UK General Election Day and Results: 'Parliament is Well Hung.' - Polidicks

[QUOTE=DogGunn;52302978]That's a shocking result for Labour if that is the case. Going backwards - although with Corbyn at the helm, it wouldn't surprise me. The only people that I've seen talking about him "warming up" are those that are already committed to voting Labour anyway.[/QUOTE] Or those that are vehemently oppose to May.

Latest ipsos mori polls showing Theresa May's ratings tanking, Corbyn is +12 she's -11, I think if the election were a week or two later it'd be more interesting.

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303621]Or those that are vehemently oppose to May.[/QUOTE] In other words, rational human beings with at least a shred of empathy

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;52303579]If May still gets a major majority then what the fuck is wrong with people - how can you vote for someone who doesn't show up to any debate and who's only policy is trying to attack Corbyn and shit on just about everyone by lying to them whilst spewing "strong and stable".[/QUOTE] If May wins a majority it will be in no small measure the fault of Corbyn who, despite vehement opposition within his own party, has stubbornly stayed on as Labour leader despite being a borderline fringe candidate. His allowance of more mainstream Labour views in its manifesto launch and what can only be described as the best efforts of the Conservative party to throw the election seem to have narrowed the polls, but much like in the US election with Clinton it might be a case of Jeremy Corbyn being pretty much the only person who could have failed to beat May in this election.

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;52303698]Latest ipsos mori polls showing Theresa May's ratings tanking, Corbyn is +12 she's -11, I think if the election were a week or two later it'd be more interesting.[/QUOTE] [media]https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/870619241103413250[/media] It's the hope that kills you.

[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;52303753]In other words, rational human beings with at least a shred of empathy[/QUOTE] Yeah cos you are going to provide some evidence to prove this silly statement?

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303763]Yeah cos you are going to provide some evidence to prove this silly statement?[/QUOTE] Can you say she has any with a straight face? All I hear from her on the topic of wealth inequality and cuts to social services are empty platitudes and "strong and stable". Her policies are the evidence; Anyone endorsing them, or her, lacks the empathy to value, or even know about, the problems that plague a majority of people in this country. Cut the NHS? Fuck people who need healthcare. Cuts to the police? Fuck people in high-crime areas. Cuts to benefits? Fuck people who can't work cause they're a burden. If the tories actually cared about these issues they'd be doing something about them, instead of maintaining their stance in the name of a "strong and stable" economy, which is the exact opposite of what I've been experiencing as a result of their policy.

Half of households in the UK receive more in benefits than they paid in taxes. [url]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2016#half-of-households-in-the-uk-receive-more-in-benefits-than-they-paid-in-taxes[/url] Maybe someone needs to have some money trees in their manifesto. Or we could always follow the Greeks economic policies.

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303818]Half of households in the UK receive more in benefits than they paid in taxes. [URL]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2016#half-of-households-in-the-uk-receive-more-in-benefits-than-they-paid-in-taxes[/URL] [/QUOTE] Maybe that's because they don't have the income to be taxed in the first place or the money to spend on commodities and luxuries the government receive tax on [editline]2nd June 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303818] Maybe someone needs to have some money trees in their manifesto.[/QUOTE] Re-raising the corporation tax and increasing the minimum wage get the government more tax money cause the entities with loads are giving them more, and the people who work for them spend more.

[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;52303855]Maybe that's because they don't have the income to be taxed in the first place or the money to spend on commodities and luxuries the government receive tax on [editline]2nd June 2017[/editline] Re-raising the corporation tax and increasing the minimum wage get the government more tax money cause the entities with loads are giving them more, and the people who work for them spend more.[/QUOTE] Easy solution then, I wonder why such a simple solution has slipped the net? Maybe because the Tories are all just evil people by nature?

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303911]Easy solution then, I wonder why such a simple solution has slipped the net? Maybe because the Tories are all just evil people by nature?[/QUOTE] No but they do have interests in business.

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303818]Half of households in the UK receive more in benefits than they paid in taxes. [url]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2016#half-of-households-in-the-uk-receive-more-in-benefits-than-they-paid-in-taxes[/url] Maybe someone needs to have some money trees in their manifesto. Or we could always follow the Greeks economic policies.[/QUOTE] A bit off topic but they need to work on their urls

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303911]Easy solution then, I wonder why such a simple solution has slipped the net? Maybe because the Tories are all just evil people by nature?[/QUOTE] Conflict of interest perhaps? You are aware that partisan ideology is a factor in what a Government will and wont do, right?. Is it really so hard to believe a party would ignore a simple solution to a problem if it appeared too "right wing!" or "left wing!" for their voters to swallow?

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303911]Easy solution then, I wonder why such a simple solution has slipped the net? Maybe because the Tories are all just evil people by nature?[/QUOTE] Not evil. Different value systems. They are the people who go on about agency and believe in concepts like social darwinism where those who are best will always get to the top and they're at the top because they deserve to be. They don't believe in too much welfare because they think too much welfare makes people lazy and not want to work, welfare is a tool to placate people and shut them up rather than a tool to improve lives. It's an honour based value system. Its a value system similar to nietzsche's master morality they value strength and success over compassion and dignity. The simpler solution slipped the net because its at odds with that ideology. It would involve taking money from people who, in their eyes, earned every last penny of it and would be giving it to people who, in their eyes, didn't earn it because they didn't work hard enough. I think some measure of being out of touch does apply though - the politicians tend to be doing fairly well and will use that as a yard stick by which to gauge everyone else. Even those who came from the bottom may overlook the breaks and lucky opportunities they've had and [URL="http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate"]wrongly attribute[/URL] their success to their own skill of hard work (that factors in but opportunity does also). Those who got unlucky or simply started with less are often considered lazy and undeserving of support they need. I think also the success of businesses and businessmen/women is wrongfully [b]all[/b] attributed to the management and the principle - in truth the business wouldn't have succeeded with the state supported workers, the state supported consumers and the state supported infrastructure; all of which require taxes. Not evil by any means, I'm sure many people here will sympathise with this. Just a different value system. part of this too is that it's no 2 sides scale, people will fall all along the spectrum and if people's views don't align someone will end up being called a marxist or a far right foon Also there is a tendency for those with money and power to adopt this ideology themselves, then use that money and power to project that ideology and ensure that government policy disproportionately reflects their interests

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52303818]Half of households in the UK receive more in benefits than they paid in taxes. [url]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2016#half-of-households-in-the-uk-receive-more-in-benefits-than-they-paid-in-taxes[/url] Maybe someone needs to have some money trees in their manifesto. Or we could always follow the Greeks economic policies.[/QUOTE] Just a simple question for you. There are more pounds in the world today then there were ten years ago. How do you think this happened?

[QUOTE=Grizz;52303761][media]https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/870619241103413250[/media] It's the hope that kills you.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://order-order.com/2017/06/02/tory-and-labour-candidates-all-believe-may-heading-for-comfortable-win/"]And yet.[/URL] [QUOTE]They are not seeing on the doorstep the alleged Labour surge seen in the polls...Guido has spoken to Tory candidates in seats with 8,000 Labour majorities who still believe they will win.[/QUOTE] Before anyone starts bitching about Guido as a source, there's nothing in there which is factually untrue.

To be fair no one is going to say their side is going to loose, well aside those in the Labour party who have been gunning for Corbyn since day one.

BBC called out on air :v: [media]https://twitter.com/WillBlackWriter/status/870670317227737089[/media]

[QUOTE=Grizz;52304351]BBC called out on air :v: [media]https://twitter.com/WillBlackWriter/status/870670317227737089[/media][/QUOTE] Almost certainly in response to accusations of audience bias since the debate a few days ago.

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;52304605]what a mad lad - BBC's bias is such fucking bullshit[/QUOTE] And yet I've heard people say they have an anti-Brexit bias here? Outside looking in... it seems the BBC can always be accused of bias. Depending on how you view issues, of course.

[media]https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/870673372908224512[/media] Through the looking glass now, folks. Just over 35 minutes until Question Time to see May and Corbyn wheeled out separately again.

If labour do manage to get into government then I really do hope that Diane Abbott is given a calculator

I wish Corbyn was not attached to McDonnell and Dianne Abbott because both are hard to elect and Abbott has shown herself to be pretty stupid at times.

Reckon Corbyn did pretty well, despite being dogged by the usual questions. I've got to say, the nuke talk was a little wearing.

Corbyn did stumble on the nuke topic, although the guy suggesting we launch a first strike against Iran was insane

[QUOTE=The mouse;52304433]Almost certainly in response to accusations of audience bias since the debate a few days ago.[/QUOTE] I don't think you fix that by swinging from one extreme to the other.

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;52305243]The amount of blood thirsty war mongerers in that room was crazy.[/QUOTE] It's a weird conundrum that. Tory voters who preach "economic sensibility" wanting to fucking annihilate the world economy with first strikes.

I completely understand why we need the nuclear deterrent but actually using it isn't really an important question because that would only happen if nukes are on the way: in that case we're all dead anyway

Why were they allowed to focus on nuclear weapons so much?

[QUOTE=Shadow801;52305285]Why were they allowed to focus on nuclear weapons so much?[/QUOTE] Because talking about issues that affect people on a day-to-day basis would be boring.