MikeCrotch posted:

Are we talking actual car crash or "person I don't like is being interviewed" car crash interview here

Weasling Weasel posted:

I read today that Theresa May might consider including abandoning the triple lock for state pensions in the manifesto, yet Labour want to commit to it until 2025. Pretty bad sign if the Tories are so confident of victory they are willing to spite their core demographic without actually worrying of any repurcussions. (Though I guess with inflation hell around the corner, dropping the minimum 2.5% increase won't actually have any real affect on pension income)

Also, why is McDonnell trying to keep it for? Considering the uneven growth to pensioner wealth compared to working people throughout the last decade, it hardly seems a progressive economic move to keep the state pension locked in above inflation.

Namtab posted:

Pensioners are one of the bigger voting blocs

MikeCrotch posted:

Are we talking actual car crash or "person I don't like is being interviewed" car crash interview here

TheRat posted:

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/855096228308234240

TheRat posted:

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/855096228308234240

Pissflaps posted:

This is so loving apposite.

An avatar of Pissflaps next to the words 'clueless'.

El Grillo posted:

She got asked about JC's 'rigged system' stuff and tried to deflect by saying what was really needed was discussion of policies. Then it turned out, guess what, there were no specific policies she could talk about.
It was so painful.
We are so, so hosed.

Pissflaps posted:

This is so loving terrible.

A photo of Corbyn looking constipated next to the words 'Tory victory'.

They're clueless.

Pochoclo posted:

everything_wrong_with_the_uk.txt

eleven extra elephants posted:

reaching a bit here

jBrereton posted:

Yeah if only they had one good clear policy everyone could agree with rather than some bullshit ten pledge thing that is asking to be picked apart and then this laughable Rigged System bollocks someone at labour HQ should lose their job for.

Pissflaps posted:

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/855055346842443780

Lmao

Pissflaps posted:

That's a Thornberry.

ukle posted:

Seriously how the hell did these poo poo speakers become MP's. It seems there is only 1 MP on the traditional left in Labour that can speak, Clive Lewis, and he is distancing himself as much as possible from Corbyn ever since the BREXIT vote. This whole election is going to be a car crash and the Tories could well end up with over 50% of the vote.

Pissflaps posted:

This is so loving terrible.

A photo of a man running below the name "pissflaps"

A man running....from the truth

TheRat posted:

Out of curiosity, do you have a source for the rumours?

quote:

For a moment this morning it looked like Labour might do something interesting. Jeremy Corbyn was asked about holding a second vote on whatever Theresa May's final Brexit deal was and refused to answer. John McDonnell was asked several times and also refused to answer. The Labour leader even offered some passably coherent comments on the dangers of a WTO fallback option and the intricacies of trade networks.

It seemed for a second that the shock of the general election might have forced Labour to get its act together on the issue. Maybe it would even adopt a policy on it. But within hours these hopes had been put to bed and normal service was resumed. "A second referendum is not our policy and it won’t be in our manifesto,” Labour's spokesperson said.

So we're back where we were with Corbyn's Brexit policy: He "accepts" the vote, he wants no second referendum, his demand for the talks is limited to tariffs only - a lower benchmark than May has set for herself - and he opposes membership of the single market. Labour is a pro-Brexit party. You might think they would deliver a softer Brexit, but that is an article of faith or intuition. It is not a matter of policy.

This is worth bearing in mind now that Brexit supporters in the press are increasingly saying that May will have a mandate for hard Brexit after the election. These are the same people, don't forget, who just days ago were saying she already had a mandate for hard Brexit by virtue of the referendum result. They are also the people who said she didn't need a mandate for hard Brexit in the form of a second referendum.

The argument is quite mad. It tacitly accepts that a mandate is needed but insists it can only be expressed through an election against another pro-Brexit party, not by a referendum in which the specific question is on the ballot paper.

You could say that Remainers have other parties to vote for. It's technically true, but not meaningfully so. The SNP only contest seats in Scotland. The Lib Dems have nine MPs and no hope of forming a government or even a coalition. The Greens have one.

For May to have a mandate for hard Brexit through an election, there must be another vehicle by which voters could stop her from pursuing it. That vehicle does not exist. Therefore there is no mandate.

The choice between Labour and the Tories in this election is a choice between Brexit or Brexit. Don't let anyone tell you this process offers a mandate for May's plans.

Namtab posted:

jBrereton posted:

How many minutes do you think it'd take for someone at Tory HQ to whip up a little thing saying "if I was any oval office I'd want strong, secure leadership. Vote Conservative."

Zephro posted:

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/04/20/the-choice-in-election-2017-brexit-or-brexit

A good article which points out that May can't claim a mandate from this election when the two biggest parties both support a hard Brexit.

You can have anything you want as long as it's crashing out of the EU with virtually nothing to replace it with

forkboy84 posted:

An old article from 2015, but here's Tim Farron bleating about how unfairly persecuted Christians are, he thinks he'd not be challenged on his views on gay sex if he was a Muslim or Jew. Ignoring the salient point, which is he's the leader of the loving Liberal Democrat Party, and liberal people tend to expect slightly better treatment for homosexuals than he's so far shown.

Of course he then goes and proves he's talking shite by saying “But we’re still grieving the loss of Charles Kennedy who spent seven years being party leader and quite a devout Roman Catholic, and nobody looks back and thinks that was some kind of theocracy.” And of course, Charles Kennedy never dithered about whether gay sex was a sin or immoral.

I edited this because I totally missed the date was 2015 & not 2017, in my excitement of Tim Farron being lovely again. Still think it's relevant when people are considering voting for the Liberal Democrats in 2017 though, he's hardly repudiated these views.

Gonzo McFee posted:

Utter bollocks.

Pissflaps posted:

If you're somebody sitting there believing that the time is right for a resurgence of popular leftism in the UK following a global trend you should be loving furious with Corbyn for loving it up this badly.

Jedit posted:

The SNP have a third generation MP in Stuart Donaldson (son of Maureen Watt, grandson of the late Hamish Watt) so I don't see it being outlandish.

jabby posted:

gently caress you guys are grim. Corbyn made a good speech, played perfectly to the 'underdog' and 'anti-establishment' vibe, answered questions well, and even got largely favourable media coverage.

Plus Labour are getting much better at refuting Tory attack lines. Yesterday as soon as the 'coalition of chaos' was mentioned Corbyn ruled out a coalition with the SNP. Today as soon as rumours of a second Brexit referendum started swirling Labour did the same. In fact they ruled it out fast enough that an interview with Theresa May where she attacked them about it was nullified by the time if was broadcast.

jBrereton posted:

The only time a "rigged system" should be brought up in UK politics is if the candidates are holding a debate on the Cutty Sark. Otherwise it sounds like something you've chored off an American, which it is.

jabby posted:

It worked. And it's also true. Seems like two good reasons to bring it up.

jabby posted:

gently caress you guys are grim. Corbyn made a good speech, played perfectly to the 'underdog' and 'anti-establishment' vibe, answered questions well, and even got largely favourable media coverage.