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.
Are you kidding me? Your local mayor (if you had an elected mayor) and local councillors.

This isn't some secret - do you honestly not know what you're voting for when these elections occur?
Mind blow. TDIL what local elections are. I was just wondering how the councillors were related to the MP you vote for. I thought if you vote for a particular MP, then you get his party's councillors. Now I know what those elections were about recently. I saw some elections were held and I was wondering what they were since the big election is still coming up.
 
Probably because the Tories are going full Tory. Cameron, love him or hate him, brought the party more into the middle and in my opinion was a fairly 'moderate' Tory. May on the other hand.....

Also just to add


Osborne know what is going wrong too -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40071822

"Former Chancellor George Osborne has said the Conservatives have failed to think through commitments made in their election manifesto.

Mr Osborne, now editor of the London Evening Standard, stood by headlines in the paper critical of Tory pledges on social care and immigration.

He also said Theresa May had moved away from the international liberalism and globalisation pursued by David Cameron."



This is no doubt losing them a lot of the more centrally inclined voters they had.
 
I've been quite surprised by the public response to Corbyn's comments about foreign policy having increased the chance of attacks like this. I thought the Manchester bombing would increase support for May in the usual Pavlovian way that people rally around their leader. I also thought that Corbyn's more nuanced comments would be met with a barrage of accusations that he's a traitor / soft on terrorism, etc. Well the usual papers and commentators are doing that of course, but actually the public seems to acknowledge and agree that of course Britain's foreign policy has increased terrorism. I suppose because with Iraq and now Libya, most people already knew that to be the case so May's more traditional black and white views aren't being received as well as I expected.

I saw an interesting article where they listed all instances of the UK's foreign intervention in the last few decades versus terrorist attacks and on the balance of numbers our foreign policy more often doesn't result in attacks because of it than it does by an overwhelming amount and where it does is almost exclusively countries with strong links to Islam. As always the devil is in the detail.
 
Abbot will be a backbencher within 1 month if Labour wins. This is only through her own utter incompetence she shares the sames pedestal as that Giles Brandrith chap who was also utterly incompetent considering how bright he is.

The BBC is utterly useless though I have to say.
 
I saw an interesting article where they listed all instances of the UK's foreign intervention in the last few decades versus terrorist attacks and on the balance of numbers our foreign policy more often doesn't result in attacks because of it than it does by an overwhelming amount and where it does is almost exclusively countries with strong links to Islam. As always the devil is in the detail.

It would appear the British public's opinion is increasingly at odds with the above sentiment.
Perhaps the devil would be in the detail if you provided any.
 
It would appear the British public's opinion is increasingly at odds with the above sentiment.
Perhaps the devil would be in the detail if you provided any.

It is kind of obvious that we didn't get orthodox christian terrorists after intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo no?
 
It would appear the British public's opinion

Opinion is one thing - the numbers on paper - even if very slightly disingenuous use of the numbers - says otherwise. As above much of our intervention has been stuff like Bosnia which hasn't had significant repercussions domestically.
 
https://amp.theguardian.com/politic...n-for-theresa-may-in-televised-leaders-debate

Amber Rudd? It's like she wants to lose. She had Davis and Boris there to use instead, who are both more likeable and also crucially, were on the leave side of the debate and so would naturally focus the subject into Brexit, which is the conservatives main strength.

Rudd supported remain and was famous for attacking Boris. Not the image the Tories want to recall.
 
Opinion is one thing - the numbers on paper - even if very slightly disingenuous use of the numbers - says otherwise. As above much of our intervention has been stuff like Bosnia which hasn't had significant repercussions domestically.

Sorry but to Both who are now trotting out "examples" of foreign policy with zero detail of what is expected to be counted as cause and effect.
Are you suggesting the UK's involvement in Kosovo was a Unilateral action which likely claimed 600K lives in 3 years and has a 175K-195K confirmed civilian body count to date?
 
Abbot will be a backbencher within 1 month if Labour wins. This is only through her own utter incompetence she shares the sames pedestal as that Giles Brandrith chap who was also utterly incompetent considering how bright he is.

The BBC is utterly useless though I have to say.

I'm not sure that she will be, she is very closely allied to the leadership, and if Corbyn actually does win then the parliamentary party will be full of new MPs who back him and her.
 
Before it is no doubt suggested (again), making a link between unilateral action that claims a massive loss of life and makes the space and conditions for a giant terror network to incubate (as predicted by those opposing the action), is not the same as condoning/excusing an idiots terror actions, I fully support capping at the knees anyone who tries to bring harm to Children's concerts in the UK!
 
Sorry but to Both who are now trotting out "examples" of foreign policy with zero detail of what is expected to be counted as cause and effect.
Are you suggesting the UK's involvement in Kosovo was a Unilateral action which likely claimed 600K lives in 3 years and has a 175K-195K confirmed civilian body count to date?

I was just giving an example that we've been involved in more instance of intervention than the more recent headline ones everyone seems to limit their thinking to - some with bigger effect on the native population than others, etc.
 
I was just giving an example that we've been involved in more instance of intervention than the more recent headline ones everyone seems to limit their thinking to - some with bigger effect on the native population than others, etc.

If the devil is in the detail, have some or don't.
 
If the populist movement continues in the same vain as the Brexit/US presidential votes, then we could well see Corbyn win.

If history has shown us anything the Tories squander/resist public investment and only serve to make rich capitalists richer. The public are wising up to this now with the horrendous direction the NHS is going and May's meaningless promises to the just-about-managing.
 
You're voting for a person to become the representative Member of Parliament for your constituency. The party with the majority of MPs governs, with their leader being the PM.

So, you aren't really voting for a party, you are voting for a person who happens to represent a party in your constituency. That person may or may not agree with everything the party stands for, but will generally go along the party lines in votes in the House of Commons.

Except May has turned the whole thing into a Presidential vote for her.
 
If the populist movement continues in the same vain as the Brexit/US presidential votes, then we could well see Corbyn win.

If history has shown us anything the Tories squander/resist public investment and only serve to make rich capitalists richer. The public are wising up to this now with the horrendous direction the NHS is going and May's meaningless promises to the just-about-managing.

Possibility for hung parliament I think more likely - I think people are honestly 100% crazy voting either Labour or Conservative this time around - its time for a real change - not just jumping blindly to the next rung down the ladder after the Tories to Labour who are in a position where they can promise the earth on a wild gambit - and a once in a lifetime chance to vote for something completely different if the country collectively got its act together.
 
The invasion of Iraq led to the Islamic State's formation and thus the incidence of attacks attributed to them, I find it very hard to believe that these attacks would have happened anyway if Hussein, Assad and friends remained in unfettered power. There's a proverb: stirring the hornets' nest.

British involvement abroad has painted a target on their backs at home, I don't think it's a far-fetched conclusion to make. If there's evidence on the contrary, provide a link instead of saying 'It's not so just because I read an article somewhere'.

This is why parliament's decision not to attack Syria will prove an effective call in the long term.
 
The invasion of Iraq led to the Islamic State's formation and thus the incidence of attacks attributed to them, I find it very hard to believe that these attacks would have happened anyway if Hussein, Assad and friends remained in unfettered power. There's a proverb: stirring the hornets' nest.

British involvement abroad has painted a target on their backs at home, I don't think it's a far-fetched conclusion to make. If there's evidence on the contrary, provide a link instead of saying 'It's not so just because I read an article somewhere'.

This is why parliament's decision not to attack Syria will prove an effective call in the long term.

But may not matter as senior Tories are talking about attacking Syria doesn't need a parliamentary vote and May can just order it anyway.
 
I was just giving an example that we've been involved in more instance of intervention than the more recent headline ones everyone seems to limit their thinking to - some with bigger effect on the native population than others, etc.

I think pushing people into support the position of either All Interventions are Bad or All Interventions are Good and that each (despite entirely different scales and circumstances) still should/would have the same outcome on international terror is silly, don't you?

My personal position is the greatest issue in recent times, is breaking away from the United Nations Security Council's community rule on the world stage, complaints about the UN may be valid and God knows there are places on the planet that have experienced very large sudden loss of life with virtually no action over these time frames but on average the approach is more measured than random state action and part of the reason it was created in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom