General Election 2017

[soistes]

They do address this indirectly, and indicate that voters are forthcoming when coming out of polling booths.

Fair enough. I suppose my doubt centres on whether "forthcoming" is necessarily "honest".

 

[BBassic]

Where were you in 2015 then?

Worthing.

 

[darkwolf666]

Yes I get the drift, and I disagree. There are Tory policies I don't like, they cut too much IMO, but like most other people, I trust them more with the economy than I do Labour. And it's always about the economy (stupid).

The strange thing is, the economy was in a better state with Labour, until the world wide crash, and that was without having to cut public services to the bone - but that is now conveniently forgotten...

 

[jakarta]

As I have posted previously all you have to do is imagine a combination of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott in charge when you vote...

 

[studio150]

I would never vote Labour, after the Conservative campaign locally, I was planning not to vote, however this morning I have decided to vote for Kristy Adams reluctantly!

There was a local conservative campaign? No one knocked the door, my wife got a couple of leaflets in the post, I didn't and that was it.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

As I have posted previously all you have to do is imagine a combination of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott in charge when you vote...

Well you could do, but (as you well know) Abbott has stepped aside anyway.

 

[studio150]

Of course they rely on people telling the truth when asked.

They must like me then as I always decline to say who I voted for or what my polling card number is.

 

[Me and my Monkey]

Whoever I vote for today, I will feel dirty, soiled, hypocritical. But as in a previous post, I can't NOT vote or I will feel BAD. Is it too early to start drinking?

 

[brighton_girl87]

There was a local conservative campaign? No one knocked the door, my wife got a couple of leaflets in the post, I didn't and that was it.

I haven't heard a peep from anyone on Kristy Adams team either. All I received through the door, from the Conservatives, was a leaflet designed to look like a trashy gossip magazine.

 

[Triggaaar]

You don't think there's a (human and financial) cost further down the road, to pay, for (indirectly) arming people that want to kill us?

No. If we don't arm them, they'll simply get their arms from somewhere else. And if we manage to get all arms producers to stop arming them, they'll have to use their vast wealth to develop their own arms industry, which is a risk worthy of debate, should it be an option.

The strange thing is, the economy was in a better state with Labour, until the world wide crash, and that was without having to cut public services to the bone - but that is now conveniently forgotten...

The economy was in a good state when Labour took office, and it carried on in a good state until it wasn't any more. Which is how it always works with Labour.

The UK government cycle is as follows:
Labour **** up the economy
We vote in the Tories to fix it
The Tories fix it and cut spending
We're happy with the economy, but want more spent on welfare, so we vote in Labour
Labour spend more on welfare and things look good
Labour **** up the economy

 

[Mellotron]

Funny how people view things differently. I'm 31 and have voted in every election that I've been able to. This is the FIRST time I feel fully comfortable in voting for a candidate.

 

[SK1NT]

I thought about voting Labour, then I logged in to Facebook and saw the type of people I would be in cahoots with and almost threw up.

Why are they friends on your facebook then?

May is useless. Was a very poor Home Secretary. Coupled with the fact that it is the worst Tory manifesto i can ever remember.

Labours manifesto is appealing and Corbyn has looked good on these debates.

I shall vote Lib Dem purely because Labour don't get a look in, in my constituency and i cannot vote Tory.

 

[happypig]

They must like me then as I always decline to say who I voted for or what my polling card number is.

I always say "I am not a number, I am a free man". Mostly goes over the heads of the old dears with a biro and bag of werthers

 

[SK1NT]

"Played into terrorists hands as well".....are you for real?
And just to confirm you are in some way trying to compare her cuts in Police budgets....(which is wrong by he way)......to turning up and being arrested at a pro IRA political rally after the IRA bombed our city. And to this day refuses to condemn the murdering actions of the IRA....and before there's any issues....Jeremy Corbyn has categorically refused to condemn the murders of British citizens and Soldiers...fact!

So what you are saying is you shall vote Tory not because of May or her policies but just because you think Corbyn is an IRA sympthiser. Wow the Daily Mail got to you good. I assume that you are equally as angry about May's Saudi state visit? To the country that encouraged ISIS?

- **** the fact the Tories will destroy the NHS (it is slowly being privatised),
- **** the Brexit talks in which she is going to be a "bloody difficult woman" which won't help negotiations at all. We are in no position for this stance. The best Bexit talk lawyer Keir Starmer is also Labour. What the **** is a good deal and a bad deal? A bad deal has to be anything worse than we currently have being in the EU. I guarantee we won’t be getting a better deal than we currently have,
- No figures or costings for anything in her manifesto.
- Getting rid of kids school dinners
- Keep a public sector 1% pay rise cap on nurses police etc
- Reducing top earners tax
- Introducing of fox hunting again
- Removal of the Ivory trade ban
- Dementia tax (wtf is the cap)

But let's forget about all the present facts and detail about the Tories at this current time and let’s look at how the Daily mail has portrayed Corbyn as an IRA sympathiser 20 years ago.

 

[Machiavelli]

Fair enough. I suppose my doubt centres on whether "forthcoming" is necessarily "honest".

Oh, that's fine. They also deal with this indirectly too, because they've been extremely accurate in their predictions/generalisations for the past two elections, and this rests upon them gathering honest indications.
But if your point is that we need to be wary of, and interrogate, the notion of the shy Tory, I'm completely with you. Mind you, someone on here has provided a very interesting long and deep test case of what a shy Tory says and operates.

 

[Chicken Run]

I haven't heard a peep from anyone on Kristy Adams team either. All I received through the door, from the Conservatives, was a leaflet designed to look like a trashy gossip magazine.

Exactly my point which I guess I didn't make clear, I was so incensed that I hadn't seen anyone from the Conservative party I didn't originally feel she deserved my vote!

 

[Machiavelli]

They must like me then as I always decline to say who I voted for or what my polling card number is.

But the likes of you are probably fairly consistent across elections. We also need to distinguish between those who are 'telling' for political parties (which is all about getting the/ir vote out), and the opinion polling companies gathering information for an exit poll.

 

[beorhthelm]

Here's a(n extremely tentative) prediction: their model won't be as successful in this election as the last two. They've obviously refined it, improving its accuracy with the last two elections, but -- and here's my problem with the statistical/positivist approach to politics -- it can't take account changing factors sufficiently well. Brexit being one which, for me, is part of a wider dissatisfaction with neoliberalism (which also may well feed into this election), but also an increased younger vote will also appear with this election.

thats a valid criticism of normal polling, which is attempting to forecast the voting intention. they dont know of changes or their impact until after post analysis with the result. as exit polls are a snapshot of voting behavior that has occurred, its inherently more accurate, should smooth out demographic variations and reflect changes well.

 

[SK1NT]

The strange thing is, the economy was in a better state with Labour, until the world wide crash, and that was without having to cut public services to the bone - but that is now conveniently forgotten...

Indeedy. However you will constantly hear the same crap about how Labour screwed us all in 2008 conveniently forgetting about the global market crash.

 

[Pantani]

No. If we don't arm them, they'll simply get their arms from somewhere else. And if we manage to get all arms producers to stop arming them, they'll have to use their vast wealth to develop their own arms industry, which is a risk worthy of debate, should it be an option.

The economy was in a good state when Labour took office, and it carried on in a good state until it wasn't any more. Which is how it always works with Labour.

The UK government cycle is as follows:
Labour **** up the economy
We vote in the Tories to fix it
The Tories fix it and cut spending
We're happy with the economy, but want more spent on welfare, so we vote in Labour
Labour spend more on welfare and things look good
Labour **** up the economy

What about the 1991 recession? How did Labour have a hand in that? Your understanding of economics is so simplistic as to be worthless.

The last two recessions have been caused by global factors. And the first of those began after a decade of Tory rule. You can blame Labour for a recession nearly 40 years ago though, if you want. That was the last time your statement actually lined up with the facts.