|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: UK General Election June 8th 2017
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
Nutall has quit as UKIP leader, as of course they didn't get any seats. He's making a speech at the moment insisting they are still electorally relevant....
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Surely now he deserves to be allowed to lead without sniping from his critics; he's won that.
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
I can't see it. They seem to hate him with a passion; or hate what he stands for with a passion and therefore he is a target.
I hope *I* am wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
I suspect, and fear, you're right. But surely on the basis of last night's result, the last thing Labour needs is more in-fighting. Now's the time to go after the Tories, not each other.
They may do that. Politicians are usually pragmatists. If their political interests are best served by pulling together and fighting the Tories there's a fair chance they will do that.
Speaking as someone else who called it wrong, I think there needs to be humility on the part of the PLP and magnanimity on the part of Corbyn et. al.
What Corbyn achieved last night would have been pretty impressive for a mainstream Labour politician achieving respectful press coverage and with the support of the Parliamentary party. To achieve what he did in the circumstances he did was frankly bloody magnificent. I take it all back - well, most of it - he really is the absolute boy.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
Nutall has quit as UKIP leader, as of course they didn't get any seats. He's making a speech at the moment insisting they are still electorally relevant....
This has got to hurt: Nutall's big thing when he became leader was how UKIP was going to do serious damage to Labour for their (allegedly) anti-Brexit stance. Now Nutall's quit and Corbyn looks more secure than for a long time.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
I suspect its going to take a good long while for the most virulent of anti-Corbyn MP's to admit their current leader is not as bad as they thought.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
The DUP manifesto - the Bible with fortnightly bin collections.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Once more we have one party surprised that the electorate doesn't share its belief that it has an inherent and inalienable right to govern, and a second which again has successfully bribed influential sections of the electorate with uncosted promises that will prove a legislative nightmare and cost billions.
Of course Labour don't have an inherent and inalienable right to govern, but it will do them good to reflect on that for a while.
And, as for the Tories bribes, they simply got it wrong. Bribing the 5% wealthiest in the population doesn't work in a democracy, no matter how influential you think those people are (and, the multi-millionaries running our newspapers are influential), when the 95% see through it.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
Not sure that's true - Barrow is where all the nuclear submarines are built...
Woodcock is relatively popular locally, and it's possible that it was indeed Corbyn that gave him the 500 or so he needed to get over the line.
It's however equally likely that it was Corbyn that got the other guy to within 500 or so of him in the first place...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Still can't see how a DUP-Tory gov is going to work.. just needs few to be sick or away and they've no majority.
The trick here for the opposition is to be more organised, push everything to a vote, delay, obstruct, refuse to cooperate. I don't think a thin majority can survive that kind of pressure.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I think I'd be tabling laws about gay rights in NI. Get a few Tories to support it and the fragile coalition is toast.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wet Kipper
Circus Runaway
# 1654
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
This has made a vote for the SNP and explicit vote for an early IndyRef2 - which affected the local elections (where it should have been irrelevant) and yesterday. So, those people who don't want another referendum (which, probably, includes some of the vote-weary 45%) were more inclined to look at one of the other parties.
and when "one of the other parties" (Labour) was telling people to vote for the other "other party" to stop the SNP winning seats, you end up with "surprise" Tory gains.
--------------------
- insert randomly chosen, potentially Deep and Meaningful™ song lyrics here -
Posts: 9841 | From: further up the Hill | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
Not sure that's true - Barrow is where all the nuclear submarines are built...
Woodcock is relatively popular locally, and it's possible that it was indeed Corbyn that gave him the 500 or so he needed to get over the line.
It's however equally likely that it was Corbyn that got the other guy to within 500 or so of him in the first place...
Barrow has voted Labour since 1987 but the majorities have been slipping each election.
Woodcock held on by 800 votes in 2015. He likely would have lost but for Corbyn.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The DUP manifesto - the Bible with fortnightly bin collections.
The Tory hope is a bunch of fundamentalist Protestants with historic links to Loyalist terrorist groups.
Expect them to shut up about Corbyn and the IRA - can you imagine if Labour were short of a majority and cosied up with Sinn Fein? You'd never hear the end. Yeah, I know that Sinn Fein don't take up their seats, but for the sake of argument...
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
It might be interesting if someone was able to persuade Sinn Fein to turn up to Westminster only for a no-confidence vote - on the basis that DUP in government would destroy Stormont and leave NI adrift.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Karl:
quote:
The Tory hope is a bunch of fundamentalist Protestants with historic links to Loyalist terrorist groups.
I woke up this morning and can't quite believe what I'm reading. I know political parties like to hold on to power, but surely not at any cost. A Tory/DUP alliance......well, I've seen it all now. What a terrible, terrible mistake.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
Not sure that's true - Barrow is where all the nuclear submarines are built...
Woodcock is relatively popular locally, and it's possible that it was indeed Corbyn that gave him the 500 or so he needed to get over the line.
It's however equally likely that it was Corbyn that got the other guy to within 500 or so of him in the first place...
Barrow has voted Labour since 1987 but the majorities have been slipping each election.
Woodcock held on by 800 votes in 2015. He likely would have lost but for Corbyn.
In the 1980s Barrow elected a conservative, switching to labour in the 1990s with a generally declining majority.
Personally, I think opposition to Trident is likely to be a significant factor for the 2015 and 2017 election results. Before then (in 2010) John Woodcock had a better majority than his predecessor. Also the labour vote in Barrow may be just that labour demographic which is supposed not to like Corbyn
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
I suspect its going to take a good long while for the most virulent of anti-Corbyn MP's to admit their current leader is not as bad as they thought.
I'd like to see Corbyn use the next few years to take an iron grip on the party machine and use it to attack his internal opponents. He should pick a few vulnerable Blairites and show the party that dissent will be exterminated. OK, I'm beginning to go Dr Who now, but I am excited.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by Karl:
quote:
The Tory hope is a bunch of fundamentalist Protestants with historic links to Loyalist terrorist groups.
I woke up this morning and can't quite believe what I'm reading. I know political parties like to hold on to power, but surely not at any cost. A Tory/DUP alliance......well, I've seen it all now. What a terrible, terrible mistake.
It does rather reduce the British government's ability to play honest broker in the Province if it is dependent for it's survival for the votes of one faction in the House of Commons.
On the plus side, if you live in Northern Ireland you can now expect to be living the life of Riley at the expense of the English taxpayer. I'm sure that won't stimulate any resentment among the English who are notoriously laid back about that sort of thing.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
It was vaguely funny watching that Woodcock guy in Barrow get asked what he thought about Corbyn - his only answer was "I'm not sure what is going on." Dude won by less then 500 votes and likely only won due to Corbyn but just couldn't admit that possibly Corbyn was a decent campaigner.
I suspect its going to take a good long while for the most virulent of anti-Corbyn MP's to admit their current leader is not as bad as they thought.
I'd like to see Corbyn use the next few years to take an iron grip on the party machine and use it to attack his internal opponents. He should pick a few vulnerable Blairites and show the party that dissent will be exterminated. OK, I'm beginning to go Dr Who now, but I am excited.
I think if he does that, it will be fatal for the party's chances of doing even better at the next election - Labour in-fighting once again.
Look, Corbyn's critics should shut up: as I said in a previous post, Corbyn's played a blinder in this election, far exceeding expections and he's won the chance to lead unchallenged. If there's any rumblings of a leadership election based on "but we didn't win", then the people making them are stupid and want to lose.
But, equally, this is no time for Corbyn and his supporters to turn on others in the party; to do that will confirm people's view of Labour as a party that's likely to fall out with itself, to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They need to keep their fire trained on May and the Tories (and DUP) now, to go in as one against their weaknesses. To try and get revenge on the right of he party can only detract from that and make Labour's position worse, not better.
And in any case, wouldn't it be better for Corbyn's side to show they're better than those who forced the leadership election: show they welcome those on the right of the party who hail Corbyn's victory, welcome them back into the fold, call on them to work with Corbyn to push on towarda the next election? This result should be a uniting, not a dividing, one for the party.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ArachnidinElmet
Shipmate
# 17346
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by ArachnidinElmet:
Sexist scumbag, Philip Davies, has lost Shipley. A pleasing result.
I've been asleep but I think this is wrong, sadly.
Dammit you're right. Thought I'd caught the official results, but obviously not.
Very happy about the West Yorkshire results. Labour have held Wakefield and gained three other seats; Yvette Cooper still has her 15,000 majority in Pontefract and Castleford. As stated above (poss by Doublethink?) these are all areas Theresa May visited. We've been bombarded by leaflets comparing a Corbyn Win to Trump's victory and banging on about Brexit. This is a high Leave area (60+%) and the Cons still didn't gain enough traction. Clearly it's not easy to buy an election.
In a side issue, The Yorkshire Party (centre left, want devolved regional power) seem to have mopped up a lot of the Lib Dem vote. A friend, a first time MP candidate, was standing in my constituency and jumped straight to 3rd with 2000-odd votes. It'll be interesting to see if that develops into something over time, or if it's just a blip.
--------------------
'If a pleasant, straight-forward life is not possible then one must try to wriggle through by subtle manoeuvres' - Kafka
Posts: 1887 | From: the rhubarb triangle | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
On the plus side, if you live in Northern Ireland you can now expect to be living the life of Riley at the expense of the English taxpayer. I'm sure that won't stimulate any resentment among the English who are notoriously laid back about that sort of thing.
The "spongers" line did not play well for Harold Wilson.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
I would claim to be happy as can be with this result for several reasons.
I didn't want to see Corbyn and McDonnell in Downing St with their Marxist agenda of tax, spend and borrow your way to bankruptcy.
I didn't want to see Nicola Sturgeon with 50% or more of the Scottish vote crowing about independence.
I didn't want to see Teresa May with a stonking majority which would allow her to ride roughshod over the electorate.
Having said that, Corbyn was the hero of the campaign in England and Ruth Davidson was in Scotland. So where do we go from here?
I think that the Tories with DUP support are perfectly entitled to form a government because they still had 50 seats more than Labour. I suspect that, hopefully, a hard Brexit is much less likely, because it will have to focus more on the needs of Northern Ireland to maintain an open border. Also May is a busted flush who won't be taken seriously in Brussels. That could be good for a serious softening of her stance.
We can also safely say that a Scottish independence referendum can be kicked into the long grass with the SNP getting only 37% of the Scottish vote. So all in all, I'm quite happy with the outcome.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
Wow.
Just read a transcript of May's speech outside No 10; it's harder to imagine a stronger case of denial of what's happened over the last 12-24 hours than that, basically pretending that nothing has changed, that everything's still OK for her, that things can go on as normal and that - most incredibly - hooking up with the DUP will provide "certainty" for 5 years.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I know political parties like to hold on to power, but surely not at any cost. A Tory/DUP alliance......well, I've seen it all now. What a terrible, terrible mistake.
Well, when all the other parties have point-blank said that they refuse to work with the Tories, and yet the Tories still have the largest block of seats (not quite a majority, but close), that's what happens.
The Lib Dems were hardly going to offer, after what happened to them last time.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I woke up this morning and can't quite believe what I'm reading. I know political parties like to hold on to power, but surely not at any cost. A Tory/DUP alliance......well, I've seen it all now. What a terrible, terrible mistake.
When the Conservatives and the DUP have 328 seats between them and Labour have 261, why shouldn't they get the first chance to form a government? 326 is the magic number for an overall majority, but since Sinn Fein don't sit, they have the arithmetic!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
It was great to wake up to a pleasant electoral surprise for once.
I was never a Corbyn hater, but I was very sceptical about him achieving anything like this. Hats off to him, and McDonnell, actually, always a good performer on "Today" and probably the brains of the outfit.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Wow.
Just read a transcript of May's speech outside No 10; it's harder to imagine a stronger case of denial of what's happened over the last 12-24 hours than that, basically pretending that nothing has changed, that everything's still OK for her, that things can go on as normal and that - most incredibly - hooking up with the DUP will provide "certainty" for 5 years.
Well, she's obviously not going to say "My government is now on life-support propped up by a bunch of religious bigots and terrorist-lovers."
But, on that score, what potential issues, if any, are there which might compel the DUP to take the risk abandoning the Tories in a confidence vote?
[ 09. June 2017, 12:28: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I think that the Tories with DUP support are perfectly entitled to form a government because they still had 50 seats more than Labour. I suspect that, hopefully, a hard Brexit is much less likely, because it will have to focus more on the needs of Northern Ireland to maintain an open border. Also May is a busted flush who won't be taken seriously in Brussels. That could be good for a serious softening of her stance.
Entitlement is the wrong phrase. In a Westminster parliament, the government can only exist if it has the support of a majority of MPs. It isn't about whether May is "entitled" to form a government, it is about whether she can hold together enough MPs to deliver a government platform.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The Tories would be able to form a perfectly functional government without the help of the DUP. But, it appears Mrs May has bought into the lie that a strong and stable government needs to be able to control a majority of MPs. Which is, of course, nonsense.
A minority government is better than a majority in many ways. Most importantly they can't rely on simply whipping their MPs through the lobbies to get their way. They need to sell their policies, convincing at least a small number of the MPs from other parties to support them (or, at the very least a larger number to abstain). Policies which can generate cross-party support are IMO almost guaranteed to be better. And, being only a small number of seats short the only way they'd lose a no-confidence vote is if they do something so stupid that they can't even get all of their own MPs voting for them, in which case they don't deserve to govern.
By bringing the DUP onboard Mrs May would have ticked off many of the Tory voters for no real gain. Another example of why she isn't fit to be our PM.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The Tories would be able to form a perfectly functional government without the help of the DUP. But, it appears Mrs May has bought into the lie that a strong and stable government needs to be able to control a majority of MPs. Which is, of course, nonsense.
Rubbish.
quote:
A minority government is better than a majority in many ways. Most importantly they can't rely on simply whipping their MPs through the lobbies to get their way. They need to sell their policies, convincing at least a small number of the MPs from other parties to support them (or, at the very least a larger number to abstain). Policies which can generate cross-party support are IMO almost guaranteed to be better. And, being only a small number of seats short the only way they'd lose a no-confidence vote is if they do something so stupid that they can't even get all of their own MPs voting for them, in which case they don't deserve to govern.
I suggest you misunderstand the nature of the Westminster system. It simply isn't built for coalitions or cross-party agreement on the majority of issues - there simply isn't time to debate absolutely everything.
In fact the whole thing is based on the ancient idea of representatives voting on their conscience and the whole party thing was a more recent development. As such it retains oddities which mean that it is the individual MP voting on his/her conscience that has all the power in the Westminster system and not the whip. The party can threaten and cajole but at the end of the day it is the MP who walks through the voting chamber and nobody can stop him/her doing so.
quote:
By bringing the DUP onboard Mrs May would have ticked off many of the Tory voters for no real gain. Another example of why she isn't fit to be our PM.
I think a more immediate concern is that there are Tory MPs who are uncomfortable with becoming the DUP-in-London.
Come the first contentious bill, we'll see how strong this Tory-DUPE really is. I suspect not very.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Two thoughts.
1. As just stated on the BBC News, a Tory/DUP alliance poses problems for government in Ulster as it will be impossible to convince republicans that Westminster is working in the province's best interest. And, on a national level, I am worried that too much policy will be driven by the need to keep the DUP onside.
2. Could one suggest that Sturgeon's emphases on Scotland having voted to Remain and her desire to have a second independence referendum have not only blown up in her face but also inadvertently strengthened Mrs. May's position? (That wouldn't have been the case if people had transferred their allegiance from SNP to Labour).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Wow.
Just read a transcript of May's speech outside No 10; it's harder to imagine a stronger case of denial of what's happened over the last 12-24 hours than that, basically pretending that nothing has changed, that everything's still OK for her, that things can go on as normal and that - most incredibly - hooking up with the DUP will provide "certainty" for 5 years.
Well, she's obviously not going to say "My government is now on life-support propped up by a bunch of religious bigots and terrorist-lovers."
But, on that score, what potential issues, if any, are there which might compel the DUP to take the risk abandoning the Tories in a confidence vote?
On the first point, no she's not going to admit "it's all gone a bit s**t".But when your party's just lost their majority in an election they (and everyone else) were expecting to win handsomely, an election that was totally unnecessary and which you called for no real reason AND when a lot of that is being attributed to you fighting a poor campaign and producing a poor manifesto... surely some level of "lessons learnt" or "we will listen more closely" would be appropriate when you re-enter Number 10? Didn't see any of that in May's speech.
On the second point: I'll admit I was ranting as much as anything. I've just got this "it'll all end in tears" feeling about it.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Indeed, a very comfortable majority voted against it in the referendum, but the SNP still held all but 3 of the Scottish seats in the old Parliament.
Yes. After the first ref, the SNP were able to galvanise support in the next Westminster election to pull off a shock result.
That was never going to work this time around, and focusing on the possibility of an #indyref2 was a mistake.
The big difference was that in 2015 there was no question about there being another independence referendum. The 2014 result was clear, and without any major change in circumstances there wasn't going to be another shot until sometime after 2030. Scots opposed to independence could then vote SNP based on support for the rest of their policies (or simply an "up-you" to the Labour and Tory two-party system) without fear that by doing so they were implicitely supporting another referendum during the course of the Parliament (and, several after that).
Then there was Brexit, and the refusal of the Tory government to even consider what the Scottish Parliament were saying, and IndyRef was back on the table. Even holding the referendum had changed the circumstances making an early IndyRef2 more likely - which I think was reflected in the move away from SNP in the Scottish Parliament elections prior to the EU referendum. This has made a vote for the SNP and explicit vote for an early IndyRef2 - which affected the local elections (where it should have been irrelevant) and yesterday. So, those people who don't want another referendum (which, probably, includes some of the vote-weary 45%) were more inclined to look at one of the other parties.
The SNP was never likely to keep all the seats they had. The result does show that the polls saying there wasn't an appetite in Scotland for amongst the majority for another vote were right. 65% of people voted for a Unionist party rather than the SNP.
It's also likely to be an expression of dissatisfaction with the SNP's government in general. They've been in power for 10 years. There's only so much London blaming you can get away with.
Labour had a fantastic campaign. The Tories were pitiful. And, having made a huge fuss about Labour's links with terrorism and "coalitions of chaos" have done what exactly?! Shameful!
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I woke up this morning and can't quite believe what I'm reading. I know political parties like to hold on to power, but surely not at any cost. A Tory/DUP alliance......well, I've seen it all now. What a terrible, terrible mistake.
When the Conservatives and the DUP have 328 seats between them and Labour have 261, why shouldn't they get the first chance to form a government? 326 is the magic number for an overall majority, but since Sinn Fein don't sit, they have the arithmetic!
Constitutionally it's innocuous but given the toxicity of some of the DUP positions - on the issue of gay rights, for example, they make Tim Farron look like Peter Tatchell - it's not a good look and it completely nixes the British government's ability to play honest broker. With Stormont currently suspended over a disagreement between the DUP and the Shinners, that is rather significant.
The trouble with Mrs May is that simply everything is subordinated to the question of staying in power. I wouldn't mind so much, but if we've learned anything in the last few weeks she clearly isn't particularly good at it.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I suggest you misunderstand the nature of the Westminster system. It simply isn't built for coalitions or cross-party agreement on the majority of issues - there simply isn't time to debate absolutely everything.
Westminster is an adverserial system. It doesn't have to be that way, a consensual system is far better and works very well throughout most of the rest of Europe, and beyond. I don't see any reason why I shouldn't want a better way of governing the country than the crap system we currently have. And, if that means needing to find methods of prioritising things so that there is time to debate important issues properly then we need to find those methods, not throw up our hands in defeat and not engage with getting a better system in place. The committee stages of legislation already provide ample opportunity for serious discussion of issues. If we need more time in the chamber, then turning PMQs into a serious discussion rather than the current shambolic circus would help.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Sorry, I don't agree but am too tired to argue about it. Westminster is set up as an adversarial system in a way that the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament are not.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Sorry, I don't agree but am too tired to argue about it. Westminster is set up as an adversarial system in a way that the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament are not.
And, I agree that's how Westminster currently is. Just that it needn't be that way, and a consensual system could work without changing any of the structures (so, legislation still processes the same way, no need to change the awful FPTP etc), just a change in attitude by MPs to be there to get the best laws for the country rather than shouting down any idea not proposed by their side. Some changes to the system would help, but aren't essential to take a step or two towards a democracy we can be proud of.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Also, don't underestimate the effect of the size the Labour Party now is. There were thousands upon thousands of volunteers prepared to go out and knock on doors.
When we discussed this before many of us sceptics thought the joiners had done so to elect Corbyn for as a one-off act and wouldn't be willing to or able to sell him on the doorstep.
Clearly enough of them were in fact both willing and able. And likely the success will inspire more to join them.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
When we discussed this before many of us sceptics thought the joiners had done so to elect Corbyn for as a one-off act and wouldn't be willing to or able to sell him on the doorstep.
Clearly enough of them were in fact both willing and able. And likely the success will inspire more to join them.
It occurs to me that the whole shiny-faced victory salutes by Corbyn and chums is actually to rouse the base for the next election.
Surely it is clear to everyone that nobody has won. Yes, the Labour party did far better than almost anyone expected, but there is no sense that they could run a minority government with so many seats fewer than the Tories. So pretending that they could is either bollocks or a ploy.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
... The trouble with Mrs May is that simply everything is subordinated to the question of staying in power. ...
I'd say, 'that's because she's a Conservative' except that Gordon Brown was much the same.
I haven't been posting or following this thread, because I've found this election deeply, deeply depressing, so much so that I didn't even stay up to watch the results come in. It was quite a surprise to get up this morning to find out about the only good thing about it IMHO, which is that it's failed to give either of the two main parties an overall majority.
I've a high regard for our local MP, who, as it happens, is out of favour with their party leader, but there was nothing about either main party as they are at the moment that made me want to vote for them. There still isn't.
I don't like Mrs May but she doesn't arouse in me the visceral personal feelings of dislike that some other politicians, some of them in her cabinet, do. Perhaps I'd better not mention their names. I still don't like Jeremy Corbyn. The election campaign hasn't changed that. Nor have the Facebook sharing of his fans. And I don't think the adulation he's been getting recently is good for him. He isn't used it it. I strongly suspect that over the last 18 months it has been going to his head. I also still find John McDonnell sinister.
I also don't think either party leader has shown any sign of being able or willing to work with others, nor to change their minds about anything.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Goode
Shipmate
# 9224
|
Posted
I believe I may have said this here before, but it's such an apt pearl of wisdom, it bears repeating.
As a former boss of mine used to say: "There's only thing in this life that's worse than getting shot up the ringpiece, and that's shooting yourself up the ringpiece".
[ 09. June 2017, 14:10: Message edited by: David Goode ]
Posts: 654 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Surely it is clear to everyone that nobody has won. Yes, the Labour party did far better than almost anyone expected, but there is no sense that they could run a minority government with so many seats fewer than the Tories. So pretending that they could is either bollocks or a ploy.
Politicians have to pretend they have done better than they have done. But having said that, going from facing a wipe-out to a hung parliament under the circumstances of adverse press and a divided parliamentary party is pretty incredible and I suspect that many of the smiles are genuinely heart-felt.
Claiming to be ready to form a government is maybe an over-egged pudding, but what is an opposition for if not to oppose?
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I still don't like Jeremy Corbyn. The election campaign hasn't changed that. Nor have the Facebook sharing of his fans. And I don't think the adulation he's been getting recently is good for him. He isn't used it it. I strongly suspect that over the last 18 months it has been going to his head.
Whats your evidence for this?
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
"Strong and Stable" appears to be dead and Maggie May has replaced it with "Certainty"!
Who is she kidding? The situation is less certain than ever! I can't recall any recent Tory government being dependent on Unionist support, still less Democratic* Unionist support.
*"Democratic" here has much the same meaning as in "People's Democratic Republic of North Korea".
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
The hilarious thing is that I'm sure Corbyn has rung SF to try to get them to help him into government.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The hilarious thing is that I'm sure Corbyn has rung SF to try to get them to help him into government.
You can bet Tory Party HQ will be running that through the Wapping Liar and similar papers.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'd say, 'that's because she's a Conservative' except that Gordon Brown was much the same.
Gordon Brown didn't resign until the coalition was agreed because somebody had to stay in place to mind the fort. He didn't come out maintaining that nothign had changed and that he was providing certainty.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Funny old world isn't it. At this election UKIP received 593,852 votes, stunningly close to the 514,819 votes received by the BNP in 2010.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
Sinn Fein press conference coming up. Will they do the unthinkable now they know the DUP are going to hold a power balance?
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Okay, for what it’s worth, this is my analysis. It's long (fnarr). Apologies.
The Labour vote in Leave areas was vulnerable to swings to the Tories, who successfully parked their tanks on UKIP’s lawn and effectively annihilated them as a party.
The Conservative vote in Remain areas was vulnerable to swings to Labour, but not because Labour promised them a second referendum, but a ‘better’ Brexit.
There was a lot of tactical voting between the left, against the right.
The SNP relied too much on IndyRef2 to shore up its vote, leaving it vulnerable to unionist voting, even if that meant the Tories.
Labour didn’t lose the seats they were expected to in the north. Even though most of the UKIP vote went to the Conservatives, Labour also increased their vote numbers by enough to hold them off.
There were huge swings to Labour in the south, enough to topple some and worry a lot of others.
A great number of those votes came from younger people, many voting for the first time. University students especially, but also others who had been previously disengaged from the political debate. They overwhelmingly voted Labour.
The press, newspapers (including the Guardian), and television (and especially the BBC) had spent months monstering Corbyn. There was absolutely no way of getting the signal through the noise. Two things changed that: firstly, the leak, then launch of the Labour manifesto, and secondly the ‘impartiality’ rules that meant the BBC had to at least attempt to report Labour fairly.
Corbyn and his team managed to outflank the negative publicity by doing something very old and something very new. He went out on the stump. He talked to people. The more people saw of him, the more people liked him, and the more obvious the disconnect between what people were told to think and what he actually said. The other was social media: the younger you are, the more likely you are to get your news through Facebook and Twitter. People, unorganised and adhoc, started refuting the anti-Corbyn propaganda and challenging those spreading it.
You don’t win hearts and minds by promising the same as the other lot with a bit of red-wash. You do it by laying out a progressive, radical platform that gives people the hope of a better future. No matter how often Corbyn was characterised as ‘far left’, his actual policies were smack in the middle of European social democracy. That’s what people wanted. And when they saw it, they voted for it.
Corbyn ran an absolute blinder of a campaign. May ran a grotesquely awful one.
Imagine what would have happened if the Parliamentary Labour Party had spent the last two years getting behind Corbyn rather than trying to stab him in the back. Imagine what would have happened if the press (especially the BBC) hadn’t spent two years trying to poison the well.
Now we’re left with a minority Conservative government assisted by the almost comically retrograde DUP, a corrupt, venal party with as many links to terrorists as Sinn Fein. God help us all.
The light at the end of the tunnel is this: young people overwhelmingly reject the Conservatives, and the chances of a hard Brexit have diminished hugely.
All in all, 6.5/10, could do better, but well done all you youngsters. One last push and we’re there.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
At least, we will all be saved from sodomy and evolution now, and not just Ulster. I see a plan!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
