The Theresa May General Election thread (edited)

ChuckManual

Octafish said:

It's rather naive to think that politicians, spin doctors, advisors etc won't look at how to manage the Manchester bombing to their adavantge over the coming weeks. Let's not forget the 'good day to bury bad news' incident, that's how Westminster works.

That worked reasonably well when the news media was your morning paper and/or The Nine O'Clock News - but in the age of the internet, I think it's pretty much dead and buried as a strategy.

I'd like to think so, anyway... 

Octafish

ChuckManual said:

Octafish said:

It's rather naive to think that politicians, spin doctors, advisors etc won't look at how to manage the Manchester bombing to their adavantge over the coming weeks. Let's not forget the 'good day to bury bad news' incident, that's how Westminster works.

That worked reasonably well when the news media was your morning paper and/or The Nine O'Clock News - but in the age of the internet, I think it's pretty much dead and buried as a strategy.

I'd like to think so, anyway... 

I'm not so sure. I find it inconceivable that no one at all involved in May's campaign saw the bombing as taking the heat of her after a her shittest day in the campaign and opportunity to re-focus her campaign/message, re-assert her strong and stableness and paper over the dementia tax furore.

Sporky

Octafish said:

I'm not so sure. I find it inconceivable that no one at all involved in May's campaign saw the bombing as taking the heat of her after a her shittest day in the campaign and opportunity to re-focus her campaign/message, re-assert her strong and stableness and paper over the dementia tax furore.

I don't disagree, but I do think there's also another side; none of the parties/leaders could not respond to it. The tricky bit is responding to it in a manner which benefits your cause (including trying not to look like that's what you're doing).

Heartfeltdawn

Octafish said:

It's rather naive to think that politicians, spin doctors, advisors etc won't look at how to manage the Manchester bombing to their adavantge over the coming weeks. Let's not forget the 'good day to bury bad news' incident, that's how Westminster works.

Used to work. The speed with which news travels with modern media is incredible.

Octafish

Sporky said:

Octafish said:

I'm not so sure. I find it inconceivable that no one at all involved in May's campaign saw the bombing as taking the heat of her after a her shittest day in the campaign and opportunity to re-focus her campaign/message, re-assert her strong and stableness and paper over the dementia tax furore.

I don't disagree, but I do think there's also another side; none of the parties/leaders could not respond to it. The tricky bit is responding to it in a manner which benefits your cause (including trying not to look like that's what you're doing).

Indeed, that's probably what's being frantically calculated now. Mind you many seemed to be suckered in by Blair's blatently fake, contemptous and cynical people's Princess speech.

Fretwired

One area of difference will be over the Prevent strategy (Prevent Violent Extremism). The Tories are in favour of it as it has had some success, but Jeremy Corbyn wants it scrapped or changed as it only targets the Muslim community who feel stigmatised by it.

He said: “I talk to people in the Muslim community, I talk to people in mosques, I talk to people in churches, I talk to people that go to synagogues, all kinds of different faiths and different groups.

“I think what Prevent has often done is seen to target the Muslim community, not anybody else, looks to say there is a kind of suspicion over the whole community and it’s actually often counter-productive.”

He continued: “Deal with the issue of far right extremism within our society, deal with the issue of racism in our society, deal with the issues of discrimination within our society, deal with the issues of the perceptions of stop and search within our society, above all be inclusive of people and what Prevent does, it says ‘hang on, let’s look at only the Muslim community’.”

When pushed on exactly what he believed needed to change, he said: “I’m saying broaden it into an agenda of inclusion.”

“Focus it on all communities,” he said.

There was also controversy when hidden CCTV cameras were put outside mosques.


Background: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28939555

Garthy

Octafish said:

ChuckManual said:

Octafish said:

It's rather naive to think that politicians, spin doctors, advisors etc won't look at how to manage the Manchester bombing to their adavantge over the coming weeks. Let's not forget the 'good day to bury bad news' incident, that's how Westminster works.

That worked reasonably well when the news media was your morning paper and/or The Nine O'Clock News - but in the age of the internet, I think it's pretty much dead and buried as a strategy.

I'd like to think so, anyway... 

I'm not so sure. I find it inconceivable that no one at all involved in May's campaign saw the bombing as taking the heat of her after a her shittest day in the campaign and opportunity to re-focus her campaign/message, re-assert her strong and stableness and paper over the dementia tax furore.

Jo Moore sent an internal memo that ended her career, so whatever people have in their own heads they would be mad to expand on it.

Fretwired

The left are acting predictably without any thought to what damage they may do to Corbyn.  Sam Kriss, a supporter of Mr Corbyn and journalist for the Vice news website, suggested on Twitter that he believed the decision to deploy troops in the wake of the terror attack was politically motivated.

He said: “I'm sure absolutely no political calculation went into the decision to put Strong Decisive Army Men on the streets weeks before the election.”




And the press are reminding people that Andrew Murray, a former member of the British communist party who was brought in to run Labour’s campaign earlier this month, once called Isil's victories a "series of sudden and stunning triumphs".

Fretwired

Police Federation puts the boot into May and the Tories ... "We wouldn't need troops on the street if the government stopped police cuts"

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/05/police-federation-we-wouldnt-need-soliders-on-the-streets-if-government-stopped-police-cuts/

thomasw88

Strong and stable?:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/conservatives-primary-school-breakfasts-back-track-election-2017-manifesto-pledge-a7753311.html


Imagine the outcry if Labour did something like this..

Fretwired

thomasw88 said:

Strong and stable?:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/conservatives-primary-school-breakfasts-back-track-election-2017-manifesto-pledge-a7753311.html


Imagine the outcry if Labour did something like this..

Who is doing the Brexit negotiations? I hope they know the difference between million and billion and that the EU works in Euros .... this is like a bad episode of Yes Prime Minister!

Snap

I've been thinking about how Corbyn's mind works, and this was prompted by the bomb in Manchester.

In the 70s, 80s and even 90s, when terrorist attacks by the IRA were relatively common, deaths by bombing were happening quite often and the British public were rightly sickened.

In the environment of that sentiment, and public feeling, Corbyn still made a judgement call to sympathise with the IRA and to buddy up with them. He was all over them, acting like their best mate. What I have a real issue with (with him) is the lack of judgement this shows, and what it says about his character.

There is an argument to be made that engaging with terrorists is necessary to get them to move past it. I disagree, but understand the arguments against my view.

But, and its a crucial but, his sense of timing, perspective and general sensibiliy appears to be shot. And I think this stems from an innate arrogance and unwillingness to see other people's views if they don't align with his.

I also think he gravitates to who he perceives to be the underdog, or the David vs Goliath. He is doing this with Hamas, Hezbollah. What he is seemingly blind to, is how these underdogs are making their voices heard.

I think he has serious judgment flaws and this is one of the reasons I think he is completely unworthy of the position of Prime Minister.

His engagement with terrorists over the years, and his showing of support and solidarity with agencies linked to terrorism, make him fit for nothing in my opinion.

I;d say anyone who thinks he's OK should have a long hard think about that, Momentum too.

thomasw88

Snap said:

I've been thinking about how Corbyn's mind works, and this was prompted by the bomb in Manchester.

In the 70s, 80s and even 90s, when terrorist attacks by the IRA were relatively common, deaths by bombing were happening quite often and the British public were rightly sickened.

In the environment of that sentiment, and public feeling, Corbyn still made a judgement call to sympathise with the IRA and to buddy up with them. He was all over them, acting like their best mate. What I have a real issue with (with him) is the lack of judgement this shows, and what it says about his character.

There is an argument to be made that engaging with terrorists is necessary to get them to move past it. I disagree, but understand the arguments against my view.

But, and its a crucial but, his sense of timing, perspective and general sensibiliy appears to be shot. And I think this stems from an innate arrogance and unwillingness to see other people's views if they don't align with his.

I also think he gravitates to who he perceives to be the underdog, or the David vs Goliath. He is doing this with Hamas, Hezbollah. What he is seemingly blind to, is how these underdogs are making their voices heard.

I think he has serious judgment flaws and this is one of the reasons I think he is completely unworthy of the position of Prime Minister.

His engagement with terrorists over the years, and his showing of support and solidarity with agencies linked to terrorism, make him fit for nothing in my opinion.

I;d say anyone who thinks he's OK should have a long hard think about that, Momentum too.

I really don't share your point of view at all.  When you say buddy up, you mean attempt to facilitate discussion with the aim of creating peace.

You do actually realise that the British government unofficially were speaking to the IRA all the time they were saying they weren't.

The Irish troubles came to an end round the negotiating table not by one side killing more than the others.

mellowsun

Fretwired said:

The left are acting predictably without any thought to what damage they may do to Corbyn.  Sam Kriss, a supporter of Mr Corbyn and journalist for the Vice news website, suggested on Twitter that he believed the decision to deploy troops in the wake of the terror attack was politically motivated.

He said: “I'm sure absolutely no political calculation went into the decision to put Strong Decisive Army Men on the streets weeks before the election.”




And the press are reminding people that Andrew Murray, a former member of the British communist party who was brought in to run Labour’s campaign earlier this month, once called Isil's victories a "series of sudden and stunning triumphs".

Ludicrous to suggest the deployment of troops is politically motivated. At the same time, the effect of this atrocity, and the presence of troops, marks the end of any hope of a Labour win.

A Tory landslide is now guaranteed because the majority will feel the urgent need for stability and strength, and sticking with the current government of the day is a natural expression of that need.

Snap

thomasw88 said:

I really don't share your point of view at all.  When you say buddy up, you mean attempt to facilitate discussion with the aim of creating peace.

You do actually realise that the British government unofficially were speaking to the IRA all the time they were saying they weren't.

The Irish troubles came to an end round the negotiating table not by one side killing more than the others.

At the time of regular bombings, killing British citizens, indiscriminately, he was pictured at IRA member's funerals, making his respects. If you think that is fine, then that really is up to you. I don't, and I think there are millions of people who agree with me.

I mean buddy up in it's truest sense as well, not just facilitate discussions. I remember it at the time, he was all over them - in my opinion, his conduct, timing, judgment etc showed a total blindspot for public opinion and sentiment, and was hugely disrespectful of British victims. this is an MP, not a general member of the public.

Thankyou for pointing out how the Troubles were settled. As a 47 year old, whose ancestors were in the Easter Risings in 1916, members of the original IRA, who's old enough to remember seeing and hearing about terrorist activity almost daily through my youth, who was in Belfast on the day the agreement was signed, I know exactly how it worked. I had personal interests involved (family).

Corbyn was an unneccessary meddler, who did the opposite of help the peace progress IMO. A busy body self appointed controversy seeking do-gooder, who's actions were poorly judged.

It seems he has made a lifetime habit of misjudging many things. Trident and the military are another.

I admire people who take a stand, and buck convention. I like that. But....it needs tempering with common sense and realism. His stance on nuclear weapons is classic for this. He assumes (because is fundamentally arrogant) that his disarmament stance will make people listen, lead a swell of opinion. It won't, it will merely expose our bellies, and put thousands out of work.

His politics, his views, his judgement and his politcal behaviour are (IMO) immature and naiive. As I've said before, he's an idealist and an activist, nothing like a leader.

ICBM

Snap said:

His stance on nuclear weapons is classic for this. He assumes (because is fundamentally arrogant) that his disarmament stance will make people listen, lead a swell of opinion. It won't, it will merely expose our bellies, and put thousands out of work.

Just to pick up on this - no it won't. Even if it became Labour policy to cancel Trident (which it isn't) he wants to spend the money on improving the conventional forces. That's actually *better* for jobs - both in the services themselves and in the defence contractors - than Trident.

It also again raises the point that for some reason, people can't seem to see beyond Trident if we want to retain a nuclear capability. There are other types of nuclear weapons systems, which while not as good for fighting an all-out WW3, are a more credible deterrent because they could possibly be used *without* starting WW3.

Trident is actually not a good deterrent because it's too powerful for the threat of its use to be taken seriously - like Polaris before it. Did Polaris deter General Galtieri from invading the Falklands? Or for that matter, has Trident deterred Putin from conducting a proxy war in Ukraine?

Not only that, Trident is not an independent deterrent - the missiles are American. Regardless of what they say about us having freedom of use, that means that we are still dependent on them for the actual delivery system - with both money going outside the UK, and a question mark as to how high we are required to jump when the US asks, in order to maintain them.

If we must retain nuclear weapons - which I actually agree we should, while they exist elsewhere in the world - it needs to be a truly independent, British-built, smaller-scale, submarine cruise missile or air-launched system.

Meanwhile May has said that she "wouldn't hesitate" to use nuclear weapons, even in a first strike. If so she's either bluffing or insane - using Trident in a first strike would start WW3, and undoubtedly destroy our country. Even using it in retaliation is questionable.

capo4th

Snap said:

I've been thinking about how Corbyn's mind works, and this was prompted by the bomb in Manchester.

In the 70s, 80s and even 90s, when terrorist attacks by the IRA were relatively common, deaths by bombing were happening quite often and the British public were rightly sickened.

In the environment of that sentiment, and public feeling, Corbyn still made a judgement call to sympathise with the IRA and to buddy up with them. He was all over them, acting like their best mate. What I have a real issue with (with him) is the lack of judgement this shows, and what it says about his character.

There is an argument to be made that engaging with terrorists is necessary to get them to move past it. I disagree, but understand the arguments against my view.

But, and its a crucial but, his sense of timing, perspective and general sensibiliy appears to be shot. And I think this stems from an innate arrogance and unwillingness to see other people's views if they don't align with his.

I also think he gravitates to who he perceives to be the underdog, or the David vs Goliath. He is doing this with Hamas, Hezbollah. What he is seemingly blind to, is how these underdogs are making their voices heard.

I think he has serious judgment flaws and this is one of the reasons I think he is completely unworthy of the position of Prime Minister.

His engagement with terrorists over the years, and his showing of support and solidarity with agencies linked to terrorism, make him fit for nothing in my opinion.

I;d say anyone who thinks he's OK should have a long hard think about that, Momentum too.

Corbyn is a well known supporter of bombers and terrorists the info is out there. 

He he is a dangerous weapon against the UK and cant be trusted to run the Labour Party let alone the UK

capo4th

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/manchester-arena-theresa-may-wonderful-timing-election-2017-labour-stroud-party-chairman-debbie-a7751691.html


Look at this sad Labour woman using the Manchester attacks for her own personal gain.
Hopefully she will be fired in the morning. Brain dead idiot ! 

We need to crack down on these religious nuts ! 

capo4th

johnnyurq said:

capo4th said:

There you have it folks let's got Johnny and the lunatic Scottish politicians to negotiate Brexit.

Sounds like a plan! 

If that is what you took from my opinion then I am afraid to be the one to tell you that your reading and comprehension is somewhat lacking. May want to address that and if yout did have a private education you might want to get at least a partial refund.

But in the spirit of helping the word observe whose definition is easily looked up is fairly clear and then we add the word role to emphasise that it would be purely to observe and not meddle, you know to keep them honest.

There now that wasn't difficult now was it!?

We now have to add poor reading skills and woeful comprehension to your not so observational role as a Troll. Now off you fuck there's a good chap.


Also I meant to say (well it was late) that I would also advocate a similar setup  to observe the EU negotiators in case they behave badly, obstructively and in a petty fashion too.

I have no more faith in them than our shower to conduct themselves as they should in such an important set of negotiations.

Surely we could find and nominate observers from the various camps who have the integrity and gravitas to be useful checks and balances against excess from both sides of the table.

The Ken Clarke's of the political spectrum is my thinking.

The problem for me is Davis and Co are so much the slavering anti EU types they are in no way going to be objective as it is clear they want as sharp and hard a Brexit as is possible from their rhetoric. I genuinely think they   should be held to account if they behave in a Trumpy way  as in their reaction to the leak from the EU camp.

Similarly the Tusk types of the EU side of it need similar oversight from more moderate individuals.

But I do agree that it was not at all  defensible for them to leak stuff in the childish childish fashion they did.

The thing  for me was that May's andDavis at al reactions were like something from a Brass Eye parody though and frankly cringeworthy.

Johhnny what are you blabbling on about ? 

Please mind your language some younger people maybe reading. 

Also please stop losing your shit on the internet you big soggy haggis.

cruxiform

Of course, they've moved on since then...