|
What is the best flav... you all know what this question is: This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Labour |
|
907 | 49.92% |
| Theresa May Team (Conservative) |
|
48 | 2.64% |
| Liberal Democrats |
|
31 | 1.71% |
| UKIP |
|
13 | 0.72% |
| Plaid Cymru |
|
25 | 1.38% |
| Green |
|
22 | 1.21% |
| Scottish Socialist Party |
|
12 | 0.66% |
| Scottish Conservative Party |
|
1 | 0.06% |
| Scottish National Party |
|
59 | 3.25% |
| Some Kind of Irish Unionist |
|
4 | 0.22% |
| Alliance / Irish Nonsectarian |
|
3 | 0.17% |
| Some Kind of Irish Nationalist |
|
36 | 1.98% |
| Misc. Far Left Trots |
|
35 | 1.93% |
| Misc. Far Right Fash |
|
8 | 0.44% |
| Monster Raving Loony |
|
49 | 2.70% |
| Space Navies Party |
|
39 | 2.15% |
| Independent / Single Issue |
|
2 | 0.11% |
| Can't Vote |
|
188 | 10.35% |
| Won't Vote |
|
8 | 0.44% |
| Spoiled Ballot |
|
15 | 0.83% |
| Pissflaps |
|
312 | 17.17% |
| Total: | 1817 votes | ||
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I'm not in Britain, so I'm mainly getting British political news second hand from reading threads. As far as I cant ell, Theresa May's promises to the British people are to fire all the cops, fire all the firefighters, and replace the internet with going to jail. And the primary argument for voting for her is that Jeremy Corbyn is either silly or horrifying. You seem to have a firm grasp on it already. Her only "positive" promise, is that she'll scare the EU into giving us a Strong and Stable Brexit means Brexit. Spoilers, she loving won't and is prepared to tank our economy by turning it into a tax haven. [e]: 140 - the number of Free Schools Theresa May wishes to build, despite the fact everyone says and thinks they're a terrible waste of time and money. Pesky Splinter fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Jun 7, 2017 |
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
For the record you can get estimated times each seat will declare here: http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/general_2017_by_time.php Early results being singled out to watch to see if the YouGov model is lining up are Battersea at 1:00am (currently held with a 15.6% Tory majority but which YouGov are projecting will flip Labour) and at 2:00am Bury North (which the Tories hold with only 300 odd votes but no UKIP candidate is in the running and they got about 12% of the vote last time, YouGov projecting a Labour gain) and Thurrock (held by the Tories with only 500 odd votes but UKIP got 31.7% here in 2015, YouGov again projecting Labour gain). If those results don't go the way YouGov are projecting the model may be a bit off
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I'm not in Britain, so I'm mainly getting British political news second hand from reading threads. As far as I cant ell, Theresa May's promises to the British people are to fire all the cops, fire all the firefighters, and replace the internet with going to jail. And the primary argument for voting for her is that Jeremy Corbyn is either silly or horrifying. I mean Jeremy Corbyn isn't horrifying to anyone really, it's just that the Tories think it's horrifying to leave defending the country against, uh, a few loonies and a bunch of migrants, to a well-funded police force and a pacifist who believes in talking things out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Does she have an actual positive message to get people to vote for her?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Apraxin posted:I don't think 'positive' is exactly the word but the parts of her message related to 'vote for me', as opposed to 'jeremy corbyn, what a nutter' are mix of repeating over and over what a competent and safe pair of hands she is (please do not think too much about this or ask for specific examples) and that ParliaWint tweet about fiddling with the racism dial until you find the most audience-pleasing setting. She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument? The country has not literally caught fire in the last year, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:48
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument? She's coming up for a year. The one thing she points at is triggering article 50. Other than that she has nothing.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument? She was home secretary before she was PM and she cut thousands of police, while every police chief in the country told her this was a terrible idea that was going to make the country more vulnerable to serious crime like terrorism, and she told them, literally, to stop crying wolf.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument? Lol She has also deported no small number of people to almost certain death in hostile regimes
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
Actually to be fair I should probably give some context to where the strong and stable poo poo comes from. It isn't at all related to her governance of the country, but it was always intended as an attack on the perception of Labour as a divided party with weak leadership. When the election started she had an absolutely ridiculous lead over Corbyn on "seen as strong" and her approval rating was the highest recorded. Since then both have plummeted and Corbyn is polling higher on both counts.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:Actually to be fair I should probably give some context to where the strong and stable poo poo comes from. It isn't at all related to her governance of the country, but it was always intended as an attack on the perception of Labour as a divided party with weak leadership. When the election started she had an absolutely ridiculous lead over Corbyn on "seen as strong" and her approval rating was the highest recorded. Since then both have plummeted and Corbyn is polling higher on both counts. So this is all the fault of the Labour leadership that tried to gently caress over Corbyn and their own voters?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:So this is all the fault of the Labour leadership that tried to gently caress over Corbyn and their own voters? Considering how well he's done since he started campaigning, uh, yeah probably.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Apraxin posted:You're probably better off asking someone else this one. She focuses as much on her stint as Home Secretary before she became PM as she does on the past year. In that role, she introduced... well, a bunch of bad poo poo, but among it was minimum annual income requirements necessary for being allowed to bring your foreign spouse to live in the UK, as a result of which I can basically never go home again, so I really loving hate her! Wait, what? She made it illegal to marry a foreigner if you're poor? What the gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:So this is all the fault of the Labour leadership that tried to gently caress over Corbyn and their own voters? yea along with an entirely hostile/bias press of course
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Wait, what? She made it illegal to marry a foreigner if you're poor? What the gently caress? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW3w4L5PN3k Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Wait, what? She made it illegal to marry a foreigner if you're poor? What the gently caress? No, you can marry them, but you can never bring them to live with you, if you are a poor. Not even *very* poor, just a bit poor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:00
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Wait, what? She made it illegal to marry a foreigner if you're poor? What the gently caress? And for the real head gently caress, they've been using the fact that this very policy that they introduced doesn't apply to EU citizens currently due to freedom of movement, as a way to attack freedom of movement arguing it's unfair that a Brit can bring their German SO over when someone who has a SO from outside of the EU cannot.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Me and my wife were living in a third country when we got married, so the wages we were earning there didn't even count. I'd have had to move back to the UK, find a job that paid the required amount (haven't checked recently, but I think it's still set at about or slightly over the national median income), work there at least a year, and then maybe I could have applied for her to move to the UK. They could still have rejected the application though. This is in addition to the necessary documentation being ridiculously prescriptive, so that self-employed people making two or three times the required amount get turned down because they don't have pay-stubs, poo poo like that. May initially claimed this new policy was to cut down on the number of forced marriages when she introduced it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:So is there any point at all having any hope at all anymore? Hope is always good. Right now I am hoping for Corbyn to win. On Friday, i will start hoping for Trump to be impeached. Like religion, the trick is to believe in it without necessarily thinking it is true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
That just seems like evil for the sake of evil
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:And for the real head gently caress, they've been using the fact that this very policy that they introduced doesn't apply to EU citizens currently due to freedom of movement, as a way to attack freedom of movement arguing it's unfair that a Brit can bring their German SO over when someone who has a SO from outside of the EU cannot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:That just seems like evil for the sake of evil
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
spectralent posted:This is literally my mum. She's said, outright, that the tories wouldn't have cut so much if they could avoid it because they'd know it'd be unpopular. The trouble with this is that it's really consistent in the absence of full information. It's completely logical and it even takes into account the cynicism of "they'll do anything to get elected", because the cynical end goal is assumed to be "get the most votes possible so I get elected again". Unless you're aware of the ideological agenda, it's quite a leap to understanding what's going on. I've had to explain what Conservatives actually stand for an alarming number of times lately - and not even the UKMT take, but the dry philosophical version - people seem to have no idea that parties are formed along ideological lines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LFMmag/status/872179417732263937 imagine not voting for this man. the absolute boy
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Hope status - caught in the middle with you
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
If only there was a way for the inevitable loving over of people to only hit Tory voters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Prince John posted:The trouble with this is that it's really consistent in the absence of full information. It's completely logical and it even takes into account the cynicism of "they'll do anything to get elected", because the cynical end goal is assumed to be "get the most votes possible so I get elected again". Unless you're aware of the ideological agenda, it's quite a leap to understanding what's going on. I tried to focus on "why are we cutting so many public services while also lowering corporation tax and minimum income thresholds if the situation's so dire they have to make big choices?". Guy Goodbody posted:Wait, what? She made it illegal to marry a foreigner if you're poor? What the gently caress? Me and my partner fell afoul of this but she fortunately still qualifies under long residence. Guy Goodbody posted:That just seems like evil for the sake of evil Now you're getting it!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:That just seems like evil for the sake of evil How are you still surprised?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
loving McTernan on Newsnight explaining that Corbyn supporters don't actually want to win power, in contrast to the plucky Blairites who are so hungry to win that they've actively sabotaged the party for the last two years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
jabby posted:loving McTernan on Newsnight explaining that Corbyn supporters don't actually want to win power, in contrast to the plucky Blairites who are so hungry to win that they've actively sabotaged the party for the last two years. Blairites are even less able to comprehend principle than Tories are. Tory principles are utterly reprehensible, but at least they exist. The only thing the Labour right can fathom is trying to win elections by staying in the center ground (regardless of how far that might move rightward).
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:She's been PM for awhile now, right? Does she have a track record that justifies the safe hands argument? Her role as PM has mostly been about Brexit (or rather, how the Tories are going to give us everything we want, and the EU will cave in, or she'll get really really cross and turn the UK into a tax haven, and that'll show 'em.) Her previous role as Home Secretary - let's just say she's loving awful - among other things she instigated in no particular order:
There's probably more, but that's off the top of my head. (oh, and that's not including police cuts either). Bear in the mind, the only reason she got the PM role is because she stayed relatively quiet and not being; a oval office so toxic even the Tories hate him, an STD, a woman with working ovaries lording over women with barren wombs, a man so loving gormless he has become gorm incarnate, or an egg. Short version; she's an evil Tory gently caress. Pesky Splinter fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Mr Crabb looks very dignified at all times, too. https://twitter.com/parliawint/status/749550893461282816
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Blairites are even less able to comprehend principle than Tories are. Tory principles are utterly reprehensible, but at least they exist. The only thing the Labour right can fathom is trying to win elections by staying in the center ground (regardless of how far that might move rightward). It just boggles the mind that Corbyn's supporters are clearly desperate for him to win this election, and he's managed an almost unprecedented increase in support over the campaign, and arseholes like McTernan still accuse us of not being interested in power. I'm pretty sure if that were true we would be significantly less pissed at the people who decided to rip the party apart rather than allow Corbyn to lead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
jabby posted:It just boggles the mind that Corbyn's supporters are clearly desperate for him to win this election, and he's managed an almost unprecedented increase in support over the campaign, and arseholes like McTernan still accuse us of not being interested in power. I'm pretty sure if that were true we would be significantly less pissed at the people who decided to rip the party apart rather than allow Corbyn to lead. yeah but if they stopped parroting that poo poo it might be even more obvious that they still have no ideas other than lower business rates and softer racism
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Internet media is worse, look at the American election. Makes me wish schools actually taught rhetoric as a subject. I'm under no illusions that this would make people more left-wing or even more resistant to actual, good propaganda but I wish we at least taught people to recognise when the most basic propaganda tactics are being employed on them so that the media couldn't get away with being so lazy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:For the record you can get estimated times each seat will declare here: http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/general_2017_by_time.php I never realised they were predicting Thurrock going red, that completely obliterates the model for me because that place is Daily Star - The Constituency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
It's honestly a miracle their offices haven't been burned to the ground with this kind of "reporting".
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Barbe Rouge posted:It's honestly a miracle their offices haven't been burned to the ground with this kind of "reporting". To be fair isn't it literally true?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
hakimashou posted:To be fair isn't it literally true? I see you're working overtime trying to keep that posting award in your hands.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 03:10
|
|