General Election 2017

[Atticus Finch]

And May isn't?

May and the whole Tory party are making our future position on Europe on the hoof!
They never had a plan if the UK voted Brexit - even the most ardent outers - and now they have been caught with their pants truly down by their ankles by the result.

As Alan said, the referendum was just political expediency by Posh Dave to try and stop the Tories being smashed at the 2015 election by UKIP.

So now we are left in a position that thanks to Posh Dave, Gorgeous Gideon and Bonkers Boris, aided by the idiot Gove and other cronies (Davis et al) we face the prospect of losing all the good that has been gained from our membership of the EU over the last 40+ years.

A fantastic legacy to leave to the next generation.

I hope that we are all truly delighted with this gift we have given to them...

 

[Knutsfordian]

So Atticus - everyone loved the EU before the referendum and by some cruel twist of fate they, the electorate, somehow inadvertently managed to vote us out of the EU. My take on it is this - There has been a growing groundswell of anti EU opinion in this country for 40 years. A vote was coming sooner or later and Cameron recognised that. We were duped into going into the Common Market by collusion amongst MPs to pervert the course of Parliamentary votes. At that time it was already known by a few leaders that the real intention was a steady move towards a United States of Europe and this intention was never communicated to the people. We were then denied a vote on all the subsequent European treaties including Lisbon and Mastricht where the political elite thought they knew best by giving away Parliamentary powers to make us subservient to Brussells. The Labour and Conservative parties developed policies that were pro-European but failed to understand, recognise or legislate for the huge number of people who were never in favour of this march to European unity (and they have the gall now to talk about the 48% of remoaners and how they need to be taken into account - where were they for the last 40 years in protecting those who never wanted to be in the EU?). At the outset Labour had been an anti Europe party, changed its mind, but never sought to bring its supporters along with that view. Ultimately, the referendum was lost because there is no compelling argument to be in the EU. People didn't want to be part of a failed European unity vanity project costing £ billions and the electorate made their decision based on 40 years of EU experience ! It wasn't a cruel twist of fate, or people duped by rhetoric. It was a carefully thought out decision based on a life time of experience !! The cost and failures of EU institutions far outweighs any benefits. Thank god the Liberals never managed to get us into the Euro as was their intention. As for the "oldies" condemning the "youngsters" to a future of isolationism, I don't think we have denied our children a future, we have given back to them the opportunity and freedom to be the country they want to be.

 

[Alan M]

Rather than going over all the old pro/con arguments on what is now a done deal, maybe we can focus on the current position?

Has May called the election because she wants a bigger majority so that she can
a) better resist the excessive demands of some of the more extreme pro-leave members of her party and go for a deal more in line with her own instincts?
b) be more able to push through possibly unpalatable (to some in her party) final terms for leaving the EU?
c) give her negotiating position with the EU more authority because she has a larger majority?
d) ditch the last remaining links with the Cameron era and get a personal mandate?
e) make political capital out of the mess that the opposition find themselves in?
f) avoid having to deal with the embarrassment and consequences of charges of electoral fraud from 2015?

Personally I still think it's (e).

 

[Andy]

When I comes to Brexit, the parties have made there stances "clear":

Conservatives - They're just getting on with carrying out Brexit. A lager majority makes it easier for them to carry this out. The EU knows this.

Labour - It's clear. Clear as in they haven't got a clue what their stance is on Brexit (or just about anything).

Lib Dems - the Anti Brexit party. The party that will do anything to stop it. They're setting their stall out as the anti democracy party. Their whole campaign is being exactly what people hate about politics, exactly why the likes of Trump and Le Pen happen.

I can understand why someone would vote labour, but for the life of me can't work out why anyone would vote for Dim Tims party, a party that is showing once again they'll say anything to get a vote.

Dim Tim stood in his constituency and said to his Cumbrian constituents "I will respect the outcome of the referendum". Another lie told to his constituents. I can't wait for the look in Dim Tims face when he loses his seat on 9th June.

 

[Nicki]

...and they have the gall now to talk about the 48% of remoaners and how they need to be taken into account

So to clarify, are you using the derogatory term 'remoaners' to apply to all the people who voted for remain, including those who voted that way because they felt it was best for them, their family and their livelihood and who accepted the result of the democratic vote?

Seems like you're generalising to me. As discussed previously on here, it's probably best to avoid doing that about Brexiters and Remainers.

 

[Nicki]

Politicians from all parties lie. It's perhaps the least differentiating factor across them all. If you're going to choose which way to vote on that basis (Andy - I don't believe you are) you might as well just close your eyes and put a cross wherever your pencil touches the paper.

 

[Knutsfordian]

Nicki - point taken regarding remoaners, but there are still many who don't accept the referendum outcome as being a given way forward and that the base line is we will exit the EU, even if we can't agree a deal with Brussels. Its quite evident that there are swathes of people across Europe who don't agree with the EU project, but the EU is intent on even more integration and doesn't take account of the opposition. It seems more intent on binding countries in so that they can't get out and has shown constant disregard for democratic verdicts within nation states. So for me its really important that our government isn't thrown off track and delivers on the referendum outcome.

Alan M - I think all your points are valid and the reason for the general election is most, if not all, of these reasons plus a couple more i) to stop Nicola Sturgeon from constantly claiming that Mrs May has no mandate and ii) to try and prevent Gina Miller from launching another court intervention to stop Brexit at the 12th hour.

 

[FCUM Dave]

So Atticus - everyone loved the EU before the referendum and by some cruel twist of fate they, the electorate, somehow inadvertently managed to vote us out of the EU. My take on it is this - There has been a growing groundswell of anti EU opinion in this country for 40 years. A vote was coming sooner or later and Cameron recognised that. We were duped into going into the Common Market by collusion amongst MPs to pervert the course of Parliamentary votes. At that time it was already known by a few leaders that the real intention was a steady move towards a United States of Europe and this intention was never communicated to the people. We were then denied a vote on all the subsequent European treaties including Lisbon and Mastricht where the political elite thought they knew best by giving away Parliamentary powers to make us subservient to Brussells. The Labour and Conservative parties developed policies that were pro-European but failed to understand, recognise or legislate for the huge number of people who were never in favour of this march to European unity (and they have the gall now to talk about the 48% of remoaners and how they need to be taken into account - where were they for the last 40 years in protecting those who never wanted to be in the EU?). At the outset Labour had been an anti Europe party, changed its mind, but never sought to bring its supporters along with that view. Ultimately, the referendum was lost because there is no compelling argument to be in the EU. People didn't want to be part of a failed European unity vanity project costing £ billions and the electorate made their decision based on 40 years of EU experience ! It wasn't a cruel twist of fate, or people duped by rhetoric. It was a carefully thought out decision based on a life time of experience !! The cost and failures of EU institutions far outweighs any benefits. Thank god the Liberals never managed to get us into the Euro as was their intention. As for the "oldies" condemning the "youngsters" to a future of isolationism, I don't think we have denied our children a future, we have given back to them the opportunity and freedom to be the country they want to be.

Amen to a brilliant post.

 

[Alan M]

Knutsfordian - to me, my (a) and (b) were actually opposites - (a) being for the case where she actually wants a softer approach to the whole exit thing but can't get away with it at the moment and (b) being the case where she realises she might not be able to walk into the negotiations with a list of demands and come out with a series of ticks (the problem being that we don't know, and nor does she, how these negotiations will pan out).
And to me your (i) is the same essentially as my (d), but I get your point, while I don't see how with (ii) a general election will impinge on any possible court case (particularly, as I recall, since she was threatening to go to court in relation to the process for accepting or otherwise the terms of the final deal, which at general election time will not be known anyway).

 

[Knutsfordian]

I don't think any of these points are mutually exclusive, with a larger majority allowing flexibility within the process to include (or exclude) certain sections of the party depending on the required outcome. With regard to our neighbours up north, I think a resurgence of the Tories in Scotland would add further weight to any decision to kick another referendum into the long grass. The Gina Miller question is going to be tricky. I think the Conservative party manifesto may include specific items that would allow the Attorney General to argue that the government was elected with a clear mandate to carry forward their Brexit proposals without further challenge in the courts. We'll see. Essentially though, there is no one clear reason for this election, which I think is why Mrs May has gone for it, it covers a multitude of bases and outcomes.

 

[paul]

Politicians from all parties lie. It's perhaps the least differentiating factor across them all. If you're going to choose which way to vote on that basis (Andy - I don't believe you are) you might as well just close your eyes and put a cross wherever your pencil touches the paper.

Agree with that Nicki. Not only that but some sections of the press then also tell lies about the lies they are writing about! It is becoming increasingly difficult for the voter to make an informed decision, all the rubbish on social media doesn't help either. You just have to make your choice on the most reliable information available you have obtained (or at least what you think is!).

Personal view but for me there are way too many politicians these days, most getting paid way above what they are worth, and again social media is a fantastic tool for them to get their messages across more frequently and forcefully. Also, someone that no-one had ever heard of before like Gina Miller sticking her two penneth in and seemingly being able to reduce governments powers makes it even more of a farce.

Honestly I'm sick to death of politics currently and hearing what most of them have to say. Its usually the same old rubbish just said in a different way.

 

[Alan M]

When I said I thought calling the election was for political expediency and was helping make people fed up with politics, you (Paul) said "Ridiculous comment, which bit of democracy can you not grasp?!"
Have you changed your mind?

 

[Nicki]

This is an interesting site which I've never seen before... perhaps a reflection of my own (lack of) interest in politics, but it takes a little guesswork out of whether or not your existing MP is the one for you. Of course, we can only speculate what the other candidates would've done given the same vote:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/

Actual behaviour is a better measure than rhetoric.

 

[paul]

When I said I thought calling the election was for political expediency and was helping make people fed up with politics, you (Paul) said "Ridiculous comment, which bit of democracy can you not grasp?!"
Have you changed your mind?

No definitely not Alan. I wish I could vote for Labour but I just couldn't because a) I have absolutely no idea what their policy will be on anything (and I don't think they do yet either) and b) they will go against me (and 17 million others) that voted out of the EU.

Sorry I haven't as keen an interest as politics as you and I bow to your superior knowledge on it. I will listen to as much as I can put up with until election day but I really can't see myself changing my mind.

 

[Toddy]

That's a relief Paul would hate to be supporting the same side as you.

 

[paul]

That's a relief Paul would hate to be supporting the same side as you.

That's nice.....Don't worry Toddy I will never support the Greens in any shape or form

 

[Alan M]

I wish I could vote for Labour but I just couldn't because a) I have absolutely no idea what their policy will be on anything (and I don't think they do yet either) and b) they will go against me (and 17 million others) that voted out of the EU.
.

I think they will try to present themselves as the caring face of politics in the hope of convincing a reasonable number. Whether that will manifest itself in meaningful policies is another matter - they were caught a bit on the hop by the decision to bring the election forward three years.
But then at the moment we are all eagerly awaiting all the party manifestos so we can pick holes in them all.

I haven't seen any evidence of Labour as a party suggesting that they will renege on the referendum vote - the party line may well be that they wouldn't have voted for it, and they have pushed for detail on the negotiations, but few Labour politicians have got behind any calls to actually try to stop it happening. Holding a government to account is however the job of the opposition, so their job is to question everything May and co do.

 

[Alan M]

When I comes to Brexit, the parties have made there stances "clear":

Conservatives - They're just getting on with carrying out Brexit. A lager majority makes it easier for them to carry this out. The EU knows this.

Labour - It's clear. Clear as in they haven't got a clue what their stance is on Brexit (or just about anything).

Lib Dems - the Anti Brexit party. The party that will do anything to stop it. They're setting their stall out as the anti democracy party. Their whole campaign is being exactly what people hate about politics, exactly why the likes of Trump and Le Pen happen.

For a slightly more considered appraisal of where each party stands, try this from today ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39665835

 

[Andy]

For a slightly more considered appraisal of where each party stands, try this from today ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39665835

Just proving my point as to regards Labour not really having a clue as to how to approach Brexit.

And when it comes to anything Brexit from the BBC, bare in mind they've recently been hammered from all corners in reagards to a painfully pro-remain bias.

 

[Nicki]

BBC... a painfully pro-remain bias.

It just offsets the painfully pro-Brexit bias on here!