|
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 | ||
|
ronya posted:there's polls that are free for public consumption, and then there's polls which are paid for by party hq or other NGOs Idk how other parties do it but Labour's numbers come from volunteer canvassers. It's looking like the Tories have got no chance round here, but I'm getting really worried by this "gently caress Off" party I keep hearing about.
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
orange sky posted:OK why is the Middle East making GBS threads on Qatar right now? Call me  if you will but I seem to recall leaked US intelligence not too long ago that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding Daesh - making GBS threads on the one that May & Trump haven't (to my knowledge) recently been involved with high-profile arms deals with seems like a solid diversion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:The UK does plenty of arms dealing with Qatar, see https://www.caat.org.uk/resources/countries/qatar Lol. Guess I'll have to trade in my tinfoil hat then to make weapons with which to indirectly support loving Daesh which apparently nobody will give a poo poo about since only bearded lefties can be terrorist sympathisers
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
madey posted:I've got to try something. Get in touch with your local CLP and go knocking on doors - you'd be amazed how many undecided voters there are and how easily they're persuaded. Better yet, if you're in a safe or unwinnable seat, try a different constituency. It's easy, I swear, even goony fucks can do it, and just showing your face and asking for support is enough to win some people over. It's pissing with rain here and I'll be out in it all evening, only fair someone should feel my pain.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:the Lib Dem candidate in my seat (Swansea East) was based in loving London. Hey, a Jack! Reminder that the Tories beat Labour by 27 votes in Gower last time if you feel like helping out (I'm Swansea West but like gently caress we can lose here, the Tory candidate's more English than I am) e: Zalakwe posted:The impact of a leader's visit to a seat is pretty negligible to be honest. A few people will notice but not nearly enough. Usually it's just a pain in the rear end for the campaign team. e2: loving votes, not seats, our electoral system's not perfect but I'm pretty sure the Gower can get by with 1 MP Borrovan fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jun 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Now got Thurs off work. Is there US style get people out to vote schemes in this country? Feel like I want to be haranguing people into the booth. Young people anyway. http://www.labour.org.uk/w/polling-day-volunteers-qs e:f,b
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
The recent trend of one lost election => immediate resignation destabilises individual parties and our entire parliamentary system. I don't doubt that the Lange messer would be out immediately following a loss, but, considering most of the criticism against Corbyn is about his electability, it's pretty much unjustifiable to call for his resignation if he makes any ground at all after a decade of waning support. e: ^ I'd really like to hear the Tory response to having economics explained to them like they're 5, I'm genuinely disappointed that people aren't firmly rebuking the whole "but you see it's good to give rich people all the money because they'll put a small amount of it back into the economy unlike ordinary people who put all of it back into the economy" thing Borrovan fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 09:32
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Milliband improved on Brown's result. He lost seats against an incumbent government, and one that was implementing a policy of literally grinding up the poor and using them as fuel at that. Plus, a dead cat could have improved on Brown. A trend is a trend.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:Just made a complaint about that dp terrorism thing, and you all should do. Heads should be rolling for that. Mugsbaloney posted:Do you have a form link? e: lol, Lib Dems have been complaining about that Andrew Neil interview with Tim Farron. "Our party leader was treated like a petulant child for no better reason than acting like a petulant child, this cannot be!" Borrovan fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 10:23
|
|
|
It was a while back we were talking about this, but here's the 2 complaints I've made to the BBC so far today - I figure if enough people complain we've got a chance of getting some kind of response tomorrow, and pasting these here might save people some time. Does anyone know when the DP show was that had the "how awesome is Theresa May on a scale from totally to absolutely" poll was, so I can bother them about that one and all?quote:In January it was reported that the BBC Trust had concluded that a Laura Kuenssberg report for the News at Six in November 2015 breached your impartiality and accuracy guidelines, by misrepresenting the meaning of "shoot to kill" (i.e., an informal policy that the police in Northern Ireland were accused of adopting during the Troubles, and that has never been official policy) in the context of comments made by Jeremy Corbyn. The next one relates to yesterday's Daily Politics, 7 minutes into the program (the complaint form asks you for that): quote:The introduction to your piece on terrorism was clearly biased in favour of the Conservatives in the following ways: e: Please don't just copy/paste though so we're not just ignored, as someone pointed out Borrovan fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:I just imagined Tony Blair's face it Corbyn wins this election. Think about it. That image might be enough to smash UKMT's counterrevolutionary "hope is a lie" mantra.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Prince John posted:I settled for doing an effortreply but perhaps you're right. I'll reach for the hard stuff! No effortreply needed, it's a great example of tax cuts disproportionately favouring the wealthy and the necessity of cracking down on offshore tax avoidance schemes, whilst also demonstrating the folly of the "no pint is better than an expensive pint" argument as the rich man realises that drinking a can at home is comparatively poo poo. The unspoken answer to the opening question is "yes, absolutely!"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Is this report 'somebody on twitter'? Incidentally, my laptop packed in this morning and I've been campaigning all day, did I miss anything?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Crosspeice posted:If winning means a hung parliament, shaky Brexit mandate and dealing with the DUP, then I think the country is hosed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:Is there any information on how this is likely to change Labour membership? Think I saw someone on Twitter breathlessly claiming it's going to go up to 800,000 and that'd be great but seems like a really big number. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
e;f,b
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
My hot take: if the Labour right hadn't undermined Corbyn by waging full-fledged rebellion, this election would never have been called, meaning that the Tories wouldn't have been thrown into total disarray, we wouldn't have finally killed the ghost of Blair and we wouldn't be in the position to capitalise on the biggest Labour swing (in terms of share of the popular vote) since 1945. Unintended side effects of a bunch of idiots throwing their toys out of the pram, or the greatest false flag in parliamentary history? The first one, obviously.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
Fine gambit: rally everyone behind a literal and figurative walking corpse, leak it to the press to make damned sure everyone knows it's him that rallied them - May falls, Boris remains at the front of the pack. e: lol like 5 other people noticing the same exact thing in the time it took me to type that. Let's see how gullible the Tory party is.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Why is she having it now when the DUP are clearly going to be negotiating for a spot and making it a deal breaker. I don't think the DUP would be all that keen on letting Jeremy "up the IRA" Corbyn into number 10. In related news, it looks like people are finally noticing the flagrant BBC bias in reporting Corbyn's alleged terror links: just imagine how this election would have gone if they hadn't occasionally shut up about it  (warning:Mail).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Joda posted:The Jeremy Paxman interview showed up in my recommended videos, so I'm watching it, and all I can think of is how loving much I want him to shut his loving mouth and let Corbyn answer his questions. This is almost as bad as American "journalists" It was awful, but tbh I think it came over pretty well: Paxman's considered both an upstanding, highbrow journalist and a vicious attack dog, and Corbyn came out of that making the interviewer look like a boorish oaf. That's like having a salesman knock on your door and you selling them a nice tea towel and a set of tupperware. Compare Tim Farron on Andrew Neil: same basic interview style (repeated interruptions, ignoring answers, general rudeness) from a generally more oafish presenter, but without that CorbynTM-brand sincerity & charisma he just looked like a sniveling
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
dispatch_async posted:Interesting stuff here: Phew, lucky the Tories didn't gain any ground from the SNP, that'd be a disaster
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
All this talk of no confidence reminds me: https://www.change.org/p/theresa-may-mp-no-confidence-in-a-conservative-and-dup-coalition-forthevoiceofthemanynotthefew Guessing you guys have mostly signed already, and it's already got more than enough to trigger a debate, but what the hell, I'm always down for making Tories look daft
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Following on from a post-election discussion I'd taken part in on Facebook, I ended up in a surprising and slightly heated political debate with my mother yesterday. I was very disappointed to see her buying heavily into all the Daily Mail stories about Corbyn while applying no critical thinking on obvious bias and the absence of cited sources (she's a retired teacher with two degrees!). Putting aside the horror of watching my own mother turning into a 'kipper, one point did strike me. She kept coming back to "there's no money for all of this", and when I tried to explain that austerity was a huge con I quickly hit the limits of my knowledge on the subject. No expert either but, from what I gather, we're the only ones in Western Europe who completely stopped investing in infrastructure when the recession hit, which is why our recovery was much slower than our neighbours - there's not a great deal of data since it's pretty much universally accepted that you do not cut investment during a recession (but cuts to public services are another matter). A lot of people also don't consider that poorer people tend to actually spend, meaning it goes straight back into the economy and gets spent again over and over, whereas the Tory model of giving money to wealth From what I gather, the Labour costing involves actually taking into account the effect of investment and greater distribution on growth, whereas the Tory objections are based on the assumption that investment just means throwing money into a hole and fiscal policy has no effect whatsoever on the economy. Safe hands, amiright e: PS - don't forget to always challenge the myth that it's Labour's spending that caused the global financial crisis, it's ridiculous how often you see statements like "we all know what happened last time" go unchallenged on the telly and whatnot. Yes, we all know what eventually happens when you spend the entire 1980s deregulating the financial services industry whilst rendering the entire economy dependent on it in the name of curbing union power, what of it? Borrovan fucked around with this message at 10:20 on Jun 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 10:14
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Also what the Tories were up to wasn't actually austerity as the term has been applied at any other point in the UK's history. Previous periods of austerity were marked by high taxation and extensive redistribution to soften the blow on the poorest (normally along with large capital projects to stimulate the economy).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 10:26
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:actually yeah, could someone with more knowledge of labour internals go through the list and bold the ones who are particularly promising, and strike through the ones which don't have a chance? Just cross-referenced with this list, probably using it for the opposite purpose for which it was intended: quote:Cat Smith
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 11:27
|
|
|
Vlex posted:Stella Creasy (Hella Easy) is my MP, I have half a mind to get in touch regarding recent affairs and her place in them. Do MPs actually read correspondence from their constituents? I imagine letters are more likely to be read than e-mails? I've always gotten a nice reply by post when I've emailed my MP. Borrovan posted:list Further refinements: quote:Richard Burgon ...but, I think we're officially out of heavy hitters at this point, and would struggle to find a politician who isn't a poo poo in some respect, anyway. There Is One Leader, And Corbyn Is His Name.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
deletebeepbeepbeep posted:So how long until we get a functioning Government? No government is better than a bad government
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
blunt posted:Yeah I don't mean him calling a vote, but putting out one to the press, like a manifesto of things labour believe they could pass with cross party support, to fill the news void while Theresa faffs around and build support. Tbh that actually sounds like a fairly solid plan. "Theresa May has called for strong and stable government; there is one party in the UK that is ready and able to govern". e: Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick#2016_presidential_elections Borrovan fucked around with this message at 12:41 on Jun 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
mehall posted:So the BBC got back to me after my complaint, and it's a doozy: BBC Trust posted:What if I’m dissatisfied with the BBC's reply? Still waiting on (both of) my non-response(s)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
efb
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Not Operator posted:I'm genuinely shocked by this level of self awareness. I just assumed they repeated it until this bollocks until they believed it. Holy poo poo maybe May's staying after all, they've thought up a plausible scapegoat! And I never got to make my "Lynton's Interfering Hand" joke at D&D night 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
lol, BBC News right now (re 1922 Committee): "PM described as 'strong and purposeful'". "Well guys, 'strong and stable' was a total bust, we need to change tac... any ideas?"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Corrode posted:This is a magical sequence (format is year, name, original party, new party, reason) I liked this one (all in a row in the table): 1935 Katharine Stewart-Murray, Duchess of Atholl Conservative Independent Resigned Whip over the India Bill and the "socialist tendency" of the government's domestic policy. 1935 Katharine Stewart-Murray, Duchess of Atholl Independent Conservative 1937 Katharine Stewart-Murray, Duchess of Atholl Conservative Independent Resigned Whip over Anglo-Italian Agreement 1937 Katharine Stewart-Murray, Duchess of Atholl Independent Conservative 1938 Katharine Stewart-Murray, Duchess of Atholl Conservative Independent Resigned a third time, this time to stand as an Independent in opposition to Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement of Adolf Hitler Incidentally, never knew Nye Bevan got expelled!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:So does anything at all that the British Parliament does require greater than a simple majority? It's not quite that simple. Don't forget how much of our constitution is governed by convention and not rocking the boat too much: take the House of Lords for instance, everybody knows that the Commons can just legislate their power away if they want to, but they don't, because that would be causing a nuisance and just plain un-British; accordingly, the Lords do their job of kicking up a fuss when absolutely necessary* but not take the piss. If an Act of Parliament requires a special majority, it must be complied with, but that Act itself can be overturned by simple majority and then the original vote done over. This means that the whole process involves a lot more scrutiny, so it takes a lot more political capital to push it through. *See, for example, this crucial debate on a matter of crucial historical significance e: context
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Fans posted:American's have a long history of supporting the IRA without really knowing what they're doing. Why stop now? I was drinking with an American in an Irish bar in Germany, and he ordered an "Irish car bomb", which I learned was a drink. The bartender didn't like that so I had to explain to him that he's a oval office and he left presently.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:
Shhh we're democratic socialists for now 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
c0burn posted:The Times But, let's see if the biggest electoral gently caress-up in recent history can fight Corbyn on his own turf. You can't out-social the socialists! Even if we lose, forcing the Tories to the left is a win for society. e: context
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
So, Tories do a load of posturing on Corbyn's turf, giving him unlimited fodder to tear them down with and making him look even more honest and sincere by comparison, whilst (hopefully) giving the more egregiously bloodthirsty poo poo a rest and tearing themselves apart in the process? Sign me up. One nation!EmptyVessel posted:On the other hand: 9999 Prince John posted:That seems like a really weird way to read the result to me. It is literally the outcome of the election, I guess, but that's not the same as saying it's what even one person in the country actually wanted
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:How many of these "universities just make people socialists and provide safe spaces" people have ever been to one? I teach at a university in a field that touches upon social and economic issues, and can confirm that socialist arguments are disproportionately accepted whereas conservative arguments tend to be firmly bebutted because that's what happens when you apply a degree of critical reasoning and examine the evidence e:seriously, how do people notice that educated people who spend their lives thinking about this poo poo disproportionately tend to disagree with them and jump to the conclusion that obviously they must all be biased. The DPRK posted:Tell me if you're getting bored of these. "You could apply the same slippery slope argument to literally any public spending. Should we not have an NHS, or schools? The problem is that you do run out of money if you don't invest in the economy and education and instead let all the wealth aggregate in a few hands where it does no good for anyone." <- shortest & most convincing answer I could come up with. Borrovan fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Jun 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:If we make the rich more rich then they will buy more yachts. Then the poor can ftfy e: The DPRK posted:"Here here!"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 13:03
|
|