May, the people don't want you. Corbyn, you stood up and have become extremely popular and likeable. Tories still in 'power' and by a fair way. If May steps aside or is sacked then another GE looms, with Corbin a shoo in. An interesting few months ahead, but terrific to see the parties get closer and a Kabour party getting more left and popular at the same time. Only 68% turnout, time for compulsory voting? Hope so.........
If the people dont want May - who got the most votes and seats - can I assume that they absolutely dont want Corbyn?
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
So every anti terrorist comment you made on the London and Manchester terrorist attacks thread was just rank hypocrisy. You are happy for innocent civilians to be slaughtered if they don't have the same values as you.
Remind me again what you were proposing should happen to Muslims who express support for Islamic terrorist organisations.
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
Wow!
Wow what? In relation to the British government, the Loyalist paramilitaries were on their side. The IRA wanted everyone in it dead. That just a fact luv
Pretty disgusting to think there is a "right side" in a choice between two groups of murdering terrorists. But I am not going to get engaged in this debate any more.
I fuckin wish you wouldn't engage in debate with me
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
Wow!
Wow what? In relation to the British government, the Loyalist paramilitaries were on their side. The IRA wanted everyone in it dead. That just a fact luv
Except for the fact that it isn't a fact, and it's offensive.
The Loyalist paramilitaries were no more on the side of the British Government than were the IRA.
Their loyalty has always been conditional (just as was that of the original UVF at the time of the Solemn League and Covenant in 1912). Loyalist paramilitarism since the foundation of the UVF is based upon a threat of violence against anything that challenges their Britishness, and that would include any UK Government that they believed was looking to sell them out (hence the Larne gun running was providing them with the weapons to resist the state).
While some members of the security forces and intelligence agencies did collude with Loyalist murderers, as they also did with IRA murderers, the murderers were not on anyone's side but their own.
The argument that always pisses me off, which will doubtless be trotted out imminently by a second or third placed party, is "But 58% of the electorate dont want a conservative government". Might be true, but then so is it that 60% of the electorate don't want a labour government. Or in Scotland, where 63% don't want an SNP government. It's a stupid argument all round unless somebody gets >50% of the vote.
The last party to gain more than 50% of the popular vote was the Conservatives with 55.5% - in 1931 !!
Surely that was the Ramsey MacDonald led National Government Bob? Mostly Tories I agree but I don't feel like conceding them anything today.
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
So every anti terrorist comment you made on the London and Manchester terrorist attacks thread was just rank hypocrisy. You are happy for innocent civilians to be slaughtered if they don't have the same values as you.
Remind me again what you were proposing should happen to Muslims who express support for Islamic terrorist organisations.
I would like to apologise for other Labour supporters and I feeling a sense of euphoria and victory today. I can't help it and I do know Labour finished second. I hope that fact makes the Tories feel better for now
The argument that always pisses me off, which will doubtless be trotted out imminently by a second or third placed party, is "But 58% of the electorate dont want a conservative government". Might be true, but then so is it that 60% of the electorate don't want a labour government. Or in Scotland, where 63% don't want an SNP government. It's a stupid argument all round unless somebody gets >50% of the vote.
The last party to gain more than 50% of the popular vote was the Conservatives with 55.5% - in 1931 !!
Surely that was the Ramsey MacDonald led National Government Bob? Mostly Tories I agree but I don't feel like conceding them anything today.
Fair enough - I would concur with not conceding anything to the tories today!
Assuming we go again before too long........ I struggle to see where Labour will dig a majority out from.
That youth turnout would be hard pressed to be replicated second time around now the novelty has worn off. Likewise was there really enough marginal seats that the Tories pipped them on (most of the marginals seemed to go Labours way). Could the Lib Dems and SDP get hard hit in another run?
I'm not saying this is as good as it can get by any means for Corbyn, but it aint gonna be easy.
It's going to get even harder with the reduction of MPs and the boundary changes, which will favour the conservatives.
But as the link below make clear these boundary changes can only take effect after being approved by a parliamentary vote scheduled for next year:
Given where we are now and the parliamentary arithmetic I would have thought that it is unlikely that that timetable will now happen before another general election (something which some commentators already thought was unlikely before yesterday's Tory meltdown).
What a mess..... two major parties succeeding in being pretty much equally unappealing to a deeply divided nation and leaving us with the almost certain prospect of another election before too long.
Mrs May did not refer directly to the fact her party had failed to form a majority government, or to any of its losses last night.
In her brief statement, she said her party would "put fairness and opportunity at the heart of everything we do". She also promised to:
Over the next five years, build a country in which no one and no community is left behind. A country in which prosperity and opportunity are shared right across this UK.
Mrs May said the Conservatives and DUP would work together "in the interests of the whole United Kingdom".
This will allow us to come together as a country and channel our energies towards a successful Brexit deal that works for everyone in this country, securing a new partnership with the EU which guarantees our long-term prosperity.
That's what people voted for last June, that's what we will deliver. Now let's get to work.
The deluded opportunist at it again. No mention of strong and stable though.
I really don't want the f*cking DUP working in my interests thank you very much.
Rob, I don't think you can just look at this result in terms of absolute number of seats. There's so much subtext to this. From the start I said anything but an increase in their majority would be a failure for the Tories, a loss of seats would be a disaster but what we actually got was verging on one of the biggest fuck ups in political history. Sure, they're still in power, just but for me it's all about momentum.
When this election was announced how many honestly thought it would end up like this? Corbyn was so far behind that Labour not being wiped off the political map altogether was being seen by some as doing well.
Labour still lost the election, that can't be ignored but it isn't what was important here. We all felt that the Tories would win but in losing the election Labour still won. I guess you could say lost the battle to win the war but we will have to wait and see how the war pans out.
I was just trying to put a bit of perspective on the results itself in comparison to what has come before. I've said a few times this morning that the Conservatives royally messed up, utter utter failure and Labour did well - both from where they were, but even in those circumstances when you compare yesterday to the previous 6 elections it's not as if the country has listened to Corbyn's ideas and said 'yup that's for me' compared to previous labour leaders, he is still well short of a majority and just about joint 2nd worst election result for Labour in the last 7 elections or 25 years.
I don't honestly see in another election with the same manifesto's Labour romping home with a majority. I think Labour have a real chance though if they can move slightly more to the right of gaining power, much like Blair did (and they wouldn't have to move as far as he did).... it seems to me that there is still a core of centre people in this country that form the majority. As generations change that may too, but I don't see that for the foreseeable future. I can see more the Conservatives learning from their lessons and the next election taking a majority again if Corbyn remains, they were only 7/8 seats short under the worst election campaign known to man!
I don't care what colour a party is or what name they take, I've never had any allegiance on that basis, if either party had been slightly more central it could have been a massively different result, that's my take anyway, if you want a government that truly represents ALL the people then you need to compromise and meet somewhere in the middle. Not that I can stand the bloke in the end but that's effectively what Blair did in 1997 with 418 seats and again in 2001, how many leaders can say they had that much of a majority? As per usual those seeking election need to listen to what the people want, sadly they rarely do as 'they know better'.
I don't agree it is too left wing at all and I think a 40% vote share shows this. A you gov poll just before the election suggested that 40% of respondents thought Corbyn unelectable due to his past IRA links. That is a huge number to overcome and there is a whole generation that hates him. He has shown the labour party that platform is potentially electable under a different leader.
Answering a question on Corbyn and the IRA doesn't mean that aside you would vote for everything else or someone else with the same policies.
I'm banking on one more year of tax cuts for the rich and then another election, Corbyn gets in, my daughter gets free uni education and I can retire on an enhanced state pension
No, but come on mate the conservatives knew what they were doing. With FPTP you only need 30% of the vote and they have just wiped out 40% of the pool. The policies have polled well for months, normally a majority in favour, long before the election was called. They only lost popularity when Corbyn's name was attached to it.
I just meant because someone said they wouldn't vote for Corbyn due to 'X' doesn't mean they would vote for a different person with the same manifesto. The flip side works, just look on here the support for Corbyn and allegedly all around the country. One could argue if he goes the labour vote would. E dramatically worse?
I agree it is no guarantee, but the policies were populist long before the election. This is about direction and what the labour party thought was electable rather than the leader and trust within that individual. To be elected the Labour party will always have to find an individual that is charismatic and trusted by the public as increasingly it decides elections, especially as FPTP can be so cynically exploited.
People keep talking about how Blair made Labour electable in the 90's but that was the 90's and that was how Labour need to change then. I disagree fundamentally with you about how elections will revert back to low turn outs in certain demographics, even. This is the election they can turn to and say that youth and the disaffected actually made a difference. They stopped a Tory majority much like the Valley party lost Labour seats. Moving forward voter registration/turn-out is key and the left have already realised this at this election.
Blair was needed at the time, Corbyn in many ways is what we needed now. I think he shall ever remain one of my favourite politicians, not because he is the most inspiring or competent, but because he has humanised politics again. Here is a genuine, thoughtful, principled man, everything we should look for in our leaders. You might not agree with him but you actually know what he believes in. He has also shown people you can engage the disaffected and the young in politics if act in manner for the people, something most of the house has forgotten.
I would like to apologise for other Labour supporters and I feeling a sense of euphoria and victory today. I can't help it and I do know Labour finished second. I hope that fact makes the Tories feel better for now
if you want to celebrate losing then crack on mate don't let us victors stop you ;-)))
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
So every anti terrorist comment you made on the London and Manchester terrorist attacks thread was just rank hypocrisy. You are happy for innocent civilians to be slaughtered if they don't have the same values as you.
Remind me again what you were proposing should happen to Muslims who express support for Islamic terrorist organisations.
It was a passing comment ffs
If anyone was offended, I couldn't give a fuck
fair enough but you've shown your true colours as a terrorist sympathiser whether you give a fuck or not
Thats DUP leader Peter Robinson admitting to supporting UDA prisoners and denying that the UDA - which killed over 400 people in the troubles were even terrorists at all.
So, I think we are pretty safe to say these guys are pretty close.
At least they were on the right side
So every anti terrorist comment you made on the London and Manchester terrorist attacks thread was just rank hypocrisy. You are happy for innocent civilians to be slaughtered if they don't have the same values as you.
Remind me again what you were proposing should happen to Muslims who express support for Islamic terrorist organisations.
It was a passing comment ffs
If anyone was offended, I couldn't give a fuck
fair enough but you've shown your true colours as a terrorist sympathiser whether you give a fuck or not
WIth the youth engaged by Labour - who on the Tory side will steal their votes - or do you think once engaged they will quickly be disengaged. Politics changed yesterday - it has been changing for some time and the old rules don't apply any more.
Are the DUP like the loyalist equivalent of Sinn Fein ? I.e were they the political wing of one (or more) of the loyalist paramilitaries back in the day but now stand as a legitimate party with no (official) link to terrorist/paramilitary groups ?
No. The equivalent to Sinn Fein on the Loyalist side would have been the Progressive Unionist Party (UVF) and Ulster Political Research Group (UDA), though the latter encouraged support for Emma Little Pengelly in her successful challenge for South Belfast yesterday.
It's much more the case that the DUP has represented most closely a intransigent and hardline Protestant strand of Unionism (often working class or rural that the Ulster Unionsits took for granted).
Although Ian Paisley did flirt with the idea of creating his own militia/paramilitary-type group in the 1980s, with the Third Force, and there was Peter Robinson's spirited actions in County Monaghan in 1986 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clontibret_invasion), I'd be inclined not to suggest anything organised - there were short term alliances and a willingness to engage in mass disruption, but not a specific association between a paramilitary group and the Party.
They are very British, to a degree that is, in many ways, unBritish.
We are going to need a hard border to stop another Clontibret invasion.
@Fiiish will know this - what percentage of Parliament needs to agree to (another) election under the Fixed Term Parliament Act?
Am I right in thinking that, for the first time, it could be the opposition parties who will, in effect, decide whether there will be a snap election.
If the House resolves a no confidence vote in the Government and it is not overturned within 14 days then a snap election can be called. This is a simple majority.
Ultimately we need a government. If nothing more to see us through the next few months until we have another election once the Tories have decided on another leader.
This seems to be the only want anyone can form a government.
Assuming we go again before too long........ I struggle to see where Labour will dig a majority out from.
That youth turnout would be hard pressed to be replicated second time around now the novelty has worn off. Likewise was there really enough marginal seats that the Tories pipped them on (most of the marginals seemed to go Labours way). Could the Lib Dems and SDP get hard hit in another run?
I'm not saying this is as good as it can get by any means for Corbyn, but it aint gonna be easy.
Young people only vote for something because it's a "novelty". How patronising.
We need to move on - as long as both sides are treading the path of peace we need to look forwards not backwards. It doesn't excuse the crimes but peace is the be all and end all. It is the only way forwards.
Not sure the right would be so forgiving if Corbyn was currently trying to put together a coalition with Sinn Fein !
We need to move on - as long as both sides are treading the path of peace we need to look forwards not backwards. It doesn't excuse the crimes but peace is the be all and end all. It is the only way forwards.
Not sure the right would be so forgiving if Corbyn was currently trying to put together a coalition with Sinn Fein !
If he could negotiate getting Sinn Fein to turn up to the House of Commons then I reckon he'd be the perfect man to negotiate Brexit.
Ultimately we need a government. If nothing more to see us through the next few months until we have another election once the Tories have decided on another leader.
This seems to be the only want anyone can form a government.
Why do the Conservatives prefer to give the DUP whatever they want instead of being a minority government? Minority government is very common in Europe.
Stormont won't open while the DUP can control it from Westminster.
We need to move on - as long as both sides are treading the path of peace we need to look forwards not backwards. It doesn't excuse the crimes but peace is the be all and end all. It is the only way forwards.
Not sure the right would be so forgiving if Corbyn was currently trying to put together a coalition with Sinn Fein !
If he could negotiate getting Sinn Fein to turn up to the House of Commons then I reckon he'd be the perfect man to negotiate Brexit.
Don't start. He will be a EU sympathiser by the morning.
Comments
Remind me again what you were proposing should happen to Muslims who express support for Islamic terrorist organisations.
The Loyalist paramilitaries were no more on the side of the British Government than were the IRA.
Their loyalty has always been conditional (just as was that of the original UVF at the time of the Solemn League and Covenant in 1912). Loyalist paramilitarism since the foundation of the UVF is based upon a threat of violence against anything that challenges their Britishness, and that would include any UK Government that they believed was looking to sell them out (hence the Larne gun running was providing them with the weapons to resist the state).
While some members of the security forces and intelligence agencies did collude with Loyalist murderers, as they also did with IRA murderers, the murderers were not on anyone's side but their own.
If anyone was offended, I couldn't give a fuck
"November 2017 Revised proposals (8 week consultation period)
Summer 2018 Report submitted to Parliament for approval"
http://labourlist.org/2016/01/a-beginners-guide-to-the-boundary-review/
Given where we are now and the parliamentary arithmetic I would have thought that it is unlikely that that timetable will now happen before another general election (something which some commentators already thought was unlikely before yesterday's Tory meltdown).
People keep talking about how Blair made Labour electable in the 90's but that was the 90's and that was how Labour need to change then. I disagree fundamentally with you about how elections will revert back to low turn outs in certain demographics, even. This is the election they can turn to and say that youth and the disaffected actually made a difference. They stopped a Tory majority much like the Valley party lost Labour seats. Moving forward voter registration/turn-out is key and the left have already realised this at this election.
Blair was needed at the time, Corbyn in many ways is what we needed now. I think he shall ever remain one of my favourite politicians, not because he is the most inspiring or competent, but because he has humanised politics again. Here is a genuine, thoughtful, principled man, everything we should look for in our leaders. You might not agree with him but you actually know what he believes in. He has also shown people you can engage the disaffected and the young in politics if act in manner for the people, something most of the house has forgotten.
Am I right in thinking that, for the first time, it could be the opposition parties who will, in effect, decide whether there will be a snap election.
This seems to be the only want anyone can form a government.
Stormont won't open while the DUP can control it from Westminster.