The Politics Thread

[Lord Kangana]

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, we have an actual PM who would love to do away with all our rights to privacy, to any human rights (of course these are terrible for some reason).

They just don't call themselves communists. So they're ok, right?

[Worthy4England]

There is an awful lot of guesswork going on here, which I suppose also reflects the bewilderment of the MSM.

It is clear that the published manifestos did have some effect both on the elderly vote and the younger student types. May screwed up the Conservatives with their manifesto which seemed only to offer more of the same hairshirt policies with further twists of the knife. She was ill-advised not to take counsel from rather more experienced types than her gruesome twosome Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill rather than hide the contents of the manifesto from most of her cabinet.

Corbyn offered straight forward bribes which would never have been affordable in a million years. But he did convince enough students on the loans and probably some elderly waiting for the onset of Alzheimers.

More worrying for people like me was the clear statement that the public sector should get significant wage increases, payable by the private sector, of course. Many of whom have not had any increase in income since 2009. That, coupled with major increases in corporation tax which would have the effect of driving many multi-national companies elsewhere, gave a worrying glimpse of the future under Corbyn and both his right-hand man and his handmaiden. Ugh.

A friend of mine, a life-long Labour voter (public sector breeds them) said even he was worried about a knock on his front door in the middle of the night, spirited away never to be seen again. Communists only have one way of dealing with dissent.

Your actual government is propped up by a real life fcking terrorist organisation and we need to be worried about the communist bogeyman?

I'm going to get me the Daily Mail to read some serious news.

[Worthy4England]

May is still PM.

For now, however, she's to arrogant to realise that her position's untenable.

Yesterday's GE was one huge slap in the face for the arrogance and high-handedness of both May and Sturgeon, yet both are too stubborn to budge.

Fear not, after having the most intelligent electorate on the planet last year, Crispin Blunt has already pointed to the electorate getting it wrong in yesterday's poll.

[Bruce Rioja]

May is still PM.

For now, however, she's to arrogant to realise that her position's untenable.

Yesterday's GE was one huge slap in the face for the arrogance and high-handedness of both May and Sturgeon, yet both are too stubborn to budge.

Fear not, after having the most intelligent electorate on the planet last year, Crispin Blunt has already pointed to the electorate getting it wrong in yesterday's poll.

No need to worry about him. The DUP will already have him and his 'sort' on their forthcoming 'Missing Persons' list anyway.

[Worthy4England]

Actually, that might be a perfect fit, in the circumstances.

[Lord Kangana]

There's some upside to all this.

Despite Labour handing it to them on a plate in 2010 and 2015, and having an 'unelectable leader' in 2017, they still can't get a stable f*cking majority. They need the DUP. FFS. They're in our government. People clearly don't want enough of what they're offering.

Hopefully, that'll mean they change. I'm not up for one party politics. We talk of Labour change, but over the years more often than not it's actually been the Conservative party who have reacted most quickly to the wind of change and changed themselves accordingly. It can only be hoped they get the f*cking message and sort their act out, and steer away from the Jacob Marley caricature of themselves they've become.

[BWFC_Insane]

There's some upside to all this.

Despite Labour handing it to them on a plate in 2010 and 2015, and having an 'unelectable leader' in 2017, they still can't get a stable f*cking majority. They need the DUP. FFS. They're in our government. People clearly don't want enough of what they're offering.

Hopefully, that'll mean they change. I'm not up for one party politics. We talk of Labour change, but over the years more often than not it's actually been the Conservative party who have reacted most quickly to the wind of change and changed themselves accordingly. It can only be hoped they get the f*cking message and sort their act out, and steer away from the Jacob Marley caricature of themselves they've become.

Some upside? This is a wonderful result. Tories in chaos and now with an undeliverable mandate.

Corbyn has shown socialism can be revived. The youth turnout shows what can be achieved. Labour can now work together to ensure Corbyn's platform remains, with a few tweaks, and a more electable leader endorsed by Corbyn. That isn't easy, but Labour are in a great spot right now. They can probably consider themselves favourites at the next election, whenever that might be.

[Lord Kangana]

I don't disagree with any of that. But if the Tories continue on their current path of Dickensian reimagining, well it's not good for politics in general. There's always a general direction of travel, and it's best if the two parties keep each other in check, just enough .(we'll come to PR and compulsory voting later, both of which I would wish for).

I'd prefer a social democratic party, like many, but actually quite like Corbyn - I like his honesty, and seems fairly unflappable, not full of hot air - and I've definitely warmed to him during this campaign when the gloves were very much off. Time will tell whether this is the start of the revolution that makes bedwetter so scared he wants to hide behind Paul Dacre's sofa, though.

[BWFC_Insane]

I don't disagree with any of that. But if the Tories continue on their current path of Dickensian reimagining, well it's not good for politics in general. There's always a general direction of travel, and it's best if the two parties keep each other in check, just enough .(we'll come to PR and compulsory voting later, both of which I would wish for).

I'd prefer a social democratic party, like many, but actually quite like Corbyn - I like his honesty, and seems fairly unflappable, not full of hot air - and I've definitely warmed to him during this campaign when the gloves were very much off. Time will tell whether this is the start of the revolution that makes bedwetter so scared he wants to hide behind Paul Dacre's sofa, though.

Theresa May won't last. So I'd not worry.

There will be another election before too long.

Even the right wing media have turned against May.

[Prufrock]

I'm not as optimistic as you both. The Tories can't be that bad again. These feels like a time in which we should be making hay, not planning to possibly sneak a bit of grass in five years.

A hell of a lot depends on the quality of younger MPs finding their feet because the two front benches are hopeless, odd exception apart.

[Worthy4England]

It took Labour 18 years from 1979 to get elected with a majority. They went through lots of false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders. It took the Tories 18 years from 1997 to get elected with a majority, they too went through a few false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders.

To get elected with a majority they have to appeal to voters outside of their more right or left wings.. Which neither leader managed today, with Corbyn having much further to travel than someone widely acknowledged as running possibly the worst campaign in living memory... (I recall Micheal Foot's so I'm not sure that's quite true)...

[BWFC_Insane]

It took Labour 18 years from 1979 to get elected with a majority. They went through lots of false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders. It took the Tories 18 years from 1997 to get elected with a majority, they too went through a few false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders.

To get elected with a majority they have to appeal to voters outside of their more right or left wings.. Which neither leader managed today, with Corbyn having much further to travel than someone widely acknowledged as running possibly the worst campaign in living memory... (I recall Micheal Foot's so I'm not sure that's quite true)...

Corbyn got a vote percentage that would win many elections. Were there to be another election tomorrow, the Tory vote would certainly be down.

[Harry Genshaw]

More worrying for people like me was the clear statement that the public sector should get significant wage increases, payable by the private sector, of course.

Public sector employees don't pay income tax? Blimey. Missed that

[Worthy4England]

It took Labour 18 years from 1979 to get elected with a majority. They went through lots of false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders. It took the Tories 18 years from 1997 to get elected with a majority, they too went through a few false dawns on the way and more than a few leaders.

To get elected with a majority they have to appeal to voters outside of their more right or left wings.. Which neither leader managed today, with Corbyn having much further to travel than someone widely acknowledged as running possibly the worst campaign in living memory... (I recall Micheal Foot's so I'm not sure that's quite true)...

Corbyn got a vote percentage that would win many elections. Were there to be another election tomorrow, the Tory vote would certainly be down.

He did. May got more, translating into a 50 seat gap... So it's all somewhat relative...

[bedwetter2]

I don't disagree with any of that. But if the Tories continue on their current path of Dickensian reimagining, well it's not good for politics in general. There's always a general direction of travel, and it's best if the two parties keep each other in check, just enough .(we'll come to PR and compulsory voting later, both of which I would wish for).

I'd prefer a social democratic party, like many, but actually quite like Corbyn - I like his honesty, and seems fairly unflappable, not full of hot air - and I've definitely warmed to him during this campaign when the gloves were very much off. Time will tell whether this is the start of the revolution that makes bedwetter so scared he wants to hide behind Paul Dacre's sofa, though.

I am pleased to say you will be in the privileged first wave of those against the wall come the revolution

Strangely enough you are not alone in misunderstanding my position. The fact that you also have a defective memory is neither here or there I suppose. I previously told you which newspapers I read and the Daily Wehrmacht (or similar red tops) is certainly not one of them.

I am no lover of the Conservatives and May is definitely an incompetent PM. Nor do I think Labour with or without Corbyn and his buddies is fit to govern. Neither of the 'major' parties have any truly talented leaders. Where I would take issue with you is the EU which is also managed by vindictive schoolboys playing at being politicians albeit with absolutely no democratic mandate. I want the UK to leave the EU so supported the Conservatives for that reason alone. You don't agree.

As to the view that the DUP is a terrorist organisation as stated by someone else, I would instead gently point you in the direction of Sinn Fein. Whether you feel that the DUP is an intransigent, backward-looking party as I do they did not mount any armed campaign of terror to the best of my knowledge.

[bedwetter2]

More worrying for people like me was the clear statement that the public sector should get significant wage increases, payable by the private sector, of course.

Public sector employees don't pay income tax? Blimey. Missed that

Who said they don't pay tax? The equation is simple - let's just say for the sake of argument that a public sector worker is paid £30k per annum, his tax and NI would amount to just over £6k. His employer's costs, excluding the generous pension final salary arrangements still in place for many public sector employees, amount to on costs for payroll, employers NI contributions, HR and temporary employees to cover sickness absence (three times as high on average as the private sector) would be somewhere around a further £4k. So he/she costs us £34000 per year and contributes £6k in taxes before spending net income.

If you are trying to imply that public sector employees cover their employment costs through taxes, you are sadly mistaken. The balance of £28k comes from the private sector.

[Lord Kangana]

Two wrongs don't make a right. I think someone said that. If they didn't, it's the sort of thing they should have said.

So, and catchphrase alert here, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If the Tories would so readily jump in to bed with a nefarious a crowd as the DUP - well, interestingly it highlights how grasping for power they are. And how utterly ridiculous people sound when they conjure up the spectre of crazy coalitions. That'd be Tories 2 -0 against everyone so far by the way.

And I'm pretty certain that the overwhelming majority of final salary pensions, in both public and private sector (hint:they weren't confined to the public sector, and they certainly din't just rip a hole in the public sector finances) don't exist anymore.

[Lord Kangana]

And I'll also bet that a larger percentage of people on in-work benefits work in the private sector. Why the f*ck do I have to subsidise greedy companies who won't pay their workers a decent wage that they can afford?

[Prufrock]

More worrying for people like me was the clear statement that the public sector should get significant wage increases, payable by the private sector, of course.

Public sector employees don't pay income tax? Blimey. Missed that

Who said they don't pay tax? The equation is simple - let's just say for the sake of argument that a public sector worker is paid £30k per annum, his tax and NI would amount to just over £6k. His employer's costs, excluding the generous pension final salary arrangements still in place for many public sector employees, amount to on costs for payroll, employers NI contributions, HR and temporary employees to cover sickness absence (three times as high on average as the private sector) would be somewhere around a further £4k. So he/she costs us £34000 per year and contributes £6k in taxes before spending net income.

If you are trying to imply that public sector employees cover their employment costs through taxes, you are sadly mistaken. The balance of £28k comes from the private sector.

You imply that anyone has argued the public sector pays for itself. Of course it doesn't, if it's supposed to, good luck with the volunteer charged with sorting your inevitable stroke. The public sector by definition costs money. You need an argument as to why it isn't worth it, not why doctors or soldiers are paid more than they pay in.

I'm happy to have spent the last two years treating the terrorist-sympathiser Corbyn with the disdain he deserves for kowtowing to Adams et al. After six weeks of snide ads about his history, you're damn right if I think TesMes can f*ck jolly well right off for her supplication to a bunch who are psychos even when they aren't terrorists, which they are.

[Prufrock]

The public sector has just about managed to get its first (inflation matching) pay increase since 2008. If you think the private sector is anywhere close to that you're a bulldog in a blue rosette. Good luck, but we've better thing you know...