Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dolph said:
A good deal in my mind involves a sensible exit payment (say £30bn), agreement on rights for UK citizens in the eu and vice versa, say an exchange of nationalities, and binding basics of a trade deal.

A bad deal involves a large payment to the eu (say £70bn+), unilateral granting of rights to eu citizens in the UK and nothing on trade.

No deal means no real payment to the eu, citizenship entirely in our control and no trade deal.

In that context, no deal is definitely better than a bad one.
Click to expand...
You see to me your bad deal is still a very good deal and miles better than no deal. Suppose it depends who you ask.
 
Corbyn isn't even respected by his own MPs, imagine him as Prime Minister leading us into Brexit negotiations? If there was a military or security crisis he'd be flapping about, he couldn't make a difficult decision.
 
So Corbyn supporters thought he did better, May supporters thought she did better.

Wonder if it made any difference to anyone's voting?
 
dalehitchy1 said:
And what of a deal on trade... If we want access to the single market and passporting rights... and the deal to include services. If there is no model for services and the EU dont want to negotiate... are you happy to leave with the likely possibility of the economy being in ruins after. To me that sounds like a bad deal
Click to expand...

It probably does, but such a scenario is more a mutually assured destruction approach by the eu given that much of the funding for the eu comes via London, and burning that bridge through protectionism will not be popular with the finance markets or banks.
 
satchef1 said:
Corbyn was good with the audience questions. Appeared confident. His interview with Paxman was something of a car crash; Paxman focussed on Corbyn's character, with very little talk of policy. Corbyn looked incredibly uncomfortable and frustrated.

May was pretty awful with the audience. She looked uneasy, and was on the back foot the whole time. Faisal Islam made sure she answered the questions instead of dodging them with the usual sound bites. The Prime Minister was much better with Paxman, though arguably she was on more comfortable ground. Paxman focussed on policy and her record in government. She gave a decent account of herself.
Click to expand...

Good summary. I would probably say the audience thing is in part the difference between policies which promise the moon billed to someone else vs doing what you believe to be right even if it is not popular.
 
jimjamuk said:
Missed it - can anyone give a one
Click to expand...
Summary here: http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-debate-live-jeremy-paxman-2017-5?r=US&IR=T

May improved as time went on and with honest answers. Good negotiating strategy for Brexit (very big support from audience on this).

Corbyn concerning history on IRA, Falklands and links with Hamas. He came across as knowing what he was talking about.

Suggests neither person won but that this is good for May as she has the lead going into the election.
 
satchef1 said:
Corbyn was good with the audience questions. Appeared confident. His interview with Paxman was something of a car crash; Paxman focussed on Corbyn's character, with very little talk of policy. Corbyn looked incredibly uncomfortable and frustrated.

May was pretty awful with the audience. She looked uneasy, and was on the back foot the whole time. Faisal Islam made sure she answered the questions instead of dodging them with the usual sound bites. The Prime Minister was much better with Paxman, though arguably she was on more comfortable ground. Paxman focussed on policy and her record in government. She gave a decent account of herself.
Click to expand...


Thanks not that I saw it but this seems more believable that the Corbyn won or May won answers
 
Dolph said:
It probably does, but such a scenario is more a mutually assured destruction approach by the eu given that much of the funding for the eu comes via London, and burning that bridge through protectionism will not be popular with the finance markets or banks.
Click to expand...

Losing access to 27 trade deals across the EU (plus other non eu countries) is much worse than the EU 27 loosing access to one ... no matter how big our economy currently is.
It wouldnt be a mutual destruction....the EU would survive much easier
 
delta0 said:
Summary here: http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-debate-live-jeremy-paxman-2017-5?r=US&IR=T

May improved as time went on and with honest answers. Good negotiating strategy for Brexit (very big support from audience on this).

Corbyn concerning history on IRA, Falklands and links with Hamas. He came across as knowing what he was talking about.

Suggests neither person won but that this is good for May as she has the lead going into the election.
Click to expand...

thanks will read
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom