Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

[wordy]

That so many people are considering Labour is deeply alarming.

Jeremy Corbyn:

Career politician for over 30 years.
Never had a meaningful job.
Terrorist sympathiser.
Weak on defence.
Economic policies straight out of the bad days of the 1970's.
Slept with Diane Abbott.
Is a garden gnome

Diane Abbott:

Racist.
Useless.
Never had a meaningful job.
Is Diane Abbott.
Slept with Jeremy Corbyn.

John McDonnell

Arch Marxist.
Never had a meaningful job.
Is John McDonnell.
Economically incompetent.

Yeah, well Teresa May looks like Zelda from Terrahawks.

 

[McPhee]

A spoiled ballot is effectively a Tory vote IMO.

Nobody of any importance will ever see your spoiled ballot, they just go in the bin

You're right. That was a bit of a dim point on my part. It would make more sense to vote Lib Dem. The question being, do I vote for them knowing it increases the chances of a Tory victory. Or do I vote for Labour, knowing it makes the Tories less likely to win?

 

[Uther]

''Jeremy Corbyn has announced he will take part in a live TV General Election debate tonight and challenged Theresa May to join him.

The Labour leader will join the leaders of the Liberal Democrats, UKIP, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru, and the SNP's leader at Westminster, at the BBC event, which has been boycotted by the Prime Minister.



The Tories are to be represented by Home Secretary Amber Rudd, after Mrs May made clear that she would not take part in a face-to-face showdown with any other party leaders during the campaign.

Mr Corbyn had also previously refused to take part in a leaders' debate unless the PM also took part.

The veteran left-winger's decision to attend reflects a growing confidence in the Labour camp, buoyed by the latest YouGov poll that suggested the UK could be heading for a hung parliament on 9 June, with the Tories falling short of an overall majority.

There will also be a political calculation in seeking to make the PM look weak and "running scared".

Mr Corbyn said: "I will be taking part in tonight's debate because I believe we must give people the chance to hear and engage with the leaders of the main parties before they vote.

"I have never been afraid of a debate in my life. Labour's campaign has been about taking our polices to people across the country and listening to the concerns of voters.

"The Tories have been conducting a stage-managed arms-length campaign and have treated the public with contempt. Refusing to join me in Cambridge tonight would be another sign of Theresa May's weakness, not strength."
http://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-to-take-part-in-live-tv-debate-10899431

 

[Em3bbs]

The Tory policies are awful and unpopular, some of the major ones at least

You mean the one that doesn't give you a free house after sitting on your arse for 50 years or so? Yeah, we get it.

 

[No1newts]

With the increased popularity of Corbyn be interesting what impact his appearance will have. He comes across as quite calm and relatively unflappable and this could provide a lot of negative publicity for Maybot is she still dodges.

I would probably say the negativity publicity she would receive for dodging will probably be better than her appearing as her pathetic excuse for any form of debate would probably she her mutilated on stage.

 

[FoxEye]

You're right. That was a bit of a dim point on my part. It would make more sense to vote Lib Dem. The question being, do I vote for them knowing it increases the chances of a Tory victory. Or do I vote for Labour, knowing it makes the Tories less likely to win?

If you sincerely don't want the Tories to win, and your seat is Labour/Tory, you vote Labour.

Anything else indicates you might actually be on the fence, and not entirely as disillusioned with the Tories as you claim. Ie, your confidence in them is lessened, but you still support them, begrudgingly.

Only you know the answer to that, but a spoiled vote or a vote for a party that has no chance is effectively endorsing the Tories, thanks to our useless FPTP system. But that's the reality we live in, and the reason why the Greens, Lib Dems, etc, can never do well. Ever.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I think it was a tory mistake making such a deal of May. When it comes to brexit what is needed is a"strong and stable" government, not individual. With a strong government in place with the majority of the UK voters backing them the profession negotiators are in a good place to do the actual negotiations. May would never actual do any negotiations herself, it's all pre agreed and negotiated long and hard by professional diplomats and civil servants - the leaders just do the sound bites and bargaining of a few headline at the end.

What is needed though is a strong vision for what is to be achieved by brexit for the professionals to then negotiate on. This is where I think think Labour or a weak coalition will spell disaster as it will be impossible for the diplomats to negotiate a good deal when they have a weak uncertain hand to play constantly getting undermined by UK parties wanting to promote their own interests rather than the big picture.

That above all is why i think like it or not we need a strong Tory government this time out to calm finance and big business, retain investment into the Uk, enable our professional negotiators to feel confident they have a firm backing to go get a good deal (no one ever got a good deal starting from a point of weakness and confusion). I just don't think practically any other party can offer that this time.

If the Tories screw up they get punished hard next time out (as I said before) when Labour stepped in for 13 years. Too much is at stake now for a weak government and dicking around trying to appeal to everyone, if we screw this up now we and our children will have to live with the consequences for decades and nothing i've seen from Labour supported by the SNP, Greens and Lib Dems in an alliance of convenience gives me confidence that would get the UK a good brexit result and decent trade deals globally encouraging big business and finance to continue to invest in the UK. Indeed talk of nationalising everything he can lay his hands on could just ensure companies look at brexit and the danger of a left wing government/nationalisation and decide to take the offers being made by france and germany to re locate lock stock and barrel.

There's a much bigger picture for the next few years than if you don't like an individual person.

If only we hadn't brought this mess upon ourselves and could have focused on other than Brexit for the next 2+ years

 

[FoxEye]

You mean the one that doesn't give you a free house after sitting on your arse for 50 years or so? Yeah, we get it.

You won't be able to find a single post from me, ever, saying that I want a free house from the state. I think you'll find the house I live in has been bought and paid for by my family.

You just have a massive issue with having a very modest inheritance, and would probably rather BTL landlords take our family home, then rent it back to me. Our family home isn't a mansion. It's a small terraced house.

Nice attempt to paint me as a freeloader, tho. I do work for a living.

 

[VincentHanna]

You're right. That was a bit of a dim point on my part. It would make more sense to vote Lib Dem. The question being, do I vote for them knowing it increases the chances of a Tory victory. Or do I vote for Labour, knowing it makes the Tories less likely to win?

If you sincerely don't want the Tories to win, and your seat is Labour/Tory, you vote Labour.

Agreed.

 

[dowie]

You won't be able to find a single post from me, ever, saying that I want a free house from the state. I think you'll find the house I live in has been bought and paid for by my family.

right and I just want to keep the money I earned and not have the government skim a big chunk of it... oh wait it doesn't work that way because we need to pay taxes in order for society to function

 

[Macro]

''Jeremy Corbyn has announced he will take part in a live TV General Election debate tonight and challenged Theresa May to join him.

The Labour leader will join the leaders of the Liberal Democrats, UKIP, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru, and the SNP's leader at Westminster, at the BBC event, which has been boycotted by the Prime Minister.



The Tories are to be represented by Home Secretary Amber Rudd, after Mrs May made clear that she would not take part in a face-to-face showdown with any other party leaders during the campaign.

Mr Corbyn had also previously refused to take part in a leaders' debate unless the PM also took part.

The veteran left-winger's decision to attend reflects a growing confidence in the Labour camp, buoyed by the latest YouGov poll that suggested the UK could be heading for a hung parliament on 9 June, with the Tories falling short of an overall majority.

There will also be a political calculation in seeking to make the PM look weak and "running scared".

Mr Corbyn said: "I will be taking part in tonight's debate because I believe we must give people the chance to hear and engage with the leaders of the main parties before they vote.

"I have never been afraid of a debate in my life. Labour's campaign has been about taking our polices to people across the country and listening to the concerns of voters.

"The Tories have been conducting a stage-managed arms-length campaign and have treated the public with contempt. Refusing to join me in Cambridge tonight would be another sign of Theresa May's weakness, not strength."
http://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-to-take-part-in-live-tv-debate-10899431

All that does is illustrate how two faced Corbyn is and prepared to dance to anyones tune if he thinks it will get him a vote. Up until today he's steadfastly refused to do a debate, now in a complete U-Turn it's for the good of free speech, although apparently that was't a good enough reason yesterday. So much for the much vaunted man of principles... meh...

 

[VincentHanna]

That's why there is already an inheritance tax Dowie, and also why Labours much derided 15% death tax would have been a lot fairer than what the conservatives are proposing.

 

[wildman]

Yeah, 'cos that stopped them last time

What happens depends on the arithmetic of the seats. Labour/SNP/LD is not likely.

Your levels of naivety are somewhat amusing. If you think the Lib Dems will lay down with the Tories after the way they threw them under the bus in the 2015 campaign and effectively cost them pretty much all of their seats then i am not sure how your thought processes work. There is absolutely no chance of them ever propping up a hard brexit visioned Tory government which is what we could end up with.

 

[FoxEye]

right and I just want to keep the money I earned and not have the government skim a big chunk of it... oh wait it doesn't work that way because we need to pay taxes in order for society to function

I'd quite happy to pay more tax. The govt can increase income tax to pay for social care if they want to.

The idea that working families must sell their family homes to pay for social care is nonsense.

And let's be honest. We know where these sold homes will end up. As fewer and fewer first time buyers can afford a house, they will just be added to a BTL portfolio. Or encourage another middle-class high-earning to become a BTL landlord.

Can't you see that this policy is both unnecessary for raising extra revenue, and also encourages a greater rich/poor divide? It's socially irresponsible in the current climate.

If we had a functioning housing market it might make sense. In the current climate, looking at the big picture - which you should always do - it is a policy which will hurt working families and not help them. It will only benefit BTL landlords.

 

[scorza]

Your levels of naivety are somewhat amusing. If you think the Lib Dems will lay down with the Tories after the way they threw them under the bus in the 2015 campaign and effectively cost them pretty much all of their seats then i am not sure how your thought processes work. There is absolutely no chance of them ever propping up a hard brexit visioned Tory government which is what we could end up with.

I agree with this. Rememer that the current leader of the LibDems, Tim Farron, did not want to be appointed as a government minister in the coalition precisely because he was on the left of the party and opposed to the Conservatives. If we get a hung parliament the LibDems will only go into coalition with Jeremy Corbyn, possibly with Farron as Foreign Secretary (no way will Corbyn want to get rid of Diane Abbot as Home Secretary).

 

[dowie]

Can't you see that this policy is both unnecessary for raising extra revenue, and also encourages a greater rich/poor divide? It's socially irresponsible in the current climate.

not particularly - all assets are already used in the case of residential care so in the case where your mother needed to go into a home (1/4 cases) she'd lose the house anyway (if no other assets present) and be liable for costs down to her last 23k rather than last 100k

in the case of non-residential care currently we've currently got discrimination based on asset allocation - why should someone with a 250k home be better protected than someone who also had a similar home but downsized to a 100k bungalow and now has 150k in cash/investments?

the idea of paying for care (of people with substantial assets) through general taxation seems unfair to me - in some cases families(particularly Asian ones) will look after elderly relatives and therefore not burden the state with these costs, not to mention that plenty of the working people you'd be taxing in order to fund this aren't able to afford a home themselves yet they're supposed to subsidise the care of asset rich people with greater wealth than themselves

edit - clarifying that I'm referring to people with substantial assets not people in general

 

[Rroff]

So much for the much vaunted man of principles

It is amusing how many are taken in by the persona he projects. You'd have thought by now people would have learnt.

 

[Six6siX]

Too much is at stake now for a weak government and dicking around trying to appeal to everyone, if we screw this up now we and our children will have to live with the consequences for decades and nothing i've seen from Labour supported by the SNP, Greens and Lib Dems in an alliance of convenience gives me confidence that would get the UK a good brexit result and decent trade deals globally encouraging big business and finance to continue to invest in the UK. Indeed talk of nationalising everything he can lay his hands on could just ensure companies look at brexit and the danger of a left wing government/nationalisation and decide to take the offers being made by france and germany to re locate lock stock and barrel.

Unfortunately, I think the time for trotting out the 'too much is at stake' line (project fear, was it?) has long since passed. If the issue of Brexit is that critical to the economy - if it's something that could make or break the entire country simply depending on who is in power then perhaps it is too big a gamble to take.

In my mind, no matter which party gets into power, Brexit will not be an economic success relative to what we currently have now. Therefore I'd rather vote for the party that has policies most aligned with my views and most likely to keep the one I disagree with the most out of power. The arguments over strong leadership are neither here nor there.

 

[antijoke]

That so many people are considering Labour is deeply alarming.

Jeremy Corbyn:

Career politician for over 30 years.
Never had a meaningful job.
Terrorist sympathiser.
Weak on defence.
Economic policies straight out of the bad days of the 1970's.
Slept with Diane Abbott.
Is a garden gnome

Diane Abbott:

Racist.
Useless.
Never had a meaningful job.
Is Diane Abbott.
Slept with Jeremy Corbyn.

John McDonnell

Arch Marxist.
Never had a meaningful job.
Is John McDonnell.
Economically incompetent.

 

[danielanthony]

Looks like Labour supporters showing their hatred of Jews again, Daily Fail link but also reported on Daily Politics show today:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...roll-Emma-Barnett-Woman-s-Hour-interview.html

Not all Labour supporters are like this, just like not all UKIP supporters are swivel-eyed racists either.