|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 12, 2017 21:42:20 GMT
One thing I hope comes out of this election, is that we don't need another one in the next few months. Many politicians are calling for another one and frankly I've had enough of this I think the politicians know people are fed up with repeated elections. However given the parlous state Mrs May finds herself in another election may be unavoidable if the govt can't get votes through the house. The more likely result in another election will be a firmer vote one way or the other. Far, far too many people are getting ludicrously excited about the prospect of another election going in favour of the Labour Party. I'm sceptical about that unless things change hugely in Scotland and parts of the north / midlands where the Tories made gains or held on. The electoral maths for Labour to form a government on their own are still very, very difficult. Any sign of pre-election stitch ups between Labour and the SNP will cause further tremors in Scotland and not to either party's advantage. I think talk of an indy referendum anytime soon has annoyed a lot of Scots hence the Tory's gains there. Without those seats Mrs May would be in even worse straits. There is also the not insignificant issue of blowing another £130m on another election and whether the parties can raise sufficient funds to fight another campaign. Unfortunately I think we will be trudging back to the polling booths within 12 months because the "arrangement" with the DUP is coming under ever growing pressure even before the Parliamentary session starts. I can't see it lasting given the spotlight that is now being shone on the state of affairs in NI and the danger the Good Friday Agreement is in. The prospect of NI peace breaking down will bring international pressure never mind domestic concerns. Brexit just adds another nightmare-ish dimension to NI issues. But Labour also/ won seats in Scotland on the back of the SNP's second referendum pledges. Just remember how last election Scotland hardly voted labour as they did years ago. If Sturgeon wasn't going on about 2nd referendum, she would have lots more seats. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 12, 2017 23:07:04 GMT
But Labour also/ won seats in Scotland on the back of the SNP's second referendum pledges. Just remember how last election Scotland hardly voted labour as they did years ago. If Sturgeon wasn't going on about 2nd referendum, she would have lots more seats. Agreed. And the other risk for Mrs Sturgeon is that rather more Scottish seats are now marginal than before. It would not take very much for more seats to swap party assuming the same momentum for Labour / Conservatives and ongoing dislike for a second referendum. I doubt the SNP will be doing much demanding for another election anytime soon. They have their fair share of domestic policy woes which is also affecting their popularity. I expect Labour / Tories will put a *lot* more effort into Scotland if there is another election soon. |
|
|
|
Post by T.R. on Jun 14, 2017 20:01:54 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 14, 2017 20:38:56 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats. I wonder if this will be a good opportunity for Vince Cable to take a jump at the position |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jun 14, 2017 22:51:15 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats. I wonder if this will be a good opportunity for Vince Cable to take a jump at the position What a picture that would make(with rocket assistance)  |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 15, 2017 0:04:32 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats. Apparently due to his Christian beliefs hindering him leading his party - never heard so much nonsense in my life personally. Since when does religion stop you from successfully leading a party. |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jun 15, 2017 7:24:24 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats. leading his party - never heard so much nonsense in my life personally. Since when does religion stop you from successfully leading a party. So why did he take on the job as leader in the first place?  |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 15, 2017 11:35:14 GMT
Tim Farron has resigned as leader or the Liberal Democrats. Apparently due to his Christian beliefs hindering him leading his party - never heard so much nonsense in my life personally. Since when does religion stop you from successfully leading a party. Easy enough to answer that - when campaigners believe you have a conflict between your personal religious views and the party you lead's manifesto commitments. It's an open goal for people to aim at and to accuse him of hypocrisy. I suspect people both within and without the Liberal Democrat party are aware of the depth of his religious convictions and what that means in terms of an issue like gay sex. Despite multiple opportunities to provide clarity on that issue he never quite got there and certainly not in a way that satisfied his critics. I can't say I was ever terribly fussed about the issue myself but I can see why in party terms it was becoming a millstone for the Lib Dems and it was probably not doing Mr Farron much good either. If we hadn't had an election I suspect he'd have gone a few weeks ago but now the campaign is over (for now) the party has moved to effectively force him out (if you believe reports he initially refused to quit) to avoid a re-run of the questioning if we have another election in October this year or May next year. Politics is a brutal business and you can argue the Lib Dems didn't campaign as well as they might have done and their stance on Brexit didn't resonate despite the rough 50/50 split in the country on the issue. They gained MPs so it wasn't a complete disaster but with Clegg gone there is an opportunity to get a new leader who is more left leaning that is likely to be more to the Lib Dems' taste. They somehow need to escape the tainting of things like university fees and other things done in the Coalition. Mr Farron's got a narrow majority to defend in his constituency and if there is another election he will be under tremendous pressure. He might save his political skin by having more time to campaign locally although I understand he is an incredibly active constituency MP anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 19, 2017 14:29:50 GMT
Apparently due to his Christian beliefs hindering him leading his party - never heard so much nonsense in my life personally. Since when does religion stop you from successfully leading a party. Easy enough to answer that - when campaigners believe you have a conflict between your personal religious views and the party you lead's manifesto commitments. It's an open goal for people to aim at and to accuse him of hypocrisy. I suspect people both within and without the Liberal Democrat party are aware of the depth of his religious convictions and what that means in terms of an issue like gay sex. Despite multiple opportunities to provide clarity on that issue he never quite got there and certainly not in a way that satisfied his critics. I can't say I was ever terribly fussed about the issue myself but I can see why in party terms it was becoming a millstone for the Lib Dems and it was probably not doing Mr Farron much good either. If we hadn't had an election I suspect he'd have gone a few weeks ago but now the campaign is over (for now) the party has moved to effectively force him out (if you believe reports he initially refused to quit) to avoid a re-run of the questioning if we have another election in October this year or May next year. Politics is a brutal business and you can argue the Lib Dems didn't campaign as well as they might have done and their stance on Brexit didn't resonate despite the rough 50/50 split in the country on the issue. They gained MPs so it wasn't a complete disaster but with Clegg gone there is an opportunity to get a new leader who is more left leaning that is likely to be more to the Lib Dems' taste. They somehow need to escape the tainting of things like university fees and other things done in the Coalition. Mr Farron's got a narrow majority to defend in his constituency and if there is another election he will be under tremendous pressure. He might save his political skin by having more time to campaign locally although I understand he is an incredibly active constituency MP anyway. I think it is more to do with his election results. I am sure if he had take 20+ seats he would have still been there. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Jun 24, 2017 13:53:38 GMT
Although Labour didn't win the General Election, they achieved several distinctions. They received the highest number of seats since 2005, the highest vote share since 2001, the highest number of votes since 1997 and second highest since 1966.
This puts Jeremy Corbyn up there with Harold Wilson & Tony Blair as one of the 3 most successful Labour leaders in the last 60 years!
|
|
|
|
Post by TNL33036 on Jul 13, 2017 11:47:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ibus246 on Jul 13, 2017 12:50:22 GMT
Well obviously, that was not the result she was expecting? The reason as to why she held the snap election are very clear indeed |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 13, 2017 13:21:55 GMT
Well obviously, that was not the result she was expecting? The reason as to why she held the snap election are very clear indeed Indeed, it was simply to increase her majority as well as have her own mandate rather than holding onto Cameron's one. I don't like the woman or the Tories for that matter but I think some of the stick she has received is really OTT - I don't believe for one moment that if anyone had the chance to increase their majority that they'd refuse that opportunity. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 13, 2017 13:45:06 GMT
Well obviously, that was not the result she was expecting? The reason as to why she held the snap election are very clear indeed Indeed, it was simply to increase her majority as well as have her own mandate rather than holding onto Cameron's one. I don't like the woman or the Tories for that matter but I think some of the stick she has received is really OTT - I don't believe for one moment that if anyone had the chance to increase their majority that they'd refuse that opportunity. I don't blame her for wanting to increase the majority, even though I do not support the tories I'd much rather a strong and stable government (gosh that sounds familiar  ) to get us through the Brexit negotiations rather than a minority government where at any stage a disagreement can create a mountain out of a mole hill. But what I do blame her for is the disastrous campaign, the fact it was completely aimed at the older generation and people who had voted leave as opposed to all the young people and the 48% of people who voted remain. This is where Jeremy Corbyn really managed to damage the hopes of the Conservative Party as he and the Labour party saw through this, they saw that there were two sides to the whole Brexit argument and they noticed that if they got a lot of support from the younger generation they could increase their presence in Parliament. I know a lot of the younger people who simply voted Labour just because University tuition fees would be abolished starting 2017/2018 academic year, Labour would have got this money from somewhere although it quite possibly would have meant depriving the money from elsewhere. But it was a jolly good tactic to get a huge amount of votes. Another huge problem that Theresa May brought upon herself was not taking part in any TV debates, she instead opted to campaign locally. Jeremy Corbyn also refused to come to many debates unless May was there, which I think was lucky for Theresa May because in the one instance where Jeremy Corbyn was present against all the other party leaders and Amber Rudd he completely demolished the Torries on TV, for thousands of people all over the country to watch while Mrs May was campaigning locally. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 13, 2017 15:32:42 GMT
Well obviously, that was not the result she was expecting? The reason as to why she held the snap election are very clear indeed Indeed, it was simply to increase her majority as well as have her own mandate rather than holding onto Cameron's one. I don't like the woman or the Tories for that matter but I think some of the stick she has received is really OTT - I don't believe for one moment that if anyone had the chance to increase their majority that they'd refuse that opportunity. Oh what delights. She believed her own hype and that of favourable newspapers. She didn't pay much attention to the history books. The British typically do not like being messed around by politicians calling endless elections. If nothing else the lessons of the 60s and 70s should really have taught her something. She and many in her party completely underestimated the campaigning nature of Mr Corbyn. Whether you like his approach to things or not he knows how to campaign. Mrs May demonstrably does not. To me that was a fundamental weakness and I don't understand how people in the Tory party did not spot this. Mrs May appears to lack any natural curiosity. She isn't interesting in things. She doesn't question, challenge. She appears to be one of those gilded politicians who have never had to struggle for very much, who've risen through the ranks with little difficulty and who've found a comfortable seat where there is little need to campaign to keep it. I know she has a good reputation as a constituency MP but that doesn't make a Prime Minister. Her inability to campaign and to cope with "normal people" is what cost her the campaign along with an incompetently run organisation in Central Office. I also suspect she's spent so long in the Home Office getting her own way through the use of her completely discredited and sacked "advisors" (henchmen more like) that she couldn't cope with being challenged or the demonstrable need to change. I am afraid I laughed for days after the election result. Her hubris cost her the election. She deserves all the agonies that are being piled on her head. Factions in the Tory party have got what they wanted - the referendum, Brexit etc - and now look at the shambles they are in. Yes they are in government but it is weak, vulnerable and a laughing stock and is becoming more discredited by the week. Oh how my heart bleeds. And yes Labour and the Lib Dems are not exactly in fine form either but at least the Tory Party cannot inflict the more horrific elements of their appalling manifesto on us. EDIT Have look at the graphics on this tweet as to what people recall about the General Election. Very interesting. |
|
) to get us through the Brexit negotiations rather than a minority government where at any stage a disagreement can create a mountain out of a mole hill. But what I do blame her for is the disastrous campaign, the fact it was completely aimed at the older generation and people who had voted leave as opposed to all the young people and the 48% of people who voted remain. This is where Jeremy Corbyn really managed to damage the hopes of the Conservative Party as he and the Labour party saw through this, they saw that there were two sides to the whole Brexit argument and they noticed that if they got a lot of support from the younger generation they could increase their presence in Parliament.