Chat Forum
It is currently Thu May 25, 2017 11:41 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3912 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 ... 98  Next

Which way will you vote?
Conservative 33%  33%  [ 59 ]
Labour 9%  9%  [ 17 ]
Liberal Democrats 25%  25%  [ 45 ]
UKIP 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
Scottish National Party 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
Greens 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
Democratic Unionist Party 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
Plaid Cymru 4%  4%  [ 7 ]
Sinn Fein 9%  9%  [ 17 ]
Gavin Henson/Other 9%  9%  [ 16 ]
Total votes : 180
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:47 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
What's interesting about that one is that it's a policy which poll respondents seem to like, until and unless it's explicitly associated with Labour, at which point it suddenly becomes indelibly associated with venal grasping and work-avoidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17860
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
openclashXX wrote:
also in other news (not sure if it's been posted yet or not) but McDonnell unsurprisingly wants to raise income tax on those earning more than £70k

Quote:
Yesterday, the Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, said the election should not focus on Brexit, but on an economy that is about to take a turn for the worse. He also appeared to make a specific announcement on tax: arguing that ‘the rich [need to] pay their way more’, and in particular those earning ‘above £70,000 to £80,000 a year’.

For 2017/18, the ‘higher rate’ of tax at 40 per cent is currently applied to people earning above £45,000 per year. The ‘additional rate’ of 45 per cent is applied to incomes over £150,000.

In 2014/15, people with pre-tax incomes above £70,000 were among the richest 5 per cent of individuals in the country, with the richest 1 per cent enjoying incomes in excess of £160,000 – although it is worth bearing in mind that the highest income individuals will not always live in the highest income households.

The income tax system is already highly reliant on high earners. HMRC estimate that the top 5 per cent in 2016/17 will have paid more than 47 per cent of all income tax, with the top 1 per cent contributing just under 27 per cent. This is not true of the tax base overall, however, with taxes such as VAT and National Insurance being much less skewed to high earners; indeed, in the case of VAT being actually regressive (ie less than proportional to income).


The link is here btw: http://www.ippr.org/blog/higher-tax-for ... -the-facts

they model different scenarios where McDonnell creates a new tax bracket of 45% for those earning between £70k-£150k and bring in 50% tax for those on more than £150k


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12378
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


Agreed

This election will be referdum mk2 with lib dem remainers winning in London boroughs at tories expense, and outside of London tories to Hoover up at labours expense

Lib dems are going to do very well out of this election I think


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:54 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
openclashXX wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
also in other news (not sure if it's been posted yet or not) but McDonnell unsurprisingly wants to raise income tax on those earning more than £70k

Quote:
Yesterday, the Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, said the election should not focus on Brexit, but on an economy that is about to take a turn for the worse. He also appeared to make a specific announcement on tax: arguing that ‘the rich [need to] pay their way more’, and in particular those earning ‘above £70,000 to £80,000 a year’.

For 2017/18, the ‘higher rate’ of tax at 40 per cent is currently applied to people earning above £45,000 per year. The ‘additional rate’ of 45 per cent is applied to incomes over £150,000.

In 2014/15, people with pre-tax incomes above £70,000 were among the richest 5 per cent of individuals in the country, with the richest 1 per cent enjoying incomes in excess of £160,000 – although it is worth bearing in mind that the highest income individuals will not always live in the highest income households.

The income tax system is already highly reliant on high earners. HMRC estimate that the top 5 per cent in 2016/17 will have paid more than 47 per cent of all income tax, with the top 1 per cent contributing just under 27 per cent. This is not true of the tax base overall, however, with taxes such as VAT and National Insurance being much less skewed to high earners; indeed, in the case of VAT being actually regressive (ie less than proportional to income).


The link is here btw: http://www.ippr.org/blog/higher-tax-for ... -the-facts

they model different scenarios where McDonnell creates a new tax bracket of 45% for those earning between £70k-£150k and bring in 50% tax for those on more than £150k


Nothing like stopping consumers spending to boost your economy. :roll:

People aren't saving so there is no surplus of cash to pay the extra tax. If he taxes the individual more then they will simply cut back on spending and the economy will falter. Typical lefty claptrap.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8311
Location: Sunny London
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney who got about 20K in a very strong remainer area. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Last edited by TranceNRG on Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Zac was only running as an independent nominally, and he was the incumbent. I would chalk this post up to wishful thinking


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:07 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Brexit is a big issue. Olney should hold the seat unless a remainer tory comes in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17860
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
theo wrote:
Nothing like stopping consumers spending to boost your economy. :roll:

People aren't saving so there is no surplus of cash to pay the extra tax. If he taxes the individual more then they will simply cut back on spending and the economy will falter. Typical lefty claptrap.


not to mention in the long-run you'll just see behaviour-switching, people on those sorts of incomes will just get their employer to pay them a paper salary of £69k or £149k and get the rest paid in through other loopholes

or just move overseas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8311
Location: Sunny London
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Brexit is a big issue. Olney should hold the seat unless a remainer tory comes in.


It's a big issue but I dare say a significant number of people who voted to remain have moved on and Brexit won't be the defining issue for them. Also a number of them would be dissapointed with Olney and wouldn't be voting her this time around. Reckon it will be very close.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:09 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4406
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


I'm not going to disagree on the first part - a decent conservative candidate would have a good chance, but on the second part I can disagree from personal experience. That was a train wreck of an interview, granted, but I know her and one interview where she was exhausted and couldn't hear properly due to a bad line, is not a fair way to assess her intellect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5070
backrow wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


Agreed

This election will be referdum mk2 with lib dem remainers winning in London boroughs at tories expense, and outside of London tories to Hoover up at labours expense

Lib dems are going to do very well out of this election I think


I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:15 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Brexit is a big issue. Olney should hold the seat unless a remainer tory comes in.


It's a big issue but I dare say a significant number of people who voted to remain have moved on and Brexit won't be the defining issue for them. Also a number of them would be dissapointed with Olney and wouldn't be voting her this time around. Reckon it will be very close.


You are mistaken. Brexit is the big issue. A lot will depend on how the Tories set out their Brexit policy and who they put forward. No one I have spoken to is disappointed with Olney. In fairness she's not had much time to make an impact.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
Hawk97 wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
Hawk97 wrote:
That poll is damning. I happen to think LD will have a very strong showing (certainly compared to 2015), but I doubt they'll usurp Lab for the main opposition.


It's the big question of the election, with the Tories certain to gain a lot of seats - just how low is Corbyn's floor of support? I think we will find that once the campaign really gets going it is very low indeed.


I think Conservatives will also lose plenty of seats. They'll lose some of those traditional LD South West seats that they picked up back to the LDs. I also think Corbyn's floor of support is very low.


While it's assumed the South West is vulnerable to Tory to Lib Dem swings, will it happen? The South West was pro-leave which may not mean they will swing the Lib Dems way in large numbers. I feel as they frame themselves as a remain party their chances at gaining seats are SW London, university towns (is tuition fees still in memory a factor?) is much bigger. I don't see massive gains at the moment. A good analysis of lib Dem target seats are here:

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battle ... l-democrat

It doesn't look like there is masses of them with realistic swings to challenge. Though they might be at such a low any gain is a victory.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12378
Are there any constituencies where ukip came second and have a chance of winning ?
Thanet and clacton , anywhere else ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
Leinster in London wrote:

I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.



Not a chance. They have 50+ seats last election. They have 8 and not even close to the level of last election in the polls. They haven't really gained form this often implied Remainer bounce. They are barley polling above UKIP. They probably won't even reach 20 seats on current trends. A bit of SW London and a few uni towns is their likely gains.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
eldanielfire wrote:
Leinster in London wrote:

I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.



Not a chance. They have 50+ seats last election. They have 8 and not even close to the level of last election in the polls. They haven't really gained form this often implied Remainer bounce. They are barley polling above UKIP. They probably won't even reach 20 seats on current trends. A bit of SW London and a few uni towns is their likely gains.


They haven't gained from the Remainer bounce in national polls, but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum. They may well not do as well as LiL suggests but saying they haven't got a chance is way too absolutist


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 322
Location: Newport, Gwent
openclashXX wrote:
again, highly unscientific, but on my Facebook feed over the past few days I've seen a fair few (until now relatively quiet) Labour supporters reappear posting exactly that sort of anti-Tory stuff that MW highlighted

for instance I've seen this re-shared a fair bit:

Image


:lol: :lol:

Here's Giles Brandreth finding out how many in Guildford are secret Labour voters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Leinster in London wrote:

I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.



Not a chance. They have 50+ seats last election. They have 8 and not even close to the level of last election in the polls. They haven't really gained form this often implied Remainer bounce. They are barley polling above UKIP. They probably won't even reach 20 seats on current trends. A bit of SW London and a few uni towns is their likely gains.


They haven't gained from the Remainer bounce in national polls, but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum. They may well not do as well as LiL suggests but saying they haven't got a chance is way too absolutist


Wot? When did I say they have no chance? I have clearly stated they will gain seats, I predict 20. But no chance of the 50 plus they enjoyed this century. In the by-elections since Brexit the Lib Dems won one. And fave frequently only gained swings of 1000 extra votes. That is all fine but the Tories have shown bigger swings. They are the big post Brexit winners.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
eldanielfire wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Leinster in London wrote:

I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.



Not a chance. They have 50+ seats last election. They have 8 and not even close to the level of last election in the polls. They haven't really gained form this often implied Remainer bounce. They are barley polling above UKIP. They probably won't even reach 20 seats on current trends. A bit of SW London and a few uni towns is their likely gains.


They haven't gained from the Remainer bounce in national polls, but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum. They may well not do as well as LiL suggests but saying they haven't got a chance is way too absolutist


Wot? When did I say they have no chance? I have clearly stated they will gain seats, I predict 20. But no chance of the 50 plus they enjoyed this century. In the by-elections since Brexit the Lib Dems won one. And fave frequently only gained swings of 1000 extra votes. That is all fine but the Tories have shown bigger swings. They are the big post Brexit winners.


Literally the first line of your previous post was "not a chance".

Yes, there is plenty of reason to doubt the Lib Dem surge. But doubt is not the same as "dismiss as impossible"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17860
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
bessantj wrote:


tbf you could conduct much of the same stuff in Labour heartlands with Tory policies (assuming you cherrypick the right ones that have broad popular support like Brandreth did for Corbyn)

all it really highlights is how rigid people have become with their voting tendancies on both sides of the political spectrum

plus what would've been more interesting is if he'd followed up on any of them

"do you want free thing X"

"yes"

"how do you want it funded?"

"er..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 684
Location: Dorset
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
I still have no idea who will be the Conservative candidate for Richmond Park assuming Zac G won't come back into the fold.

Though I have no doubt LD will win the seat.


I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Brexit is a big issue. Olney should hold the seat unless a remainer tory comes in.


It's a big issue but I dare say a significant number of people who voted to remain have moved on and Brexit won't be the defining issue for them. Also a number of them would be dissapointed with Olney and wouldn't be voting her this time around. Reckon it will be very close.


You are mistaken. Brexit is the big issue. A lot will depend on how the Tories set out their Brexit policy and who they put forward. No one I have spoken to is disappointed with Olney. In fairness she's not had much time to make an impact.


The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election. The Tories will fight this on immigration and Corbyn. I predict the dirtiest general election in 100 years.

Question time could be a good watch, there could well be fighting in the aisles. The left are up for this in a big way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:23 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 322
Location: Newport, Gwent
openclashXX wrote:
bessantj wrote:


tbf you could conduct much of the same stuff in Labour heartlands with Tory policies (assuming you cherrypick the right ones that have broad popular support like Brandreth did for Corbyn)

all it really highlights is how rigid people have become with their voting tendancies on both sides of the political spectrum

plus what would've been more interesting is if he'd followed up on any of them

"do you want free thing X"

"yes"

"how do you want it funded?"

"er..."


Yeah that's what I got out of it. It's 'funny' how people would cut off their nose to spit their face when it comes to how they vote.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Leinster in London wrote:

I think the LDs may reclaim most of the seat lost in the last election (in England).
I think Labour are unlikely to make any gains (except possibly in Scotland). The number they lose I think will depend upon the number of their supporters who stay at home.

The only story really will be how efficient the LD's are able to sell tactical voting of Labour supporters in marginal seats.



Not a chance. They have 50+ seats last election. They have 8 and not even close to the level of last election in the polls. They haven't really gained form this often implied Remainer bounce. They are barley polling above UKIP. They probably won't even reach 20 seats on current trends. A bit of SW London and a few uni towns is their likely gains.


They haven't gained from the Remainer bounce in national polls, but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum. They may well not do as well as LiL suggests but saying they haven't got a chance is way too absolutist


Wot? When did I say they have no chance? I have clearly stated they will gain seats, I predict 20. But no chance of the 50 plus they enjoyed this century. In the by-elections since Brexit the Lib Dems won one. And fave frequently only gained swings of 1000 extra votes. That is all fine but the Tories have shown bigger swings. They are the big post Brexit winners.


Literally the first line of your previous post was "not a chance".

Yes, there is plenty of reason to doubt the Lib Dem surge. But doubt is not the same as "dismiss as impossible"


There isn't a chance of them winning 50/60 seats in any sane analysis.

The "wot" is about the stuff you put about how they are not gained votes but are unambigious election result winners. In the actual By-elections they have made one gain from a candidate who disgraced himself in a election they are always possible winners. elsewhere their increased votes have frequently been around a 1000 votes and that would win they only 3 of their target seats. Even their post Brexit peaks have been far below where they were though the 90's and 2000's. How on earth are you claiming they ahve a chance of reaching 50/60 seats again?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


I agree. The two main reasons the serious analysis of why she changed her mind on Brexit have suggested she wants rid of Cameron manifesto as it is trash and embarrassing her domestic agenda. the other reason is that she is for a softer Brexit not a hard one (I've always stated any sensible look at her shows this) but doesn't want to risk opposition and her hard line Brexiters trying to down one. It's apparently what David Davis (another soft Brexiter) has been privately telling her since she was elected leader.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
eldanielfire wrote:
There isn't a chance of them winning 50/60 seats in any sane analysis.

The "wot" is about the stuff you put about how they are not gained votes but are unambigious election result winners. In the actual By-elections they have made one gain from a candidate who disgraced himself in a election they are always possible winners. elsewhere their increased votes have frequently been around a 1000 votes and that would win they only 3 of their target seats. Even their post Brexit peaks have been far below where they were though the 90's and 2000's. How on earth are you claiming they ahve a chance of reaching 50/60 seats again?


Yes, if you discount all but one of the elections in which they won since Brexit they haven't won many elections


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13311
Location: West of Londinium
eldanielfire wrote:
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


I agree. The two main reasons the serious analysis of why she changed her mind on Brexit have suggested she wants rid of Cameron manifesto as it is trash and embarrassing her domestic agenda. the other reason is that she is for a softer Brexit not a hard one (I've always stated any sensible look at her shows this) but doesn't want to risk opposition and her hard line Brexiters trying to down one. It's apparently what David Davis (another soft Brexiter) has been privately telling her since she was elected leader.

Given she's committed the UK to leaving the single market as a member, the customs union and the ECJ I'm not entirely sure where the soft bit is in all that. If anything I'd say she's hoping to gain enough seats so that she's not held hostage by tory remainers and the opposition. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 684
Location: Dorset
Gospel wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


I agree. The two main reasons the serious analysis of why she changed her mind on Brexit have suggested she wants rid of Cameron manifesto as it is trash and embarrassing her domestic agenda. the other reason is that she is for a softer Brexit not a hard one (I've always stated any sensible look at her shows this) but doesn't want to risk opposition and her hard line Brexiters trying to down one. It's apparently what David Davis (another soft Brexiter) has been privately telling her since she was elected leader.

Given she's committed the UK to leaving the single market as a member, the customs union and the ECJ I'm not entirely sure where the soft bit is in all that. If anything I'd say she's hoping to gain enough seats so that she's not held hostage by tory remainers and the opposition. :?


I agree with the above, there is no soft brexit. She need a bigger majority to drive a hard brexit through.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:42 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
Gospel wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


I agree. The two main reasons the serious analysis of why she changed her mind on Brexit have suggested she wants rid of Cameron manifesto as it is trash and embarrassing her domestic agenda. the other reason is that she is for a softer Brexit not a hard one (I've always stated any sensible look at her shows this) but doesn't want to risk opposition and her hard line Brexiters trying to down one. It's apparently what David Davis (another soft Brexiter) has been privately telling her since she was elected leader.

Given she's committed the UK to leaving the single market as a member, the customs union and the ECJ I'm not entirely sure where the soft bit is in all that. If anything I'd say she's hoping to gain enough seats so that she's not held hostage by tory remainers and the opposition. :?


Yes, under the current arrangements. The new arrangement may well see more of the same. She knows she is staring down an economic barrel if she f**k this up. Easier to get a transition period by moving out the next general election and then putting it all to the electorate again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 38624
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
There isn't a chance of them winning 50/60 seats in any sane analysis.

The "wot" is about the stuff you put about how they are not gained votes but are unambigious election result winners. In the actual By-elections they have made one gain from a candidate who disgraced himself in a election they are always possible winners. elsewhere their increased votes have frequently been around a 1000 votes and that would win they only 3 of their target seats. Even their post Brexit peaks have been far below where they were though the 90's and 2000's. How on earth are you claiming they ahve a chance of reaching 50/60 seats again?


Yes, if you discount all but one of the elections in which they won since Brexit they haven't won many elections


Their chance of reaching 50 seats again is also bolstered by the Conservatives' own polling showing that they would lost most of the 27 seats they gained from the Lib Dems two years ago back to them. So unless you think Labour are in a stronger position against the Lib Dems than the Tories are...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:53 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
Latest poll of polls has LD's over UKIP.

Spoiler: show
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8311
Location: Sunny London
kagamusha wrote:
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
theo wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:
I think the results will be closer this time around and Conservatives could potentially win it back if they have a good candidate and Zac doesn't contest it. Remember Zac was a strong leaver and running as an independent he still managed to get about 18.5K votes compared to Sarah Olney. I don't think Brexit will be an as big an issue as it was last year plus Olney doesn't' seem very bright either.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/l ... election/#


Brexit is a big issue. Olney should hold the seat unless a remainer tory comes in.


It's a big issue but I dare say a significant number of people who voted to remain have moved on and Brexit won't be the defining issue for them. Also a number of them would be dissapointed with Olney and wouldn't be voting her this time around. Reckon it will be very close.


You are mistaken. Brexit is the big issue. A lot will depend on how the Tories set out their Brexit policy and who they put forward. No one I have spoken to is disappointed with Olney. In fairness she's not had much time to make an impact.


The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election. The Tories will fight this on immigration and Corbyn. I predict the dirtiest general election in 100 years.

Question time could be a good watch, there could well be fighting in the aisles. The left are up for this in a big way.


Utter nonsense. This 'hard brexit' is a BS term coined by left wing parties. If you are referring to trading under WTO rules, neither EU nor UK want it. WTO is the worst case scenario in the unlikely event there's no deal but both parties are keen to have a free trade deal and avoid this scenario so I don't know why you guys keep peddling the same lies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13235
Location: South Oxfordshire
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


Very much this. There's an amusing polarity in political discussion at the moment, where on one side you have the SNP, LibDems etc all claiming that this is a Tory smokescreen to try and get loads of MPs to guarantee a very extreme Brexit, while on the other side you have the Tory voters and most external political commentators viewing this as a chance to try and get loads of MPs in order to guarantee that they don't get a very extreme Brexit.

With most of the opposition guaranteeing to vote against the result of any Brexit negotatiation unless it contains provisions that will be almost impossible to extract, the only result the current government can realistically achieve right now is to just crash out and hope to pick up the pieces later. With a majority of onoy 12, the hardliners in her own party won't permit any other alternative.

If she can get to 80+ seats then she can soften the deal significantly and still get it through parliament even with the opposition voting against it. The EU are in favour of this because they understand that negotaiations are far more likely to be fruitful as there will be some room to actually negotiate


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13235
Location: South Oxfordshire
theo wrote:
Latest poll of polls has LD's over UKIP.

Spoiler: show
Image


50 seats here we come!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:57 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18495
Saint wrote:
theo wrote:
kagamusha wrote:

The EU have called her bluff, May has found out that the only brexit is a hard brexit which is why she has called an election.

I don't think that is set in stone yet. My sense is that she needs to hold a larger majority to have more wriggle room to negotiate a deal that might be unpalatable to her staunch Brexiteers.


Very much this. There's an amusing polarity in political discussion at the moment, where on one side you have the SNP, LibDems etc all claiming that this is a Tory smokescreen to try and get loads of MPs to guarantee a very extreme Brexit, while on the other side you have the Tory voters and most external political commentators viewing this as a chance to try and get loads of MPs in order to guarantee that they don't get a very extreme Brexit.

With most of the opposition guaranteeing to vote against the result of any Brexit negotatiation unless it contains provisions that will be almost impossible to extract, the only result the current government can realistically achieve right now is to just crash out and hope to pick up the pieces later. With a majority of onoy 12, the hardliners in her own party won't permit any other alternative.

If she can get to 80+ seats then she can soften the deal significantly and still get it through parliament even with the opposition voting against it. The EU are in favour of this because they understand that negotaiations are far more likely to be fruitful as there will be some room to actually negotiate

:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13568
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
There isn't a chance of them winning 50/60 seats in any sane analysis.

The "wot" is about the stuff you put about how they are not gained votes but are unambigious election result winners. In the actual By-elections they have made one gain from a candidate who disgraced himself in a election they are always possible winners. elsewhere their increased votes have frequently been around a 1000 votes and that would win they only 3 of their target seats. Even their post Brexit peaks have been far below where they were though the 90's and 2000's. How on earth are you claiming they ahve a chance of reaching 50/60 seats again?


Yes, if you discount all but one of the elections in which they won since Brexit they haven't won many elections


Are you reading what you have posted? You've claimed they have had "but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum". they have won fewer By-Elections then both Labour and the Tories since Brexit. How does that show them as clear and unambiguous winners in elections since Brexit?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8311
Location: Sunny London
Also I don't see this big surge to Liberal Undemocrats. They've gained one point since the EU referendum so I don't know where they are going to win all these seats. People aren't buying in to their rhetoric.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/u ... l-10266121

Also Tim Farron has been consistently polling as one of the worst party leaders and only Jezza is behind him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8311
Location: Sunny London
eldanielfire wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
There isn't a chance of them winning 50/60 seats in any sane analysis.

The "wot" is about the stuff you put about how they are not gained votes but are unambigious election result winners. In the actual By-elections they have made one gain from a candidate who disgraced himself in a election they are always possible winners. elsewhere their increased votes have frequently been around a 1000 votes and that would win they only 3 of their target seats. Even their post Brexit peaks have been far below where they were though the 90's and 2000's. How on earth are you claiming they ahve a chance of reaching 50/60 seats again?


Yes, if you discount all but one of the elections in which they won since Brexit they haven't won many elections


Are you reading what you have posted? You've claimed they have had "but in actual election results they have been the clear and unambiguous winners since the EU referendum". they have won fewer By-Elections then both Labour and the Tories since Brexit. How does that show them as clear and unambiguous winners in elections since Brexit?


To use Chucky's own words 'it's wishful thinking'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13311
Location: West of Londinium
Saint wrote:
[If she can get to 80+ seats then she can soften the deal significantly and still get it through parliament even with the opposition voting against it. The EU are in favour of this because they understand that negotaiations are far more likely to be fruitful as there will be some room to actually negotiate

To reiterate, May's committed to the UK leaving the single market membership, the customs union and the ECJ. Perhaps you can pin the tail on the donkey for me and explain where she's going to be able to soften her stance? I'm not seeing a lot of wiggle room here unless we're talking about the money as the EU aren't for turning on freedom of movement.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3912 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 ... 98  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 4071, Bing [Bot], Bogbunny, Brazil, croyals, DragonKhan, duke, elcamino, geordie_6, Google Adsense [Bot], Grizz Wyllie, hermie, HighKingLeinster, Homer, Jensrsa, kiweez, Lobby, lorcanoworms, Margin_Walker, Market Square Hero, mr bungle, Mullet 2, MungoMan, nardol, Nolanator, Ogre, Peaches, penguin, Petros, Porterbelly1, rabble, Santa, Silver, spookly, swc, theo, The Sun God, Tony Blair's Therapist, Turbogoat, Wilson's Toffee and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group