UK Election June 08

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jericho

Even if they do win, I think May's finished after the election.
They'll have won in spite of her, not because of.
But, Craig Mackinlay getting charged, another attack on the NHS...Call it pie in the sky, wishful thinking, whatever.
I'm feeling that dramatic collapse.

---

Indeed one of the bizarre twists of this election is that it now appears it was a profound mistake for Mrs May to go for it, I don't think it will be as calamitous as Cameron betting the country on staying in the EU, because the Tories will still be the government, but this is twice in a row that the Tories have assumed their public persona of invincibility is tripping them up. The decision to hold an election and her failure to maintain the policy on social care for more than a few days has damaged her reputation for sound management, but it doesn't offer much hope to her opponents as there are no credible alternatives, for while I think David Davis would be the obvious choice, I don't believe he has the support of the party around the country.

This is in a way a continuation of the internal war over Europe the Tories have been fighting since 1972 because we don't really know what the negotiations will bring, although I think there will be an agreement on the rights of residence for EU citizens in the UK, and UK citizens in the EU. The UK I think will have to commit to maintaining its financial contributions to the EU as long as it remains a member, but we don't know when the formal relationship will end, and the longer it takes the more we will pay. But the real stumbling block will be on trade. A 'bad deal' would surely be no preferential access to the Single Market after a relatively short cut off point -say December 2019- a good deal would be a phased withdrawal which gives the UK a few more years to detach itself, with other phased withdrawals from, say, the Fishing and Agricultural sectors. But as the EU is in command of these talks, we cannot know how sympathetic to UK demands they will be. The border with the Irish Republic is a conundrum that could prove to be harder to deal with, as it may come down to various scenarios linked to access/no access to the Single Market.

Confidence is a curious commodity in politics, among the population at large, Mrs May had it in abundance at the start of the election, Corbyn very little; if anything it has been reversed. In the longer term this may suit Jeremy Corby who will want to remain leader of the party while he maintains the process of reforms to 'return' it to the membership as long as it doesn't threaten John McDonnell's Stalinist grip of policy. Right now a close look at the parties suggests decisions are made by a Poliburo in Labour, and a Church Fete Committee in the Tories.

Would you like another fairy cake with your tea, vicar, or a pint?

^^^ miss may. i stopped reading there. really... ?

but seriously [insert serious face]. fuck theresa may.

i had a point and forgot it. there is a seriously fucking sexy dame in this airport and i have designs to fuck her. chances her i will not, but my chances are greater if i don't think about whatever the fuck you guys are on about in this thread.

sorry if you read this

i will report soon if i "score"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

Worth a "wager" though if Corbyn is good odds!

---

They were when i put a bet on! :mrgreen:

A pathetic response from both party leaders last night to two compelling questions:

-when asked by a nurse why her wages in 2017 are the same as they were in 2009 Mrs May droned on with the established Central Office mantra: there is no magic money tree -so suddenly all that money the UK will save when it leaves the UK has disappeared? Was it not supposed to be spent on the NHS?

-Corbyn was asked if he would press the red button to launch a nuclear weapon if the UK has been attacked and he couldn't give a coherent answer to the precise question, just waffle on about not being in a position to need retaliation -what he could have done is make it clear that ot all nuclear weapons are Hiroshima-type bombs as nuclear warheads have for some time had a lower yield and are sometimes referred to as 'tactical' or 'battlefield' weapons which, if anything, makes them more likely to be used than the Hirosihima style 'strategic' weapons capable of wiping Moscow off the map. This has meant that within NATO first use has been part of the 'deterrence' strategy, and was indeed confirmed by Geoff Hoon in the last Labour government when he said in 2003

"Let me make it clear the long-standing British government policy that if our forces or our people were threatened by weapons of mass destruction we would reserve the right to use appropriate proportionate responses which might ... might in extreme circumstances include the use of nuclear weapons." The follow-up question (from David Dimbleby) "But you would only use Britain's weapon of mass destruction after an attack by Saddam Hussein using weapons of mass destruction?" Hoon replied: "Clearly if there were strong evidence of an imminent attack if we knew that an attack was about to occur and we could use our weapons to protect against it."
https://www.opendemocracy.net/confli...clear_3693.jsp
(A rather long but useful overview of nuclear weapons policy in the UK since the 1940s)

I believe Corbyn was opposed to this policy, but as I have pointed out in posts above, Labour does not seem to have looked in depth at Trident or the future of the Navy and thus the debate on nuclear weapons doesn't seem to me to have made any advance on the position the UK has had since the 1950s. A missed opportunity to re-set this whole debate, not least the more pertinent one that the UK outside the EU may not have enough money to sustain a nuclear strike force which is anyway mostly controlled by the USA without whose permission the UK cannot use nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile the Conservative Party campaign stumbles on suggesting there is no central command. Three examples:

1) Yesterday Craig Mackinlay was charged by the police with breaking election law in the General Election of 2015 in which he was elected MP for Thanet South, it relates to the party's election expenses. Mackinlay saw off a challenge from Nigel Farage of UKIP who believes the Tory vote in Thanet South will collapse and this time the fight is between Labour and UKIP, but Farage has been wrong before.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-40129826

2) Yesterday Boris Johnson (Foreign Secretary) and Michael Fallon (Defence Secretary) both said the party will not raise taxes, even though their party manifesto does not say this, thus Michael Fallon:
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph today Sir Michael made it clear that income tax "absolutely" will not rise under a new Conservative government.
While Mr Johnson told BBC's Newsnight: "We will bear down on taxation and we have absolutely no plans to raise income tax."
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-06-03/s...-under-tories/

3) The Tory pledge on Housing has also changed, thus:
The Conservatives have U-turned on a flagship pledge to build “a new generation” of social housing announced in their manifesto just weeks ago.
Theresa May personally promised her policy would deliver “a constant supply of new homes for social rent”, but her housing minister has now admitted planned homes would be let at significantly less affordable rents.
...in an interview on Friday with trade magazine Inside Housing, minister Gavin Barwell admitted the party was planning to continue to build homes with higher rents and was not in fact reinstating traditional socially rented council housing.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7769866.html

So, questions now arise as to who is making policy and what the policy is, because the Manifesto doesn't tell us. But will the media take the bait and ask Mrs May awkward questions about tax and housing?

You forgot to mention that lovely gentleman "Philip Hammond", he got his figures mixed up over HS2 by a mere £20 billion! Not sure what programme it was? Newsnight possibly? Cause; the BBC haven't mentioned it! :crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

You forgot to mention that lovely gentleman "Philip Hammond", he got his figures mixed up over HS2 by a mere £20 billion! Not sure what programme it was? Newsnight possibly? Cause; the BBC haven't mentioned it! :crap

---

I might have done in an earlier post, but either way Philip Hammond is still alive, though you won't see him on tv or hear him on the radio. A curious absence for one of the most senior politicians in the country who may be considered 'second-in-command' to Mrs May, assuming there is someone in command of the campaign. It is of course possible Hammond boarded a blue bus for Kettering and has never been seen again. Or was it Redditch?

He'll be counting his money somewhere!
Up to his neck in all sorts of things is that guy, ask former swimmer Sharon Davies; Some dirty waste company decided to build an incinerator at the bottom of her "Cotswolds" garden a couple of years ago, Hammond was a director!

that debate on friday was a whole heap of bull. BOTH the PM and Corbyn dodged questions, and looked out of place.

I don't watch them because I know my politics & how I will vote but suspect if Corbyn was dodging questions it's probably because they were about his opinions from 30 years ago which doesn't concern him or his supporters over him becoming PM. Elections should be about Policies & making sure they're implemented!
May probably had no idea as usual I suspect.
Today we hear a statement from her re. terrorism; Enough is enough! And........? That's it!
Goodbye & thanks for coming!

In the last week the gap between the Tories and Labour has continued to narrow -the last time I posted Martin Baxter's predictions it suggested a 76 seat majority whereas polling up to last Saturday reduces this to 72.

It remains to be seen if the attack in London and the 'debate' about policing and Theresa May's 'urgent' call for a review of security policy will work to the Tories advantage. But while Labour has always been seen as weak on policing, and the reduction of police numbers began under the last Labour government, Labour will be on stronger ground if it focuses on what it is that resources are used for.

Boston, in the USA has shown that better community policing can bring local people and law enforcement into a better and non-confrontational relationship, though there is a clear need for accountability on the part of LE to maintain confidence in communities that they matter, so that in the end the outcome is a reduction of crime- the stark difference being confrontational policing that views 'difficult' inner-city and often poor districts as war zones where might is right.
http://harvardpolitics.com/united-st...ity-relations/

The reduction of police numbers is relevant if it means that community policing is either non-existent or so stretched as to be ineffective. Whether or not it would prevent fanatics from killing people I don't know, but I would expect a closer engagement of policing with the public to be a good thing, and it would be a human intelligence aspect that the fetish for controlling the internet cannot match. It has been claimed Theresa May wants internet controls as severe as those in China, but I suspect that peer-to-peer and encrypted communications are now standard though it also seems that once decisions have been made, the organizers and perpetrators of massacres go silent.

Whatever the arguments are, an election Theresa May called on leadership and Brexit, has spun out of her control, and it proves that 'events' can rapidly undermine political strategy -but that in this case there does not appear to have been a 'Plan B', which confirms in the comparison with the EU Referendum, that we have a generation of politicians who, if not entirely useless, are unable to think through their own policies to imagine a world without them.
Theresa May's internet policy may be here (doesn't really tell you much)
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a7774221.html

There is talk of a cover-up regarding the Manchester bomber & what we aren't being told & you may of seen one of the London Bridge terrorists was very well known to the Police! It's very worrying but I have to say our society as become far too tolerant.
If one ever dares to look at child pornography or attempts to download it; you would expect a knock on the door from the Police the next day however it seems some of these fanatics are looking at extremist & ISIS paraphernalia & little is done about it!
I really can't see an answer to it.

Re. The Election; The BBC have gone into overdrive, Jo Coburn of the Daily Politics made a complete buffoon of herself yesterday basically ignoring everything Corbyn as said recently and focussing only on what he said 30+ years ago & today on BBC Breakfast the presenter allowed Boris Johnson to rant on for 5 minutes branding Corbyn a terrorist without a hint of interruption! I want my license fee refunding!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

There is talk of a cover-up regarding the Manchester bomber & what we aren't being told & you may of seen one of the London Bridge terrorists was very well known to the Police! It's very worrying but I have to say our society as become far too tolerant.
If one ever dares to look at child pornography or attempts to download it; you would expect a knock on the door from the Police the next day however it seems some of these fanatics are looking at extremist & ISIS paraphernalia & little is done about it!
I really can't see an answer to it.

Re. The Election; The BBC have gone into overdrive, Jo Coburn of the Daily Politics made a complete buffoon of herself yesterday basically ignoring everything Corbyn as said recently and focussing only on what he said 30+ years ago & today on BBC Breakfast the presenter allowed Boris Johnson to rant on for 5 minutes branding Corbyn a terrorist without a hint of interruption! I want my license fee refunding!

---

The point about Butt is not that he was on a tv programme and known by the police and security services for his affiliations, but did he break the law? The laws on pornography are clear, but so too are the laws on terrorism, and one of the things extremists do when organized, is sail as close to the edge of the law as they can, which is how Anjem Choudary managed to stay out of prison for so long. The alternative, as Nigel Farage argued on Fox News the other day, is internment, a policy that was tried and failed in Northern Ireland.

If you think back to the 1960s and 1970s MI5 regularly (still do, in fact) infiltrated the assortment of Marxist, Trotskyist, Maoist and Anarchist groups, mostly aware that for all their talk of revolution the closest they were ever going to come to it was throwing stones at the police on anti-Vietnam demos. But then there was the Angry Brigade who went further and launched small scale bombs at targets like embassies, and when arrested were imprisoned, then went on hunger strike which led to them being 'force-fed', described as a form of torture and eventually a practice that was ended. The point being that we have always had fringe groups who want to overthrow the state, but rarely do anything about it, similarly in West Germany where it didn't matter until Baader-Meinhof crossed the line and killed a policeman.

As for Boris Johnson, I also listened to him this morning and it was clear he had no real answer to the questions other than to depict Jeremy Corbyn as irresponsible. Neither he nor Mishal Hussein (and note how he once made a point of saying her full name) pointed out that Corbyn's opposition to anti-terror legislation has been due to what he believed was the infringement of individual liberty in those Bills, which may also be why both Boris Johnson himself and Theresa May also voted against some of that legislation.

But consider for comparison sake, the difference between Jeremy Corbyn, and Peter King, the Republican Representative of New York's 2nd District on Long Island, here is just a flavour of views that would cause multiple heart attacks in the offices of the Daily Mail:
King began actively supporting the Irish republican movement in the late 1970s. He frequently traveled to Northern Ireland to meet with senior members of the paramilitary group, the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA), many of whom he counted as friends.^[13][29] King compared Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Féin, the political wing of the Irish republican movement, to George Washington, and asserted that the "British government is a murder machine".^[30] However, he apparently did not meet Adams until 1984.^[31]

King became involved with NORAID, an organization that the British, Irish and U.S. governments had accused of financing IRA activities and providing them with weapons.^{[13][32][33][34]} Regarding the 30 years of violence during which the IRA killed over 1,700 people, King said, "If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it."^[35]

He also called the IRA "the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_...rt_for_the_IRA

Jeremy Corbyn appears dull and pathetic when compared to Peter King, and that is before you get started on Muslims and their mosques...

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUVUC1NHftY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jericho

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUVUC1NHftY

---

I watched the whole of this yesterday, and I think it is a fair and useful attempt by Corbyn to re-establish the purpose of the Labour Party after Blair and the crash of 2008. At that time it was often stated that there were no new alternatives to the solutions to capitalism and its problems that had been tried before, a reference to the 'post-war Keynesian consensus' on the one hand, and Thatcherism on the other. I do think a debate on how far the State should intervene in the economy is a useful one, not least because for all their commitment to 'free markets', every Conservative government has intervened when it wanted, or needed to.

However, there have always been 'radical' free market apostles in the Conservative Party, and today they see a 'Hard Brexit' as another opportunity to prove markets are better than states, even though it appears they believe governments can and should be involved in these new global trade deals a UK free of the EU will be able to negotiate. It is indeed worthwhile offering an alternative because I think it is clear a lot of people in the UK want the State to do what markets cannot, or will not do, and that most people value the fair re-distribution of wealth over unlimited private profit.

What is fundamentally wrong with Corbyn's speech is its lack of truth -he offers no proper explanation for the decline of coal, for while it is true Mrs Thatcher presided over the decline of operating mines, coal was eclipsed in the 1960s by oil and gas because petroleum is cheaper, more efficient as a fuel, and in abundant supply. Hard though it might be to believe, it is also more environmentally friendly than coal, and kills fewer people working in the industry. Again, the decline of shipbuilding, dockyard labour, thousands of jobs in printing -these all went through lack of competition or technological change. But the real problem is that Corbyn is not thinking through the financial impact of the UK's exit from the EU, because it offers the nightmare scenario of a Labour government committed to spending billions on social programmes it cannot afford, simply because the money will not be there.

It would make sense if all the parties admitted what I think will become true over the next 5-10 years as we leave the EU: interest rates will rise, inflation will rise, VAT will rise, and direct taxation will rise. To offer 'no tax increases' or 'no tax increases for lower earners' is a false promise.

Lastly, Dianne Abbott has pulled out of another public speaking engagement. Although I think she has been a disaster for the campaign, I now wonder if she is genuinely ill. In the past she had a degree of energy, indignation and fluency that she has lacked for over a year now, and although only 63 years old, the wife of a friend of mine began developing Alzheimer's at the age of 60 (she has since died) and those signs, forgetting things, appearing to be lost in the present, apparent indifference, are signs of illness. I hope this is not true, but there could be more to this than campaign fatigue or some internal rows with members of the team.

What about the £161m per week(The PRO-remain BBC's own figure)that we won't be sending to the "Millionaires Club" anymore once this whole situation is sorted?

Love this;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

What about the £161m per week(The PRO-remain BBC's own figure)that we won't be sending to the "Millionaires Club" anymore once this whole situation is sorted?

---

The predictions that have been made of the money the UK will save by not have to pay into the EU have been fiction from the start of the EU Referendum until a moment ago.
The point is that as long as the UK is in some way engaged with the EU, be it on trade, be it on Euro-Policing, be it in the service sector, education, scientific research and so on, there will be costs to pay. The Hard Brexiteers even think that if the UK just 'walks away' at the end of 2019 that's it, but even then the UK will still be linked to the EU if not at the level of government, then through commercial contracts which are protected by international law. My guess is that the full financial 'benefit' of not being part of the EU, in terms of the annual membership fee and other financial costs, will not be known for at least ten years. In between then and now, some costs will not be incurred, but I don't know what that figure is, and neither does anyone else.

Well I for one am glad that this election is over but for the voting itself. I can't see the Tories losing this, and I can't see Labour winning, but there will be surprises and some shocks. A lot depends on the turn-out which I think may be low generally, but high among the under-30s which theoretically benefits Labour. Labour's obstacle to power is its lack of support in Scotland although the SNP are forecast to lose 12 seats, but perhaps to the Conservatives rather than Labour. Baxter and Election Calculus retain their prediction of a 72 seat majority so it will be interesting to see if his team got it right. The fate of UKIP is an enigma, most of us think it is finished as a party but the seat to watch may be Hartlepool, though I hope they fail wherever they stand, even if it means the return of their saviour, Nigel Farage to the leadership.

I shall vote Green, which won't make a difference either way as my constituency, apart from voting for a Whig in the 1840s and, in a freak result for Labour in 1997 has been Tory since 1832, although the county was for Cromwell in the Civil War and the Constituency voted Remain in the EU referendum. Some say that after Brexit and the US elections, we should not be so safe in our predictions, and that people want change. But change is coming with Brexit, and isn't that enough for now?

I believe that...Enough is enough.

The turn out will be high.
Labour will win.
We all live happily ever after.
Well, OK, maybe the last bit's a stretch! :dead:

I agree, thank goodness it's over, the bias shown by the Media as made me sick & very confused as to why?
The Tories will triumph & it makes me wonder what sort of people I'm surrounded by when I go about my normal business!
We are not safe :nervous:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I agree, thank goodness it's over, the bias shown by the Media as made me sick & very confused as to why?

---

That's simple, init.
Cunts like Murdoch, with his mates, Branson and tory barrow boy, Sugar, don't want to part with a fucking penny more than they have to!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

The Tories will triumph

---

Peejaye, I will not countenance this.
Not until unequivocally proven wrong...And even then, I want a recount!
And until then, I have hope that the people of this country will do the right thing.

It's going to be a long day and a longer night!

I'll second the recount Jericho!

In fact Martin Baxter's final prediction has been made today, based on polls up to yesterday the 7th. This gives the Conservatives a majority of 66 with 37.8% of the vote, a significant reduction in their expectations of 100+ when the election was called. Labour retain opposition status with 218 seats and a 31.2% share but he has the Liberal Democrats with 8 seats, which I think could be wrong, and UKIP with one seat and a 12.9% share of the vote whereas most polls had them barely around 5%; he predicts the SNP will lose 7 seats.

We will find out by this time tomorrow although Northern Ireland doesn't usually conclude its results until Saturday.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

I shall vote Green, which won't make a difference either way

---

I like the idea of the Greens, I hope they retain their deposits (at the expense of the Tories, of course).
Even I need a conscience...Occasionally!

Some say that after Brexit and the US elections, we should not be so safe in our predictions, and that people want change. But change is coming with Brexit, and isn't that enough for now?[/QUOTE]

No.

Without a doubt, Brexit has introduced uncertainty into our lives (Thanks a lot, you fucking idiots - When you dickheads die, I hope you spend eternity sucking on Boris Johnsons rancid cock!!!)

But Brexit's not the be all and end all of this election (no matter how much they'd like us to think otherwise).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I'll second the recount Jericho!

---

Lets hope it's not needed.

After watching 6 hours of FBI Comey testimony Yanks were hoping Brits would give us election sanity with a significant May victory.
I'm watching New York returns and that's not happening.
We're all doomed

Nick Clegg, ex deputy prime minister, libdem.
Just lost his seat to Labour.


Early, real early, but FUCK!

Oh, and Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary...Fuck off, and when you get there, fuck off a bit more!

I am sorry for gloating.
This will be the last time.

But...Fuck (I bet stavros would have a word for what I'm feeling right now)!
(fuck you, fullofshit is not one word)!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jericho

Oh, and Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary...Fuck off, and when you get there, fuck off a bit more!
I am sorry for gloating.
This will be the last time.
But...Fuck (I bet stavros would have a word for what I'm feeling right now)!
(fuck you, fullofshit is not one word)!

---

Perhaps you feel vindicated?

The word for Theresa May is catastrophe. Just as David Cameron did not need to hold a referendum on the EU in 2016 but did so, convinced the vote was won before the vote- and lost, so Theresa May, elevated by hubris and the polls that gave her a 20 point lead which would translate into a Commons majority of at least 100, swallowed the bait, and is now choked. It is now 5.30am, and the gossip is that later this morning she will announce her intention to resign, but not immediately. Boris Johnson, according to social media, has been planning his leadership bid since 1am, but now Amber Rudd has scraped back in with a majority of I think 400 in her constituency, those two and maybe David Davis could be in the frame.

If there is a key explanation here, on the one hand it has been the worst managed Conservative campaign in living memory with what one pundit on ITV (far superior coverage than the BBC which I stopped watching early on -I have been up all night) also called the worst manifesto of a government in British electoral history....a manifesto given to Cabinet members an hour before its launch that they had no input into and did not agree with, whose social care pledge had to be reversed within three days -simply unforgivable in what used to be a well-oiled (and well-funded) party machine. May refused to take part in a debate which Corbyn turned up to, and she came across as stiff, monotonous and utterly lacking in precisely the enthusiasm that Corbyn's campaign had in buckets.

On the other hand the other key is the role of social media and the extent to which it may have eclipsed mainstream media, with the vitriolic abuse of Corbyn in Murdoch's Sun and also in the Daily Mail having no effect. Labour is plugged into social media and the 'youth vote' with apps, twitter, facebook and all that, but for the Tories this is not a world they know or live in, indeed I have been citing polls that appear to have dismissed the 'youth vote' as unreliable because I too know little about this other world, yet it is clear that youth did turn out in large numbers, not least in my constituency which has dumped the Tory for Labour with a less than 2,000 vote majority -but we were a remain constituency, and there is a large cohort of students from a nearby university which I think has tipped the vote. I am also pleased that we recorded one of the highest votes for the Greens at nearly 2,000, and delighted to see UKIP's useless candidates losing their deposit, but probably not thrown in the dustbin of history as Nigel Farage will probably be leader again soon.

Crucially, this does nothing to give clarity to Brexit negotiations which are supposed to begin in two weeks time, not least because the Labour surge suggests a re-think on what the details might be, and the extent to which an accommodation with the EU may be sought to prevent a 'hard Brexit'. Moreover, if there is no overall control or a narrow majority, we may need another election in October.

More on this later, but congratulations to Labour for its enthusiastic, positive campaign, and for restoring to the agenda a raft of policies that were considered redundant. I still feel they are cowards on defence/Trident, have offered nothing on curriculum development in education, and cannot fund their programme after Brexit and are either lying about taxes or are just deluded, but that is for another day.

On a tranny forum a hung parliament might seem like a desirable state of affairs, but I'm doubting any of you lot are in the mood for humor right now.

This is what you get for being greedy, not learning from history and being so stupid in announcing policies like the 'dementia tax' and thereby jeopardising the UK's negotiating position in the Brexit talks.

I'm not usually vindictive but delighted to see Angus Robertson lose his seat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rodinuk

This is what you get for being greedy, not learning from history and being so stupid in announcing policies like the 'dementia tax' and thereby jeopardising the UK's negotiating position in the Brexit talks.

I'm not usually vindictive but delighted to see Angus Robertson lose his seat.

---

To which one must add a stunning restoration of the Conservative vote in Scotland without which the Tories would be in a deeper mess than they are now. Ten years of SNP rule is beginning to pall, even Labour did better than expected. George Osborne on ITV made the point that Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader in the Scottish Parliament, ran exactly the positive and enthusiastic campaign north of the border that Mrs May did not in England and Wales, and that this gives her a lot of authority when they begin choosing a new party leader. One wonders if she could have replaced Theresa May were she to have been an MP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rodinuk

This is what you get for being greedy, not learning from history and being so stupid in announcing policies like the 'dementia tax' and thereby jeopardising the UK's negotiating position in the Brexit talks.

I'm not usually vindictive but delighted to see Angus Robertson lose his seat.

---

Alex Salmond gone as well. That will make a lot of people I know, very happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

To which one must add a stunning restoration of the Conservative vote in Scotland without which the Tories would be in a deeper mess than they are now. Ten years of SNP rule is beginning to pall, even Labour did better than expected. George Osborne on ITV made the point that Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader in the Scottish Parliament, ran exactly the positive and enthusiastic campaign north of the border that Mrs May did not in England and Wales, and that this gives her a lot of authority when they begin choosing a new party leader. One wonders if she could have replaced Theresa May were she to have been an MP.

---

This is largely what I predicted earlier in the thread (so much for the SNP "whitewash";)). A lot of people, including some lifelong labour supporters, have been very impressed with the way Ruth Davidson has conducted her campaign. Labour themselves have probably done slightly better in Scotland than I expected as well.

Well; I've just got up having stayed up till 3.30 am expecting the Torys to scrape through! I am now having a 5.0% craft IPA for breakfast instead of toast and coffee :cheers:

Theresa May will be going to Buckingham Palace at lunchtime to tell the Queen she can stay in power and form a government with the help of the Democratic Unionist Party. Proof that this foolish woman is obstinate and determined to carry on, plugging a hole in a sinking ship, but for how long?

There is no obligation to begin the Brexit talks on the 19th June, they could be postponed -but as Article 50 has been invoked with a two year time-table, the talks have to end by the end of 2019. In theory, Theresa May could try to form a 'Brexit consensus' in the Commons which would require her to open talks with Labour, the SNP, the Liberal Democrats and the Democratic Unionist Party in order to secure an agreement with them to vote with the government on Brexit negotiations, but that assumes a) that the other parties will agree to it, and b) that her own party will support a strategy that must require her Brexit agenda to be compromised and be 'too soft' for that half of her party that wants to see the EU fall apart and therefore wants a 'hard Brexit'.

If her managerial reputation has been so damaged by this result, I am not sure how she can create a holding operation in the Commons, but I don't believe there can be an internal challenge to her leadership until the party conference in late September. There is also the spoiling operation that the other parties could try and use to extract commitments to domestic policies they prefer, say on housing and education- as a trade for support for Brexit. And what happens if the 'Brexit consensus' produces precisely the 'backsliding' on Brexit the militants in her party are opposed to and vote against her whenever they can?

So far this morning Mrs May has not brought the Cabinet together in a meeting to tell them what is going on and what the formal position of the party/government is, and we can only wait to see if she calls a Cabinet meeting for this afternoon when she returns from the Palace. If she wants to hold her party together in the Commons, she needs to break out of her shell and even if only for a short term, learn how to be part of a team. I am speculating and events could move fast over the next few days and we don't know where the country will be on Monday morning.

Couldn't of put it better myself Stavros. Having sobered up; I am quite shocked she hasn't offered a resignation! Just pure arrogance I suppose?

You might be sober, Peejaye, but is Mrs May? This is what she said a few moments ago:

What the country needs now more than ever is certainty. Having secured the largest number of votes and greatest number of seats in the general election, it is clear the Conservatives and Unionist party has the legitimacy to provide that.

Certainty? Legitimacy? Yes, the Tories have the largest number of seats, but the whole point of this election was to secure a 'mandate' for her vision of Brexit with a huge majority and she has failed, and the one thing that is not certain is what is on the agenda for Brexit and what has been taken off, who is in the government and who is not. As for legitimacy, we know her own party is convulsed with rage and that her own position is vulnerable. And where is her own government this morning? Are they still asleep? This could be a long day for all concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Perhaps you feel vindicated?

---

Not really.
At that particular moment, something along the lines of 'elated' would have covered it.
Really thought Rudd had lost her seat, and Labour were in.
I'll go with gutted, atm.

Fuck!

i voted tory, but then the campaign was badly run.

and it makes us look pretty stupid, since May called the election when the polls were good, and then now she needs the DUP to get a minuscule majority. and it's not a shock result. The Tories were always going to get the most seats/votes, but then with a normally-run campaign, it would have been a 20 seat majority. The care policy fucked up, and if this new DUP/Tory coalition doesn't work, then May really should resign and get in Boris Johnson.

Then again, maybe Corbyn could win next time. He's not as damaged goods as he was six months ago.