British Politics

[Padme]

Corbyn wants to make football great again 

He has a plan to get flexible train tickets. And money for grassroots football. He is attending a match today

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40069110

[wasted]

They can start by putting live football games on the BBC. Non league up to Prem. 

Looks like Corbyn is more Brexit than May. Maybe they can shutdown all the Tapas bars. Black pudding renaissance.

[Padme]

Videos of Corbyn today... "playing" football. He is on a rolling 

https://twitter.com/singharj/media

[DieselDaisy]

If a Labour wanker arrives at my door I'll chase them away with my cricket bat.

[wasted]

Labour cold calling are like Jehovah's witnesses without a good story or a ladder. 

[DieselDaisy]

Or a Watchtower.

 

[wasted]

What can you do with elbow patches and a beard at 11am on a Sunday morning?

Hope that it's not a joke. 

[bucketfoot]

2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

If a Labour wanker arrives at my door I'll chase them away with my cricket bat.

[DieselDaisy]

[Padme]

Corbyn just announced he will join the debate!!! Get in the ring! 

[DieselDaisy]

And the Tories have bollocked up their campaign with 'dementia tax' seemingly.

[Padme]

So Theresa and Nicola were in Axl's ass. I feel bad for Rudd. Why she had put up with this crap when she is mourning her father?

[DieselDaisy]

It is weird how the Prime Minister - and in fairness I would have said this about comrade Jeremy also if he didn't change his mind - is being attacked for not appearing on these television shows when these televised debates are rather novel in British political culture and in fact somewhat antithetical to British political culture, being presidential in nature and heavy-handed by way of the executive (case in point, they sit awkwardly with a person who for instance hates party leader X but votes party X's constituency MP). We are not the Americans who have done this since JFK v Nixon.

But now it is another novelty in this country, like lanyards, oversized coffees, diversity courses and acronyms pertaining to variations upon homosexuality.

[Padme]

5 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is weird how the Prime Minister - and in fairness I would have said this about comrade Jeremy also if he didn't change his mind - is being attacked for not appearing on these television shows when these televised debates are rather novel in British political culture and in fact somewhat antithetical to British political culture, being presidential in nature and heavy-handed by way of the executive (case in point, they sit awkwardly with a person who for instance hates party leader X but votes party X's constituency MP). We are not the Americans who have done this since JFK v Nixon.

But now it is another novelty in this country, like lanyards, oversized coffees, diversity courses and acronyms pertaining to variations upon homosexuality.

A little correction, the Americans have been doing it for ages. The Nixon and Kennedy debate was the first debate on T.V. But not the first debate in the history of the U.S. In the history books the debate that matters the most was the Lincoln and Douglas. I guess in the near future the debates are gonna take place in youtube or something like it.

Corbyn gave the BBC better ratings numbers. And for some people or a lot of people, if somebody doesn't show up it looks like that person is afraid. Meaning a sign of weakness. And it help to get to know other people. For example the Green Party got more advertising and promotion. They are very small. They needed the debate a lot more than the Tories and Labour

[AtariLegend]

Probably a smart move not to show up on the balance for May. Imagine her standing there looking like a deer in headlights getting booed even worse than she did on the C4 debate. She's simply terrible at answering real questions and engaging with the public, offers no policies that'll benefit actual people. Amber Rudd as a nasty authoritarian school teacher on the attack probably appealed to the right side of the base they were hoping to anyway. 

Spare a thought for Dominic Raab who on the BBC morning debate a few days ago looked absolutely repulsed that he had to engage with common people in a debate where he basically tried to claim poor people don't exist, it's just people with "cash flow problems". 

The public absolutely hate these policies and these people, but their strategy of going on about Brexit and having the Daily Mail/Murdoch attack Corbyn is only just keeping them ahead so far.

As for Corbyn, I thought he dealt better with the Channel 4/Sky News debate despite people in the audience asking about things they'd clearly read in tabloids. He still got cheered. On the BBC debate last night, he didn't get as much time due to the format. At least he didn't say anything that'll tank his poll numbers.

I like a bit of Paxman now and again even if I don't agree with his views, but he was just there to get soundbites. Didn't ask any questions related to policies.

I think Tim Farron did well last night, he was the better speaker and managed to be the most witty at both the start and the end. However he did have to dodge all those questions/accusations about the 2010 decision to side with the Tories that almost killed the party in 2015. I wouldn't be able to get past that if my area had a Lib Dem candidate standing.

As for the Greens. They do have alot of the same policies as Corbyn outside of immigration for example. I'd normally be a supporter, but it was a little cringe worthy when you consider they're just there to make up the numbers. Even if the polling is correct, they're (she at least) is extremely unlikely to play a part in a coalition short of a mathematical improbability. 

I think it's safe to say SNP are still holding out hope that they are part of a coalition though. 

Still not sure why Harry Hill representing the BNP was on stage though.

Edited June 1, 2017 by AtariLegend

[DieselDaisy]

1 hour ago, Padme said:

A little correction, the Americans have been doing it for ages. The Nixon and Kennedy debate was the first debate on T.V. But not the first debate in the history of the U.S. In the history books the debate that matters the most was the Lincoln and Douglas. I guess in the near future the debates are gonna take place in youtube or something like it.

Corbyn gave the BBC better ratings numbers. And for some people or a lot of people, if somebody doesn't show up it looks like that person is afraid. Meaning a sign of weakness. And it help to get to know other people. For example the Green Party got more advertising and promotion. They are very small. They needed the debate a lot more than the Tories and Labour

Well that is actually what I meant, televised debates! Why the sudden need to have this nauseating Americanised spectacle in our politics? It does not sit well with British political culture or it fits awkwardly at best.

[Padme]

21 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well that is actually what I meant, televised debates! Why the sudden need to have this nauseating Americanised spectacle in our politics? It does not sit well with British political culture or it fits awkwardly at best.

But  the usual debates in the Parliament also get live t.v. coverage. You pay the salaries of elected officials. You deserve answers and explanations. Millions of people watch T.V. I guess that's the reason

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Padme said:

But  the usual debates in the Parliament also get live t.v. coverage. You pay the salaries of elected officials. You deserve answers and explanations. Millions of people watch T.V. I guess that's the reason

It is presidential in nature. In Britain we unload the symbolic head of state upon the Queen, and the executive upon the cabinet. We are left with a prime minister, merely the prime minister of many ministers, primus inter pares (whose real title is actually First Lord of the Treasury anyhow). Technically a politician can form a government and not be prime minister, or not even be de jure party leader; technically a Member of the House of Lords can form a government.

In Britain there is also the aspect of, voting for your Member of Parliament and not that Member's party leader; we've seen it here with Corbyn as, in Tory areas Labour have been omitting Corbyn from their campaign literature and emphasising the prospective Labour candidate.

Who decides who is present at these debates, as in theory (a glorious theory) anyone can form a political party and run for office and stand just as good chance as Labour or the Tories (in theory)? Constituencies contested? The SNP and Plaid Cymru are only targeting a small segment of the country so do not apply for the majority (England), and it also raises the question, where are the Northern Irish parties, e.g. Sinn Fein, DUP?  Seats (acquired in the last general election)? UKIP and the Greens only have one - one measly seat! There is an independent also - where was the independent? That also raises the question, if they lost that seat can we expect them to be absent from future debates as the BNP and Monster Raving Loony Party were absent in this one?

And from my reading of reports of the thing (I wouldn't waste my time watching) the whole thing was an absolute circus, consisting of shouting, factually incorrect statements ('Britain being the world's second biggest arms trader' - Greens), jargon and the same vacuous declamations, that left the viewers most dismayed - has democracy really being served by such a spectacle? Regarding the previous one, apparently Paxman made a dog's dinner of proceedings.

[AtariLegend]

SNP are relevant simply due to the number of seats in Scotland and the fact that if a party other than the Conservatives are getting into power, they require the SNP.

As for Plaid Cymru I won't make the same argument. If the DUP (who'd gladly give the Tories extra seats if it was a hung election) and the SDLP aren't there, then why are Plaid? 

UKIP don't even have an MP and aren't projected to win any seats at all. There's absolutely no argument why they're all over the TV.

Edited June 1, 2017 by AtariLegend

[AtariLegend]

12 hours ago, Padme said:

So Theresa and Nicola were in Axl's ass. I feel bad for Rudd. 

At least Nicola has the argument that she's not going to be in Westminister, she's not an MP. Angus Robertson is the one who leads the SNP MPs in Westminister.

Rudd was only there, so that May wasn't the one getting booed by the audience.

[Padme]

26 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is presidential in nature. In Britain we unload the symbolic head of state upon the Queen, and the executive upon the cabinet. We are left with a prime minister, merely the prime minister of many ministers, primus inter pares (whose real title is actually First Lord of the Treasury anyhow). Technically a politician can form a government and not be prime minister, or not even be de jure party leader; technically a Member of the House of Lords can form a government.

In Britain there is also the aspect of, voting for your Member of Parliament and not that Member's party leader; we've seen it here with Corbyn as, in Tory areas Labour have been omitting Corbyn from their campaign literature and emphasising the prospective Labour candidate.

Who decides who is present at these debates, as in theory (a glorious theory) anyone can form a political party and run for office and stand just as good chance as Labour or the Tories (in theory)? Constituencies contested? The SNP and Plaid Cymru are only targeting a small segment of the country so do not apply for the majority (England), and it also raises the question, where are the Northern Irish parties, e.g. Sinn Fein, DUP?  Seats (acquired in the last general election)? UKIP and the Greens only have one - one measly seat! There is an independent also - where was the independent? That also raises the question, if they lost that seat can we expect them to be absent from future debates as the BNP and Monster Raving Loony Party were absent in this one?

And from my reading of reports of the thing (I wouldn't waste my time watching) the whole thing was an absolute circus, consisting of shouting, factually incorrect statements ('Britain being the world's second biggest arms trader' - Greens), jargon and the same vacuous declamations, that left the viewers most dismayed - has democracy really being served by such a spectacle? Regarding the previous one, apparently Paxman made a dog's dinner of proceedings.

Well there can be debates like in France. Before the first round there were 11 candidates debating. Those debates were very long. But it help Melenchon Party. Before those debates the guy had about 3% of the vote or less. But he performed rather well. He gained momentum. And the day of the first round he ended up with about 20% of the votes.

I know that in the UK things are very different. My point is that people watch. And it can make a difference for a less known party if that party brings a candidate that knows how to debate and how to make a point. I disagree with most of what Melenchon plan was. He sounded like some kind of Che Guevara. But he was energetic and self asure.

So who knows. In this election the Green Party might grab a couple of seats. Despite all the bullshit and screaming

In the second round Marine Le Pen made a full of herself. And people were watching

[DieselDaisy]

The crowd were a rabble of lefties apparently, and with five/seven of the candidates 'loony left' I suspect refusing to appear is one of the best decisions the Prime Minister has ever done.

PS

What the heck,

Edited June 1, 2017 by DieselDaisy

[Padme]

12 minutes ago, AtariLegend said:

At least Nicola has the argument that she's not going to be in Westminister, she's not an MP. Angus Robertson is the one who leads the SNP MPs in Westminister.

Rudd was only there, so that May wasn't the one getting booed by the audience.

Yeah, but it was hypocritical from Robertson to be bitching because May was not there

[wasted]

I'm lost. Someone explain British politics to me.

Tories win. What happens?

Labour win. What happens?

[AtariLegend]

15 minutes ago, Padme said:

So who knows. In this election the Green Party might grab a couple of seats.

The Green Party picked up quite a few votes last debate. They always do well and the Tory candidates always do badly. Cameron's ratting dropped in 2010 pre election (remember they needed the coalition).

The issue for the Greens isn't extra votes, it's the system. There's alot of safe seats in this country due to history. I don't mean Copeland safe, I mean Oxbridge safe. Seats where they could put in a tree branch and dress it in party colors and still win by a landslide. Seats where it's been held by one party for well over a century.

There unfortunately isn't really as many seats as it appears that actually can change (they're of course the ones that can decide it). If we had PR, Greens would have plenty seats. ...Of course people don't like the idea of PR since you're not actually voting for a person, but at least it'd technically be more democratic.

Things would be less polarizing.