General Election 2019 thread (16 Viewers)

Astute

Well-Known Member
It does. And I keep repeating myself but it falls on deaf ears with you. Usually because you want to start arguments with people trying to agree with you. Complete waste of time.
I would like to answer you but have answered this several times before.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
There's nothing wrong with wanting to know what one would be voting for. Labour's policy is not a binary option and is predicated on the notion that it will renegotiate with the EU and offer a second referendum. If the British people dislike that deal, then we will be out.

What is unclear about the policy? If voters want a binary choice, then by all means I would suggest that they vote for a different party which has a binary stance such as the Lib Dems or Conservatives, but to suggest that it is not a clear policy would be to misinterpret the rules of the English language.


I'm not convinced this is true, as Corbyn himself has long been a Eurosceptic. Sure, a large proportion of the rank and file will be Remainers but this does not translate to a Remain policy - or else they would have committed to it. Why would they risk losing votes to the Lib Dems/other progressives when they could easily posit themselves as the only realistic hope of a benign Brexit/no Brexit at all?
So after reading this would you vote for someone that won't state what they will do?

And there is the problem.
 

Walsgrave

Well-Known Member
So after reading this would you vote for someone that won't state what they will do?

And there is the problem.
I'm saying that if you want to vote for a Party that has a binary stance on the question of Brexit, don't vote for Labour. But to suggest that a party isn't stating 'what it will do' just because they have a rather more complex policy is a bit fallacious.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
I'm saying that if you want to vote for a Party that has a binary stance on the question of Brexit, don't vote for Labour. But to suggest that a party isn't stating 'what it will do' just because they have a rather more complex policy is a bit fallacious.
I am a Labour voter. I always vote Labour. But I want my X to go to remain.

So why shouldn't I know what I am voting for?
 

Walsgrave

Well-Known Member
I am a Labour voter. I always vote Labour. But I want my X to go to remain.

So why shouldn't I know what I am voting for?

Again, this ultimately boils down to what one defines as clear or unclear.

As mentioned, there isn't anything wrong with wanting to know what one is voting for. But Labour's policy should not be concerned unclear just because it is not stating that it either for or against at this stage. Rather, it will put that question to the people. That's what one would be voting for by choosing Labour.

Being a middle way between two extremes doesn't amount to an unclear position.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Pointless bridge- £15 billion
An extra £85 a year-£11 billion
HS2-£56 billion according to latest government estimates

Alienating Northern Ireland and giving more hope for Scottish independence? Priceless.
Don’t they need to make the new technology before build the bridge? Something to do with the pylons needing to be the deepest and longest ever built.
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
The Daily Mail going with the headline that Boris refused to back Prince Andrew. Obviously missed the bit where he said he was above criticism.
He actually said "the institution of the monarchy is beyond reproach"

The question was about the Royal Family...not specifically Prince Andrew.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Walsgrave

Well-Known Member
Labour have a complex voter base to consider, and as such have always had to try and find a position that could unite two disprite positions.
...As is true of almost any party in a mature democracy.

If Labour were pure office seekers, then they would not be pursuing a third way route. They lose many more potential voters from the Remain spectrum than voters adamant about the need for Brexit.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Johnson says monarchy 'beyond reproach'

Click on the video...10-15s in.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Watch the whole thing and how his face immediately drops when Corbyn says that before we talk about Prince Andrew let’s think of the victims and the reaction it got from the audience. That was the realisation of a man who’d just said that the royal were beyond reproach when in fact they aren’t.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
It’s been bugging me for a while now who Boris reminds me of. Just switched over to E4 and The Inbetweeners is on and the penny dropped. Boris is a poor man’s Jay.
 

Philosoraptor

Well-Known Member
I always said when the Queen finally goes then this would be time to ask ourselves if we still need a hereditary Head of State.

Have always been a fan of turning ourselves into a Republic.
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Watch the whole thing and how his face immediately drops when Corbyn says that before we talk about Prince Andrew let’s think of the victims and the reaction it got from the audience. That was the realisation of a man who’d just said that the royal were beyond reproach when in fact they aren’t.
So Corbyn made it specific AFTER Boris gave his answer. Not sure what you heard. It sounded pretty clear to me

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Philosoraptor

Well-Known Member
I think there is common understanding that Australia is only hanging around from being a Republic for this reason.
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
It’s all over the news. I’ve even provided links in a later post. I can’t help you if you don’t want to read what’s put in front of you.
Well I just checked the 'Election Extra' section on the BBC news site - It definitely isn't all over that

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
I think there is common understanding that Australia is only hanging around from being a Republic for this reason.
I actually think that when people see the institution of the Royals in action and the hereditary power being handed to Charles it could actually cause a few to start asking questions.

A lot of people seem to think it’ll get passed over to William due to him being younger and more popular - err it doesn’t exactly work that way!
 
Last edited:

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Well I just checked the 'Election Extra' section on the BBC news site - It definitely isn't all over that

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
It’s the latest poll from MORI. The BBC are clearly waiting for Cummings to give Kuenessberg permission to report on it. Interestingly the shift has come in the last week, the previous week the same pollsters had Brexit as the No 1 concern for voters.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top