Support NeoGAF

[SteveWD40]

Time to call back Dave Miliband, I guess.

A centralist, pragmatic Labour leader would be viable right now. Sadly 7 weeks is not long enough for anything dramatic.

 

[toythatkills]

She'll still be PM, unless the Conservatives lose, which is incredibly unlikely (or the party unseats her as leader, even less likely). What this will do is turn a slim Conservative majority in Parliament into a huge one.

I wonder what she'd have to do to actually lose this election? She could stay indoors not speaking to anyone for the next two months and still comfortably win. She could probably die and still beat Labour.

 

[liquidtmd]

 

[SlipperyFishes]

Well, she looked pretty reluctant meeting Trump, but it seems increasingly clear that we're going to need the US more than ever going forward anyway.

Edit:

I keep hearing about this "tax haven" strategy. Would that mean I'd pay less tax? I'm in favour if so.

Companies wouldn't pay as much tax which means a shortfall in available money to spend on the public sector. You would pay the same, more services would be privatized (NHS). You'd end up paying more money to private companies over time to cover that "tax haven" strat.

Nobody wins but Tories and the rich.

 

[Dougald]

I wonder what she'd have to do to actually lose this election? She could stay indoors not speaking to anyone for the next two months and still comfortably win. She could probably die and still beat Labour.

She could announce that we're going to start turning the poor into Soylent Green and still win

 

[Billy_Pilgrim]

Cheers Jeremy, you absolutely fucking useless twat.

 

[Screaming Meat]

What's her gameplan here? Seems to me Tories are unlikely to lose and she knows it. Is she simply cementing her position to quell dissent, or is there something I'm missing?

 

[D4Danger]

Cheers Jeremy, you absolutely fucking useless twat.

hey, May just cut three years off his reign. you should be happy.

 

[Coriolanus]

Right, but I don't think centrist means what you think it means. 'centrist' seems to be used synonymously with 'Blairite neoliberal' (you know what I mean ). That's not 'centrism' any more - it's not where the median voter is at. A genuinely centrist Labour Party, at the centre of the British political spectrum, is going to look more small-c conservative, is going to be bigger on patriotism, tougher on immigration, anti-globalism, and so on. They're going to look *more* like Kate Hoey, not less.

yknow, Aus-Labour might be a good example of this, wot with shit like stopping the boats. Still lost to that fucker Abbot tho.

 

[autumnleaf]

What's her gameplan here? Seems to me Tories are unlikely to lose and she knows it. Is she simply cementing her position to quell dissent, or is there something I'm missing?

The Tories have a small majority currently, they will have a much bigger one after this.

 

[Dougald]

hey, May just cut three years off his reign. you should be happy.

I wonder which bumbling fool Labour will nominate next

 

[Screaming Meat]

The Tories have a small majority currently, they will have a much bigger one after this.

Ah, okay. She wants more seats. Smart move, I guess.

 

[Mr. Sam]

Companies wouldn't pay as much tax which means a shortfall in available money to spend on the public sector. You would pay the same, more services would be privatized (NHS). You'd end up paying more money to private companies over time to cover that "tax haven" strat.

Nobody wins but Tories and the rich.

Basically. Transforming Britain into a tax haven, i.e. Singapore with worse weather, would profoundly transform the type of country we are. Right now, it's been put on the table as a sort of nuclear option - "give us what we want or we'll set ourselves up as an off-shore tax haven just to spite you" - but, because of how severe the impact would be on (already ailing) public infrastructure going forward, it doesn't really seem like a viable option.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

hey, May just cut three years off his reign. you should be happy.

No way. Jezza's reign is entirely unrelated to elections and their results

Edit:

Basically. Transforming Britain into a tax haven, i.e. Singapore with worse weather, would profoundly transform the type of country we are. Right now, it's been put on the table as a sort of nuclear option - "give us what we want or we'll set ourselves up as an off-shore tax haven just to spite you" - but, because of how severe the impact would be on (already ailing) public infrastructure going forward, it doesn't really seem like a viable option.

I don't know. Didn't Ireland kinda do the low corporation tax thing? It seemed to work out pretty well for them. And our weather is marginally better.

 

[daviyoung]

What's her gameplan here? Seems to me Tories are unlikely to lose and she knows it. Is she simply cementing her position to quell dissent, or is there something I'm missing?

It's a Tory takeover of Parliament.

 

[funkystudent]

May with the political equivalent of cashing in Money in the Bank while the champion is out cold.

One can hope the incoming decimation will be the thing that finally gets Corbyn but you never know with that guy.

 

[Heigic]

Well at least Labour might have their shit together by 2022.

 

[31GhostsIV]

What's her gameplan here? Seems to me Tories are unlikely to lose and she knows it. Is she simply cementing her position to quell dissent, or is there something I'm missing?

Right now her chances of getting anything but a larger majority are slim and none.

It also resets the clock to five years before another GE, otherwise it would be in 2020 and at that time her popularity will likely be in the toilet because of Brexit. This means there's more time to prey on the short memories of the British public (that has already forgotten about Tory electoral fraud from 2015 I should add).

I also expect Rupe to get his full purchase of Sky in favour of the usual biased-as-shit coverage in the next few months.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

yknow, Aus-Labour might be a good example of this, wot with shit like stopping the boats. Still lost to that fucker Abbot tho.

Yeah, but they probably wouldn't have if they'd not gone through the woeful process of self-destruction for no apparent reason. Sanders vs. Clinton and Kendall vs. Corbyn actually had stakes behind them. Rudd vs. Gillard was just... what? Two nearly identical candidates who just couldn't keep their ambitions in check. Woefully poor decision-making by all involved.

But yeah, Aus-Labour is actually a not an inaccurate model of where I think most leftist parties will need to be moving - they're leading the Liberals and that's with Bill Shortern in charge!

 

[Xando]

So, realistically. How much % can Lib Dems gain on a anti brexit campaign? Can they overtake labour?

 

[SymbiantXenos]

Can picture the mail headlines already.

 

[jem0208]

Right now her chances of getting anything but a larger majority are slim and none.

It also resets the clock to five years before another GE, otherwise it would be in 2020 and at that time her popularity will likely be in the toilet because of Brexit. This means there's more time to prey on the short memories of the British public (that has already forgotten about Tory electoral fraud from 2015 I should add).

I also expect Rupe to get his full purchase of Sky in favour of the usual biased-as-shit coverage in the next few months.

Oh man the Daily Mail is going to be even more insufferable for the next few months now...

 

[D4Danger]

Can picture the mail headlines already.

I'm hoping someone uses "May Day" unironically.

 

[Charles Brandon]

Companies wouldn't pay as much tax which means a shortfall in available money to spend on the public sector. You would pay the same, more services would be privatized (NHS). You'd end up paying more money to private companies over time to cover that "tax haven" strat.

Nobody wins but Tories and the rich.

Theoretically, this isn't necessarily true. A sharp reduction in corporation tax encourages multinationals to set up shop in your jurisdiction. More companies means more/better paid jobs, more/better paid jobs means more income tax. Corporation tax is a relatively small slice of the tax take pie and is dwarfed by income tax. Ireland have used this model to some success. The main problem in general (apart form the fact that it may not attract enough extra jobs to take up the shortfall) is that corp tax reductions are a race to the bottom. If every country does it, then every country loses because there is no pull factor for the multinationals and the corporations benefit alone. If you make a system like this work, it only works because you are increasing your jobs (and therefore tax take) at the expense of another nation. Therefore there is agreement in the EU not to pursue this strategy (Ireland are considered to be controversial). So the UK are saying, if we're not in the EU, we don't have to follow this agreement. However, whether the low rate of corp tax would be sufficient compensation to businesses for being outside the single market is debatable to put it mildly.

 

[system11]

The Tories have a small majority currently, they will have a much bigger one after this.

At least that's what they believe. Not sure myself.

It's also about timing - things look good for them in the polls which these days is like reading tea leaves, but it also gives them a buffer period post-Brexit to finish the job or delay punishment for a bad one, depending on your level of cynicism.

I still think it's a bad idea, and I'm pro-Brexit and currently back the Conservatives because they're the only actual party at the moment with Labour still a disasterous mess from the Corbyn Wars and LD saying anything that will get them a vote, no matter how destructive.

That's the problem with UK politics right now, if you look at things rationally for a moment and stop screeching - which of the three actually has enough competant members to form a semi functional government tomorrow?

If you want to see a return to a functional opposition, instead of wailing about TORIES the focus needs to be on destroying the fringe parties and rebuilding one of them to make it electable in future.

 

[Jezbollah]

So, realistically. How much % can Lib Dems gain on a anti brexit campaign? Can they overtake labour?

I suspect they'll get around 20, maybe 30 seats. They won't overtake Labour unless something utterly insane happens.

 

[Charles Brandon]

So, realistically. How much % can Lib Dems gain on a anti brexit campaign? Can they overtake labour?

The can but probably won't. But they could get close.

edit: no, actually Dan is right. They can't.

 

[Zelias]

So, realistically. How much % can Lib Dems gain on a anti brexit campaign? Can they overtake labour?

Not a chance.

 

[Principate]

Right now her chances of getting anything but a larger majority are slim and none.

It also resets the clock to five years before another GE, otherwise it would be in 2020 and at that time her popularity will likely be in the toilet because of Brexit. This means there's more time to prey on the short memories of the British public (that has already forgotten about Tory electoral fraud from 2015 I should add).

I also expect Rupe to get his full purchase of Sky in favour of the usual biased-as-shit coverage in the next few months.

The whole 5 year term legislation seems completely rigged at every level to favour the party in power. Your locked into 5 years term but oh you can trigger a snap election with a 2/3rd vote in parliament. Something would always benefit the party that is currently in power and rather than void the term it resets it.

 

[Charles Brandon]

The whole 5 year term legislation seems completely rigged at every level to favour the party in power. Your locked into 5 years term but oh you can trigger a snap election with a 2/3rd vote in parliament. Something would always benefit the party that is currently in power and rather than void the term it resets it.

It was always rigged this way, the five term thing hasn't really changed anything.

 

[Hazzuh]

the LDs could probably poll higher than Labour and still get 100 less seats, our electoral system is a joke.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The whole 5 year term legislation seems completely rigged at every level to favour the party in power. Your locked into 5 years term but oh you can trigger a snap election with a 2/3rd vote in parliament. Something would always benefit the party that is currently in power and rather than void the term it resets it.

It's a necessary part of a parliamentary system. The executive requires the confidence of the legislature. If the legislature cannot possibly agree, then you can't have an executive. To avoid this, the failsafe is that if the legislature does not agree, there has to be an election to break the deadlock.

Supposing you didn't have the ability to call snap elections, suppose the Conservatives refused to form government. Labour would be unable to form government because the legislature is still controlled by the Conservatives. So you'd need an election to break the deadlock.

So snap elections is just a way of preventing the farce of May resigning then Labour being unable to form government and the Queen having to step in and call an election. It's a necessary pressure valve for parliamentary systems.

 

[naweednrahman]

I wonder if a coalition between Labour and Libdems would work?

 

[Pandy]

You assume any meaningful negations were going to occur in the two years when there was already talks in the EU that proper negotiations shouldn't start until after the two years are up (but not before any positive EU benefits are gutted from the UK). It's going to be a total slaughterhouse which is why May is calling this now. it's only going to get worse and May wants to sure up her position before this shitcoaster properly starts.

There are two important sets of negotiations:
Negotiating the exit of the UK from the EU under Article 50, which has a 2-year time limit.
Negotiating a trade deal between the UK and the EU, which I think is the bit you mean.

Both are important, and it's hilarious/tragic that May is sabotaging the early stages of the process after all her talk to the contrary.

That said, we seem to agree on the reason why she's doing it.

I suspect they'll get around 20, maybe 30 seats. They won't overtake Labour unless something utterly insane happens.

Didn't you hear? Theresa May has called for a General Election.

 

[Charles Brandon]

I wonder if a coalition between Labour and Libdems would work?

Only if Labour decided it was anti-brexit, which won't happen save for an assassination

 

[SlipperyFishes]

Theoretically, this isn't necessarily true. A sharp reduction in corporation tax encourages multinationals to set up shop in your jurisdiction. More companies means more/better paid jobs, more/better paid jobs means more income tax. Corporation tax is a relatively small slice of the tax take pie and is dwarfed by income tax. Ireland have used this model to some success. The main problem in general (apart form the fact that it may not attract enough extra jobs to take up the shortfall) is that corp tax reductions are a race to the bottom. If every country does it, then every country loses because there is no pull factor for the multinationals and the corporations benefit alone. If you make a system like this work, it only works because you are increasing your jobs (and therefore tax take) at the expense of another nation. Therefore there is agreement in the EU not to pursue this strategy (Ireland are considered to be controversial). So the UK are saying, if we're not in the EU, we don't have to follow this agreement. However, whether the low rate of corp tax would be sufficient compensation to businesses for being outside the single market is debatable to put it mildly.

A tax-haven is a simple way for them to attract satellite offices where the income flows to without having to employ people in that region. Like how Ireland and Apple have gotten along. There's very little infrastructure in place in Ireland for Apple beyond some business suits.

 

[ghst]

tories were always going to do whatever they wanted between now and the GE after next. just seen dianne abbot on the box doing her famous drunk trout impression and the thought of corbyn and his acolytes finally having the reality spelled out to them at the ballot box makes me glad it's happening sooner rather than later.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

I wonder if a coalition between Labour and Libdems would work?

On paper, it would be a potentially quite powerful move, and would tip the scales in a wide number of constituencies, especially after you factor in the usual swing that comes with any election.

In terms of the two parties coming together to agree it? Pretty much no chance.

 

[jem0208]

Only if Labour decided it was anti-brexit, which won't happen save for an assassination

Well the LibDems aren't going to campaign to revert Brexit, they're going to go for soft Brexit. Labour could go for that.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I was distracted by the gay baboon. Well this is unexpected.

 

[Par Score]

To think, all this shit is happening is because David fucking Cameron wanted to get one over on UKIP and placate his nuttier backbenchers.

All this "National Interest" bollocks over what's been a bunch of petty Tory infighting, and their reward is going to be a massive majority. Jesus wept.

So, realistically. How much % can Lib Dems gain on a anti brexit campaign? Can they overtake labour?

There is absolutely a chance the Lib Dems can overtake Labour in vote share, almost zero chance they can overtake them in seats.

 

[jem0208]

the LDs could probably poll higher than Labour and still get 100 less seats, our electoral system is a joke.

Fucking 0 chance it will ever change too with the absolute jokes of politicians that we get.

 

[nOoblet16]

Only if Labour decided it was anti-brexit, which won't happen save for an assassination

Libdem wants soft Brexit, Farron even said so this morning. Labour probably wants the same, so it's possible. Whether they get enough votes to do it though that's a different thing.

 

[EGM1966]

They could resist going for the bigger majority and taking UK (well mostly England really) further right I guess.

SNP can probably use this and a conservative win to push stronger for independence with Scottish voters with fear of hard right wing English government and Brexit.

Leastways that's my quick gut reaction.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Lib Dems are pumped for this. Much better than waiting for 2020 to get our MPs back.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

Well the LibDems aren't going to campaign to revert Brexit, they're going to go for soft Brexit. Labour could go for that.

Libdem wants soft Brexit, Farron even said so this morning. Labour probably wants the same, so it's possible. Whether they get enough votes to do it though that's a different thing.

Lib Dems want back in the EU. However, they may choose their words carefully so as to make a soft brexit seem acceptable in current circumstances. Pumping the brakes before trying to pull into reverse.

 

[UpDownLeftRight]

I don't get how this will win them more seats? Who's going to vote for them? The opposition may be weak but we choose psychopaths instead? I don't understand UK politics in the slightest.

 

[Principate]

It was always rigged this way, the five term thing hasn't really changed anything.

Sorta but opposition could decided when they wanted to call a general election. Under the current system that's not really the case anymore.

It's a necessary part of a parliamentary system. The executive requires the confidence of the legislature. If the legislature cannot possibly agree, then you can't have an executive. To avoid this, the failsafe is that if the legislature does not agree, there has to be an election to break the deadlock.

Supposing you didn't have the ability to call snap elections, suppose the Conservatives refused to form government. Labour would be unable to form government because the legislature is still controlled by the Conservatives. So you'd need an election to break the deadlock.

So snap elections is just a way of preventing the farce of May resigning then Labour being unable to form government and the Queen having to step in and call an election. It's a necessary pressure valve for parliamentary systems.

I'm not talking about the snap elections in general I'm talking about why triggering the fails safe is substantially easier for the party in power rather than the opposition.

 

[Hazzuh]

Fucking 0 chance it will ever change too with the absolute jokes of politicians that we get.

I'm still mad about the AV referendum, the BS the Tories spread in that campaign has been overshadowed by more recently lies but still...

 

[DECK'ARD]

Lib Dems are pumped for this. Much better than waiting for 2020 to get our MPs back.

It's a gift for them, can only win from it.