General Election June 2017

Hah! Good times indeed!

Saw this earlier and assumed the statements were made weeks/months apart. Just looked at the time stamps, wow

Or you could not like either option so vote Lib Dem.

If you don't like the Tories, you hold your nose and vote for whichever party has the best chance of defeating them in your constituency

insensitive post deleted

Edited to save Richie's blushes.

don't say that...

Rescinded.

edited.

Edited. No need to be a cunt too.

look - a falcon!

I saw Richie's post, but can't imagine what AndyP would have said to offend... Such mystery.

No need for that- super low blow MRAK, suggest you edit.

I went to my local Constituency Meeting last night. Emily Thornberry, our MP, made it clear that while Labour accepted that the referendum vote went the way it did and the Article 50 had been triggered and so we were leaving the EU, the necessity was to negotiate a deal that protected the economy and that therefore gave us everything that we had as members. In other words the softest of soft Brexits. Brixit only in name.

Unsurprisingly, this is exactly the same approach that the Liberals are adopting.

Most impressively, they're both still on her twitter timeline.

Fair play.

Interestingly just now Jeremy C has said that he will not support an MP's vote on a deal before passing it.

Can't have all member benefits w/o being a member.

Perhaps the Norwegian model is possible for the UK, but then just say that...

From what Maybot has said this election is about "Leadership" and strengthening her position. Whilst an overall loss for the Tories is pretty much definitely not going to occur, a result equal too, or worse than 2015, would by May's own standards be a loss and a blow to her leadership?

I can't quite work out whether Labour are being disingenuous or dumb with their "not approving Brexit unless it gives the exact same benefits as being in the EU" stance.

Is it a tactic to allow them to vote against any deal and point back to that or do they really see a scenario where we leave the EU and and still keep all the same benefits?

I think it's a sop to their supporters who don't want anything to do with Brexit - the 'liberal elite' or remoaniacs or whatever.

IMO it's a dumb position to take - if they were to wait until the last minute then veto May's deal (whatever she manages to scrape together) then they'd be painted as utter traitors; we'd still leave the EU but labour would be blamed for all the chaos that would follow a 'no deal' brexit.

I think they've squandered the most significant time to impact the brexit negotiation when Corbyn three line whipped his MPs.

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/04/19/bolton-voters-show-theresa-may-in-no-uncertain-terms-what-they-think-of-her/

Not massively impressed by Corbyn's new anti-establishment schtick. I can see where he's coming from, trying to use the Trump/Brexit/Le Pen/Melenchon kind of populism, but I don't think that's what really plays well here. He's trying to embrace his 'extremist' image and use it to his advantage, but actually the point is his policies really aren't that extreme, and it's the political mainstream that has shifted. Not that Labour have a lot of hope anyway, so maybe it's worth a shot, but I can't see it succeeding in Tory/Labour marginals.

It must be true because it's in a non-profit newspaper run by VOLUNTEERS!

Conveniently doesn't mention that news outlets known for being unbiased are also reporting that Corbyn is a big fat loser.

Also talking about policy based voting decisions is missing the point when a lot of people agree with his policies but don't want to vote an utter shambles of a party into government.

Populism only works if you're popular. I agree with the premise - there is a generation with a paucity of life chances/economic opportunities and none jobs having to watch fat middle aged cunts driving around in Range Rover Sports with boots full of Prosecco and conspicuous consumption on Instagram - but it's being communicated terribly as per usual.

Did you hear Emily Thornberry on Today this morning? Painful. She made it sound like they were a party standing on a niche single issue.

Nothing's true. But it makes a fair point, that you can't belive anything you read and need to sieve the fake news from the real.
I try to read 'news and opinion' from a multitude of sources, from different countries, to try to get a full sense. Even then, places that should be factual are still biased.

Not all places that should be factual are biased - I'd argue that as the BBC manage to piss off both sides they're probably right and news agencies rely on being seen as factual and trustworthy - we'd lose clients if we weren't.

It's very good to read news from a multitude of sources but bear in mind that the article you linked to was submitted by a reader, so is effectively user generated content. I.e. the internet equivalent of Barry speaking his branes down the pub.