Don't vote Tory

[p.pete]

3 minutes ago, babyblade41 said:

They'd never swear allegiance to the Queen so wouldn't ever consider  taking their seats 

There's plenty in the parliament not allegiant, I wouldn't assume that's the great block that you think it is - assuming they decide there's a political interest for themselves to be there. 

[eFestivals]

14 hours ago, ghostdancer1 said:

not true at all.
the vast majority of Loyalist terrorist killings were of ordinary civilians.

of the 1016 deaths they committed:

868 Civilians
14 British Security service members
41 Republican paramilitaries
93 Loyalist paramilitaries

Loyalists killed more civlians during the Troubles than anyone else, including the IRA.

 

I wasn't claiming perfection for them, just as no one could claim perfection for the IRA.

I'm well aware of all aspects around 'the troubles' having read a lot about it (including Dangerfield). I'm well aware of the long history of loyalist violence that precedes the time of the P.IRA and during it (and still goes on today).

It still doesn't alter the fact that those loyalist terrorists were, at a base level, fighting against those who were fighting against the british state, which (at the same base level) puts them on the side of the british state rather than against it.

And of course, at the same base level, that puts them on 'our' side and the IRA against 'us'. It allows for the very different narratives they had (and still do).

And for all the Brits who served in NI during the troubles, and those connected to them, or others in and around the forces who feeled allied to them, being on 'our' side or against 'us' was a very VERY big deal. It's people who want to kill us, and people who don't.

[The Nal]

8 minutes ago, p.pete said:

There's plenty in the parliament not allegiant, I wouldn't assume that's the great block that you think it is - assuming they decide there's a political interest for themselves to be there. 

Tough one to sell to the more, err, "committed" within their electorate. 

[p.pete]

What kind of votes would Sinn Fein actually want to turn up for? Assuming there's appetite for softer brexit in parliament then they don't need to turn up for that? There won't be too many other relevant votes unless DUP get something reversing devolution before parliament- which would be unlikely and unlikely to pass, not sure I can see them having much interest?

[p.pete]

2 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Tough one to sell to the more, err, "committed" within their electorate. 

Hah, true - as per my post above, I'm not sure how relevant they'll see themselves turning up. Great for stirring shit at this stage though

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, bamber said:

They are probably right. I'm like Corbyn, I never supported the ways and methods of the IRA, but I always supported the Sinn Fein manifesto. Ireland should be one nation, the English/Unionists have no right to be there. Let it go.

sorry bamber, but you've missed it just about totally there. Yep, Sinn Fein want a united Ireland, but that's not really much of what 'the troubles' were about. 

At the time of 'the troubles' starting in the 60s it came from purely a civil rights thing, where there was no universal franchise. Instead it was a franchise based on property ownership, which largely dis-enfranchised Catholics (so if you like, an apartheid state). Add in some (NI) state sanctioned violence against protests for equal rights, and it all kicked off.

As for one nation, that should be a self-determination thing - and even a majority of Catholics are happy with the status quo today.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, Fingerbobs said:

There'll surely be a bit of a power shift from the loony fringes of the tories (Rees-Mogg, Redwood etc) who had way too much as and air time to the Ken Clarke's and Anna Soubry's of the party.

that's what May was hoping to achieve with a bigger majority. It's why there was an election in the first place.

Not having a majority has put her more on the string on the tory headbangers, not less.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

I just can't see how this can possibly work. My understanding is that May called the election to get a bigger majority, because there are too many hard brexiters in her party (and she actually wants a soft Brexit) and this way she'd have enough support to out vote them. DUP want a soft Brexit, so she's got a split within her party over hard/soft Brexit. So how on earth is either a soft or hard Brexit ever going to get through parliament? I guess thinking about it a soft Brexit would be more straightforward as the majority of lib dem an labour MPs would favour it?

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, grumpyhack said:

If she's not capable of running a decent election campaign what does it say about her competency to negotiate a decent Brexit?

There's not necessarily a correlation, just as there's not necessarily a correlation between Corbyn having run a great campaign and how he'd do as PM.

Simple fact is, May has successfully negotiated with the EU before, and Jez hasn't.

And, I dislike saying it, May from that has grasped how they work, while Jez's inexperience has him giving the EU freebies, when they won't do freebies back.

[eFestivals]

45 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

A question for those that understand the Irish situation better, could Sinn Fein decide they want to take their seats in Westminster after all to combat the influence of the DUP?

Nope, not a chance. It's been restated in the last few days.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I just can't see how this can possibly work. My understanding is that May called the election to get a bigger majority, because there are too many hard brexiters in her party (and she actually wants a soft Brexit) and this way she'd have enough support to out vote them. DUP want a soft Brexit, so she's got a split within her party over hard/soft Brexit. So how on earth is either a soft or hard Brexit ever going to get through parliament? I guess thinking about it a soft Brexit would be more straightforward as the majority of lib dem an labour MPs would favour it?

From May's point of view, it's about the only option.

She took her gamble (the didn't look like a gamble at the time), and we are were we are. It's either go with it, or call another election - where she might do worse.

The tory party tend to be a quite disciplined bunch, who know when it's better t keep their mouths shut and work with it, too. .... so ultimately the headbangers might accept a softer brexit to have a tory-controlled brexit rather than perhaps something else.

At some point May will be usurped, but at a time where it looks less like opportunism, and where they feel they can hopefully avoid the 'unelected' problem that had May feeling like she needed her own mandate (or alternatively, if they feel they can win an election - and bexit negotiating circumstances might give them that).

[Spindles]

I'd say watch and wait now.  See how the Labour party put the pressure on.  Minority governments have a habit of not lasting and were I a gambling man I'd put money on May going due to "health reasons" at some point.  I think few would expect the next election to be after the full 5 year term.

This election has left the Tories with a bloodied nose, the job now is to capitalise on that, to force them into further failure and to convince more of the public that genuine left wing politics is a valid solution for this country.

[The Nal]

Things some DUP memebers believe in, senior members

 - The earth is 4000 years old and they want this thought in schools to combat "evolutionary teaching"

 - God sent Hurricane Katrina to punish gay people

 - Climate change deniers

 - Members have said homosexuality is "an abomination", "repulsive" and Pride parades "repugnant".

 - "Only gay people can get AIDS"

Great bunch of lads.

 

 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

From May's point of view, it's about the only option.

She took her gamble (the didn't look like a gamble at the time), and we are were we are. It's either go with it, or call another election - where she might do worse.

The tory party tend to be a quite disciplined bunch, who know when it's better t keep their mouths shut and work with it, too. .... so ultimately the headbangers might accept a softer brexit to have a tory-controlled brexit rather than perhaps something else.

At some point May will be usurped, but at a time where it looks less like opportunism, and where they feel they can hopefully avoid the 'unelected' problem that had May feeling like she needed her own mandate (or alternatively, if they feel they can win an election - and bexit negotiating circumstances might give them that).

Doesn't really help her negotiating stance with the EU though does it, if they know enough about the make up of her party and the way any sort of vote through parliament would likely go. I'm sure she will start with the same stance she had before, saying she wants a hard Brexit and 'no deal is better than a bad deal' but they will know (if they didn't before anyway) that she will never get it through our own parliament anyway and it will have to be watered down considerably.

I bet Theresa May is cursing the very existence of that lawyer who forced the high court ruling through about Brexit having to go through parliament.

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, babyblade41 said:

They'd never swear allegiance to the Queen so wouldn't ever consider  taking their seats 

Neither does Corbyn does he?

[H.M.V]

14 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Things some DUP memebers believe in, senior members

 - The earth is 4000 years old and they want this thought in schools to combat "evolutionary teaching"

 - God sent Hurricane Katrina to punish gay people

 - Climate change deniers

 - Members have said homosexuality is "an abomination", "repulsive" and Pride parades "repugnant".

 - "Only gay people can get AIDS"

Great bunch of lads.

 

 

Add in fraudsters to the tune of £490 million, don't believe a raped woman has the right to an abortion and don't want evolution taught in schools and finally the giants causeway is only 4000 years old. 

Make the Westboro Baptist church look good. 

Great bunch of lads

 

Edit, sorry repeated some of nals points. But they are mad as a box of frogs. 

Edited June 10, 2017 by H.M.V

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, Ommadawn said:

Neither does Corbyn does he?

He doesn't believe in the Monarchy, but I think he'll do any swearing or kissing necessary given the way the Government currently works.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

He doesn't believe in the Monarchy, but I think he'll do any swearing or kissing necessary given the way the Government currently works.

.

Edited June 10, 2017 by Ommadawn

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

There's not necessarily a correlation, just as there's not necessarily a correlation between Corbyn having run a great campaign and how he'd do as PM.

Simple fact is, May has successfully negotiated with the EU before, and Jez hasn't.

And, I dislike saying it, May from that has grasped how they work, while Jez's inexperience has him giving the EU freebies, when they won't do freebies back.

Well, id say her agressive stance and trigerring article 50 then spending 3 months on a pointless election hardly makes think of her as competent

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Just now, zahidf said:

Well, id say her agressive stance and trigerring article 50 then spending 3 months on a pointless election hardly makes think of her as competent

Not to mention not doing the leaders TV debates, even though you are the PM and the one who called the election in the first place, and announcing policies that surely you would know would go down like a plate of cold cat sick with your core voters. 

[amfy]

51 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

Simple fact is, May has successfully negotiated with the EU before, and Jez hasn't.

It wouldn't be him dong the negotiating though would it. He has a highly competent team to do that.

Also - if we want our EU nationals to stay here, the is actually no valid reason why they'd want to send our British ex-pats back. We contribute skills and contribute to their economies just as much when we are there, and their citizens gain from being able to be here.

[Spindles]

Announcing almost no policies at that.  When questioned on any of them Theresa May's stock response was that nothing had been decided and that there would be a consultation after the election on what the costs and implementation of any of those policies would be.

Many commentators are focussing on how the Tory campaign was traditional attack politics, personal and targetted, but that the Labour campaign was about the message of what they planned to do to improve the country and that this resonated.  I think now is the time to build on our successes, to keep the message out there that Labour can make this country a better place for everyone and that under the Tories we've seen unnecessary hardship for the many.

 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, Spindles said:

Announcing almost no policies at that.  When questioned on any of them Theresa May's stock response was that nothing had been decided and that there would be a consultation after the election on what the costs and implementation of any of those policies would be.

Many commentators are focussing on how the Tory campaign was traditional attack politics, personal and targetted, but that the Labour campaign was about the message of what they planned to do to improve the country and that this resonated.  I think now is the time to build on our successes, to keep the message out there that Labour can make this country a better place for everyone and that under the Tories we've seen unnecessary hardship for the many.

 

That's just shows the arrogance of the decision though doesn't it. They thought they could call a snap election and just spend 6 weeks saying do you want Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn? They made no allowances for the fact that it's not just about individuals, but about policies and the things that actually affect people.

[Spindles]

It absolutely does.  There were enough quotes on the night, but it was clear that the Tory analysts, spin doctors and leadership felt their position was so strong they could just throw an election and people would flock to the "strong and stable" banner.  As with the 12 months since the Brexit vote, no thought was given to the running of the country, to ordinary people's lives, to what we need to be doing today to prepare us for tomorrow.  It was all about strengthening their own political hand.

 

[frostypaw]

19 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

That's just shows the arrogance of the decision though doesn't it. They thought they could call a snap election and just spend 6 weeks saying do you want Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn? They made no allowances for the fact that it's not just about individuals, but about policies and the things that actually affect people.

They had gotten away with it so far..... trouble is once the election was called that bubble was burst and people got to hear the actual policies.

It's still incredible how many Pro-Tory folk I've heard mouthing off making idiots of themselves as they'd clearly not even looked once at the Labour Manifesto; which echos my findings beforehand that almost everyone agreed with it and liked it until they heard who it was from, then the programmed prejudice kicked in.