Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why TMay must stay – for now

1246710

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    Anyone seen malcolm ?

    Yes me, I wrote you a post yesterday , saying I was busy and to send your gloating by PM. I have changed my name to Charlie by deed poll so any outstanding debts are null and void
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    Jonathan said:

    May and the current government are bed blockers. They need to get out of the way to enable someone competent to lead Brexit. Because it will take time for anyone to get up to speed, they should leave now.

    We need someone good in charge.

    This kind of comment is worse than useless. You need to specify who would be better, whether that be an individual or a set of candidates, all of which are better. And that 'better' means both personal ability *and* political strength.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    Fair enough.

    It's weird to see Labour doing even better than 1997 in some places, and even worse than 1983 in others.
    For the time being at least, our politics is divided by age rather than by class. Remarkable. And worrying.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,028
    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.
    Politics changes rapidly these days. We're all just clinging on to the roller coaster.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Alistair said:
    The limit should be reduced. When a foetus can survive birth within the current limit it has ceased to be a foetus and become a baby. Without going "all abortion is murder," it does make me uneasy that it is legal to abort potentially viable babies. The better the care for premature babies becomes the lower the limit for abortion should become.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,198
    IanB2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mr. Jonathan, Osborne as FO could've worked. Boris is unfit for high office.

    Why? Personal life or temperament? He has high office today. His appeal is wearing thin after 10 years,but he does have a brain the potential to extend Tory reach and is Mr Leave.
    Because he is an unreliable idiot who has managed to manourvre himself into a position where he is forced to argue for things in which he palpably does not believe (insofar as he actually has any beliefs that extend beyond his own self-advancement).

    A lesson from the election is that the public values openness, consistency and integrity. Boris is the absolute opposite.
    FWIW I've worked on committee with Boris. He is intellligent and well-educated. However, he could rarely be bothered to turn up, or, when he did, to read the material that we were supposed to be discussing. His experience is that if you're charming, unpompous and ready to say "Oops!" you can wing anything and say anything. That's more or less correct for the office on Mayor, which is all about atmosphere and a bit of general direction. For a job requiring an interest in detail, he'd be a laugh. A popular laugh, too, until the first difficult problem.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044
    tlg86 said:

    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    Anyone who now thinks "Corybn's alright" was never really a moderate. Real Labour moderates ought to be even more pissed off than ever, the task of getting rid of Corbyn will be even harder now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460

    To all those who think this result is going to change Brexit...

    In ten days or so the Government is going to have to sit down with the EU. If the EU had sense, which they don't, they would soften their position as the UK obviously is more likely to compromise and they have a chance to get a better deal. Instead, they will push out their ludicrous demands for ECJ jurisdiction etc.

    What do you think will be the result of this? When faced with the reality of the EU position, what do you think the public will say? Labour are on record as saying FOM cannot continue and the polls indicate that not even remainers want it.

    Suddenly, all this stuff about 'soft' brexit will come into focus - the only 'soft' brexit is EEA and that is unacceptable to parties who got pretty much 90% of the votes in the election. Otherwise, a deal has to be done and nobody is going to accept the EU terms. Suddenly Corbyn's plan to grant EU residents unilateral rights will fall over, because people will realise that UK residents will NOT get this in return, and in any event Corbyn's rights do not meet the requirements of the EU.

    Nothing has changed. It seems all that is meant by 'soft' brexit these days is a wish that there has to be a deal, because we don't really want to face the alternative. But what happens when it becomes clear very quickly that no deal is going to happen because the EU demands are unreasonable? How does Corbyn answer to the reality of 'there must be a deal'?

    Would not be amazed to see May 20 points ahead in the polls in 3 months time. Strange times.

    The odds on Labour being 20 points ahead should be shorter, IMO
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,400
    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.

    I am thoroughly enjoying the Tory defeat. It is fantastic and the first time I have not felt crushing disappointment at the end of an election since 2005.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971
    Jonathan said:

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.
    Politics changes rapidly these days. We're all just clinging on to the roller coaster.
    I'd like to see moderates regain control and run a sensible opposition.

    This result is a disaster from that point of view.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,230
    calum said:
    I wonder how many of the majority of her MSPs who voted against gay marriage in Holyrood are still of a settled view on the subject?
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    The DUP was not on my ballot paper.May is prepared to sacrifice the role of the UK government in a properly independent Northern Ireland as an essential cog in the maintenance of peace, for the sake of maintaining her one-party state in England.This is the same old nasty party that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing morally repugnant Tories.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,198



    Would not be amazed to see May 20 points ahead in the polls in 3 months time. Strange times.

    Ah, I see a betting opportunity. I'll offer you 10-1 against on that one. How much money would you like to lo...er, wager?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 18,093

    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    ...snip...

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,433


    FWIW I've worked on committee with Boris. He is intellligent and well-educated. However, he could rarely be bothered to turn up, or, when he did, to read the material that we were supposed to be discussing. His experience is that if you're charming, unpompous and ready to say "Oops!" you can wing anything and say anything. That's more or less correct for the office on Mayor, which is all about atmosphere and a bit of general direction. For a job requiring an interest in detail, he'd be a laugh. A popular laugh, too, until the first difficult problem.

    There have been reports from the FO that Boris reads up his briefs and has a very good grip on them - perhaps he puts his backside into gear when he has (what he sees as) serious work to do?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698

    Roger said:

    chloe said:

    Franlky, May has to go and soon.. three months max.. The Tories have fecked themselves good and proper. I cannot see how they can win the next election. The prospect of Corbyn frightens the life out of a lot of people inc me..

    She should have announced she was going yesterday. The government can't just carry on as if nothing happened.
    Yep. How can such a weakened PM negotiate in our interests?
    That's why there needs to be a leadership contest.
    'Not another one!'

    No more leadership contests. Just abandon Brexit and then the government can roll along quite comfortably with a non majority government as many countries do. Brexit is the problem not Theresa May's lack of a majority.
    But we're told this would result in an insurrection by the honest yeomans of Olde England, with a metropolitan elitist dangling from every lampost.

    Perhaps the Tories can take advice from their new allies on how to keep a lid on their headbangers & psychos (get them elected and stuff their mouths with gold it would appear).
    Is that what they're planning? I heard they were going to hang homosexuals from cranes.

    That should earn us a few trade deals with the Saudis.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460

    MaxPB said:

    I also think there is fear of Boris among Labour ranks, he won twice in London, a Labour city because he was able to connect with common people a lot more easily than other Tory politicians. He could lead a blue advance into areas that are deep crimson at the moment and if he were to deliver the £350m per week then a lot of the claims of lies would disappear, making it easier for him to win in Labour areas and shore up Tory Remainers.

    s against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    Would the EU treat him as a serious negotiating partner? (I guess the EU would just have to learn to, but people will be bearing this in mind when considering supporting him.)

    As leader of the party, would he be a net vote loser and potentially a brand-retoxifier? (There are certain parts of the population he can reach that other Tories can't, so I don't understand why more use wasn't made of him on the campaign trail, rather than the narrow presidential-style focus on May. If there'd been a Boris Bus with the - relatively cheap, over 5 years with inflation - £350m/week NHS promise on it, I think the Tories would have a majority right now. But he also turns some swing voters right off, and he is yet another posho. May has got through to people that Cameron couldn't. Plenty of these voters would find Boris PM unpalatable. As a tool deployed correctly I'm sure he wins votes, as figurehead of a national campaign he could well be a big net negative.)

    Could his obvious upper-class Englishness and divisiveness cost the Tories in key regions or nations? (We know how the folk of Liverpool see him, though no marginals there. But in some of the Midlands and northern seats May was targeting, he doesn't strike me as the right kind of Tory. Would he really buoy the party in Wales? Could he be a serious, wipe-out style, liability in Scotland?)

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)
    More fundamentally, he has clearly long believed the Uk should stay in the EU, yet has become the figurehead for Brexit. He understands that immigration benefits the Uk economy yet has been forced to argue the opposite. Etc. Etc. He always puts his short term tactical and personal advantage above any sort of principle or consistency. Not a good look for a PM.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    I wonder how Gordon Brown would now be remembered, had he called a snap election, and come back with 318 seats.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    The dementia tax was unpopular because of the impact on a man's ability to leave his house to his issue.

    I think May, Hill and Timothy are all childless. Coincidence?

    School lunches policy as well ?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    so what... it was a UK election , you are so one eyed its getting very irritating.

    Of course it was a UK election.

    I am not complaining that Ruth Davidson "won the election" for May, but it is a useful and interesting fact to discuss
    only if you want to twist facts
    I think Scott_P is right on this. If Davidson wants May gone, it'll happen.
    LOL, the loons are out today
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Alistair said:

    JackW said:

    Sean_F said:

    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.

    You are JackW's predictive love child and may claim a slap to his ARSE.
    What is your esteemed estimation on the tory dalliance with the DUP?

    Yesterday you seemed to think there might be a small amount of negatives amongst the obvious garden of glory of such an informal alliance.

    Have you now relaised that there is no flaw in such a pact between the Conservatives and the DUP?
    The Conservative dalliance with the the DUP is a daily disaster in the making, as we have already seen.

    Dull it wont be.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971



    Would not be amazed to see May 20 points ahead in the polls in 3 months time. Strange times.

    Ah, I see a betting opportunity. I'll offer you 10-1 against on that one. How much money would you like to lo...er, wager?
    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour are a few points ahead by the end of next week.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,039
    Sean_F said:

    I wonder how Gordon Brown would now be remembered, had he called a snap election, and come back with 318 seats.

    With the Tories on 230-240 I think you can safely assume that Cameron would have been gone.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,840
    glw said:
    He's not right - but articles like this which blame voters are a sign of a side losing the argument.
  • eekeek Posts: 7,096
    edited June 2017
    Regarding abortion the other issue is that there are some issues that are only visible once after it's possible for a baby to survive thanks to the miracles of modern science.

    Hence there are no easy answers and anyone who thinks there is as imposing their bias on others.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044

    I'd like to see moderates regain control and run a sensible opposition.

    This result is a disaster from that point of view.

    I know people will say I'm making a partisan point but I honestly think that Labour have the bigger party problems now. The Tories will dump May, find a better candidate, and change their views to keep power, that's what Tories do. Labour are now stuck with Corbyn for the foreseeable future, those 10:01 pm Thursday plans to boot him out have been torn up. How do the sensible people get rid of him? It looks extremely difficult to me.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,516

    The dementia tax was unpopular because of the impact on a man's ability to leave his house to his issue.

    I think May, Hill and Timothy are all childless. Coincidence?

    Round and about the same point Andrea Leadsom made (which lead to her downfall in the leadership election)
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300
    Pulpstar said:

    The dementia tax was unpopular because of the impact on a man's ability to leave his house to his issue.

    I think May, Hill and Timothy are all childless. Coincidence?

    School lunches policy as well ?
    The perils of the echo chamber.
  • Disagree David.

    'Mrs May you have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go.'
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993



    Would not be amazed to see May 20 points ahead in the polls in 3 months time. Strange times.

    Ah, I see a betting opportunity. I'll offer you 10-1 against on that one. How much money would you like to lo...er, wager?
    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour are a few points ahead by the end of next week.
    If an election was held right now, they'd probably win.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    IanB2 said:

    Just a thought: writing the next Labour election manifesto is going to be rather more challenging than writing the last one?

    Just cut and paste.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017

    Jonathan said:

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.
    Politics changes rapidly these days. We're all just clinging on to the roller coaster.
    I'd like to see moderates regain control and run a sensible opposition.

    This result is a disaster from that point of view.
    Maybe not. The moderates will have to eat humble pie and climb back on the bicycle. Having some of them back on the team will have an effect and is better than their pissing in from the outside.

    How much better would Lab have done with Cooper covering the HO brief and Diane Abbott off our screens?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Sean_F said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    The voters massively reaffirmed that Brexit means Brexit. The only thing we learned last the specifics during the election was that if the EU offered us the shittiest of shitty deals and refused to budge an inch, Corbyn would still have taken it.

    No, we also learned that voters agreed "no deal is better than a bad deal" was the jumped up bollocks we always knew it to be

    Your vision of Brexit was put to the electorate, and they told you where to stick it
    I think that's possibly true with some of the seats. But ultimately this election wasn't about that - even if the PM wanted it to be. What did for May (in terms of winning a majority) was daring to be honest about how she'd fund adult social care.

    I now think the Tories should ditch May and tell the new leader to call another election. I think it's now inevitable that Labour will win the next election, so we might as well get on with it now.
    I think the next election is highly unpredictable.

    There is likely to be much more scrutiny on Corbyn’s plans. Even with the most dreadful campaign in living memory and a poor leader, the Tories did still manage to win.

    Corbyn’s mistakes didn’t matter because no-one thought he’d do this well. Even Nick Palmer was predicting seat losses, as I recollect.

    (This is not to take anything away from Corbyn’s achievement -- the Tories found out what Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham and Owen Smith know. He’s one helluva campaigner).
    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.
    Yes. Right now, Labour have massively outperformed expectations, and the Tories have the 1993-1997 air about them.

    But, there's no iron law to say there'll be a further 4-5% swing to Labour, if another election were held in a year or two, and that they'd capture the further 60 or seats they'd need to be sure to govern.

    Anything can happen.

    Conservatives need to get the Boundary Commission changes introduced ASAP.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,230

    The DUP was not on my ballot paper.May is prepared to sacrifice the role of the UK government in a properly independent Northern Ireland as an essential cog in the maintenance of peace, for the sake of maintaining her one-party state in England.This is the same old nasty party that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing morally repugnant Tories.

    I actually think that is much more of a potential issue than any accomodations with the flat earth,flegs & creationist brigade.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,198
    tlg86 said:

    alex. said:

    Mortimer said:

    nichomar said:

    Could the queen refuse to dissolve parliament say in October and ask the Rt Hon Jeramy Corbyn leader of HMO to try and form one on the basis we've just had an election so bloody well get on with running the country. Only when it became clear that not even a government of national unity could be formed when Corbyn failed would she then dissolve parliament?

    QTWTAIN.

    If a decision to have an election has passed the commons, which is now the means by which it is disssolved, no, she can't.
    You're confusing a vote of confidence(50% required) with a vote for an election (66%). An election isn't automatic if the Opposition opposes it.
    Would Labour really vote against another election?
    BRING. IT. ON.

    And I note that Casino is equally annoyed with Labour loyalists like me who saw the virtues of Corbyn before it was fashionable, and Labour moderates like Southam who are just pleased that we're recovering. I fear we are not going to win Casino's vote whatever.

    Oh well.

    Where is SeanT?
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,339
    As expected, maybe not so soon in the case of Sutton, the 2 Plymouth seats finally switched their position in the Con/Lab axis


    Plymouth Moor View (largerly the former Plymouth Devenport even if the name ended up in the other constituency): Con majority 11.1%

    Plymouth Sutton and Devenport: Lab majority 13.5%
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044
    rkrkrk said:

    glw said:
    He's not right - but articles like this which blame voters are a sign of a side losing the argument.
    We will have to disagree on this as I'm not changing my view.
  • eekeek Posts: 7,096
    JackW said:

    Alistair said:

    JackW said:

    Sean_F said:

    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.

    You are JackW's predictive love child and may claim a slap to his ARSE.
    What is your esteemed estimation on the tory dalliance with the DUP?

    Yesterday you seemed to think there might be a small amount of negatives amongst the obvious garden of glory of such an informal alliance.

    Have you now relaised that there is no flaw in such a pact between the Conservatives and the DUP?
    The Conservative dalliance with the the DUP is a daily disaster in the making, as we have already seen.

    Dull it wont be.

    Grammar schools will remain on the agenda as the DUP are the ones fighting to keep them in Northern Ireland
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    Jonathan said:

    MaxPB said:

    I also think there is fear of Boris among Labour ranks, he won twice in London, a Labour city because he was able to connect with common people a lot more easily than other Tory politicians. He could lead a blue advance into areas that are deep crimson at the moment and if he were to deliver the £350m per week then a lot of the claims of lies would disappear, making it easier for him to win in Labour areas and shore up Tory Remainers.

    Fear on Boris is limited to the competence of his administration.

    There is little to fear electorally now. Politician have a limited shelf life. Boris already looks a bit like yesterday's man. You normally get about 10 years in the limelight. Boris is on nine.

    If anything he is perfectly placed to draw the final curtain on the project his mates started all that time ago.

    But I don't think the Tories have much choice now.
    The Tories are screwed. An election in the next two years and Jeremy will win. Change leader and there's even more chance that the government will fall. It'll be interesting to see the next lot of opinion polls. My guess is a collapse in Tory support and with Brexit that's unlikely to improve.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,028
    edited June 2017

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.

    I am thoroughly enjoying the Tory defeat. It is fantastic and the first time I have not felt crushing disappointment at the end of an election since 2005.

    Indeed. I am pleased for two reasons.

    Most important, the Tories wanted a blank cheque to deliver their hard Brexit. They haven't got one.

    There is now a chance that the negotiations will satisfy a broader constituency.

    Secondly, it is satisfying to see Labour off its knees, refreshed, popular and with a shout of government next time if it comes together. We needed a strong opposition. We've got one.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993
    edited June 2017
    eek said:

    Regarding abortion the other issue is that there are some issues that are only visible once after it's possible for a baby to survive thanks to the miracles of modern science.

    Hence there are no easy answers and anyone who thinks there is as imposing their bias on others.

    It isn't about that, where was this in the Tory manifesto for instance ?

    This abortion nonsense if true shows the DUP is wagging the Tory dog.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819
    EPG said:

    Ruth Davidson is a brilliant anti-everything campaigner. She can be anti-independence and anti-London Tory polices on Europe and your friends and allies in the wood pellet-cum-Irish flag burning party. But has Davidson ever been popular when she's been FOR something?

    Has she ever been for anything
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300
    MaxPB said:

    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    ...snip...

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.
    And what's the talented George Osborne going to do ?

    Increase student tuition fees ?
    Increase house prices ?
    Increase pensions ?
    Increase immigration ?
    Increase borrowing for vanity projects ?

    I keep asking the George Osborne cheerleaders this question but I never receive a reply.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Jonathan said:

    In the past two years the Tories have lost/irrevocably damaged.

    Cameron
    Osborne
    Hague
    May
    Gove

    This is the cause of their current pain.


    .....and May.
  • SandraMSandraM Posts: 206
    Apologies if already mentioned but a lot on twitter about New Yorker article "The Book of Jeremy". I've just read it and it's hilarious.
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    Roger said:

    Jonathan said:

    MaxPB said:

    I also think there is fear of Boris among Labour ranks, he won twice in London, a Labour city because he was able to connect with common people a lot more easily than other Tory politicians. He could lead a blue advance into areas that are deep crimson at the moment and if he were to deliver the £350m per week then a lot of the claims of lies would disappear, making it easier for him to win in Labour areas and shore up Tory Remainers.

    Fear on Boris is limited to the competence of his administration.

    There is little to fear electorally now. Politician have a limited shelf life. Boris already looks a bit like yesterday's man. You normally get about 10 years in the limelight. Boris is on nine.

    If anything he is perfectly placed to draw the final curtain on the project his mates started all that time ago.

    But I don't think the Tories have much choice now.
    The Tories are screwed. An election in the next two years and Jeremy will win. Change leader and there's even more chance that the government will fall. It'll be interesting to see the next lot of opinion polls. My guess is a collapse in Tory support and with Brexit that's unlikely to improve.
    You don't really believe opinion polls do you?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,840
    Pulpstar said:

    This abortion nonsense if true shows the DUP is wagging the Tory dog.

    It's absolutely ridiculous. Fine bung them some infrastructure money - but you don't open an issue like abortion up like this... I really think this could be toxic for the Tories whenever the next election comes.
  • Roger said:

    chloe said:

    Franlky, May has to go and soon.. three months max.. The Tories have fecked themselves good and proper. I cannot see how they can win the next election. The prospect of Corbyn frightens the life out of a lot of people inc me..

    She should have announced she was going yesterday. The government can't just carry on as if nothing happened.
    Yep. How can such a weakened PM negotiate in our interests?
    That's why there needs to be a leadership contest.
    'Not another one!'

    No more leadership contests. Just abandon Brexit and then the government can roll along quite comfortably with a non majority government as many countries do. Brexit is the problem not Theresa May's lack of a majority.
    We can't cancel Brexit. We have to still respect the referendum result.
    Without the figures in front of me I can't do the accurate calculation. Obviously 12 LD MPs were elected to fuck the referendum and I guess 1/4 to 1/3 Labour MPs is that 70 or 80 ? I guess therefore if you add the lukewarms with the burning hot at least 500 MPs were elected to implement some form of a Brexit. Let me make clear, if the LDs had even polled 150 MPs as far as I am concerned Brexit could not have continued without their 2nd referendum. But they didn't.

    The government should proceed with Brexit and wait to be defeated. At that point they should decide what to do. I thought the weakest logical part of the Conservative message was that the Coalition of Chaos would kill Brexit - that was illogical as Corbyn sort of supported it sort of.

    At that point we might need to decide Brexit or not. Former UKIPPERs will then have to decide who to vote for. Yet another General Election would be better and more unequivocal than another Referendum. We might have to have both.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Pulpstar said:

    eek said:

    Regarding abortion the other issue is that there are some issues that are only visible once after it's possible for a baby to survive thanks to the miracles of modern science.

    Hence there are no easy answers and anyone who thinks there is as imposing their bias on others.

    It isn't about that, where was this in the Tory manifesto for instance ?

    This abortion nonsense if true shows the DUP is wagging the Tory dog.
    Straw man?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017

    IanB2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mr. Jonathan, Osborne as FO could've worked. Boris is unfit for high office.

    Why? Personal life or temperament? He has high office today. His appeal is wearing thin after 10 years,but he does have a brain the potential to extend Tory reach and is Mr Leave.
    Because he is an unreliable idiot who has managed to manourvre himself into a position where he is forced to argue for things in which he palpably does not believe (insofar as he actually has any beliefs that extend beyond his own self-advancement).

    A lesson from the election is that the public values openness, consistency and integrity. Boris is the absolute opposite.
    FWIW I've worked on committee with Boris. He is intellligent and well-educated. However, he could rarely be bothered to turn up, or, when he did, to read the material that we were supposed to be discussing. His experience is that if you're charming, unpompous and ready to say "Oops!" you can wing anything and say anything. That's more or less correct for the office on Mayor, which is all about atmosphere and a bit of general direction. For a job requiring an interest in detail, he'd be a laugh. A popular laugh, too, until the first difficult problem.
    I too speak with some experience of having spent time with Boris, both in public and behind the scenes. On reflection "idiot" in my earlier post isn't the perfect word, but he is nevertheless an intelligent man who does some very stupid things.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658

    Disagree David.

    'Mrs May you have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go.'

    Do you now understand why many Conservatives legitimately thought exactly the same thing about Osborne in the aftermath of the EU referendum disaster (those who saw it as a disaster, obviously)?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 4,572
    If JC has taught us anything it's that it doesn't matter if the majority of your MPs detest you and think you're a useless cunt. On that basis alone, May probably thinks: fuck it, I'll just keep going.
  • eekeek Posts: 7,096


    FWIW I've worked on committee with Boris. He is intellligent and well-educated. However, he could rarely be bothered to turn up, or, when he did, to read the material that we were supposed to be discussing. His experience is that if you're charming, unpompous and ready to say "Oops!" you can wing anything and say anything. That's more or less correct for the office on Mayor, which is all about atmosphere and a bit of general direction. For a job requiring an interest in detail, he'd be a laugh. A popular laugh, too, until the first difficult problem.

    There have been reports from the FO that Boris reads up his briefs and has a very good grip on them - perhaps he puts his backside into gear when he has (what he sees as) serious work to do?
    I know there are committee meetings when I need the detail as discussions are going to be made and others where it's clear this is a status report where knowing the detail probably doesn't help.

    Heck that's why I've spent a week in India finding out exactly how bad things on a project because I've not seen the reports everyone is using to lie to each other.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,039

    tlg86 said:

    alex. said:

    Mortimer said:

    nichomar said:

    Could the queen refuse to dissolve parliament say in October and ask the Rt Hon Jeramy Corbyn leader of HMO to try and form one on the basis we've just had an election so bloody well get on with running the country. Only when it became clear that not even a government of national unity could be formed when Corbyn failed would she then dissolve parliament?

    QTWTAIN.

    If a decision to have an election has passed the commons, which is now the means by which it is disssolved, no, she can't.
    You're confusing a vote of confidence(50% required) with a vote for an election (66%). An election isn't automatic if the Opposition opposes it.
    Would Labour really vote against another election?
    BRING. IT. ON.

    And I note that Casino is equally annoyed with Labour loyalists like me who saw the virtues of Corbyn before it was fashionable, and Labour moderates like Southam who are just pleased that we're recovering. I fear we are not going to win Casino's vote whatever.

    Oh well.

    Where is SeanT?
    Fair play Nick. Jezza got bloody close to winning, but I do wonder what would happen if people thought he really had a chance of winning? We might yet get to find out...
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    eek said:

    JackW said:

    Alistair said:

    JackW said:

    Sean_F said:

    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.

    You are JackW's predictive love child and may claim a slap to his ARSE.
    What is your esteemed estimation on the tory dalliance with the DUP?

    Yesterday you seemed to think there might be a small amount of negatives amongst the obvious garden of glory of such an informal alliance.

    Have you now relaised that there is no flaw in such a pact between the Conservatives and the DUP?
    The Conservative dalliance with the the DUP is a daily disaster in the making, as we have already seen.

    Dull it wont be.

    Grammar schools will remain on the agenda as the DUP are the ones fighting to keep them in Northern Ireland
    Too many Conservative MPs against though.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348


    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    (Snip)

    Could his obvious upper-class Englishness and divisiveness cost the Tories in key regions or nations? (We know how the folk of Liverpool see him, though no marginals there. But in some of the Midlands and northern seats May was targeting, he doesn't strike me as the right kind of Tory. Would he really buoy the party in Wales? Could he be a serious, wipe-out style, liability in Scotland?)

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    Boris doesn't take responsibility for his actions. Sorry to harp back to the Garden Bridge, but the report into that miserable scheme shows that he should be let nowhere near anyone else's money, yet alone public funds.

    The report is here, and is well worth a read:
    https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/md2108_appendix_garden_bridge_review.pdf

    Boris refused to cooperate with the investigation. He wasted tens of millions of public funds, and has failed to accept any responsibility.

    To quote from the report: "I deeply regret that Boris Johnson, the London Mayor ultimately responsible for all the decisions and actions taken on the Garden Bridge refused to co-operate with this review,either in person or in writing and despite several requests."

    Boris should not be PM.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    Sean_F said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    The voters massively reaffirmed that Brexit means Brexit. The only thing we learned last the specifics during the election was that if the EU offered us the shittiest of shitty deals and refused to budge an inch, Corbyn would still have taken it.

    No, we also learned that voters agreed "no deal is better than a bad deal" was the jumped up bollocks we always knew it to be

    Your vision of Brexit was put to the electorate, and they told you where to stick it
    I think that's possibly true with some of the seats. But ultimately this election wasn't about that - even if the PM wanted it to be. What did for May (in terms of winning a majority) was daring to be honest about how she'd fund adult social care.

    I now think the Tories should ditch May and tell the new leader to call another election. I think it's now inevitable that Labour will win the next election, so we might as well get on with it now.
    I think the next election is highly unpredictable.

    There is likely to be much more scrutiny on Corbyn’s plans. Even with the most dreadful campaign in living memory and a poor leader, the Tories did still manage to win.

    Corbyn’s mistakes didn’t matter because no-one thought he’d do this well. Even Nick Palmer was predicting seat losses, as I recollect.

    (This is not to take anything away from Corbyn’s achievement -- the Tories found out what Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham and Owen Smith know. He’s one helluva campaigner).
    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.
    Yes. Right now, Labour have massively outperformed expectations, and the Tories have the 1993-1997 air about them.

    But, there's no iron law to say there'll be a further 4-5% swing to Labour, if another election were held in a year or two, and that they'd capture the further 60 or seats they'd need to be sure to govern.

    Anything can happen.

    Conservatives need to get the Boundary Commission changes introduced ASAP.
    Have they asked Arlene if she's happy with the boundaries ?
  • eekeek Posts: 7,096
    Pulpstar said:

    The dementia tax was unpopular because of the impact on a man's ability to leave his house to his issue.

    I think May, Hill and Timothy are all childless. Coincidence?

    School lunches policy as well ?
    I would argue both are sensible policies but they were not introduced properly let alone explained.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    glw said:

    So? He's still right.

    He's really upset that people voted for the free stuff he was peddling, and now they voted for the free stuff peddled by someone else
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    so what... it was a UK election , you are so one eyed its getting very irritating.

    Of course it was a UK election.

    I am not complaining that Ruth Davidson "won the election" for May, but it is a useful and interesting fact to discuss
    only if you want to twist facts
    I think Scott_P is right on this. If Davidson wants May gone, it'll happen.
    LOL, the loons are out today
    Your antennae's getting sharper!!
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    tlg86 said:

    alex. said:

    Mortimer said:

    nichomar said:

    Could the queen refuse to dissolve parliament say in October and ask the Rt Hon Jeramy Corbyn leader of HMO to try and form one on the basis we've just had an election so bloody well get on with running the country. Only when it became clear that not even a government of national unity could be formed when Corbyn failed would she then dissolve parliament?

    QTWTAIN.

    If a decision to have an election has passed the commons, which is now the means by which it is disssolved, no, she can't.
    You're confusing a vote of confidence(50% required) with a vote for an election (66%). An election isn't automatic if the Opposition opposes it.
    Would Labour really vote against another election?
    BRING. IT. ON.

    And I note that Casino is equally annoyed with Labour loyalists like me who saw the virtues of Corbyn before it was fashionable, and Labour moderates like Southam who are just pleased that we're recovering. I fear we are not going to win Casino's vote whatever.

    Oh well.

    Where is SeanT?

    Binge drinking his sorrows away?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558
    I didn’t post yesterday as having been up through the night I was utterly shattered.

    Since the manifesto launch I cannot think of a day that I didn’t think this was heading for trouble. Theresa became robotic and made the fatal mistake of appealing to the 52% and not the 48%. Together with the social care policy, the results in London and the South were entirely predictable

    About 8.00pm on election night I forecast that Theresa would lose her majority, that it would be a hung Parliament, and that Ruth Davidson would be the star of the night. I hoped I was wrong but I was not. The one really good feature of the election is the demise of Scottish Independence on the Scots vote of pro Union - 63% - SNP 37%

    This morning a report from Katie Perrior said that that Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, together with Theresa have no children and they failed to emphasize with women and families. I think that is a very valid point.

    The election has diminished Theresa and she will be replaced but for now she does need to continue as no matter how you do the maths there is no other Government available to the Country. However, she needs to reach out to the conservative remainer’s and more widely recognise that issues around nurses pay, police numbers, and education policy must be addressed.

    I have little fear that Corbyn will become PM, as just as I think there is now a vast majority anti hard Brexit, I also think there is a vast majority against massive tax and corporation tax rises crippling business as we leave the EU.

    I listened to Vince Cable just before the election and I was surprised that I agreed with almost everything he said and I hope he will become the Lib Dem treasury spokesman. The Conservatives, SNP, Lib Dems, DUP, and a good part of Labour do not support a large rise in corporation tax and therefore at any future election I think Corbyn will come under much more scrutiny on his free gifts for everyone policy.

    We are where we are for now and when I asked my wife how she felt she said simply she was ‘sad’. I think a lot of us could agree with her, nor least of which to see how far Theresa has fallen

    I think that PB owes itself a huge tick for the incredible political discussions over the last few weeks, and while some became over excited and angry, the level of debate has been extraordinary.

    In the spirit of the times I wish absolutely everyone on here no matter whether we agree or disagree the very best and hope that we can continue to contribute to the Nation’s political discourse, and many congratulations to David Herdson for his accurate predictive posts, together with Arthur Meeks and many others.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 18,093

    MaxPB said:

    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    ...snip...

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.
    And what's the talented George Osborne going to do ?

    Increase student tuition fees ?
    Increase house prices ?
    Increase pensions ?
    Increase immigration ?
    Increase borrowing for vanity projects ?

    I keep asking the George Osborne cheerleaders this question but I never receive a reply.
    Reconnect the party with urban liberals that we've lost. Win back seats like Enfield Southgate, Croydon Central. Advance in Ealing, Enfield North. Win back seats like Leamington.

    You might loathe Osborne but he represents a part of the party and support base that we need to win. The current leadership abandoned them to chase Blue Labour voters and we lost our majority. I think a period of silence from your lot would do us all some good.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    This abortion nonsense if true shows the DUP is wagging the Tory dog.

    It's absolutely ridiculous. Fine bung them some infrastructure money - but you don't open an issue like abortion up like this... I really think this could be toxic for the Tories whenever the next election comes.
    Why is everyone presuming this is true? Who was the "Tory minister" quoted? I'll bet it was either

    1) somebody opposed to May staying
    2) somebody strongly anti-abortion

    or

    3) both.

    Why would a random Tory minister be party to what May was or wasn't offering as a deal. And since abortion is, I think, a devolved issue anyway (albeit one now in the gift of the NI Office), why the hell would the DUP make the abortion limit in England an issue in any 'deal'?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Dura_Ace said:

    If JC has taught us anything it's that it doesn't matter if the majority of your MPs detest you and think you're a useless cunt. On that basis alone, May probably thinks: fuck it, I'll just keep going.

    That's only true because he can claim a mandate from the members.

    Unlike Tezza
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017

    Sean_F said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    The voters massively reaffirmed that Brexit means Brexit. The only thing we learned last the specifics during the election was that if the EU offered us the shittiest of shitty deals and refused to budge an inch, Corbyn would still have taken it.

    No, we also learned that voters agreed "no deal is better than a bad deal" was the jumped up bollocks we always knew it to be

    Your vision of Brexit was put to the electorate, and they told you where to stick it
    I think that's possibly true with some of the seats. But ultimately this election wasn't about that - even if the PM wanted it to be. What did for May (in terms of winning a majority) was daring to be honest about how she'd fund adult social care.

    I now think the Tories should ditch May and tell the new leader to call another election. I think it's now inevitable that Labour will win the next election, so we might as well get on with it now.
    I think the next election is highly unpredictable.

    There is likely to be much more scrutiny on Corbyn’s plans. Even with the most dreadful campaign in living memory and a poor leader, the Tories did still manage to win.

    Corbyn’s mistakes didn’t matter because no-one thought he’d do this well. Even Nick Palmer was predicting seat losses, as I recollect.

    (This is not to take anything away from Corbyn’s achievement -- the Tories found out what Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham and Owen Smith know. He’s one helluva campaigner).
    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.
    Yes. Right now, Labour have massively outperformed expectations, and the Tories have the 1993-1997 air about them.

    But, there's no iron law to say there'll be a further 4-5% swing to Labour, if another election were held in a year or two, and that they'd capture the further 60 or seats they'd need to be sure to govern.

    Anything can happen.

    Conservatives need to get the Boundary Commission changes introduced ASAP.
    A) given the volatility of the political mood, they probably won't make much difference

    B ) they are probably dead in the water now. A fresh 650-seat review with more sensible criteria is what I expect.

    C) if Tories are reduced in desperation to fiddling with the 'rules' to stave off the inevitable, it's game over.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,313
    IanB2 said:

    Just a thought: writing the next Labour election manifesto is going to be rather more challenging than writing the last one?

    It is also going to get tested to destruction by opponents who next time see it stands a very real chance of being implemented.

    Frankly, Labour's 2017 Manifesto got a free ride. Someone in Tory High Command obviously thought that it was a bit tacky, a bit putting the boot into a guy when he was down. They made EXACTLY the same mistake as those in Labour who nominated Corbyn. Only one thing to do with the Left - go for their throat: THEIR plans require YOUR money. How many of those middle class types who voted Labour because they liked the idea of somebody else paying their little darlings' tuition fees? Hint - it's actually you. And not just tuition fees - everything else in that Folio of Follies.

    Plus, next time around, the Tory campaign cannot be that bad. It just can't. The complacency of "we've had bad campaigns before - and still they vote for us " has been torpedoed. Next time, no complacency over a single vote. And certainly no half-arsed policies that, however well intentioned they might have been, your opponents can paint as us punishing the voters.

    I can't believe the care proposals weren't focus-grouped. If they were, fire whoever did the focus groups. If they weren't, fire whoever didn't focus group them. A policy like that needs months and months to bed in, for most people to realise that actually, it doesn't affect them. And for those affected to realise, it won't be anywhere near as bad as we first feared, because our exposure will be capped, and we can leave our little darlings with 200k instead of just 46k. I mean, it's just politics 1.01...

    The Tories presented the worst of all worlds. They required Theresa May to lose face mid-campaign, explaining the the cap was always intended. Frankly, it didn't sound likely. This after May had inevitably lost face by calling an election she said she would not. Just by calling the election, her ratings were inevitably going to take a knock. The 20% leads were going to fall some. Perhaps quite a bit. She was there as a safe pair of hands. To get Brexit through. Not to burst into the casino and place all her political capital on black coming up....so she had a free hand on fixing care costs.

    It still beggars belief how this campaign shaped up. I feel so sorry for some really good MPs who two months ago still thought they had 4 years to run. And probably many more. Now they are polishing up their CVs...
  • alex. said:

    Disagree David.

    'Mrs May you have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go.'

    Do you now understand why many Conservatives legitimately thought exactly the same thing about Osborne in the aftermath of the EU referendum disaster (those who saw it as a disaster, obviously)?
    No.

    May isn't fit to lick Osborne's boots.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,028
    Dura_Ace said:

    If JC has taught us anything it's that it doesn't matter if the majority of your MPs detest you and think you're a useless cunt. On that basis alone, May probably thinks: fuck it, I'll just keep going.

    To take that route you have to have direct membership support, charisma and a wealth of hidden campaigning talent ready to unleash.

    Good luck.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    malcolmg said:

    LOL, the loons are out today

    Morning Malky

    Glad to see your capacity for being catastrophically wrong about all things Scottish Tory has not been diminished by the spectacular results.

    Enjoying having a Tory MP?

    Keep up the good work.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,433
    MaxPB said:


    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.

    I don't disagree that he can reach across the divide. There are voters he can reach that the others can't - 52%, including many Labour voters, says a lot about that. The problem is that he is also toxic to some other voters. (@JosiasJessop on here being one example!) To strong Remainers, and/or those who see him as a bumbling incompetent toff, he is very seriously offputting. I think you could get away with him as a campaigner supporting someone else, but not as the main proposition you're asking people to vote for. I don't think he'd carry London now after his role in the Leave campaign.

    (I did suggest a few threads that if the Tories want to make a positive statement with a leadership change, rather than one that looks like a post-defeat retreat, they should consider putting making someone smart, fresh-faced and forward-looking like Kwasi PM! But in reality I think it needs to be someone experienced in political chicanery and deal-making in the Commons, and a big enough beast to command respect from the Tory MPs / negotiators in Brussels.)
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Had Leadsom become leader instead of May, would she have called an election?

    I think her judgement, taking wide advice, would have been to get on with the job (of Brexit).

    Leadsom for leader.


  • Yes. Right now, Labour have massively outperformed expectations, and the Tories have the 1993-1997 air about them.

    But, there's no iron law to say there'll be a further 4-5% swing to Labour, if another election were held in a year or two, and that they'd capture the further 60 or seats they'd need to be sure to govern.

    Anything can happen.

    In deed. Within the Conservative Party we have to recognise that the 2017GE has happened. Then we need to select a new Harold Macmillan as leader and prepare for a re-run of the 1959 GE.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,400
    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    I don't agree with Corbyn's policies. I can't forgive or forget his past. But he has undeniably taken Labour forward. The reason I am so delighted with Thursday's result, though, is because the Tories did not get a mandate for what I saw as May's profoundly dangerous Brexit strategy. That is well worth celebrating.

  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,354

    alex. said:

    Disagree David.

    'Mrs May you have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go.'

    Do you now understand why many Conservatives legitimately thought exactly the same thing about Osborne in the aftermath of the EU referendum disaster (those who saw it as a disaster, obviously)?
    No.

    May isn't fit to lick Osborne's boots.
    Your master strategist has made the cockup of his career and isn't in parliament.
  • eekeek Posts: 7,096

    eek said:

    JackW said:

    Alistair said:

    JackW said:

    Sean_F said:

    Everything is unpredictable. I expected Labour to win enough seats to form a government in 2015, Remain to narrowly win last year, Hilary Clinton to scrape home, and the Conservatives to win a working majority.

    You are JackW's predictive love child and may claim a slap to his ARSE.
    What is your esteemed estimation on the tory dalliance with the DUP?

    Yesterday you seemed to think there might be a small amount of negatives amongst the obvious garden of glory of such an informal alliance.

    Have you now relaised that there is no flaw in such a pact between the Conservatives and the DUP?
    The Conservative dalliance with the the DUP is a daily disaster in the making, as we have already seen.

    Dull it wont be.

    Grammar schools will remain on the agenda as the DUP are the ones fighting to keep them in Northern Ireland
    Too many Conservative MPs against though.
    There is an argument for them though. Currently there are large parts of the country where I can buy my child access to the best school in town via a very expensive house purchase or rental leaving the poor with no access to it and in the case of home town a set of options that should be closed down and everyone reasonable fired without pension. Grammar schools would provide a means of fixing that.

    As I said before there are decent ideas in the Tory manifesto. The introduction and explanation of them was however beyond woeful.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    ...snip...

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.
    And what's the talented George Osborne going to do ?

    Increase student tuition fees ?
    Increase house prices ?
    Increase pensions ?
    Increase immigration ?
    Increase borrowing for vanity projects ?

    I keep asking the George Osborne cheerleaders this question but I never receive a reply.
    Reconnect the party with urban liberals that we've lost. Win back seats like Enfield Southgate, Croydon Central. Advance in Ealing, Enfield North. Win back seats like Leamington.

    You might loathe Osborne but he represents a part of the party and support base that we need to win. The current leadership abandoned them to chase Blue Labour voters and we lost our majority. I think a period of silence from your lot would do us all some good.
    Osborne had become extremely unpopular by the end.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,926
    edited June 2017
    Mr. P, the social care policy wasn't truth, it was idiocy. Osborne's forecasts were terrible fiction.

    Both made comparable mistakes.

    Mr. Rabbit, a loss. Were Osborne in the Commons he'd be PM now, and a damned sight better than May.

    Edited extra bit: reminder P3 is at 3pm, so the pre-qualifying article will likely be around 4-5pm.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    IanB2 said:

    Just a thought: writing the next Labour election manifesto is going to be rather more challenging than writing the last one?

    It is also going to get tested to destruction by opponents who next time see it stands a very real chance of being implemented.

    Frankly, Labour's 2017 Manifesto got a free ride. Someone in Tory High Command obviously thought that it was a bit tacky, a bit putting the boot into a guy when he was down. They made EXACTLY the same mistake as those in Labour who nominated Corbyn. Only one thing to do with the Left - go for their throat: THEIR plans require YOUR money. How many of those middle class types who voted Labour because they liked the idea of somebody else paying their little darlings' tuition fees? Hint - it's actually you. And not just tuition fees - everything else in that Folio of Follies.

    Plus, next time around, the Tory campaign cannot be that bad. It just can't. The complacency of "we've had bad campaigns before - and still they vote for us " has been torpedoed. Next time, no complacency over a single vote. And certainly no half-arsed policies that, however well intentioned they might have been, your opponents can paint as us punishing the voters.

    I can't believe the care proposals weren't focus-grouped. If they were, fire whoever did the focus groups. If they weren't, fire whoever didn't focus group them. A policy like that needs months and months to bed in, for most people to realise that actually, it doesn't affect them. And for those affected to realise, it won't be anywhere near as bad as we first feared, because our exposure will be capped, and we can leave our little darlings with 200k instead of just 46k. I mean, it's just politics 1.01...

    The Tories presented the worst of all worlds. They required Theresa May to lose face mid-campaign, explaining the the cap was always intended. Frankly, it didn't sound likely. This after May had inevitably lost face by calling an election she said she would not. Just by calling the election, her ratings were inevitably going to take a knock. The 20% leads were going to fall some. Perhaps quite a bit. She was there as a safe pair of hands. To get Brexit through. Not to burst into the casino and place all her political capital on black coming up....so she had a free hand on fixing care costs.

    It still beggars belief how this campaign shaped up. I feel so sorry for some really good MPs who two months ago still thought they had 4 years to run. And probably many more. Now they are polishing up their CVs...
    Enjoy the wedding today :)
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107

    alex. said:

    Disagree David.

    'Mrs May you have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go.'

    Do you now understand why many Conservatives legitimately thought exactly the same thing about Osborne in the aftermath of the EU referendum disaster (those who saw it as a disaster, obviously)?
    No.

    May isn't fit to lick Osborne's boots.
    I've no idea why one adult male idolises another
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,516

    Had Leadsom become leader instead of May, would she have called an election?

    I think her judgement, taking wide advice, would have been to get on with the job (of Brexit).

    Leadsom for leader.

    At this point literally anyone would be better than May.

    They could even ask Larry the Cat,
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,039

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    I don't agree with Corbyn's policies. I can't forgive or forget his past. But he has undeniably taken Labour forward. The reason I am so delighted with Thursday's result, though, is because the Tories did not get a mandate for what I saw as May's profoundly dangerous Brexit strategy. That is well worth celebrating.

    That's fair enough. But whatever happens with Brexit, the Labour Party is now firmly in the hands of the Left. That either means that the Tories will be in power for a long time, or you'll have to accept whatever a Corbyn (of whoever) led government does when they get into power.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 759
    calum said:
    ...I can't believe this is happening
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Roger said:

    Jonathan said:

    MaxPB said:

    I also think there is fear of Boris among Labour ranks, he won twice in London, a Labour city because he was able to connect with common people a lot more easily than other Tory politicians. He could lead a blue advance into areas that are deep crimson at the moment and if he were to deliver the £350m per week then a lot of the claims of lies would disappear, making it easier for him to win in Labour areas and shore up Tory Remainers.

    Fear on Boris is limited to the competence of his administration.

    There is little to fear electorally now. Politician have a limited shelf life. Boris already looks a bit like yesterday's man. You normally get about 10 years in the limelight. Boris is on nine.

    If anything he is perfectly placed to draw the final curtain on the project his mates started all that time ago.

    But I don't think the Tories have much choice now.
    The Tories are screwed. An election in the next two years and Jeremy will win. Change leader and there's even more chance that the government will fall. It'll be interesting to see the next lot of opinion polls. My guess is a collapse in Tory support and with Brexit that's unlikely to improve.
    Jeremy becoming PM, is the Tories quickest way back to a majority. If they cling on as a minority Gov, rather than letting Jez, make a complete balls of it, Labour could sweep to power in five years time, even if Barry Chuckle was their leader.
  • TypoTypo Posts: 195

    Had Leadsom become leader instead of May, would she have called an election?

    I think her judgement, taking wide advice, would have been to get on with the job (of Brexit).

    Leadsom for leader.

    Agreed. I also imagine given her lack of senior experience, that she would have scarcily been able to believe she was PM, and not gone for her election. Similarly her team is likely to have been more contrite.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    I don't agree with Corbyn's policies. I can't forgive or forget his past. But he has undeniably taken Labour forward. The reason I am so delighted with Thursday's result, though, is because the Tories did not get a mandate for what I saw as May's profoundly dangerous Brexit strategy. That is well worth celebrating.

    +1. As a LibDem I have even less sympathy for Corbyn's policies than SO. But the election has at least opened up new possibilities, on both sides of politics, including potential options to reverse our biggest mistakes, that weren't available on Wednesday. And killed some of the crazy stuff on the fringes (fox hunting, imposing FPTnP on mayoral elections, the boundary changes, Internet 'controls', greater powers for the executive) that would have been pushed through on the back of the majority May was expecting. And opened up a wider range of scenarios for the future of our politics than the unending Conservative domination we faced last week.

    So there are reasons to be cheerful.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited June 2017

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    I don't agree with Corbyn's policies. I can't forgive or forget his past. But he has undeniably taken Labour forward. The reason I am so delighted with Thursday's result, though, is because the Tories did not get a mandate for what I saw as May's profoundly dangerous Brexit strategy. That is well worth celebrating.

    Will you be so happy if all her "strategy" was, was to get a blank cheque to make as many compromises with the EU as she good and deliver as "soft" a Brexit as possible. And that "no deal or Bad Deal", when previously just a negotiating tactic, has now become the reality, with a strong possibility that "Bad deal" might not even on the table?

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,926
    Mr. Abode, it's ridiculous. There's no need for the DUP to be involved. The deal should be cancelled.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,313

    As expected, maybe not so soon in the case of Sutton, the 2 Plymouth seats finally switched their position in the Con/Lab axis


    Plymouth Moor View (largerly the former Plymouth Devenport even if the name ended up in the other constituency): Con majority 11.1%

    Plymouth Sutton and Devenport: Lab majority 13.5%

    Moor View has Johnny Mercer as MP, a local political star - and hopefully a future national one.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300
    edited June 2017
    Three ways in which George Osborne damaged the Conservatives in this election:

    1) The robbing of the young.
    Increased student tuition fees and subsidised house prices have caused a vast wealth shift from the middle class young to the old. The Conservative party should be associated with aspiration instead it inflicted despair upon the young. People who despair look for change.

    2) Not leading by example.
    There was always extra money available for the vanity projects of Osborne (and Cameron) even when cuts were made on others. Believing that money was being taken from you to fund other things makes people angry. Osborne waltzing off and making millions for doing nothing then exposes the "we're all in it together" claim as a lie.

    3) Trashing Project Fear.
    In 2016 we were given Project Fear - if Leave won there would be an immediate 'punishment budget', tax rises, pension cuts, interest rate rises, price rises, a recession, job losses, a world war and the end of Western Civilisation. A year on and they haven't happened. So why would people think all those things would happen now if they voted Labour ?
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,026
    Typo said:

    Had Leadsom become leader instead of May, would she have called an election?

    I think her judgement, taking wide advice, would have been to get on with the job (of Brexit).

    Leadsom for leader.

    Agreed. I also imagine given her lack of senior experience, that she would have scarcily been able to believe she was PM, and not gone for her election. Similarly her team is likely to have been more contrite.
    May was pushed into it. Leadsom would've been pushed into it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971

    IanB2 said:

    Just a thought: writing the next Labour election manifesto is going to be rather more challenging than writing the last one?

    It is also going to get tested to destruction by opponents who next time see it stands a very real chance of being implemented.

    Frankly, Labour's 2017 Manifesto got a free ride. Someone in Tory High Command obviously thought that it was a bit tacky, a bit putting the boot into a guy when he was down. They made EXACTLY the same mistake as those in Labour who nominated Corbyn. Only one thing to do with the Left - go for their throat: THEIR plans require YOUR money. How many of those middle class types who voted Labour because they liked the idea of somebody else paying their little darlings' tuition fees? Hint - it's actually you. And not just tuition fees - everything else in that Folio of Follies.

    Plus, next time around, the Tory campaign cannot be that bad. It just can't. The complacency of "we've had bad campaigns before - and still they vote for us " has been torpedoed. Next time, no complacency over a single vote. And certainly no half-arsed policies that, however well intentioned they might have been, your opponents can paint as us punishing the voters.

    I can't believe the care proposals weren't focus-grouped. If they were, fire whoever did the focus groups. If they weren't, fire whoever didn't focus group them. A policy like that needs months and months to bed in, for most people to realise that actually, it doesn't affect them. And for those affected to realise, it won't be anywhere near as bad as we first feared, because our exposure will be capped, and we can leave our little darlings with 200k instead of just 46k. I mean, it's just politics 1.01...

    snip

    It still beggars belief how this campaign shaped up. I feel so sorry for some really good MPs who two months ago still thought they had 4 years to run. And probably many more. Now they are polishing up their CVs...
    It is difficult to put into words how awful this campaign was, as many of us on PB were saying throughout the process. It's the worst I've seen in my times - by a stretch.

    Where was the attack on the economy?
    Where was the focus on Labour's policies?
    Where was the daily press conference pounding the opposition's key figures (Abbott etc)

  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Sean_F said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    He is a very able man. There is also the question of whether he would be any good at running the country (at least, not substantially worse than the other contenders). I am confident Boris is "up for the job" in terms of being a good salesman come election-time and, based on reports of how he worked as London Mayor and how he is doing in the Foreign Office, quite capable of getting on with the business of administration. But there are at least four black marks against him, more serious than his love life or gaffe-prone nature or the "buffoon" question..

    ...snip...

    As a controversial figure within the party, could he create serious fissures within it? (Possibly unhealable if we believe certain newspaper front pages with respect to the Scottish party! But then there is the Gove issue, the internal class warfare that seems to have been taking place post-Cameron, and so on. The risk the Tory party would be taking by selecting him would not just be how the party is seen by the voters, but the coherence of the party itself.)

    (Based on comment FPT, sorry for repetition)

    A lot to agree with there, but I do think has a proven capability of reaching across the divide. He won twice in London which was and still is a Labour city. Labour anger towards Boris stems from the £350m per week lie, if he delivers £350m per week to the NHS then a lot of that anger will disappear as it won't be a lie.

    I'm personally not convinced by Boris, but I do think we need to take a gamble. If he brings in new talent (Kwarteng) and old (Gove, Osborne) then he could lead a strong government despite the fact that May fucked us with the minority.
    And what's the talented George Osborne going to do ?

    Increase student tuition fees ?
    Increase house prices ?
    Increase pensions ?
    Increase immigration ?
    Increase borrowing for vanity projects ?

    I keep asking the George Osborne cheerleaders this question but I never receive a reply.
    Reconnect the party with urban liberals that we've lost. Win back seats like Enfield Southgate, Croydon Central. Advance in Ealing, Enfield North. Win back seats like Leamington.

    You might loathe Osborne but he represents a part of the party and support base that we need to win. The current leadership abandoned them to chase Blue Labour voters and we lost our majority. I think a period of silence from your lot would do us all some good.
    Osborne had become extremely unpopular by the end.
    And that was from a pretty low base.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,313
    Pulpstar said:

    IanB2 said:

    Just a thought: writing the next Labour election manifesto is going to be rather more challenging than writing the last one?

    It is also going to get tested to destruction by opponents who next time see it stands a very real chance of being implemented.

    Frankly, Labour's 2017 Manifesto got a free ride. Someone in Tory High Command obviously thought that it was a bit tacky, a bit putting the boot into a guy when he was down. They made EXACTLY the same mistake as those in Labour who nominated Corbyn. Only one thing to do with the Left - go for their throat: THEIR plans require YOUR money. How many of those middle class types who voted Labour because they liked the idea of somebody else paying their little darlings' tuition fees? Hint - it's actually you. And not just tuition fees - everything else in that Folio of Follies.

    Plus, next time around, the Tory campaign cannot be that bad. It just can't. The complacency of "we've had bad campaigns before - and still they vote for us " has been torpedoed. Next time, no complacency over a single vote. And certainly no half-arsed policies that, however well intentioned they might have been, your opponents can paint as us punishing the voters.

    I can't believe the care proposals weren't focus-grouped. If they were, fire whoever did the focus groups. If they weren't, fire whoever didn't focus group them. A policy like that needs months and months to bed in, for most people to realise that actually, it doesn't affect them. And for those affected to realise, it won't be anywhere near as bad as we first feared, because our exposure will be capped, and we can leave our little darlings with 200k instead of just 46k. I mean, it's just politics 1.01...

    The Tories presented the worst of all worlds. They required Theresa May to lose face mid-campaign, explaining the the cap was always intended. Frankly, it didn't sound likely. This after May had inevitably lost face by calling an election she said she would not. Just by calling the election, her ratings were inevitably going to take a knock. The 20% leads were going to fall some. Perhaps quite a bit. She was there as a safe pair of hands. To get Brexit through. Not to burst into the casino and place all her political capital on black coming up....so she had a free hand on fixing care costs.

    It still beggars belief how this campaign shaped up. I feel so sorry for some really good MPs who two months ago still thought they had 4 years to run. And probably many more. Now they are polishing up their CVs...
    Enjoy the wedding today :)
    Will do! At least we are a happy bunch of campers down here in Torbay.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,028

    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Still can't believe this!!

    I find it hilarious you're celebrating these results, with gusto, when only the day before yesterday you refused to cast a ballot for Labour because you thought Corbyn was a disaster.

    Turns out you don't have many scruples and concerns about the hard Left at all, other than they don't win elections.
    Ah come on. Appreciate you're shocked and upset, but don't be a sore loser. This is the first time Labour has gained seats in twenty years. Can you imagine that? Chuck in all the gloating on here we've taken. Twenty years of shit, abuse and going backwards.

    We're entitled to enjoy it a bit.
    @Casino_Royale is simply pointing out that 48 hours ago there were Labour moderates on here slagging of Corbyn. Not because they thought he couldn't win (though they did think he wouldn't win) but because they actually didn't agree with his policies.

    I don't agree with Corbyn's policies. I can't forgive or forget his past. But he has undeniably taken Labour forward. The reason I am so delighted with Thursday's result, though, is because the Tories did not get a mandate for what I saw as May's profoundly dangerous Brexit strategy. That is well worth celebrating.

    Absolutely! We were going down a very dangerous path.

    Labour, like a veteran boxer, got off the canvas to deliver one last blow sufficient to kill that idea. Thank you Labour.
This discussion has been closed.