Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II
- Thread starter Zefan
- Start date
- Status
Ooooops. Sadly nowadays its hard to tell the difference. Plus 2020 is the first election where online voting is going to be allowed so it just didnt surprise me if Murdoch had got the gig to run it all.
If you are going to do spoof articles then you need to do ones which arent likely to become true IMO
Considering the demographics of this forum, I'm slightly shocked at the new poll results. I didn't know who to vote for a couple of weeks ago but May has made the decision much easier, to me she's more of a danger to a larger number of people (including the poor and vulnerable) than Corbyn. My main gripe with voting Labour - Dianne Abbott.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 657
Corbyn and Abbott running the country is a sobering thought. 47 of his own MPs went against his 3 line whip. They don't respect or listen to him and he'd be a disaster if he won.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,726
Agreed. I'm all for supporting labour this year... But Dianne Abbott really should go. She is a liability at this point... And putting voters off.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 3,343
- Location
- TheWirral
my google skills are failing me.
if one was to vote labour would this ensure that people
who require residential / nursing care in their later years would NOT have to sell
their homes to fund it?
i know that the cons would want at least £100k of your home sale yes?
cheers.
ps- i understand there is a funding short fall but i think raising tax's / national insurance
would be a better alternative...
if one was to vote labour would this ensure that people
who require residential / nursing care in their later years would NOT have to sell
their homes to fund it?
i know that the cons would want at least £100k of your home sale yes?
cheers.
ps- i understand there is a funding short fall but i think raising tax's / national insurance
would be a better alternative...
I just read this on The Guardian's website https://www.theguardian.com/politic...emy-corbyn-tells-paxman-in-election-interview
Am I the only one that didn't see it that way last night? From what I saw and heard, his statement about writing "the appropriate letters to commanders" was saying the opposite, and that in fact he would be prepared to do it.
Am I the only one that didn't see it that way last night? From what I saw and heard, his statement about writing "the appropriate letters to commanders" was saying the opposite, and that in fact he would be prepared to do it.
There aren't any results yet, around 1600 members voted in the original poll and only 300 in this one so far.
It's very likely to be a far smaller gap either way than the original vote come polling day but unlikely to be a 20% lead for Labour.
Are you surprised the media is twisting what he's said to suit their narrative?
Tbh, I don't really care. If it gets to the point where someone has to actually push the button - we've all lost anyway
Yep, at that point all bets are off anyway and we're doomed.
Indeed. If we are ever at the point where a UK prime minister is about to press the button we've probably got a few minutes before we're vapourised and just adding more fallout for the cockroaches to deal with.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,457
Who do we want lining up for the fight then?
It's The Guardian, they're supposed to be supporting Corbyn, if they don't think he had a good night last night then he really didn't.
That statement about writing appropriate letters to naval commanders is meaningless, what's appropriate? "Here's your P45, now be a good chap and give all the ratings theirs as well".
Paxman was awful. He ended the Corbyn interview with his arms folded in a huff having spent the last fifteen minutes engaged in amateur trolling of Corbyn. Faizul's hosting of the questions was far more professional and he took opportunities to quickly and efficiently hold Corbyn and May to the intent of the questions on behalf of the audience. Much more impressive.
There's mutual benefit in the negotiations. It's not two people holding guns to each others heads, it's horse trading of what the other wants. Of course there will be a deal and it's not because we're "willing to walk away", it's because Britain has a lot to offer Europe just as Europe has a lot to offer us and a deal is a gain for both parties. Both the Conservatives and Labour know that. The biggest difference I think being that Corbyn is acknowledging it whilst May is trying to act like its a game of chicken for election purposes.
Honestly, Corbyn presented very, very well in the interview yesterday evening. I consider myself an intelligent person and even I considered voting for Labour after that.
Who said that?
Don't believe Labour have made any firm commitments on the issue of social care, vague promises of setting up a National Social Care Service and achieving a cross-party consensus on how it should be funded with options including a new wealth tax. More than likely if Corbyn gets in we'll be stuck with the current situation where all but the last £23k of someone's assets could be taken by the state, including forcing the sale of their house.
They haven't said yet what the cap on social care costs will be, they've said they're going to consult various groups before setting it. It could be less than £100k, it could be more.
The contents of the letters can include an option to do nothing.
- Status