UK General Election 2019

The UK is set to hold a general election on 12th December. Which party do you intend to vote for? What would be your preferred outcome? Which issues are most important to you? Will you be voting tactically? What do you predict the result will be?

ClockworkOcean wrote:The UK is set to hold a general election on 12th December. Which party do you intend to vote for? What would be your preferred outcome? Which issues are most important to you? Will you be voting tactically? What do you predict the result will be?

I will probably vote for the SNP, but if I was English I would 100 percent vote for Corbyn.

He isn't perfect, but his manifesto was great and certainly a better alternative for this country than the Tory government. I might add that even when it comes to identity politics, the tories are just as bad. To me identity politics isn't as important as economics anyway.

Sadly I don't think Corbyn will win though as he has been smeared. IMO Corbyn is ironically similar to Tommy Robinson.

Both they and their fans would be horrified at the comparison but its true. Both of them have stood up for the working class and brought issues that are important to them to the forefront. Sadly however as a result, both have had to endure smear campaigns from the elite who see them as a threat. Ironically both have been smeared in the same way.

Corbyn is a critic of Israel so they twist that to mean that he is an anti semite, and Tommy is a critic of Islam so they twist that to mean he must hate brown people.

Sadly however as a result of that, and the tribal politics of the left and the right, Tommy and Jeremy have begun to associate with genuine fanatics on both sides, as that's the only support they can get. Sadly they've both ultimately ended up being seen as toxic to the very causes they champion, which leads to the problem of it would be better if someone else took up their causes, with a cleaner track record, but ultimately it seems no one else has quite the guts to do that.

Ironically it would be better if the likes of Tommy and Jeremy joined forces to take on the elite together, but they themselves are guilty of tribalism so they buy into the smears about each other.

Tommy Robinson did a big video urging people not to vote for Corbyn. UGH Tommy you've done videos and raised money in support of working class people who are on poverty row, disabled veterans who can't get access to a wheelchair or benefits. You really think that the Tory government will be better for these people than Corbyn?

Similarly Corbyn really doesn't think that there are problems with Islamic integration in poverished areas that need addressed?

Tribalism is the true enemy of the people, and sadly as the left have been made a joke, then I reckon most people will vote for the right now.

burrunjor wrote:Similarly Corbyn really doesn't think that there are problems with Islamic integration in poverished areas that need addressed?

That's why I doubt I'll be voting for Corbyn this time. I dread if he wins, we're going to go the same way as Sweden, with the cultish looney left in power, open borders, and more rights and protection for murderous jihadists than for the general public. Sadly the Greens seem just as much of a liability, even though I do have a lot of environmental concerns.

I'm probably going to vote Lib Dem as they seem the closest sane alternative to Labour. Due to my concerns about immigration and Radical Islam, a part of me would be tempted to betray everything my family holds dear and vote UKIP (which I never imagined I'd be considering four years ago), but they're not actually an available option in my ward.

However I sorely doubt the Lib Dems are going to be able to beat the Tories, so I'm probably just throwing my vote away there.

Tannman wrote:That's why I doubt I'll be voting for Corbyn this time. I dread if he wins, we're going to go the same way as Sweden, with the cultish looney left in power, open borders, and more rights and protection for murderous jihadists than for the general public. Sadly the Greens seem just as much of a liability, even though I do have a lot of environmental concerns.

I'm probably going to vote Lib Dem as they seem the closest sane alternative to Labour. Due to my concerns about immigration and Radical Islam, a part of me would be tempted to betray everything my family holds dear and vote UKIP (which I never imagined I'd be considering four years ago), but they're not actually an available option in my ward.

However I sorely doubt the Lib Dems are going to be able to beat the Tories, so I'm probably just throwing my vote away there.

That's the thing though the Tories aren't much better when it comes to combating radical Islam.

They're the government that's tortured and persecuted Tommy Robinson, declared that Islamic terrorist attacks have nothing to do with Islam, and have generally pushed identity politics dogshit just as much.

At least with Corbyn you'd get proper left wing policies. The Tories represent the very worst of both the left and the right ironically. They have the Prince John style attitude towards the poor, and the craven cowardice in standing up to identitarian fascists.[/quote]

burrunjor wrote:That's the thing though the Tories aren't much better when it comes to combating radical Islam.

They're the government that's tortured and persecuted Tommy Robinson, declared that Islamic terrorist attacks have nothing to do with Islam, and have generally pushed identity politics dogshit just as much.

At least with Corbyn you'd get proper left wing policies. The Tories represent the very worst of both the left and the right ironically. They have the Prince John style attitude towards the poor, and the craven cowardice in standing up to identitarian fascists.

[/quote]

Well I'm certainly not defending the Tories and I would never vote for them. I've been desperate to see them go every election.

As for their attitude to radical Islam, a part of me thinks their efforts at counter-terrorism policies and removing citizenship from ISIS fighters have been sabotaged by ultra-left MP's like Corbyn voting against such acts. Another part of me sadly knows that it suited David Cameron to nurture a culture of homegrown jihadi extremism to help fight the Libya and Syria cause against Qaddaffi and Assad.

The problem is, I suspect under Corbyn, Radical Islamists would become even more of a protected 'victim' class.

Haven't time for an in-depth reply right now, but I'll never vote for any austerity supporters, so not hard to guess I'm going to vote Labour.
If feels odd not being able to vote in Australia yet, because I've only been here just over a year, and yet because I'm a British citizen, I can still vote in the UK for another 14 years.

Labour. The last manifesto was replete with sensible social democratic policies, and I figure it'll be the same this time round given the decisions at conference.

If anyone thinks that's the 'loony left', then they need to step away from the Tory-owned press and supposedly objective neoliberal television 'centrists' and read a little more widely.

If I was part of a less Tory-supportive and anti-Labour constituency, I’d vote for Labour without question. I am not, and will thus tactically vote for the Liberal Democrats, in spite of my complete lack of trust in them and their policies (especially after Clegg’s deceptive antics).

I loathe austerity and the Conservative party with a passion (having taken its toll within the NHS and therefore many others close to me, not to mention Boris’ utterly moronic antics and how much they’ve done to widen the societal schism between social classes and divide the country in every possible way), and agree with Cunnus about Labour’s prior manifesto.

My old seat is a very safe Labour seat, so it probably wouldn’t matter if I didn’t vote, but I will anyway.

Thought you SNP guys might appreciate this one.  

Ronnie wrote:Thought you SNP guys might appreciate this one.  

Nice, I thought I was the only Scot here though?

To be clear my lifelong support for Scottish independence is NOT out of hatred of the English (as the MSM often likes to paint Scottish independence supporters.) I love the English. Their sci fi, women and music is the best IMO.

However I do feel that Scotland gets the short end of the stick, simply because its a smaller country and so when its latched onto a big country then its often overlooked. Its bound to happen, regardless of how tolerant the English are.

Also I think that Scotland and England do have very different identities politically.

Scotland is definitely more left wing. There are good and bad things about that. On the one hand I think we're more likely to fight for the NHS than a lot of people in England who I can sadly see voting conservative no matter what. (It was the bloody English who kept the tories in for decades.) On the other hand however Scotland is full of SJW crap more than England, and has a lot less confidence in itself. Just look at the Count Dankula fiasco, also whilst I disagree with Brexit, at least the English had the guts to gain independence, whilst the Scots bottled out of it sadly.

All of Scotland is like the London liberal bubble in some ways LOL. Pride in Scotland's history and unbelievable accomplishments is a dirty word.

Still as we are different politically then IMO we don't work as a United Kingdom. Brexit alone shows this.

Apologies for passing over the content if your post for now, but since the SNP has 3 votes in this poll, I had assumed you weren't the only Scot here.

I probably won't vote, though the novelty of Boris Johnson is tempting.

As for who I'd like to win, definitely the Tories at this point.

Labour is a shit show right now, the other parties are irrelevant. I had grievances about May/Cameron but Boris looks promising, pro-NHS etc.

Regardless, voting anything other than Tory will just fuck the Brexit process even more than it already has been. More limbo and associated consequences.

burrunjor wrote:

Nice, I thought I was the only Scot here though?

To be clear my lifelong support for Scottish independence is NOT out of hatred of the English (as the MSM often likes to paint Scottish independence supporters.) I love the English. Their sci fi, women and music is the best IMO.

However I do feel that Scotland gets the short end of the stick, simply because its a smaller country and so when its latched onto a big country then its often overlooked. Its bound to happen, regardless of how tolerant the English are.

Also I think that Scotland and England do have very different identities politically.

Scotland is definitely more left wing. There are good and bad things about that. On the one hand I think we're more likely to fight for the NHS than a lot of people in England who I can sadly see voting conservative no matter what. (It was the bloody English who kept the tories in for decades.) On the other hand however Scotland is full of SJW crap more than England, and has a lot less confidence in itself. Just look at the Count Dankula fiasco, also whilst I disagree with Brexit, at least the English had the guts to gain independence, whilst the Scots bottled out of it sadly.

All of Scotland is like the London liberal bubble in some ways LOL. Pride in Scotland's history and unbelievable accomplishments is a dirty word.

Still as we are different politically then IMO we don't work as a United Kingdom. Brexit alone shows this.

Do you think Scotland is economically strong enough to leave the UK?

So Farage is not standing. He knows he'll lose, and my prediction is that despite them doing well as a protest vote in the EU elections, hardcore Brexiteers will vote Tory, and I doubt the Brexit Party will get a single seat.

Well, the Tories have got off to a stormer, haven't they?  

- Rees-Mogg suggested Grenfell victims didn't have any common sense.

- We discovered that Alun Cairns' ministerial aide and Welsh assembly candidate, Ross England, sabotaged a rape trial, leading to its collapse. Cairns endorsed his candidacy just 4 months after.

- The National Audit Office found that none of the 200,000 starter homes announced in 2015 had been build.

- The Advertising Standards Authority banned and heavily criticised the £225,000, 'detoxifying' 9-week Universal Credit advert campaign which appeared in online media and newspapers. Not only did it break rules by assuming the guise of a normal news story, it also made a number of wholly inaccurate claims about the service presented as either 'facts' and 'myths'.

- The former head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, says a report by the Intelligence and Security Committee into Russian influence on British politics should be published. Johnson has the final say on said publication and is refusing to budge. ISC chair Dominic Grieve raised an urgent question in the commons over the issue, while Michael Gove inartfully avoided answering questions about it in a disastrous TV interview where he was asked 4 times whether the government was suppressing the report.

- CCHQ's Press Office were caught releasing an edited video of Keir Starmer, where it has been made to look as if he couldn't answer a question from Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. Instead of deleting the video and apologising, the Tories have doubled down. Party chairman James Cleverly gave two differing accounts as to why the video had been edited this morning. Firstly on GMB, he said, "We had to shorten the video.", then, half an hour later on LBC, “The video was a satirical, humorous video."

I wish it was only Tory voters that had to suffer the consequences of voting for them.....
And the Lib Dems are almost as bad.

https://nyebevannews.co.uk/jo-swinsons-election-leaflet-gets-completely-dismantled-by-labour-supporter/

Standard flaws in the machine, every party is the same. You could do just as persuasive a list on Labour or elsewise.

None of it has any bearing on the Party's prospective performance in government.

We're in discreditation season. Every side and its associated media are doing their best to highlight the flaws in their competition and tricking the public into believing they are important.

The Jacob Rees-Mogg 'controversy' is a pretty pathetic example of the same.

TiberiusDidNothingWrong wrote:The Jacob Rees-Mogg 'controversy' is a pretty pathetic example of the same.

Maybe, but it does speak to a wider truth of just how much the poor and vulnerable have suffered under the Tories, and just how calloused the party has seemed to be (in the main) to the countless victims of their ruthless austerity cuts in general.

So I don't think it can be ignored as a small thing.

It's easy to pass it off with a glib phrase, but the voting record does not lie.
I'm not saying all Lib Dems are the same as Swinson. Some have better voting records than her, but they are not leader.
The only reason they are doing comparitively well is because of Brexit, and capitalising on what remainers see as Corbyn's failure to position Labour as THE remain party.
Were it not for that, they would still be consigned to their pre-Brexit irrelevance.

Sorry, I don't have the quote function available, but I concur with Tannmann.

The reason the comment made an effective news-piece at all is largely due to the preceding assumption of the Tories' prejudice and miscomprehension of the poor and working classes.

Preceding as in it barely matters what the guy says so long as he is a Tory and the context relates to the class divide.

What he actually said, in context, was completely harmless. I shouldn't really have to defend it, but it was an ancillary and largely incongruous phrase attached to the larger point of what he was saying.

He didn't say, 'They had no common sense' - where it would function as an insult or prejudice as the conscious construction of the sentence. He said, passively, that (by common sense) you would expect people to leave the building on fire regardless of the policy.

If I had to fault him at all I would say 'common sense' was probably a mistaken phrase to use at all. If he didn't use the phrase people would probably have an easier time focusing on what he actually said and meant to say.

But hey, people don't but that much intensive thought into what they say when speaking live, you couldn't reasonably fault him for it. And you probably wouldn't if you weren't told to.

But again, why does this need to be defended? Even as a mistake - which he confessed - it's entirely minor, and entirely expected from the usual mechanism of human speech.

And it, yet again, has nothing to do with the party's ability to govern. It should be irrelevant to the elector.

I will also never understand people's interpretation of the political 'party' as some kind of independent, thinking, entity - or collective consciousness. It's a collection of very different people with - typically - only vaguely similar ideas, that changes as the members come and go and more so as the leadership changes.

It's pretty obvious, but yet people remain so intent on voting for or against certain parties for things 'the party' did decades ago under completely different leadership.

The leadership is important, being that they are supposed to carry the whip.

Beyond that, and thus the current manifesto, the 'party' is really not worth considering.

TiberiusDidNothingWrong wrote:The reason the comment made an effective news-piece at all is largely due to the preceding assumption of the Tories' prejudice and miscomprehension of the poor and working classes.

Preceding as in it barely matters what the guy says so long as he is a Tory and the context relates to the class divide.

What he actually said, in context, was completely harmless. I shouldn't really have to defend it, but it was an ancillary and largely incongruous phrase attached to the larger point of what he was saying.

He didn't say, 'They had no common sense' - where it would function as an insult or prejudice as the conscious construction of the sentence. He said, passively, that (by common sense) you would expect people to leave the building on fire regardless of the policy.

If I had to fault him at all I would say 'common sense' was probably a mistaken phrase to use at all. If he didn't use the phrase people would probably have an easier time focusing on what he actually said and meant to say.

But hey, people don't but that much intensive thought into what they say when speaking live, you couldn't reasonably fault him for it. And you probably wouldn't if you weren't told to.

But again, why does this need to be defended? Even as a mistake - which he confessed - it's entirely minor, and entirely expected from the usual mechanism of human speech.

And it, yet again, has nothing to do with the party's ability to govern. It should be irrelevant to the elector.

Well if his words have added insult to injury, it reinforces the injury itself being one of Tory incompetence.

I think to a degree what he said has been distorted, Watching the clip, it was said off the cuff a bit thoughtlessly and crassly but I don't think it was said with anywhere near genuine callousness that it's been made out to be.

I think the problem is, it sounded like someone scrambling for an excuse as to why the tragedy happened and ways to dodge acknowledging the incompetence that made it happen except to focus on the firefighters. It's like he would rather blame it on anything else, and from that, some have concluded that he was blaming the victims.

The issue for me (and probably what should be made the issue more sincerely) isn't so much that he dug himself into a hole with his remarks, but the fact he was digging in the first place to dodge the issue of where true blame lied.

My family is voting for Liberal Democrats. I'm not going to vote myself.