The Politics Thread

[Hoboh]

The main threat that UKIP posed to thw Tories wasn't beating them in the overwhelming majority of constituencies, but taking enough votes off them to push them into second place. The Tories are way too street-wise to let that happen.

4,000,000 voters nearly more than the rest bar Labour and the Tories, not bad for a party of swivel eyed loonies

Just think what a moderate centrist party could achieve, back in the days of the SDP politics was one way or the other times have changed (something that seems to have passed BWFCi by).

There is room and scope for a centre party to grow and win an election, just so long as toxic Blair ain't involved anywhere.

[Hoboh]

UK is rose to gain ONE seat... Out of 650...

And quite a few councillors and forced Cameron's hand on the referendum and propelled Farage on to the world stage, replaced the established official opposition in second place in quite a few seats etc. etc.
No referendum and UKIP would more than likely ended up beating the Lib Dems into 4th place.
Still don't let your prejudice blind you.

But they didn't achieve anything meaningful. The Tory right forced Cameron's hand. Perhaps UKIP influenced the Tory right, but electorally they were no threat.

Farage becoming a minor celebrity gobshite makes no odds.

No point creating a new "centrist party" if they can't win a GE. So we're talking about more than 300* the performance of UKIP. And in a far shorter space of time.

It isn't happening.

Enjoy the wilderness then matey, it's a long lonely walk.

[Hoboh]

Oh look,



Another bus!

[Lord Kangana]

I can't see the figure behind Corbyn. Is it higher or lower than a £350m?

[BWFC_Insane]

The main threat that UKIP posed to thw Tories wasn't beating them in the overwhelming majority of constituencies, but taking enough votes off them to push them into second place. The Tories are way too street-wise to let that happen.

4,000,000 voters nearly more than the rest bar Labour and the Tories, not bad for a party of swivel eyed loonies

Just think what a moderate centrist party could achieve, back in the days of the SDP politics was one way or the other times have changed (something that seems to have passed BWFCi by).

There is room and scope for a centre party to grow and win an election, just so long as toxic Blair ain't involved anywhere.

But you need to win over 326 seats. UKIP won 1. How many years did it take them to win 1?

How long would it take a centre left party to establish itself and be ready to really contest? Super optimistic let's say 10 years. Then another 10 to start to make inroads and establish proper grass roots local party networks. Then perhaps 10 more years to really contest an election.

That's being super optimistic.

Labour will eventually sort themselves out, just like post Foote. It might be bloody and unpleasant. But just like the Tories they will eventually get there. As I say the Corbyn supporters will eventually struggle to unite behind one person and will fracture. I agree that Corbyn may stay if they lose but then the pressure must be cranked up on him.

[Worthy4England]

The main threat that UKIP posed to thw Tories wasn't beating them in the overwhelming majority of constituencies, but taking enough votes off them to push them into second place. The Tories are way too street-wise to let that happen.

4,000,000 voters nearly more than the rest bar Labour and the Tories, not bad for a party of swivel eyed loonies

Just think what a moderate centrist party could achieve, back in the days of the SDP politics was one way or the other times have changed (something that seems to have passed BWFCi by).

There is room and scope for a centre party to grow and win an election, just so long as toxic Blair ain't involved anywhere.

You're doing a great job of proving the point I was making (as ever). Having lots of money and 4m voters translated into ONE seat. It isn't as you originally contended about "just throwing money at is like UKIP did" because in terms of being able to form a government, that clearly didn't fcking work. The SDLPLPLD or whatever maxed out at 22/23...the Libdems at 60ish - 30 years to get to less than 10% of the seats on around 25% of the vote.

[Worthy4England]

I can't see the figure behind Corbyn. Is it higher or lower than a £350m?

They need to get that picture, with Abbot in front of the bus, then the number can change by the minute...

[Hoboh]

The main threat that UKIP posed to thw Tories wasn't beating them in the overwhelming majority of constituencies, but taking enough votes off them to push them into second place. The Tories are way too street-wise to let that happen.

4,000,000 voters nearly more than the rest bar Labour and the Tories, not bad for a party of swivel eyed loonies

Just think what a moderate centrist party could achieve, back in the days of the SDP politics was one way or the other times have changed (something that seems to have passed BWFCi by).

There is room and scope for a centre party to grow and win an election, just so long as toxic Blair ain't involved anywhere.

You're doing a great job of proving the point I was making (as ever). Having lots of money and 4m voters translated into ONE seat. It isn't as you originally contended about "just throwing money at is like UKIP did" because in terms of being able to form a government, that clearly didn't fcking work. The SDLPLPLD or whatever maxed out at 22/23...the Libdems at 60ish - 30 years to get to less than 10% of the seats on around 25% of the vote.

Money is one component, a very important component but not the be all and end all.
I think BWFCi is very pessimistic on his time scale, he folk who would naturally vote Labour but won't because of the left and Corbyn have nowhere to go, the people who vote Tory because they feel a better sense of financial stability and security but are not 'real Tories' in the sense of the word would like somewhere better and altogether since the days of the SDP there are a darned sight more of them.
At a guess, I would imagine a centrist party could form the opposition in 2022 and in with a shout of governing in 2027, Labour will be finished just as in Scotland by then.
Still that's only my view, some people thought UKIP would only take a few thousand votes last time and look how wrong they were.

[Dr Hotdog]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011

Watch as Theresa finally says something with a glint of True Conviction in her eyes.

[BWFC_Insane]

The main threat that UKIP posed to thw Tories wasn't beating them in the overwhelming majority of constituencies, but taking enough votes off them to push them into second place. The Tories are way too street-wise to let that happen.

4,000,000 voters nearly more than the rest bar Labour and the Tories, not bad for a party of swivel eyed loonies

Just think what a moderate centrist party could achieve, back in the days of the SDP politics was one way or the other times have changed (something that seems to have passed BWFCi by).

There is room and scope for a centre party to grow and win an election, just so long as toxic Blair ain't involved anywhere.

You're doing a great job of proving the point I was making (as ever). Having lots of money and 4m voters translated into ONE seat. It isn't as you originally contended about "just throwing money at is like UKIP did" because in terms of being able to form a government, that clearly didn't fcking work. The SDLPLPLD or whatever maxed out at 22/23...the Libdems at 60ish - 30 years to get to less than 10% of the seats on around 25% of the vote.

Money is one component, a very important component but not the be all and end all.
I think BWFCi is very pessimistic on his time scale, he folk who would naturally vote Labour but won't because of the left and Corbyn have nowhere to go, the people who vote Tory because they feel a better sense of financial stability and security but are not 'real Tories' in the sense of the word would like somewhere better and altogether since the days of the SDP there are a darned sight more of them.
At a guess, I would imagine a centrist party could form the opposition in 2022 and in with a shout of governing in 2027, Labour will be finished just as in Scotland by then.
Still that's only my view, some people thought UKIP would only take a few thousand votes last time and look how wrong they were.

I don't think you are wrong. There is a huge gap for a centre left party to emerge. A huge gap. But that does not translate into seriously contesting an election. Not in this country.

The centre and left would be too fractured to unite (just like when the SDP formed - they were meant to be the uniting force but actually ended up fracturing the vote further) and in our FPTP seat based system would take a long time to have the infrastructure to be able to contest the volume of seats needed. Remember how long UKIP is going and in a GE they still essentially concentrate on about 6 or 7 seats only at most.

Also there are the boundary changes in a couple of years that will further favour the Tories.

If our system was a presidential one like France then I'd say, absolutely there is a massive gap for centrist or centre left options. And they could compete. But it isn't and therefore the infrastructure needed to form an effective party that can seriously challenge at an election is vast, at a variety of levels. Further, the system means that splitting that vote, leads to larger Tory majorities.

That is the problem. And lets face it, is why a split hasn't already occurred in Labour. A split might happen should Corbyn remain as leader, but I suspect any such split would be a temporary one to force his hand.

[Lord Kangana]

I can't see the figure behind Corbyn. Is it higher or lower than a £350m?

They need to get that picture, with Abbot in front of the bus, then the number can change by the minute...

That is a definite vote winner!

[Hoboh]

Jeremy Corbyn will lay out plans to take parts of Britain’s energy industry back into public ownership alongside the railways and Royal Mail in a radical manifesto that will also promise an annual injection of £6bn for the NHS and £1.6bn for social care.
A draft document drawn up by the leadership will also pledge a phased abolition of tuition fees, a dramatic boost in finance for childcare, and scrapping the bedroom tax, the Guardian has learned.
Sources say that Corbyn wants to promise a “transformational programme” with a package covering the NHS, education, housing and jobs as well as industrial intervention and sweeping nationalisation.
One central promise will be to build 100,000 new council houses a year and alongside a policy to ban fracking.
The manifesto claims that the policies will be fully costed with tax rises for those earning over £80,000 – although full details are not included. There will also be a reversal of corporation and inheritance tax cuts.
Excerpts seen by the Guardian says the party will “take energy back into public ownership to deliver renewable energy, affordability for consumers and democratic control”. It includes plans for a public owned energy company in every region of the UK. The manifesto will include a 20:1 pay cap for businesses that have public contracts.
There is also a promise to review decisions on welfare cuts, although not necessarily reverse them. A ministry of labour will oversee a new raft of reforms on workers’ rights and planned hikes in the pension age beyond 66 will not go ahead.

The draft manifesto also sets out plans to borrow £250bn to invest in infrastructure.
Meanwhile, there will be a promise to “review” other government decisions, with a view to reversing them. Among those in line to be considered are the plans for a £3.4bn cut to the Conservative’s flagship welfare policy of universal credit.
The draft manifesto will be scrutinised by Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) and shadow cabinet from midday on Thursday at what is known as the Clause V meeting.
The session, which also involves the heads of the national policy forums, will hammer down a final document that will be published next week.
Corbyn hinted on Wednesday that he would make good on a previous commitment to scrap tuition fees for higher education and restore maintenance grants for the poorest students.

Dear Lord!

Sounds like going into the very best restaurant, scoffing the most expensive menu whilst forgetting there is going to be a very large bill at the end of the evening.

[Hoboh]

I can't see the figure behind Corbyn. Is it higher or lower than a £350m?

Reading what looks like is going in the Labour manifesto, personally, I'd say there isn't enough room on the side of the bus for all the zero's.

[Worthy4England]

I can't see the figure behind Corbyn. Is it higher or lower than a £350m?

Reading what looks like is going in the Labour manifesto, personally, I'd say there isn't enough room on the side of the bus for all the zero's.

Yeah, but we'll still get more than that back by not being in EU.

[Prufrock]

Pretty sure you've backed most of that lot along the way Hobes.

Don't have many problems with the actual content of that (odd policy aside, tuition fees say), but it hardly matters when it's put forward by Marxists of the Groucho kind.

Meanwhile the Tories want to spend time arguing over the medieval sport of about ten toffs.

[Hoboh]

Pretty sure you've backed most of that lot along the way Hobes.

Don't have many problems with the actual content of that (odd policy aside, tuition fees say), but it hardly matters when it's put forward by Marxists of the Groucho kind.

Meanwhile the Tories want to spend time arguing over the medieval sport of about ten toffs.

Some of them are good ideas but are now unfeasible like the re-nationalisation on the scale proposed, simply unaffordable.
Your sums have to at least look like they could add up, this lot is off the scale and could not be implemented within the timescale of one Parliament.

[Hoboh]

Lib Dems just committed suicide.

Liberal Democrats
Tim Farron makes pledge for UK to take 50,000 more Syrian refugees
Liberal Democrats challenge Labour to match their election manifesto commitment on refugees, with the resettlement likely to cost £4.3bn

£4.3bn on top of the £17bn foreign aid that is already working a lot of folk up, when there is no money for other services? Well done Farron, just proved you are unfit to lead.

[Hoboh]

Pretty sure you've backed most of that lot along the way Hobes.

Don't have many problems with the actual content of that (odd policy aside, tuition fees say), but it hardly matters when it's put forward by Marxists of the Groucho kind.

Meanwhile the Tories want to spend time arguing over the medieval sport of about ten toffs.

They are becoming a pest rapidly, the hunts will need to be on the high streets soon to get rid of.
(Then we can start with militant I meant momentum)

[Worthy4England]

Pretty sure you've backed most of that lot along the way Hobes.

Don't have many problems with the actual content of that (odd policy aside, tuition fees say), but it hardly matters when it's put forward by Marxists of the Groucho kind.

Meanwhile the Tories want to spend time arguing over the medieval sport of about ten toffs.

Some of them are good ideas but are now unfeasible like the re-nationalisation on the scale proposed, simply unaffordable.
Your sums have to at least look like they could add up, this lot is off the scale and could not be implemented within the timescale of one Parliament.

How much will the re-nationalisation cost?

[Hoboh]

Pretty sure you've backed most of that lot along the way Hobes.

Don't have many problems with the actual content of that (odd policy aside, tuition fees say), but it hardly matters when it's put forward by Marxists of the Groucho kind.

Meanwhile the Tories want to spend time arguing over the medieval sport of about ten toffs.

Some of them are good ideas but are now unfeasible like the re-nationalisation on the scale proposed, simply unaffordable.
Your sums have to at least look like they could add up, this lot is off the scale and could not be implemented within the timescale of one Parliament.

How much will the re-nationalisation cost?

You are the figures man, have a look at the value of the companies involved