May vs Corbyn...tonight at 7.00pm

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:55 pm

This isn't fair. Paxman hasn't confronted Theresa May over her past connections and sympathies towards global terror organisations.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:56 pm

Don't feel that May has looked nervous or waffled. They've both done a decent job.

Pieater2 · Post by **Pieater2** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:57 pm

Are the audience being told to applaud when she speaks.I I'm sure theirs somebody with a clap board at the front somewhere.

john'sroseyspecs · Post by **john'sroseyspecs** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:58 pm

Has anyone changed their mind on voting intentions after watching tonight?

ksrclaret · Post by **ksrclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:58 pm

Good to see May getting asked questions that hadn't had prior approval, shame her answers were as wet and as hollow as usual.

lucs86 · Post by **lucs86** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:58 pm

She's done nothing but waffle

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 9:58 pm

She is appalling under pressure. That is not a good trait in being a leader of the country.

The applause from old people in the audience about #Brexit is getting really annoying. She hasn't said anything concrete at all.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:00 pm

utter waste of an hour as predicted, dog **** questioning from Paxman, should have been a full hour of audience questions

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:00 pm

Corbyn definitely faired better.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:00 pm

Awkward one man standing ovation.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:00 pm

It has just become 100% clear why she won't debate Corbyn, or meet a cross section of the British public on the stump...I felt a bit sorry for her in the end, with elements of the audience laughing at her....did she answer a single question well?

At one point she didn't answer the question [what a surprise] and tried to slag off the Labour Party - the audience let her have it with both barrels.
I'm no fan of her's it's true but that was a shocker.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:01 pm

john'sroseyspecs wrote:Has anyone changed their mind on voting intentions after watching tonight?

I'm still undecided, but Corbyn deserves more thinking time based on tonight.

DAVETHEVICAR · Post by **DAVETHEVICAR** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:01 pm

She is more comfortable at home with her husband discussing who puts out the bins.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:02 pm

Murger wrote:Corbyn definitely faired better.

I think that's a fair summary. Corbyn just about edged it.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:02 pm

via Imgflip Meme Generator

wickdkewlclaret · Post by **wickdkewlclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:02 pm

Who would want a no deal with brexit? That sounds absolute ****!

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:03 pm

Pair of them full of tosh.

Corbyn with his 'I don't believe in it but I'll enact it' Labour manifesto. May with her equal line on Brexit. Both willing to sell their beliefs for votes.

May for her part did well with the Brexit element and the no deal back and forth.

The bit I liked with May is her ability to admit she had made mistakes. Corbyn however would go to his death bed without admitting he was wrong to mingle with Sinn Fein back in the day.

Overall Corbyn came across better but in my experience I've always disliked the best negotiators in my profession, which is what this vote revolves around. Whoever wins this election will need to negotiate Brexit then the next government can implement fiscal policy with whatever is left.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:03 pm

Sidney1st wrote:I'm still undecided, but Corbyn deserves more thinking time based on tonight.

******* plastics!

Imagine if we applied the "proper claret" attitude to voting

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:09 pm

wickdkewlclaret wrote:Who would want a no deal with brexit? That sounds absolute ****!

No one wants that, including the EU. Thats the point.

If you're negotiating buying a house do you turn up and say '5% less than asking price is the worst offer we're prepared to go for, but we'll start now with our initial offer at 15% less.'

Or

'Here's 15% less than asking price, let us know what you think but we are prepared to look elsewhere.'

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:10 pm

I think that Corbyn was better there but I liked the fact that May would walk away with no deal rather than a bad deal. You can't show desperation when negotiating.

I can't vote Tory after what they are doing to the public services, I just don't trust Corbyn (or Abbot et al) enough to vote for him.

For the first time ever I'm genuinely torn with what to do.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:11 pm

THIS.

The most disappointing thing is that Labour will almost certainly be forced to form a coalition at which point their manifesto will become redundant anyway.

Rock and a hard place, unfortunately.

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:13 pm

Vote Loony.

You know it makes sense.

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:15 pm

Uninspiring 0-0 draw, we learned nothing new at All.

john'sroseyspecs · Post by **john'sroseyspecs** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:16 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:I think that Corbyn was better there but I liked the fact that May would walk away with no deal rather than a bad deal. You can't show desperation when negotiating.

I can't vote Tory after what they are doing to the public services, I just don't trust Corbyn (or Abbot et al) enough to vote for him.

For the first time ever I'm genuinely torn with what to do.

When you're in the voting booth, close your eyes for a second and imagine Corbyn or May sat in Downing Street at a moment of domestic or international crisis. Then make your choice.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:17 pm

No expert in negotiations, but **** me, going in like you've overdosed on your inner Farage makes no sense whatsoever

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:17 pm

How many times do you think May has asked her advisors if it's too late to do a u turn on calling the election?

john'sroseyspecs · Post by **john'sroseyspecs** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:17 pm

Caballo wrote:Uninspiring 0-0 draw, we learned nothing new at All.

Penalties!

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:18 pm

Caballo wrote:Uninspiring 0-0 draw, we learned nothing new at All.

If you've been paying attention then no, you didn't learn anything. But i think this wasn't really intended for the more informed voters and if before tonight you were one of the less informed voters and decided to watch this then you probably learned a decent amount about each of the two.

Goalposts · Post by **Goalposts** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:20 pm

SO YOU CHANGED YOUR VOTING INTENTIONS THEN TURTLE

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:21 pm

I see what you did there.

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:22 pm

john'sroseyspecs wrote:When you're in the voting booth, close your eyes for a second and imagine Corbyn or May sat in Downing Street at a moment of domestic or international crisis. Then make your choice.

Unfortunately that choice would have to be May but I can't bring myself to vote for her. A spoiled vote is looking favourite at the minute! I'd actually love there to be a hung parliament this time. A huge Tory majority would be a disaster for anybody other than the rich.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:23 pm

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:23 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:I think that Corbyn was better there but I liked the fact that May would walk away with no deal rather than a bad deal. You can't show desperation when negotiating.

I can't vote Tory after what they are doing to the public services, I just don't trust Corbyn (or Abbot et al) enough to vote for him.

For the first time ever I'm genuinely torn with what to do.

If you want well funded public services you need a strong economy. A bad deal would be bad for the economy.

john'sroseyspecs · Post by **john'sroseyspecs** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:23 pm

I'm just glad we've had a couple of hours of a politics thread without getting nasty or abusive. Vote Claret Tony

1968claret · Post by **1968claret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:24 pm

john'sroseyspecs wrote:When you're in the voting booth, close your eyes for a second and imagine Corbyn or May sat in Downing Street at a moment of domestic or international crisis. Then make your choice.

Or, to add a little balance:
Close your eyes imagine May or Corbyn sat in Downing Street when a choice needs to be made between cutting more public services or reducing income tax by 1p in the pound for high earners.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:24 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If you've been paying attention then no, you didn't learn anything. But i think this wasn't really intended for the more informed voters and if before tonight you were one of the less informed voters and decided to watch this then you probably learned a decent amount about each of the two.

I think the amount of people who will have changed their voting intention based on tonight will be in the hundreds at best.

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:25 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:If you want well funded public services you need a strong economy. A bad deal would be bad for the economy.

But the tories don't care about public services, they're quite happy to run them down!

1968claret · Post by **1968claret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:25 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:If you want well funded public services you need a strong economy. A bad deal would be bad for the economy.

Pretty certain that no deal would be that helpful to the economy either!

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:29 pm

No deal = World Trade organisation rules. Why do people expect the EU to offer a deal that is worse than something we can get without negotiation? That's why this "no deal is worse than a bad deal" soundbite is utter bullshit.

The very worst we can end up with is WTO rules. That's not to say it's a disaster, just that it's the worst case scenario. Therfore by definition there is no bad deal that is worse than no deal.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:31 pm

Wether or not you like the idea of no deal is irrelevant.
You cannot go into a negotiation, with your opponent knowing you cannot afford to walk away.
I would expect most people to understand this, being so basic.
Corbyn doesn't. And some want him thrashing out the biggest deal of our lifetimes

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:35 pm

Come on, Corbyn has just too much bad luggage. From the onset he tried to turn a question from an obviously much aggrieved Ulsterman about his respect for IRA killers into how his actions aided the Labour Party's peace process.

He quite clearly has had sympathies with just about every subversive terrorist organisation that ever existed. If faced with having to make a decision to take someone out with a drone to prevent them from attacking us, he promotes the idea of employing diplomacy and talking the matter over. He is just too unreal for words.

Oh yes, and how would he handle the issue about the so called dementia tax? Just prior to the election, John McDonnell said that they would lower the inheritance tax to back below the last Labour government's levels. Not just taxing the rich but hammering the lower and middle classes. There may have been attractive points in their manifesto but there would be an awful lot of unattractive additions should god help us they get elected.

This, a comment from someone who has, up till now, voted Labour at every election up until now.

USC · Post by **USC** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:35 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:No deal = World Trade organisation rules. Why do people expect the EU to offer a deal that is worse than something we can get without negotiation? That's why this "no deal is worse than a bad deal" soundbite is utter bullshit. The very worst we can end up with is WTO rules. That's not to say it's a disaster, just that it's the worst case scenario. Therfore by definition there is no bad deal that is worse than no deal.

.

Stop rubbishing her soundbites, you know full well what she means. What she is getting at is that if Corbyn was elected, he could do a deal that results in WTO rules PLUS Britain pays the EU 200 billion Euros PER YEAR for the privilege. Whereas she is astute enough to recognise that as a bad deal, so she would walk away.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:38 pm

Damo wrote:Wether or not you like the idea of no deal is irrelevant.
You cannot go into a negotiation, with your opponent knowing you cannot afford to walk away.
I would expect most people to understand this, being so basic.
Corbyn doesn't. And some want him thrashing out the biggest deal of our lifetimes

But they already know we can afford to walk away. They know we can get WTO rules. There's no way they're going to offer us anything worse than WTO rules. So why the **** would they think we felt like we couldn't afford to walk away?

It's just a bullshit soundbite to appeal to those who don't think and to make it look like she's being tough when if you think about it it's an entirely empty statement.

1968claret · Post by **1968claret** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:39 pm

Damo wrote:Wether or not you like the idea of no deal is irrelevant.
You cannot go into a negotiation, with your opponent knowing you cannot afford to walk away.
I would expect most people to understand this, being so basic.
Corbyn doesn't. And some want him thrashing out the biggest deal of our lifetimes

I don't think it's as simple as that. It is more about what tactics you use. The EU know that we don't want to walk out without a deal, just as they don't. This is much more about what tone you want to negotiate under. May is opting for the provocative/hard approach whereas Corbyn is looking at a more conciliatory/soft approach. Both have their merits.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:39 pm

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:39 pm

USC wrote:.

Stop rubbishing her soundbites, you know full well what she means. What she is getting at is that if Corbyn was elected, he could do a deal that results in WTO rules PLUS Britain pays the EU 200 billion Euros PER YEAR for the privilege. Whereas she is astute enough to recognise that as a bad deal, so she would walk away.

Why the **** would they ever offer that? They wouldn't. It's insane to think they ever would.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:39 pm

It's an entirely reasonable position to take ahead of negotiations commencing

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:40 pm

If it be your will wrote:My initial reaction was that nothing much had been achieved by either side, but maybe you're right. 4 bookmakers have changed their odds immediately afterwards, all (at the time of posting this) have shortened their odds slightly for a Labour win. I don't think any opinion polls have been released in the last 2 hours, so I can only assume Corbyn must have come out of this favourably - in the eyes of the bookies at least.

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/br ... ory/labour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not in the eyes of the bookies but in the eyes of bettors.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:44 pm

The WTO rules are far from the worst case scenario.

For example, (1) minor tariffs a smidgen less than WTO, for a £10bn annual fee, wedded to free movement and limitations on negotiating around the world. Less influence in the EU too. In other words, miles worse than remaining.

As opposed to (2) a clean departure under WTO rules with migration totally in our control to lower as the economy dictates, and the ability to strike deals elsewhere. Almost certainly better economically than (1) and ticks more Leave boxes too.

I would prefer a good deal instead, but (2) is clearly better than (1). May is right on that.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon May 29, 2017 10:46 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:No deal = World Trade organisation rules. Why do people expect the EU to offer a deal that is worse than something we can get without negotiation? That's why this "no deal is worse than a bad deal" soundbite is utter bullshit.

The very worst we can end up with is WTO rules. That's not to say it's a disaster, just that it's the worst case scenario. Therfore by definition there is no bad deal that is worse than no deal.

Does that mean the EU have dropped their demand for an exit fee? Surely it would be worse to have to pay €100 billion to leave with only marginal concessions to the free market; especially if most of the concessions are to allow EU access to our market, not our access to theirs.

If you can't imagine any possible deal that is even arguably worse than no deal, then you aren't trying very hard. Especially if you consider that Corbyn has already implied that when push comes to shove, he'll sign it.