Personally I would feel a lot more comfortable voting Labour if I could hear a lot more from Yvette Cooper and the Eagles, and a lot less from Abbott, Thornberry and that piece of excrescence Gisela Stuart. The latter was today promising to discuss with her local party whether she will stand again. Presumably she is waiting to hear the rival offer from UKIP.
So people complain that May is 'unelected' and has no mandate.
Now she has called an election she is being accused of being manipulative and calculating.
Also, hasn't Skinner heard of 'innocent until proven guilty'? Pretty dangerous precedent to set that any ongoing investigation automatically suspends an MP.
Might as well scrap the FTPA now. Purportedly brought in to stop politically motivated snap elections, it has failed to stop the first one there has been opportunity to do so.
At this stage - and the way politics is going, it can change - it is looking like a Tory landslide which will be a disaster for the country. It will make the prospect of a soft Brexit all the more unlikely. The best result for May would not be to gain a landslide though, only a slightly enhanced majority - this will terminally weaken Corbyn and make the Labour party more of a future threat, especially when Brexit turns out not to be the great thing some people think. She has given the people another two years of post Brexit decline to cement their views - not clever! I think staying in the single market is more important than party politics and in that respect, I will put my vote wherever the chances of that prospect is improved.
The alternative, and I think more plausible view, is that May fears the hard right in her party will inhibit her negotiations for what she knows is required for trade deals - a softer line on immigration. The secret of successful negotiation is both sides being able to show they have won. For any deal, the EU will need to show they have retained an element of free movement of people and the UK will need to retain some preferential trade relationships, and both claim credit for being able to compromise.
Calling the election is being portrayed as being done in the interests of the Tory party, not the nation. Why the two are mutually exclusive is not quite explained, unless you believe May is intent on making no concession to the EU on immigration and will sacrifice any opportunity of a trade deal.
The frenzy stoked up by the death rattles of the Remainers that all May wants is a hard, hard Brexit is based on what? She is nothing if not a shrewd and pragmatic politician, and will change her tune as the moment dictates and seems unruffled by accusations of "U" turns and broken promises, if they can be justified, - and she is a Remainer.
The inevitable backlash from the rabid anti-immigrant element of Brexit voters, who, supported by the hard right Tories, can be ignored and left to voice their demands at the ensuing election, rather than disrupt the final negotiations.
Give May some credit for genuinely wanting to avoid a divided nation and expect her to justify rowing back on "Brexit means Brexit" as being a negotiating stance and subsequently necessary to unite the nation.
The post 2020 election will then allow all major parties to be in support of retaining trade deals over blanket immigration bans, leaving UKIP for the isolated anti immigration voters. With May still in control of her party, the hard right can either shut up or, if UKIP makes a resurgence join their ranks.
Certainly the improvement in Sterling is on the back of raised hopes of trade deals rather than the fear of trade deals being sacrificed for blanket immigration controls.
Planet Dippenhall is a lovely place where the equivalent of Britain is a charming, prosperous little nation with no crime and talking flowers. Meanwhile, on Earth, we're faced with a ruling party unrecognisable from twenty years ago, with a serious lust for public service cuts and the perfect excuse for austerity (which they also created)
Having watched that footage, I am even more convinced that they are all just moronic, socially retarded arseholes. None of them appear to have any class, no matter what privileged backgrounds they come from, bloody shameful.
Just to add to my reply to Dipps earlier on the subject of putting party before country Theresa May’s stated rationale for wanting another general election so soon after the last one cannot withstand close scrutiny. She claims that her party needs a larger Commons majority in order to strengthen her hand in negotiations with the remaining twenty-seven countries of the EU.
She also claims that the opposition parties are causing her difficulties.
Neither of these claims hold any water.
Agree with it or not May already holds the best mandate possible. A majority vote of the UK electorate in favour of Brexit. Furthermore, she (reluctantly) obtained the approval of the House of Commons to her government’s invoking Article 50, beginning an irreversible process of leaving the EU which must be completed in no more than two years – deal or no deal. If what she claims were true why did the vote go through with such relative ease? What material difference does it make to the other EU countries if she has a majority if 17 or 70? None really.
She's doing it now for purely political reasons, which is completely understandable in the circumstances but of course dresses it up as if she's doing the country a big favour* rather than her party which is the transparent reality.
*and in getting shot of Jezza as a result I can't help but agree!
TBH, most of what has been said so far is irrelevant to me. I live in Lewisham so will always have a Labour MP, it doesn't matter who I might vote for. But I don't see anyone talking about the things that do matter to me - my pay has stagnated for the last 15 years, my daughter's school cannot afford to do some things so we are always having to buy textbooks and pay for stuff over and above what I remember from when I was at school. My son is about to go up to secondary later this year - and we know there are massive cuts coming the way of 99% of schools, there have been strikes and protests connected to Forest Hill School and Plumstead Manor and it's only a matter of time before more happen. My Dad needs social care and it is useless. I speak to Bexley council regularly and the service appears to be one of trying to avoid taking any responsibility. All they say is that they have cuts and cannot afford to help anyone. He doesn't have a property and I don't have enough money to fund private care for him. Nearly all the younger people I know are struggling with housing and I expect that my kids will be with us off and on for the rest of our lives unless they move somewhere where there is no work.
All of these problems are fully or partly the result of government policy over the last 20 odd years. And yes, I think Labour are as much to blame for creating the conditions for austerity by their timidity in housing and investment policy and regulation as the Tories /Lib Dems are for pushing austerity.
Calling an early election could in the long run harm the conservative party. Had May not called for an early election corbyn would have almost certainly still been leader of the Labour party come the next election thus guaranteeing a Tory victory.
Where as now the Tories will probably smash Labour in June forcing a change of leadership in the Labour party. Now if Labour manage to pick a leader of real substance and the UK suffers following Brexit this could open the way for Labour in four years time to oust the Tories.
Planet Dippenhall is a lovely place where the equivalent of Britain is a charming, prosperous little nation with no crime and talking flowers. Meanwhile, on Earth, we're faced with a ruling party unrecognisable from twenty years ago, with a serious lust for public service cuts and the perfect excuse for austerity (which they also created)
Calling an early election could in the long run harm the conservative party. Had May not called for an early election corbyn would have almost certainly still been leader of the Labour party come the next election thus guaranteeing a Tory victory.
Where as now the Tories will probably smash Labour in June forcing a change of leadership in the Labour party. Now if Labour manage to pick a leader of real substance and the UK suffers following Brexit this could open the way for Labour in four years time to oust the Tories.
Assuming the new government abolishes the entirely pointless fixed-term parliament act (er ... or perhaps, since it's pointless, if it doesn't).
I think May (may) be trying to play a canny game here.
I voted LEAVE but one doesn't have to be Mensa material to recognise that unravelling more than 40 years of integration or 'ever closer union' is not an immediate process or even achievable in 2 years given the complexity of so many trade agreements.
The opportunity is there post election result (assuming the Tories win of course - remember 'alriiight'Kinnock) to argue for a 'soft' rather than 'hard' Brexit on democratic grounds which would enable all sides to 'save face' following a further line being drawn.
As I've said before my interim (not necessarily in the Karel Fraye sense) stance towards Brexit is for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the EEA via EFTA until sensible negotiations can be completed.
An election victory for May might just reopen that option once more.
I think May (may) be trying to play a canny game here.
I voted LEAVE but one doesn't have to be Mensa material to recognise that unravelling more than 40 years of integration or 'ever closer union' is not an immediate process or even achievable in 2 years given the complexity of so many trade agreements.
The opportunity is there post election result (assuming the Tories win of course - remember 'alriiight'Kinnock) to argue for a 'soft' rather than 'hard' Brexit on democratic grounds which would enable all sides to 'save face' following a further line being drawn.
As I've said before my interim (not necessarily in the Karel Fraye sense) stance towards Brexit is for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the EEA via EFTA until sensible negotiations can be completed.
An election victory for May might just reopen that option once more.
It might. Of course she would have to tell us this intention during the next seven or so weeks. Wouldn't she?
Comments
When will people learn that they're all the same lying bunch regardless of the party they represent!!
Now she has called an election she is being accused of being manipulative and calculating.
Also, hasn't Skinner heard of 'innocent until proven guilty'? Pretty dangerous precedent to set that any ongoing investigation automatically suspends an MP.
Calling the election is being portrayed as being done in the interests of the Tory party, not the nation. Why the two are mutually exclusive is not quite explained, unless you believe May is intent on making no concession to the EU on immigration and will sacrifice any opportunity of a trade deal.
The frenzy stoked up by the death rattles of the Remainers that all May wants is a hard, hard Brexit is based on what? She is nothing if not a shrewd and pragmatic politician, and will change her tune as the moment dictates and seems unruffled by accusations of "U" turns and broken promises, if they can be justified, - and she is a Remainer.
The inevitable backlash from the rabid anti-immigrant element of Brexit voters, who, supported by the hard right Tories, can be ignored and left to voice their demands at the ensuing election, rather than disrupt the final negotiations.
Give May some credit for genuinely wanting to avoid a divided nation and expect her to justify rowing back on "Brexit means Brexit" as being a negotiating stance and subsequently necessary to unite the nation.
The post 2020 election will then allow all major parties to be in support of retaining trade deals over blanket immigration bans, leaving UKIP for the isolated anti immigration voters. With May still in control of her party, the hard right can either shut up or, if UKIP makes a resurgence join their ranks.
Certainly the improvement in Sterling is on the back of raised hopes of trade deals rather than the fear of trade deals being sacrificed for blanket immigration controls.
Everything she's said or done since taking over IMO.
She also claims that the opposition parties are causing her difficulties.
Neither of these claims hold any water.
Agree with it or not May already holds the best mandate possible. A majority vote of the UK electorate in favour of Brexit. Furthermore, she (reluctantly) obtained the approval of the House of Commons to her government’s invoking Article 50, beginning an irreversible process of leaving the EU which must be completed in no more than two years – deal or no deal. If what she claims were true why did the vote go through with such relative ease? What material difference does it make to the other EU countries if she has a majority if 17 or 70? None really.
She's doing it now for purely political reasons, which is completely understandable in the circumstances but of course dresses it up as if she's doing the country a big favour* rather than her party which is the transparent reality.
*and in getting shot of Jezza as a result I can't help but agree!
All of these problems are fully or partly the result of government policy over the last 20 odd years. And yes, I think Labour are as much to blame for creating the conditions for austerity by their timidity in housing and investment policy and regulation as the Tories /Lib Dems are for pushing austerity.
No wonder May wants to make this about Brexit.
Had May not called for an early election corbyn would have almost certainly still been leader of the Labour party come the next election thus guaranteeing a Tory victory.
Where as now the Tories will probably smash Labour in June forcing a change of leadership in the Labour party.
Now if Labour manage to pick a leader of real substance and the UK suffers following Brexit this could open the way for Labour in four years time to oust the Tories.
Had a £5 double
Labour 12/1
Charlton to win league one 17/18 @16/1
I voted LEAVE but one doesn't have to be Mensa material to recognise that unravelling more than 40 years of integration or 'ever closer union' is not an immediate process or even achievable in 2 years given the complexity of so many trade agreements.
The opportunity is there post election result (assuming the Tories win of course - remember 'alriiight'Kinnock) to argue for a 'soft' rather than 'hard' Brexit on democratic grounds which would enable all sides to 'save face' following a further line being drawn.
As I've said before my interim (not necessarily in the Karel Fraye sense) stance towards Brexit is for the UK to leave the EU but remain in the EEA via EFTA until sensible negotiations can be completed.
An election victory for May might just reopen that option once more.
Of course she would have to tell us this intention during the next seven or so weeks.
Wouldn't she?