the ifs about the economics of the two manifestos then?

 

[simpletom]

I'm blaming all voters, not just students. Voters are responsible for the outcome of the elections, not parties or individual mps, as it is the individual voters that make the choices.

The voters make decisions on a number of factors and a large factor is the party manifesto. The solely place blame at the feet of the voter is irresponsible and ridiculous.

 

[adolf hamster]

Do you disagree with the ifs about the economics of the two manifestos then?

do you at least agree that regardless of the reality of his promises, by simply trying to appeal to the electorate corbyn has shown himself to care more for the people than maybot's "it'll be fine the plebs will vote for us regardless" policy.

did you consider that many who voted labour dont really want labour, but they're absolute in their conviction that it can't be worse than what we already know the cons to be capable of.

it comes to something that the dup are going to be the ones we're trusting to keep the conservatives in check rather than the other way round.

 

[Tunney]

 

[Tefal]

Careful, your bitterness is showing.

bitter about what? i was bloody 7 when that video was filmed.

I had far more pressing concerns at that age than politics.

 

[garnett]

Do you disagree with the ifs about the economics of the two manifestos then?

The IFS that Brexiteers tried to dismiss?

This IFS?

"IFS: Neither Conservatives nor Labour being honest about economic consequences of their manifestos"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nce-budget-mid-2020s-could-require-tax-rises/

 

[Deleted member 66701]

The problem is, the newest voters don't really know anything else. This isn't a criticism, just a statement. We have had, generally, quite a benign environment across the world in the last decade. Outside of small amounts of Islamic terrorism, we haven't had much social disruption. We haven't been on a war footing with major powers, and by and large, we have been growing as an economy without major economics disruption (Remember, an 18 year old was only 9 or 10 when the bubble burst is 2007-2008).

Selling snake oil solutions is easier when the buyers lack the experience to realise that they actually have had it ok, it may not be as good as they want, but it's a lot better than it could be.

I think with this statement you've summed up the election perfectly.

Essentially the young voted based on hope, not fear.

 

[Rroff]

The IFS that Brexiteers tried to dismiss?

This IFS?

"IFS: Neither Conservatives nor Labour being honest about economic consequences of their manifestos"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nce-budget-mid-2020s-could-require-tax-rises/

Labour has said it would raise £49 billion per year from taxing the "rich" and companies.

But the IFS said the calculation includes "factual mistakes" and "optimistic assumptions" - creating a £9 billion shortfall.

But.... but... its been signed off on by "experts".

Oh look they aren't being honest about their other claims about taxes either... how anyone is suckered by Corbyn's guileful use of words just boggles my mind.

 

[Dolph]

To claim May was aiming for a soft brexit is frankly laughable. The only evidence she's shown towards which direction she wanted to go, has been "as hard as possible"

To equally claim hard brexit is now more probable goes against every political commentator out there. Most consider it impossible because she hasn't got the support of Davidson's 13 or the DUP for it along with untold amounts of rebels.

She wasn't aiming for a soft Brexit as such, she was aiming for a hard Brexit with a good trade deal, by tying the additional payments the eu would like us to make with the trade deal, which while a risky strategy, is the only one that comes close to single market access with immigration control (as the eu have already said that single market without free movement is utterly impossible). That strategy is almost certainly gone, she is unlikely to get the support for it from her party, and it doesn't meet with the commitments of the other parties to their voters.

So that leaves a crash out hard Brexit, or a softer Brexit. If the other parties continue opposition for oppositions sake, it will be the former, rather than the latter in my view.

 

[Caracus2k]

Whoever said the USSR or East Germany (or China or NK or...) were bastions of freedom?

Could you please explain what the similarity is between a Corbyn's Labour government and the USSR? Are they the same?

Jeremy Corbyn is an apologist for the Russian regime. He appointed as his ‘director of strategy and communications’ Seumas Milne. . a massive apologist for the brutal soviet regime.

He then went on to hire Andrew Murray to 'assist' with the election campaign another mass apologist for the USSR and Stalin in particular.Murray had the following to say about Venezuela ....

'Venezuela, for the first time in a generation, there is a government committed to establishing socialism.'

(Corby was also quite a fan as well)
....

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/309065744954580992?lang=en-gb

a country that is now starving thanks to the socialist rule of Chavez and Maduro

without any apparent sense of irony Corbyn appointed a Marxist to be his shadow chancellor.....

there's a lot to link Corbyn's Labour government to the USSR...

 

[stewski]

No they haven't said that if you read carefully they're not pledging single market access... I don't know why people are under the false impression that they are. You can't control immigration and have access to the single market - the EU is absolutely clear on this.

Is that the case for Norway?

In 2012, net immigration was 47,300, a national record high. About 62% of the immigrants were European citizens

I make that "record high" 29,326 from the EU in 2012

Norway to EU trade amounted to 91.85 € billion in 2008, primarily energy supplies (only 14.1% is manufactured products). The EU's exports to Norway amounted to 43.58 € billion, primarily manufactured products.[1]

I make that 48.27 Billion Euro Trade Surplus, how someone frames these 2 things as negative to Norway and/or not controlled migration is not comprehensible.

How do those figures relate to Norway's trade and immigration from the rest of the world.

The EU remains the first major import and export partner for Norway, capturing 74.3% of the latter's trade.

Proportional to trade, migration from anywhere outside the EU to Norway is far higher than from EU countries, how is this either a bad deal or uncontrolled?

Yes I know some people likes to frame the discussion of Norway's migration relative to it's tiny population, obviously we are not Norway, Switzerland etc,
we have nothing like the GDP per capita, the populations of those countries are tiny relative to their trade and geographic area and we don't run a trade surplus.

At this point no one can state what is impossible for the UK, I can say throwing mud around and talking up disastrous outcomes like WTO deals are less likely to have an acceptable outcome for the UK.

 

[b0redj0rd]

Free tuition? Students are fickle, they'll ditch their so called moral high ground for monetary gain at the click of the fingers.

That sums it up really. They aren't voting Libdem more are they?

The Conservatives lost because of a poor manifesto targeting the older generation due to thinking the had it in the bag - Labour got the younger generation due to tuition fees. With a new leader we won't see the same mistakes from the Tory's and Labour will struggle unless they go more to the centre.

 

[Dolph]

The voters make decisions on a number of factors and a large factor is the party manifesto. The solely place blame at the feet of the voter is irresponsible and ridiculous.

Manifestos influence voters, but voters can only ever be the people responsible for their vote.

My views on the campaign are already out there, you will not find me arguing that the conservatives ran a good campaign, or indeed that corbyn ran a bad campaign. The problem I have was with the deliverability of Labour's manifesto, not the politics of it.

 

[Dolph]

I think with this statement you've summed up the election perfectly.

Essentially the young voted based on hope, not fear.

That's probably a pretty good summary.

But the same thought process drove Blair's landslide in 1997, and Obama's victory in 2008. Reality soon starts to intrude on the hope when the inevitable compromises of government kick in.

 

[Jono8]

But.... but... its been signed off on by "experts".

Oh look they aren't being honest about their other claims about taxes either... how anyone is suckered by Corbyn's guileful use of words just boggles my mind.

We were told not to listen to the IFS and their damning reports on the affect that Brexit would have on the economy, so why should we listen to them now?

I am not directing this at you as i don't know how you voted in the referendum, but anyone who voted leave and brings up the economy when it comes to Labour/Corbyn needs to take a long hard look at themselves.