General Election predictions

[Honky Tonx]

China sending Corbyn Viagra to help him get Erected

 

[Triggaaar]

while a year after the referendum I've yet to hear of ANY semblance of a Brexit plan from this government.

Please give an example of a Brexit plan that you think the government should tell us.

 

[SK1NT]

The terrorist atrocities were a game-changer for Theresa May. She was on the ropes over the dementia tax but then fate dealt her a trump card - security, the chance to put soldiers and police armed to the teeth on our streets, to talk up Corbyn's IRA sympathies and record of voting against every bit of anti-terror legislation proposed. And, of course, it thrust the Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott into the spotlight and into eventual meltdown.

The cautious optimism around the time of May's no-show in the leadership debate has now gone. There is an inevitability about the result of this GE and it is intensely depressing. With police numbers so low the terrorists appear to have an open door, while a year after the referendum I've yet to hear of ANY semblance of a Brexit plan from this government.

This. What was meant to be a Brexit election has been anything but. I honestly think the terrorist atrocities have diverted so much shit away from May. As you said she was on the ropes big time. The only thing that could have shown her negatively was the police cuts being highlighted after the terror attack.

 

[Triggaaar]

I honestly think the terrorist atrocities have diverted so much shit away from May. As you said she was on the ropes big time.

So you're saying that before the attacks, the polls had Labour in the lead, and now they don't?

 

[Pavilionaire]

Please give an example of a Brexit plan that you think the government should tell us.

OK, I will:

1. Don't play politics with the EU nationals that are already here - we need their labour, they are obviously going to be allowed to stay anyway.
2. Give some indication of how you think the EU might give us a free trade deal when it appears completely counter-intuitive to their rules for them to do so. If they could sell the argument "they need us more than we need them", explaining why it would be a disaster for the EU to lose free trade with the UK then I might begin to see their point.

The evidence I see is that any economic loss they might suffer by not selling the odd Mercedes or case of wine to the UK will be more than offset by the business they can cherry-pick from us that will leave these shores to remain in the EU. And, of course, the EU are looking to get a better deal with China, Trump wants a better deal with the EU too so they're in a good place for other partners.

 

[jcdenton08]

Tories win by a majority of 24. Lloyd retakes Eastbourne (but that one is more just wishful thinking)

 

[Pavilionaire]

Corbyn's links were known and discussed before that incident and were always a liability. if Labour dont do well its because they didn't convince as many voters they can deliver as the cheerleaders believe.

His links were known but firmly IN THE BACKGROUND as he set the political agenda with his policies on NHS, education, social care that really began to resonate with voters. This was reflected in the polls that all showed the gap narrowing significantly.

Since the terrorist attacks security is obviously at the forefront of people's minds, and his previous stance on terror and his weak Shadow Home Secretary have been put firmly in the shop window. They were his biggest weaknesses, and they will end up doing for him in this Election.

 

[Triggaaar]

OK, I will:

Good, thanks.

1. Don't play politics with the EU nationals that are already here - we need their labour, they are obviously going to be allowed to stay anyway.

But you're ok for the EU to play politics with the UK nationals that are in the Eu? I disagree, I think both sides should allow the nationals to stay.

As for your point and my question (you've yet to hear of ANY Brexit plan, and my asking you for an example plan), saying you'd allow them to stay is no more of a plan than the government saying they'd like reassurance that UK nationals can stay in the EU in return.

2. Give some indication of how you think the EU might give us a free trade deal when it appears completely counter-intuitive to their rules for them to do so.

I asked for an example plan. Saying 'give some indication' is not an example of a plan, you're just repeating that you want to hear what the plan is.

If they could sell the argument "they need us more than we need them"

I don't think it's true that they need us more than we need them, but that doesn't mean they don't still need us.

explaining why it would be a disaster for the EU to lose free trade with the UK then I might begin to see their point.

They have talked about why it would be bad for the EU to lose sales to the UK. That's still not a plan, and you're not giving an example of a plan.

The evidence I see is that any economic loss they might suffer by not selling the odd Mercedes or case of wine to the UK will be more than offset by the business they can cherry-pick from us that will leave these shores to remain in the EU.

You're not giving me an example plan.

And, of course, the EU are looking to get a better deal with China, Trump wants a better deal with the EU too so they're in a good place for other partners.

The EU will want a better deal with other countries regardless of us, it's not relevant to what we're discussing.

OK, I will:

Right, you didn't. Not even a little bit. If you were in power, what would you plan be? If you can't decide that easily (which is fine), just give me an example of a plan.

An example will do, because it won't be the detail of your plan that I would then criticise, I will criticise the logic in sharing that plan with the public.

 

[Simster]

Good news for the Tories is that the weather is shite in the north today. A 50 seat majority beckons methinks.

 

[Simster]

Lots of words

He has given a couple of examples of issues that clearly haven't been thought through.

The fact that you are even trying to pick holes in these genuine concerns suggests that you are happy for the Tories to carry on unaccountably and with no credible plan. You're a lost cause as it doesn't matter what concerns are raised, your fingers are in your ears.

 

[Triggaaar]

His links were known but firmly IN THE BACKGROUND as he set the political agenda with his policies on NHS, education, social care that really began to resonate with voters. This was reflected in the polls that all showed the gap narrowing significantly.

Since the terrorist attacks security is obviously at the forefront of people's minds, and his previous stance on terror and his weak Shadow Home Secretary have been put firmly in the shop window. They were his biggest weaknesses, and they will end up doing for him in this Election.

The polls have shown Labour narrow the gap since the election was called. Following the attack in Manchester, the gap continued to narrow. The gap remained the same after the London attack.

 

[Bozza]

Good news for the Tories is that the weather is shite in the north today. A 50 seat majority beckons methinks.

I reckon it's going to be a fair few more than that.

 

[Titanic]

He has given a couple of examples of issues that clearly haven't been thought through.

The fact that you are even trying to pick holes in these genuine concerns suggests that you are happy for the Tories to carry on unaccountably and with no credible plan. You're a lost cause as it doesn't matter what concerns are raised, your fingers are in your ears.

IF the Tories win the general election, how would the so called 'Hard Brexit' be unaccountable? They have laid out clearly what the intend to do, if they are voted in, then they have a clear mandate to proceed with it. After all, isn't that the whole point of this election? To get away from the 'Theresa May has never been elected' and 'Nobody voted for this sort of Brexit' criticisms and get on with the job in hand?

 

[Triggaaar]

He has given a couple of examples of issues that clearly haven't been thought through.

I didn't ask for a list of issues that he or you think haven't been thought through (a point I disagree with). He said that he hadn't seen a plan, and I asked for an example of a plan. He hasn't given one.

The point is that you can't just detail your plan before negotiations, as it would weaken your position.

It would be like a prosecution or defence telling the other side what their plan was. You don't do it.

The fact that you are even trying to pick holes in these genuine concerns suggests that you are happy for the Tories to carry on unaccountably and with no credible plan.

I asked him for a plan, he hasn't given one. I disagree with his concerns.

You're a lost cause as it doesn't matter what concerns are raised, your fingers are in your ears.

We have different political opinions, I don't expect you to agree with me. Accusing me of being a lost cause and having my fingers in my ears is just a bit pathetic, I could say the same of you.

 

[Simster]

IF the Tories win the general election, how would the so called 'Hard Brexit' be unaccountable? They have laid out clearly what the intend to do, if they are voted in, then they have a clear mandate to proceed with it. After all, isn't that the whole point of this election? To get away from the 'Theresa May has never been elected' and 'Nobody voted for this sort of Brexit' criticisms and get on with the job in hand?

I spluttered on reading this, but then thought "no, maybe he's right and I should look at their manifesto to see what they intend to do"

Here is their manifesto:

https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/manifesto2017/Manifesto2017.pdf

Brexit is mentioned 15 times, nearly always in the context "we will deliver a secure a smooth, orderly Brexit". There is literally NOTHING else remotely informative about how they intend on achieving that (as if no other party wants to deliver the same thing).

 

[Simster]

The point is that you can't just detail your plan before negotiations, as it would weaken your position.

I asked him for a plan, he hasn't given one. I disagree with his concerns.

So why did you do that then?

That is why I consider you as having your fingers in your ears. It's no more pathetic than your double standards above really is it?

I reckon it's going to be a fair few more than that.

I'm afraid so. We are heading for a Tory government with a carte blanche to do as they please. I just can't believe they have been backed to this extent, when they haven't come close to setting out how they are going to govern. It's truly incredible - and saddening to me anyway.

 

[pb21]

Because May wants a massive Tory majority to negate the headbangers in her party who do want a hard Brexit - there are people who want the UK out of the EU at any cost, even if means considerable economic disaster. May wants a Parliament packed with Tories so the headbangers can't cause trouble.

This does of course mean that no hardcore sceptics are in the new batch of MPs.

I wonder when she says there are those trying to thwart the Democratic process in parliament she is actually referring to her own hard line Brexit colleagues.

And when she says she wants to strengthen her hand in the negotiations she means both the negotiations with the EU and with her own party consiting of hard line Brexit folk.

 

[Triggaaar]

So why did you do that then?

That is why I consider you as having your fingers in your ears. It's no more pathetic than your double standards above really is it?

What? You've got quite mixed up. Please explain what you think my double standards are.

 

[Simster]

What? You've got quite mixed up. Please explain what you think my double standards are.

You want Pavillionaire to provide a plan (on an internet message board, today, seemingly) and when he started formulating a plan you decided a plan was impossible to give.

Double standards. And it really isn't impossible at all anyway.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Good, thanks.

But you're ok for the EU to play politics with the UK nationals that are in the Eu? I disagree, I think both sides should allow the nationals to stay.

As for your point and my question (you've yet to hear of ANY Brexit plan, and my asking you for an example plan), saying you'd allow them to stay is no more of a plan than the government saying they'd like reassurance that UK nationals can stay in the EU in return.

I asked for an example plan. Saying 'give some indication' is not an example of a plan, you're just repeating that you want to hear what the plan is.

I don't think it's true that they need us more than we need them, but that doesn't mean they don't still need us.
They have talked about why it would be bad for the EU to lose sales to the UK. That's still not a plan, and you're not giving an example of a plan.

You're not giving me an example plan.

The EU will want a better deal with other countries regardless of us, it's not relevant to what we're discussing.

Right, you didn't. Not even a little bit. If you were in power, what would you plan be? If you can't decide that easily (which is fine), just give me an example of a plan.

An example will do, because it won't be the detail of your plan that I would then criticise, I will criticise the logic in sharing that plan with the public.

Obviously the government are not going to publish a detailed blue print of their battle plan, and nobody is expecting that, but we don't know ANYTHING about what they intend to reveal over the negotiating table, and that year of "information vacuum" has done great harm to the EU nationals that are here, and has reduced numbers of job applicants such as nurses, doctors, farm workers.

I believe not only do we need the immigrants that are here but we also need the EU immigrants that have stopped applying for jobs. There's no evidence that the Tories have planned for a significant exodus / drop-off in this labour market. There's no evidence they've costed the short and medium term impact of Brexit on our economy - again, if they could demonstrate that a short term hit would be replaced by longer term benefits then the EU might believe we have a viable alternative to them, but they don't believe that.

The plan should include an indication of which partners we've identified to begin post-Brexit trade talks with. Surely as we are only 21 months away from leaving the EU we need to be booking those meetings in with India, China, Japan, USA now and announcing that to the British public?

Not only are we under-prepared for Brexit, I'd argue we're under-prepared for the trade talks we'll need to replace Brexit. Where is the plan for "Global" Britain?