• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding

Status
Not open for further replies.
LD policy: Negotiate a deal with Europe, but it must include us remaining in the EFTA/EEC and the CU. Put the deal to a referendum, where either the public takes the deal or the UK remains in the EU.
Is there any grounds to the Lib Dem policy? Like after invoking Article 50 and two years of negotiations we can just say we changed our mind and we don't want to leave after all? And as a Remainer it's a pretty weak proposition since there's a decent chance people would still vote to leave anyway. The public at large won't have any understanding of what a good or bad deal is (not that my own is much better) but the Sun and Mail will tell them it's bad if it involves freedom of movement.
 

nekkid

It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
This whole idea of putting the Brexit deal to the vote is pointless. Any time you do it more half the people are always going to reject it as "not good enough".

It's why I couldn't vote for LD in the end - it's clearly just an attempt to pull votes from disenfranchised remainers, rather than any real benefit to the situation.
 
what?! like if corbyn got assassinated tomorrow they wouldn't be able to delay the election?

You can countermand an election upon the death of a candidate, so the election in Islington would be re-arranged but all the others would go ahead. This happened in 2010, when the election in Thirsk and Mallon happened in the 27th May instead
 

vonStirlitz

Unconfirmed Member
On something else terror related a guy on Twitter is claiming that Amber rudd had the Mike taken away from him at an event when he asked about the sale of arms to the Saudis. Gonna be putting up a video sometime this morning too.

https://twitter.com/nw_nicholas/status/871140931457691648
This is the potential noose for the Tories, given they are in bed with the chief funders of those that kill us. I doubt there is sufficient time, or ability (tactless charge to raise given current events) to push this argument before the public.
 
It'll only gain traction is the footage is damning. If the guy is being aggressive, shouting, etc while asking the question, it'll be ignored and rightfully so.
 
On something else terror related a guy on Twitter is claiming that Amber rudd had the Mike taken away from him at an event when he asked about the sale of arms to the Saudis. Gonna be putting up a video sometime this morning too.

https://twitter.com/nw_nicholas/status/871140931457691648
Looks like he's starting to post stuff. Hopefully he's as calm as in this video when that other show drops.

https://www.facebook.com/nicholaswilsonhastingsrye/videos/134106917152017/
 

Uzzy

Member
There is literally no legal mechanism to alter the date once parliament is dissolved.

Perhaps the next parliament should look into creating some kind of contingency for this sort of scenario. The only event that is covered is the death of the monarch (polling is postponed for a fortnight).

Giving the Government legal powers to postpone a general election after Parliament has been dissolved could be seriously dangerous.
 
There may not be enough time but it seems the Saudi story is picking a lot of traction at the moment.

We have a terror report release now being postponed or cancelled, most likely due to the Saudi angle plus of course having two attacks now.

There are some serious questions that people are starting to ask about the Tories so hopefully this has an effect.
 

satriales

Member
The thing that struck me most with the Saudi weapons selling, is the way Teresa May and the newspapers purposefully created a fake story about Cadbury's not using the word 'Easter' as a distraction. She was in Saudi Arabia selling weapons but everyone was talking about an untrue easter story instead.
 

Acorn

Member
The thing that struck me most with the Saudi weapons selling, is the way Teresa May and the newspapers purposefully created a fake story about Cadbury's not using the word 'Easter' as a distraction. She was in Saudi Arabia selling weapons but everyone was talking about an untrue easter story instead.
This anecdote being brought up would still lead to the public focusing​ on Easter eggs. Even in fucking June.
 

kmag

Member
Got to love May, talking (again) about the professionalism and bravery of the emergency services while she won't even give them the recommended 1% (as derisory as it is)
 

Moosichu

Member
Theresa May is using this awful attack to push her Big Brother agenda yet again. She keeps saying something "must be done" about the internet - but terrorism has existed long before the internet ever did. Also, so far, every single terrorist has been on a watchlist, so I don't see how throwing hay onto the haystack, by putting civilians in our free democracy under blanket surveillance will help.

She says "we can't carry on as normal", and then suggests doing exactly what the terrorists want, removing our own freedom and civil liberties from ourselves.

The security services want more funding to tackle the problems they already know about, they don't need nor want the ability to see which memes I have been looking at this year.

Quoting myself from somewhere else.
 

Ashes

Banned
Got to love May, talking (again) about the professionalism and bravery of the emergency services while she won't even give them the recommended 1% (as derisory as it is)

That police officer who warned her that police cuts would increase the likelihood of something like this happening was right on the money for a lot of people. She called it scaremongering.
 

Uzzy

Member
No more dangerous than giving the govt the unilateral ability to repeal laws at will.

You mean the whole letting the Government change EU laws to let them work after Brexit thing? I'm not too happy about that either, but at least in that case there's a Parliament in place to do something about it if it's too extreme.

In other news, the latest YouGov poll has an interesting leadership approval poll result.

V0cIlGi.png

Absolutely crazy turnaround, so I'm not sure how accurate that is, but that shows Corbyn on a net leadership approval of -2, while May's on a net leadership approval of -5.
 

Goodlife

Member
Absolutely crazy turnaround, so I'm not sure how accurate that is, but that shows Corbyn on a net leadership approval of -2, while May's on a net leadership approval of -5.

So glad that people actually seeing / listening to Corbyn with their own eyes / ears, rather than via the media, is actually doing a good job for him. It's what a lot of us have been saying for a long time
 
More police wouldn't have prevented last night's atrocity.

It's about community policing, that's where they get intelligence so don't say it wouldn't have prevented anything, the fact is we are seeing the fruits of an underfunded police force.

Our government need to stop trying to protect its people on the cheap.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
I just don't understand how Theresa May can have any kind of credibility in whatever she is saying about what happened. Her party is ruling UK since long enough to implement whatever great ideas she has. It's not like terrorist attacks are something new or like she hasn't been on top of one of the most relevant government areas in relation to these issues.
 
Is there any grounds to the Lib Dem policy? Like after invoking Article 50 and two years of negotiations we can just say we changed our mind and we don't want to leave after all? And as a Remainer it's a pretty weak proposition since there's a decent chance people would still vote to leave anyway. The public at large won't have any understanding of what a good or bad deal is (not that my own is much better) but the Sun and Mail will tell them it's bad if it involves freedom of movement.
many lawyers say that it is possible to rescind article 50 unilaterally. the reality is that it is not clearly written anywhere and it is likely to be accepted by the EU member states because they would favor stability.

and well it would be a referendum with all the facts on the table with a clearer picture what the terms would be.
It's about community policing, that's where they get intelligence so don't say it wouldn't have prevented anything, the fact is we are seeing the fruits of an underfunded police force.

Our government need to stop trying to protect its people on the cheap.

wasnt that basically what corbyn said too?
 
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-findings-may-never-be-published-saudi-arabia



Nothing to see here our government are there to protect us and never hide anything from us.

This doesn't surprise me. The UK is soon going to be in a situation where they'll have to make trade deals with less than desirable countries.

Highlighting that those countries are also heavily funding and exporting a terrorist ideology that demands non believers die, doesn't serve the country's wider need to have those trade deals.
 

Ashes

Banned
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-findings-may-never-be-published-saudi-arabia



Nothing to see here our government are there to protect us and never hide anything from us.

the Home Office confirmed the report had not yet been completed and said it would not necessarily be published, calling the contents “very sensitive

Sensitive to who? If it is to the Wahhabi community in Britain, then I guess it falls under the home secretary's remit.

But if it is Saudi Arabia, hasn't Johnson got the final say? He's already talked about the Saudi's proxy war in Yemen. So what's there to hide?
 
Feeling reasonably confident in my prediction:

Con 44
Lab 35
LD 9
SNP 5 (43% in Scotland)
UKIP 4
Green 2

Resulting in a convincing Tory majority of about 70.
 
Sensitive to who? If it is to the Wahhabi community in Britain, then I guess it falls under the home secretary's remit.

But if it is Saudi Arabia, hasn't Johnson got the final say? He's already talked about the Saudi's proxy war in Yemen. So what's there to hide?

I've noticed that most people are still pretty clueless about Wahabism in the UK. If you bring it up in a discussion about terrorism, they just stare at you and say but it's still Islam, it's all the same thing.

We've failed in providing a balanced and nuanced look at what's behind the terrorist surge of the 21st century, just by making a simple change and calling it Wahabi influenced terrorism, we'd start to combat the disease Saudi Arabia is spreading...
 

Chinner

Banned
of course May would use this to immediately push her anti internet agenda.

benefits are two fold, 1) pretend to give a shit about terrorism and 2) control freedom of information and media consumption by younger generations.

the tories have no interest of losing power on a temporarily basis.
 
Would be really nice if Scottish Labour could get their act together this week and get more MPs than the Tories in Scotland.

This is virtually impossible since so much of Labour's support is in central belt seats (esp. Glasgow) where the SNP has large majorities. Labour are favourites to hold Edinburgh South, their lone seat, but much beyond that would be very unexpected.

Meanwhile there are a lot of seats that the bookies have down as SNP/Tory marginals: East Renfrewshire, Aberdeen South, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine, Moray, Perth & North Perthshire, Edinburgh South West, Edinburgh North & Leith, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale, East Lothian (though this is a 3-way with Labour in the mix too). Even in Angus the Tories are priced at 2/1, and in Banff & Buchan they are 5/2. Compare Labour in Glasgow South (my seat): 16/1. Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk and Dumfries & Galloway are regarded as safe seats for the Tories so I didn't list them.
 
I am hoping that Labour holding 1 seat to the LDs 3, despite having three times the support in Scotland, might bring Scottish Labour around to the idea of voting reform...

Ultimately everything depends on how the SNP do...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom