The Theresa May General Election thread (edited)

ToneControl

http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Houseizem21.gif

Heartfeltdawn

This is where the anti-Corbynite element of the Labour party have done the party itself a huge favour. By not plastering their promo material with Corbyn's face, they've made it about themselves and policy. We've just had Kerry McCarthy's team visiting our house and there's barely a mention of Corbyn in there. 

May on the other hand has been the campaign. The focus has been on her as an individual rather than as a party leader. It's backfired horrifically. Seeing the campaign scamper back to Brexit Brexit Brexit and trying to load up the Corbyn IRA dart gun yet again is hilarious. Seeing the way the Conservative manifesto has been cast aside for both elements is equally hilarious. It's one thing to say that you misspoke but another to miscampaign. 

Freebird

Heartfeltdawn said:

This is where the anti-Corbynite element of the Labour party have done the party itself a huge favour. By not plastering their promo material with Corbyn's face, they've made it about themselves and policy. We've just had Kerry McCarthy's team visiting our house and there's barely a mention of Corbyn in there. 

May on the other hand has been the campaign. The focus has been on her as an individual rather than as a party leader. It's backfired horrifically. Seeing the campaign scamper back to Brexit Brexit Brexit and trying to load up the Corbyn IRA dart gun yet again is hilarious. Seeing the way the Conservative manifesto has been cast aside for both elements is equally hilarious. It's one thing to say that you misspoke but another to miscampaign. 

The Corbyn IRA line isn't the open goal May thought it was, now that it transpires the FBI and at least 5 local Muslims issued warnings about the Manchester bomber.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/fbi-warned-mi5-january-manchester-attack-bomber-salman-abedi-manchester-arena-a7760756.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4548892/FBI-warned-MI5-Manchester-bomber-planning-attack.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/28/missed-opportunities-stop-salman-abedi-investigated/

ICBM

Fretwired said:

It more profitable on green belt land. Find some land outside and existing town, build a mixed development, add a word like village to make it sound exclusive and watch the houses sell out in no time.

Precisely, which is why it must be made more profitable to build on brownfield and/or prohibitively expensive on greenfield.

It's simple economics - make it more profitable for companies to do what you want, and they will. Leave 'the free market' to decide and the wrong things happen. Tax is a very powerful lever over economic activity if it's used correctly.

TheBigDipper said:

Don't vote for Theresa vs Jeremy, vote for one manifesto over another. A PM, after all, is not a president, they are supposed to be "first among equals" and the country should be run by the cabinet (not the PM and his/her unelected special advisors).

May wants to be a Presidential-style leader though - that's precisely why she's dangerous. (As well as her proven incompetence.)

I completely agree that we should be voting for a party, policies and a manifesto - or for an individual candidate. But when government policy is going to be shaped so heavily by the leader - who has the power to hire and fire the rest of the government - then it has to be a consideration as well.

Myranda

ICBM said:

Fretwired said:

It more profitable on green belt land. Find some land outside and existing town, build a mixed development, add a word like village to make it sound exclusive and watch the houses sell out in no time.

Precisely, which is why it must be made more profitable to build on brownfield and/or prohibitively expensive on greenfield.

It's simple economics - make it more profitable for companies to do what you want, and they will. Leave 'the free market' to decide and the wrong things happen. Tax is a very powerful lever over economic activity if it's used correctly.

TheBigDipper said:

Don't vote for Theresa vs Jeremy, vote for one manifesto over another. A PM, after all, is not a president, they are supposed to be "first among equals" and the country should be run by the cabinet (not the PM and his/her unelected special advisors).

May wants to be a Presidential-style leader though - that's precisely why she's dangerous. (As well as her proven incompetence.)

I completely agree that we should be voting for a party, policies and a manifesto - or for an individual candidate. But when government policy is going to be shaped so heavily by the leader - who has the power to hire and fire the rest of the government - then it has to be a consideration as well.

What if we don't think either party likely to have a sniff of power has a chance of living up to their manifesto (both for different reasons, but genuinely think they're both leading us up the garden path)

Jalapeno

Freebird said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

This is where the anti-Corbynite element of the Labour party have done the party itself a huge favour. By not plastering their promo material with Corbyn's face, they've made it about themselves and policy. We've just had Kerry McCarthy's team visiting our house and there's barely a mention of Corbyn in there. 

May on the other hand has been the campaign. The focus has been on her as an individual rather than as a party leader. It's backfired horrifically. Seeing the campaign scamper back to Brexit Brexit Brexit and trying to load up the Corbyn IRA dart gun yet again is hilarious. Seeing the way the Conservative manifesto has been cast aside for both elements is equally hilarious. It's one thing to say that you misspoke but another to miscampaign. 

The Corbyn IRA line isn't the open goal May thought it was, now that it transpires the FBI and at least 5 local Muslims issued warnings about the Manchester bomber.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/fbi-warned-mi5-january-manchester-attack-bomber-salman-abedi-manchester-arena-a7760756.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4548892/FBI-warned-MI5-Manchester-bomber-planning-attack.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/28/missed-opportunities-stop-salman-abedi-investigated/

Which would have to have been weighed against the intelligence and prioritised for how many other suspects ?

20:20 hindsight is a wonderful thing ! 

ICBM

Myranda said:

What if we don't think either party likely to have a sniff of power has a chance of living up to their manifesto (both for different reasons, but genuinely think they're both leading us up the garden path)

Vote for the one who you think are likely to do the least damage. Or the one which has the best chance of responding to changing conditions in a sensible way later, since essentially all governments change what they've said they will do once they're in power. And which doesn't just mean U-turns when they do something really stupid or unpopular.

Freebird

Jalapeno said:

Which would have to have been weighed against the intelligence and prioritised for how many other suspects ?

20:20 hindsight is a wonderful thing ! 

Amber Rudd said yesterday there are 20,000 potential threats on the radar, so the question is how regularly do the FBI issue warnings regarding actual terror plots in progress? I think the present government know the answer, but they won't be saying how many.

Jalapeno

I suspect it's a lot higher than you appear to be assuming ....

Freebird

Jalapeno said:

I suspect it's a lot higher than you appear to be assuming ....

How many? Double? Triple? Quadruple? Maybe even higher? 

Fretwired

Freebird said:

Jalapeno said:

Which would have to have been weighed against the intelligence and prioritised for how many other suspects ?

20:20 hindsight is a wonderful thing ! 

Amber Rudd said yesterday there are 20,000 potential threats on the radar, so the question is how regularly do the FBI issue warnings regarding actual terror plots in progress? I think the present government know the answer, but they won't be saying how many.

He left the country and had gone to Libya, so he probably dropped off the radar.

Freebird

Fretwired said:

He left the country and had gone to Libya, so he probably dropped off the radar.

Surely he would have been on the radar again the moment he set foot back into the country? All persons of interest are flagged at passport control.

Heartfeltdawn

Freebird said:

Jalapeno said:

I suspect it's a lot higher than you appear to be assuming ....

How many? Double? Triple? Quadruple? Maybe even higher? 

Sounds like the terrorist equivalent of Play Your Cards Right. 

Fretwired

Freebird said:

Fretwired said:

He left the country and had gone to Libya, so he probably dropped off the radar.

Surely he would have been on the radar again the moment he set foot back into the country? All persons of interest are flagged at passport control.

Came in via Germany with a British passport .. I bet he just walked straight through. Or he could have had a false passport so he wasn't flagged up. We don't have the facts and given the slap the CIA got this week from May the FBI thought they'd give some back.

Freebird

Fretwired said:

Came in via Germany with a British passport .. I bet he just walked straight through. Or he could have had a false passport so he wasn't flagged up. We don't have the facts and given the slap the CIA got this week from May the FBI thought they'd give some back.

I thought an EU PNR system was already in place for use by the security services?

Freebird

Heartfeltdawn said:

Freebird said:

Jalapeno said:

I suspect it's a lot higher than you appear to be assuming ....

How many? Double? Triple? Quadruple? Maybe even higher?

Sounds like the terrorist equivalent of Play Your Cards Right. 

It was a trick answer as I hadn't actually assumed anything, I was just quoting from those news reports 

Fretwired

Freebird said:

Fretwired said:

Came in via Germany with a British passport .. I bet he just walked straight through. Or he could have had a false passport so he wasn't flagged up. We don't have the facts and given the slap the CIA got this week from May the FBI thought they'd give some back.

I thought an EU PNR system was already in place for use by the security services?

The German security services are a joke - I fully understand why (Gestapo). They rely on GCHQ for intelligence. Merkel upset her security chiefs by popping over to GCHQ for a terror briefing on IS as her own are next to useless.

holnrew

"Debate" time!

Heartfeltdawn

10 mins or so in and Paxman really is dialling in his performance. That classic interview with Michael Howard, he went after an obtuse politician. Against Corbyn tonight, Paxo's the one looking obtuse. 

holnrew

Theresa May's voice is very grating.