2019 UK election 2

408 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aristotleded24

epaulo13 wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:
General election 2019

Your tactical vote can stop the Tories

WHAT IS TACTICAL VOTING?

Tactical voting lets you use your vote strategically to get the overall election result you want to see.

The UK uses an election system called first-past-the-post, where the candidate who gets the most votes in each constituency wins. This makes it possible for MPs to get elected without winning the support of a majority of the voters, if the opposition is divided.

By voting tactically, you can overcome this problem, uniting behind the candidate who has the best chance of defeating the Conservatives where you live. They may not be your first choice, but your vote for them can help stop the Tories. This website is a tool to help you decide on your tactical vote.

WHY TRUST THIS SITE?

We were the most accurate tactical voting site in the 2017 general election, thanks to our simple and transparent methodology.

So people are thinking about tactically voting for the Liberal Democrats after they rolled over and gave the Tories a de facto majority from 2010 to 2015?

..no they are thinking about how to prevent a tory majority. did you read the article at 127? what are your thoughts on that?

edit.

Yes, I read the article. They endorse Liberal Democrats in some seats to beat the Tories, even though the Liberal Democrats were part of the Cameron government that unleashed that austerity and will no doubt enable the Conservatives after the election by refusing to align with Labour to topple the government. It's the same garbage the Liberals in Canada promoted, even though under Paul Martin's watch as Prime Minister health care funding was cut and the protections in the Canada Health Act against health care privatization were gutted.

The only tactical vote in this election is a vote for Labour (or possibly the SNP). It's the Labour agenda that, as the article points out, can block the threat of the Conservative public policy porgramme. The Liberal Democrats do not deserve such consideration.

nicky

Ken, I don’t believe you answered my question. If anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is a complete hoax, as you endlessly maintain, why did Corbyn apologize for it?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/03/corbyn-apologises-for-antisemitism-in-labour-party

NDPP

Labour's Leave Deal

https://briefingsforbrexit.com/labours-leave-deal/

"...Labour has recently started a charm offensive aimed at Labour Leavers. Its problem is simple. Polls have shown that Labour stands to lose more seats from the defection of Leave-supporting Labour voters than the Conservatives will lose in Remain-supporting constituencies. Labour must, and in short order, convince such Labour Leavers that it will play fair by them.

It's plan is essentially that it fooled these supporters in 2017, so there is no reason it cannot do so again in 2019. In 2017 Labour convinced many of its Leave-supporting voters that it was serious about leaving the EU by pledging to leave the Customs Union, the Single Market and definitely ending free movement. In 2019, in contrast, Labour's offering to Leavers amounts at best to Brexit-in-Name-Only.

It is incredible to remember that Labour has talked so much of Parliamentary Sovereignty these last three years, but now seeks to make our Parliament a mere registry for decisions made by the EU. All in all, this is a Brexit strategy for those who have convinced themselves that leaving the EU is so ruinous that it would be better to stay in without any voting rights. Many Labour Leavers trusted the party's 2017 promises of leaving the Customs Union and Single Market. In 2019 there is nothing in Labour's manifesto even vaguely suggesting that a Labour Brexit will be anything other than camouflaged Remain.

The EU has a long history of overturning adverse referendum results by offering cosmetic and fairly meaningless changes. Labour's offer to its Leave voters is precisely this."

 

WATCH: 50 Times Labour Promised Brexit at the 2017 Election

https://twitter.com/Chge_Britain/status/1158342679756976130

Every Labour MP was elected on Labour's promise to deliver Brexit. Promise Broken.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:
General election 2019

Your tactical vote can stop the Tories

WHAT IS TACTICAL VOTING?

Tactical voting lets you use your vote strategically to get the overall election result you want to see.

The UK uses an election system called first-past-the-post, where the candidate who gets the most votes in each constituency wins. This makes it possible for MPs to get elected without winning the support of a majority of the voters, if the opposition is divided.

By voting tactically, you can overcome this problem, uniting behind the candidate who has the best chance of defeating the Conservatives where you live. They may not be your first choice, but your vote for them can help stop the Tories. This website is a tool to help you decide on your tactical vote.

WHY TRUST THIS SITE?

We were the most accurate tactical voting site in the 2017 general election, thanks to our simple and transparent methodology.

So people are thinking about tactically voting for the Liberal Democrats after they rolled over and gave the Tories a de facto majority from 2010 to 2015?

..no they are thinking about how to prevent a tory majority. did you read the article at 127? what are your thoughts on that?

edit.

Yes, I read the article. They endorse Liberal Democrats in some seats to beat the Tories, even though the Liberal Democrats were part of the Cameron government that unleashed that austerity and will no doubt enable the Conservatives after the election by refusing to align with Labour to topple the government. It's the same garbage the Liberals in Canada promoted, even though under Paul Martin's watch as Prime Minister health care funding was cut and the protections in the Canada Health Act against health care privatization were gutted.

The only tactical vote in this election is a vote for Labour (or possibly the SNP). It's the Labour agenda that, as the article points out, can block the threat of the Conservative public policy porgramme. The Liberal Democrats do not deserve such consideration.

..you brush off the threat of a johnson majority as garbage. what if your wrong and the article is bang on? after all it is well written with a depth of knowledge. not at all the same as what you describe happened in canada. 

eta: in any case it's happening. and this is what it looks like.

The big tactical voting comparison

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

eta:..just finished listening. people inside labour thinking a labour minority. panitch is not so optimistic. interesting talk about the way forward post election. 

The British Election and Political Crisis: Corbyn versus Johnson

Having recently returned from canvassing in the British election in Yorkshire and London (and after earlier attending the Labour Party Conference and speaking at The World Transformed, Momentum and Unite the Union events), Leo Panitch addresses the strategic orientations, pitfalls and dilemmas faced by the Jeremy Corbyn leadership of the Labour Party in attempting to dislodge the Conservative Party government led by Boris Johnson. Britain goes to the polls on December 12, bringing the political crisis over Brexit to a head, and with Labour offering the most direct challenge to neoliberal policies in the UK since Margaret Thatcher came to power 40 years ago.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

TRNN has an interview with the (Jewish) editor of a new book analyzing the claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party. His summary is that there's no there there. I highly recommend this to JKR in particular.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

It’s a myth that Labour has lost the working class

quote:

On Sunday’s edition of The Marr Show, Sir John Curtice admonished Labour’s Gloria De Piero for suggesting that her party was the party of workers. “But of course you are no longer a party of the working class. You’re a party of young people,” interjected Britain’s foremost psephologist, adding that Corbyn’s party was seen as “too leftwing and too socially liberal” for its traditional “red wall” heartlands. This idea of working-class social conservatism marks a stark contrast to the Neil Kinnock years, when the Labour leader deliberately pivoted towards the professional classes as a means to “distance the party from working-class radicalism”. But while my own career as a jobbing lecturer has yet to reach the lofty academic heights of Sir John, I’ve got to say that this formulation of class is, if you want to use the Latin term, a load of fraff.

Call me a vulgar Marxist if you must, but a quick look at the economic status of the UK’s yoof tells you why it’s so absurd to treat “young” and “working class” as mutually exclusive categories: 81% of graduates will spend 30 years of their working lives with tuition debt hanging over their heads; half of 18- to 24-year-olds believe they’ll be in debt all their lives; one-fifth of all workers under 30 (going up to a quarter for young black people) are illegally paid less than the minimum wage. Young people are more likely to be on a zero-hours contract, and far less likely than previous generations to own their home. Don’t let the avocado toast fool you – young people make up the majority of the UK’s income- and asset-poor.

NDPP

Manifestoes and the Art of Misleading

https://www.cpbml.org.uk/news/manifestoes-and-art-misleading

"...Labour, meanwhile, presents a muddle where the only clear thing is that it will attempt to stay in the EU, or leave in terms that amount to staying in. Its central strategy is jaw-droppingly manipulative and anti-democratic - to present a referendum choice between staying fully in the EU or staying in the Customs Union and the Single Market but without having a say in their rules.

Jeremy Corbyn says he will stay neutral. Neutered is the right word. But to offer a referendum choice that excludes a clear leave would be outrageous. It would be no choice at all. The British people won't stand for it. The Labour Manifesto is full of great promises, most of which would definitely be incapable of implementation should we stay in the EU, and which would probably be outlawed even in a looser customs union and single market association. With the publication of Labour and Conservative manifestoes, it is at least clear what this grim election is about - deciding on the least worst option. Salvation is not going to come from above."

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

Ken, I don’t believe you answered my question. If anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is a complete hoax, as you endlessly maintain, why did Corbyn apologize for it?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/03/corbyn-apologises-for-antisemitism-in-labour-party

Probably in the belief that, if he did, it might put the matter to rest.

The whole point of the AS smear was to force Corbyn to commit Labour to the standard "Netanyahu is an infallible genius who has no alternative but to do everthing he has doen" position that the Tories and LibDems have taken.

There were a tiny number of accusations about people.  Labour investigated and discipline was imposed where it was justified, and sometimes where it was not, as in the cases of Jackie Walker and Chris Williamson.

And there was never any justification for equating criticism of the Israeli government, or even non-Zionism, with AS.   Zionism is not synonymous with Judaism and it's absurd to imply that opposing AS has to mean opposing the creation of a Palestinian state.

Ken Burch

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/‘i-served-troubles-–-and-i-know-corbyn’s-peacemaker-not-terrorist-sympathiser’?fbclid=IwAR36UtjpcMQad3UC_Ww5qGx2NkZl24tfdlaGIcYS-NoQWSMcZwAk8hZY6UQ#.XeuA1oZTGnM.facebook

josh

nicky wrote:

Ken, I don’t believe you answered my question. If anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is a complete hoax, as you endlessly maintain, why did Corbyn apologize for it?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/03/corbyn-apologises-for-antisemitism-in-labour-party

Because the media and opponents managed to successfully conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.  So he had no choice.  If he didn't, the media and the opponents would have cited that as an example of anti-Semitism.

NDPP

Labour's Pose As Defender of the National Health Service Exposed

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/11/heal-d11.html

"Labour's claims to be the only party that will defend the NHS is the main reason many support the party. But like most of its pledges, this too is without genuine substance. The most devastating rebuttal of Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn's rhetoric about there being just days to 'save the NHS'  by electing a Labour government was provided by Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth...Ashworth is heard repeatedly denouncing Corbyn and insisting that under him Labour cannot win the election...This is just one of the many right-wing MPs that Corbyn has worked cheek by jowl with as leader for years."

The Ashworth Election Tapes (and audio)

https://youtu.be/6FIrFGFAzQI

Jonathan Ashworth: "It's dire for Labour. The civil service would move quickly to safeguard the country from Corbyn..."

What a twisted trainwreck and depressing, deceiving, disappointment of a party for which people once had great hope UK Labour has turned out to be.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Lowkey‏ @Lowkey0nline

My version of Vossi Bop about the election tomorrow in full. Watch, share and Vote Corbyn

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

TROLLS, SOCK PUPPETS & USEFUL IDIOTS

An Anatomy of an Election Disinformation Campaign

quote:

The TV Journalist

The next day, Joe Pike, a young journalist for ITV Calendar in Grimsby, was following the Conservative Party leader as he posed for photos holding a large cod (not for the first time) in the fishing town which has often become an emblem of ‘taking back control’ of our waters by leaving the European Union.

Unlike the BBC interviewer Andrew Neil, Joe Pike has no reputation for skewering politicians, so Boris Johnson and his advisors probably thought they didn’t need to avoid this particular interview in the bowels of the fish warehouses. They miscalculated. Pike whipped out his phone with the photo of Jack Williment-Barr lying on the floor, and persistently questioned the Prime Minister about it.

In a psychologically revealing panic, Johnson tried to bluster that everything would improve once we “got Brexit done”. But Pike persisted. Johnson tried to steamroller him, but his darting eyes and demeanour showed that he didn’t want to answer the question and, in an effort to avoid it, the Prime Minister took the reporter’s phone and hid it in his pocket. This prompted one of the most remarkable comments of the campaign so far from Pike who remarked, calmly:

“You’ve refused to see the photo. You’ve taken my phone and put it in your pocket, Prime Minister.”

Child psychiatrists would have a field day on this. The failure to realise that hiding your face does not make you invisible, or that stealing a reporter’s phone does not make the report go away, suggests that – under pressure – the leader of the Conservative Party has the social cognitive abilities of a four-year-old.

quote:

The Mainstream Media Campaign

As Hancock rushed to Leeds, a host of media figures sympathetic to Johnson rushed into action. Guido Fawkes (which registered the site Boris2020 seven years ago) was first off the mark, with a fake story that 100 Labour activists were being paid to go to Leeds to protest. This was followed up by his former colleague at the Sun, Tom Newton Dunn, who described a “flash mob descending”.

Soon, the BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, was describing to her 1.1 million followers how “Labour activists scrambled to go and protest” and then “it turned nasty” when “one of them punched Hancock’s adviser”. The information had no attribution, or “I’ve heard” or “sources say”.

Not to be left out, Robert Peston, the political editor of the second largest broadcaster, ITV, identified the person punched to his 1 million followers, and named the special adviser to Matt Hancock, adding that the police had been called.

The only problem with this breaking story – which quickly and conveniently replaced the story of Johnson pocketing the reporter’s phone in all the major news feeds – was that it was completely bogus.

There were about four noisy demonstrators outside Leeds General Infirmary as Hancock departed in his ministerial car, not 100. No punch was ever landed. Hancock’s SpAd walked into a cyclist’s hand as he pointed to the ministerial car rushing away.

It took several hours of persistent correction from other Twitter users before both Peston and Kuenssberg corrected the damaging allegation of assault. But their apologies revealed even more…

NDPP

Re Labour's Ashworth: 'Civil Service Will Have to Move Quickly to Safeguard National Security from Corbyn' (audio)

https://twitter.com/EddieDempsey/status/1204370045922676736

"I consistently said that the Labour right would push hard-remain to deliberately lose the election or to scupper Corbynism if he wins. This sort of proves I was right about the scoundrels. From the horse's mouth. The soft-left walked into a sucker punch."

 

'Ironic Wednesday'

https://twitter.com/Alobhin/status/1204730802459811840

"Ironic Wednesday - My leave vote has been declared null and void by exactly the same people who are now telling me how important my vote is to them. The struggle won't be over on Friday, nor for many Fridays to come..."

nicky

The final polls are hardly consistent.  The Con lead is anywhere from 6 to 13. Expanding in some polls, contracting in others. 

A high interest in tactical voting vs Cons having a modest lead in Lab held marginals and a confortable lead in Con held marginals.

If it is a hung Parliament it will be because many voters who are appalled at Corbyn becoming PM will still vote Labour because they do not believe he can be elected and in any event may be replaced as Labour leader as the cost of the SNP and Lib Dems supporting a Labour minority.

But overall it looks like a modest Con majority. This despite an untrustworthy unpopular leader of a stale incompetent discredited government. And a party on the minority popular side of the major issue.

The Cons have no business coming within miles of winning this election. With virtually any other Labour leader they would not come close.

Ken Burch

If those of you who want Labour to be led by a right-winger had accepted that the 2017 election settled the leadership issue, had not invented the AS smear out of nothing, and had not spent the last two years solely attacking Labour's leader rather than doing what they were supposed to be doing and attacking the Tories, Corbyn's popularity would not have fallen at all.

And if those of you who had done that had been willing to guarantee that a leadership ballot to replace Corbyn was not limited to right wingers(sorry, "Labour moderates", as if there's a difference)only and had also been willing to guarantee that there would be yet another purge of socialists after Corbyn stood down, he probably would have gone, simply because of the intolerable, indefinsible abuse Corbyn and his supporters had received.

The anti-Corbyn hate campaign was never just about getting rid of one man.  It was about erasing everything the majority of paid Labour members and supporters stand for from the Labour Party, once and for all.

BTW, nicky, if Corbyn had led Labour to a third-place finish in the last election, losing more than half of the party's seats in the process, I'd have been among the first calling on him to resign immediately, assuming he wouldn't have had the simply decency and common sense to do so, which he would have, of course.  Why did you not do the same with the then-leader of the NDP when the situation I derive that analogy from happened in 2015?  

 

Aristotleded24

nicky wrote:
The final polls are hardly consistent.  The Con lead is anywhere from 6 to 13. Expanding in some polls, contracting in others. 

A high interest in tactical voting vs Cons having a modest lead in Lab held marginals and a confortable lead in Con held marginals.

If it is a hung Parliament it will be because many voters who are appalled at Corbyn becoming PM will still vote Labour because they do not believe he can be elected and in any event may be replaced as Labour leader as the cost of the SNP and Lib Dems supporting a Labour minority.

But overall it looks like a modest Con majority. This despite an untrustworthy unpopular leader of a stale incompetent discredited government. And a party on the minority popular side of the major issue.

The Cons have no business coming within miles of winning this election. With virtually any other Labour leader they would not come close.

The fact is that Corbyn has been under so much open warfare from his own party that it's not surprising that it brought down his popularity, even to the point of doing so during an election. Remember when Mulcair was leader? I was one of his harshest critics both in the lead-up to and during his leadership, but during the campaign I set that aside to try and help the NDP win while waiting until after the campaign to air my grievances. If Mulcair had come under half the internal sniping as Corbyn has, you would be screaming about how treasonous these people are, and I would have stood with you. Either air your grievances with the leader in a proper forum, or quit the party and do something else. As for the result, it looks like the Conservatives are going to win, and no real action will be taken to improve people's lives. Right-wingers like you should be happy with the result.

cco

nicky wrote:

If it is a hung Parliament it will be because many voters who are appalled at Corbyn becoming PM will still vote Labour because they do not believe he can be elected and in any event may be replaced as Labour leader as the cost of the SNP and Lib Dems supporting a Labour minority.

In other words, any seats Labour wins are despite Corbyn, not because of him, thanks to...you declaring it to be so.

nicky

We will all see tomorrow night.

Either I am wrong or it will be interesting to see what excuses Corbyn’s apologists advance. Of course it can never be his fault.

Aristotleded24

nicky wrote:
We will all see tomorrow night.

Either I am wrong or it will be interesting to see what excuses Corbyn’s apologists advance. Of course it can never be his fault.

Corbyn's apologists on this thread have answered your charges. You have not acknowledged that, nor have you acknowledged or attempted to refute anything they have said here.

NDPP

"The EU has the only constitution in the world committed to capitalism. It destroys the prospects of socialism anywhere in Europe, making capitalism a constitutional requirement of that setup."  - Tony Benn, UK Labour

https://twitter.com/TrevorWAllman/status/1204809286796353536

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

‘Longest queues ever’ as people stand in line around the block to vote

The polls have only been open for two hours but there are already long lines of people waiting to take part in democracy....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Greta Thunberg

Every election is a climate election. Vote for your children. Vote for the planet. Vote for future generations. Vote for humanity. #GE2019 #UKElection

robbie_dee

Guardian: From a thumping Tory win to a Corbyn coalition – four election scenarios

Quote:

2. A working majority – Conservative majority 30

This is roughly the closest to the prevailing polling, in line with YouGov’s Tuesday prediction of a majority of 28. The Conservatives would end up with 340 seats (up 23) and Labour on 237, slightly ahead of its disappointing 2015 result, but 25 seats down on last time.

Signs this is happening would be if the Conservatives gain Lincoln (Lab maj 1,538), Derby North (Lab maj 2,015), Wakefield (Lab maj 2,176) Wrexham (Lab maj 1,832), but not the seats with larger majorities mentioned in the section above.

The Conservatives could afford to lose two seats in Scotland to the SNP (Stirling and Gordon) and one in London (Chipping Barnet), but would still have a good enough result to allow Boris Johnson to look forward to five years in Downing Street.

After a successful pre-election purge of rebel Conservative MPs, even a majority of 10 or more could easily be sufficient for governing, particularly in completing the first phase of the UK’s exit from the EU.

I am expecting the above, largely thanks to the repeated attacks Corbyn has faced from his "own" team over the course of his leadership. Nicky will be pleased.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

These images of people queuing to vote will scare the death out of the Tories

JKR

NDPP wrote:

"The EU has the only constitution in the world committed to capitalism. It destroys the prospects of socialism anywhere in Europe, making capitalism a constitutional requirement of that setup."  - Tony Benn, UK Labour

 

That might come as a surprise to social democrats in countries that are much more socialist than the UK or Canada, countries like Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium,...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..pic from the financial times

kropotkin1951

epaulo13 wrote:

These images of people queuing to vote will scare the death out of the Tories

In FPTP systems the adage is voters turnout to throw out. Its not the length of those lines that is hopeful it is the apparent average age. Theses are not grey haired old guard Labour or Tory voters. This is the future and it is their election to decide.

kropotkin1951

I wonder what chord Boris has struck with the people lining up in the UK. [pic from 2015]

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..for a long time i've understood that the larger the turnout the better the chance for a more progressive outcome. because 99% vs 1%. does this not still hold true? 

Sean in Ottawa

epaulo13 wrote:

..for a long time i've understood that the larger the turnout the better the chance for a more progressive outcome. because 99% vs 1%. does this not still hold true? 

I think it does. The reason is that the most progressive people tend to be young and they tend to not vote at the same rate as older people. Older more Conservative people are more reliable voters. Therefore if more come out then it signals:

1) more progressive voters and a more progressive result

2) more motivation and therefore more likely a change in government.

All this said - Brexit screws with the second a bit becuase the motivation will be high even among those who do not want to change the govenrment.

Still - it is a positive sign.

Put another way -- a high turnout may not mean in this case a more progressive vote but it would be a prerequisite.

Generally there is a lot of historical support for the contention that a high turnout means more progressive turnout or a change in goverment. Both would be good here but Brexit is motivating people on both sides....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i agree with what you say sean. except for the young part. it's not equal for both sides. the young lean more towards labour. as i've seen over and over again one of the main reasons is they want to continue to travel europe in the same way they do today. add on to that free tuition, transit some free and other such promises from labour. 

bekayne

epaulo13 wrote:

..for a long time i've understood that the larger the turnout the better the chance for a more progressive outcome. because 99% vs 1%. does this not still hold true? 

For example, 2002 Vancouver municipal election when turnout went from 37% to 50% resulting in a COPE landslide. Also the 1995 Quebec referendum shows how a high turnout (93.5%) can confound the pollsters.

bekayne
voice of the damned

bekayne wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..for a long time i've understood that the larger the turnout the better the chance for a more progressive outcome. because 99% vs 1%. does this not still hold true? 

For example, 2002 Vancouver municipal election when turnout went from 37% to 50% resulting in a COPE landslide. Also the 1995 Quebec referendum shows how a high turnout (93.5%) can confound the pollsters.

On the other hand, prior to 2015, the Alberta NDP had its best showing in 1986, when voter turnout dipped below 50% since the first time at least as far back as 1975. They also did okay in '89, with a 53% turnout, but got wiped out in '93 when turnout hit the 60% mark.

As for their most famous showing, 2015 had a 57% turnout, but 2019 was 64%.

https://tinyurl.com/t9m7faq

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Yeah, Rowan Atkinson is much, much more entertaining as Blackadder than as Mr. Bean. Sad that many people only know about Bean.

Ken Burch

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I wonder what chord Boris has struck with the people lining up in the UK. [pic from 2015]

An atonal one, given that he's shown fretting the chord on the wrong side of the capo.

I put my hopes in the huge lines of young voters being shown all over the UK today...standing out there in the "heavy weather" Nigel Farage wished for on polling day.

Anything can happen.

kropotkin1951

Yes Ken, he is posing with that guitar and his fret work is hilarious.

jerrym

BBC exit poll based on 20,000 voters 

Cons 368 (+50) majority government

Labour 191 (-71) lowest seat count since 1935 if this happens

SNP 55 (+20) could it lead to a push for Scottish independence if this is close to the case and hard Brexit happens

LD 13 (+1)

PC 3 (-1)

Brexit 0 looks like all their vote went Con

josh

Corbyn will have to step down if those are the numbers.  

Between Labour's insistence on holding another referendum and the smear campaign against the party, it faced an almost impossible task.

Sean in Ottawa

Indeed - both Corbyn and Scotland probably gone.

nicky

The SNP looks set to win almost every seat in Scotland. 

191 seats would be the worst result for Labour since 1935.

Ken Burch

If the exit poll is correct.   Their exit polls have been wrong in the past.

And even if it is, it doesn't justify the fact that you've spent the last four years shitting on Corbyn here over and over and over again.

Your discourse has been nasty, spiteful, and fundamentally dishonest, especially in your insistence on perpetuating the AS smear even though it was long ago discredited.

Shame on you for helping Boris get a majority if that is what has happened.

 

 

josh

nicky wrote:

The SNP looks set to win almost every seat in Scotland. 

191 seats would be the worst result for Labour since 1935.

Well, that should make you happy.  The only positive for me is that Brexit vote will finally be implemented.  

nicky

Yeah, i’m Happy. Just like Cassandra was when Troy was sacked.

You  Corbynites need to take responsibility for this catastrophe.

josh

nicky wrote:

Yeah, i’m Happy. Just like Cassandra was when Troy was sacked.

You  Corbynites need to take responsibility for this catastrophe.

Nope.  You Blairites were determined to undermine Corbyn from the day he was elected leader.  By any means necessary.  Took you over 4 years, but you finally succeeded 

nicky

I helped Boris get his majority? Grow up Ken. Do you think my posts here on an obscure Canadian website influenced one single vote in Britain?

It speaks volumes that you seem to think I am more responsible for Labour’s defeat than is Jeremy Corbyn.

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

Yeah, i’m Happy. Just like Cassandra was when Troy was sacked.

You  Corbynites need to take responsibility for this catastrophe.

The outcome would have been exactly the same, or possibly worse-assuming the exit poll is correct-had Labour been led by the sort of leader you'd have preferred-a cynical left-basher who still thinks the Iraq War was right.  Corbyn never deserved to be accused of abetting a massive increase in AS in the party because there WAS no massive increase in AS in the party under his leadership.  There were a tiny number of minor incidents as there always will be in a major party-meanwhile, you said nothing about Boris having written a book that alleged Jewish conspiracies to control major institutions.  You said nothing about the fact that the Tories had never adopted any policies within the party to combat AS.  You didn't even acknowledge that Luciana Berger's allegations all occurred before Corbyn was leader and that he could not possibly have born any responsibility for them.

You have spent four years perpetuating toxic lies.   And if the exit poll is correct-it could be wrong-it's on you and those who worked with you in the AS smear-the overwhelming majority of whom were right-wing Gentiles and most likely anti-Semites themselves in the Balfour tradition-for smearing a man who did absolutely nothing to deserve the smear.

And it's not about Corbyn as a person...

It's that you've spat in the face of the young people of Britain in leading the fight against the only figure in public life they had any trust in.   

Unless Rebecca Long-Bailey or Angela Rayner become the next leader-the next leader can't be a right-winger, since a right-winger couldn't possibly bring the party together-take over from Corbyn, voters under 40 will be lost to Labour, which means Labour may not ever win another election.  

Corbyn's only flaw is that he doesn't fight back against smears-he had a lot of ground to fight back against the AS smear, given that it was utterly bogus, and he could have fairly argued that his contacts with Sinn Fein did a lot to help get NI to the level of peace it has now-it was never going to be possible to get the republican factions to just surrender, since doing that meant they'd be leaving the minority community totally unprotected against Loyalist attacks-and he could have mentioned that in his campaign.

He wasn't wrong or unpopular on any of the issues, as you've essentially admitted by never addressing the stances he took on the issues.

He was simply subjected to a level of vilification that no one in public life could ever have merited.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..it's always been the forces of divide and rule that have been driving this. having said that..it's still to early make these kind of statements. 

Pages