General Election 2017 Mega Thread

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:44 am

What kind of turnout do we think will happen today? I think we will break 70% today...

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:45 am

Dom wrote:No arrest warrant was issued, that's how he came back here.

If they weren't over sensitive to the communities that these people come from and it was an automatic arrest warrant issued, less would go, fewer would return and those that did would be under supervision.
Pussy footing as they did around those Sh@gging kids.

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:48 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:Dom, I said Westminster bridge, the Arena and London.

Read what I posted.

I'm saying since the survey. The above could be evidence of a hardening of opinion of muslims . And at 66% there were no atrocities. We've had 3 since the survey. As you say the "deadliest bombings" may show there are fewer muslims who are willing to inform on islamic terrorists.

I misread what you wrote, I thought you meant there hadn't been any muslim terrorist attacks before 2016 in the UK.
I think you're totally wrong about the number of muslims willing to inform on terrorist sympathisers. In the "Jihadi next door" documentary, the people most vocal against the Islamic extremist groups were fellow muslims, that's obviously just a snapshot into the World but it shows that they are willing to stand up against it.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:49 am

Dom wrote:What kind of turnout do we think will happen today? I think we will break 70% today...

In my household I'm the only one voting and my missis even offered me her vote, I shook my head and refused it.
If only she understood why I'm voting as I am, the irony in that.
She feels my passion and sees my anger, and wants to help, if only she would take notice, that would help.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:49 am

claretdom wrote:You would reject my information as biased so ask everyone else.

What have i ever posted that gives you the impression that i wouldn't give your opinion a fair consideration?
I've said before that you should always consider the information first and then the source. For example, if you're wrong about something then your biases might inform me as to why you were wrong, but if you are right then bias is irrelevent. So the only reason i'd have to refer to your bias would be if you are wrong. So, go on then.

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:51 am

BleedingClaret wrote:If they weren't over sensitive to the communities that these people come from and it was an automatic arrest warrant issued, less would go, fewer would return and those that did would be under supervision.
Pussy footing as they did around those Sh@gging kids.

In the past they have been scared to be labelled racist when it came to prosecuting paedophile gangs, there was evidence that proved that in Rotherham. I don't think that's the case anymore, and especially when it comes to terrorism. When they have credible evidence, they act upon it. They can only supervise them if they have the resources to do so. Which is why I think Labour would be the better bet to take us forward, they are willing to spend the money needed to add extra police.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:54 am

kendaldave wrote:Qriously (which correctly predicted the Brexit result) final survey:

Labour - 41.3%
Conservatives - 38.5%

Final result too close to call because the difference falls within the 3.2 per cent margin of error.

Some polling company or other is going to be wildly wrong!

Some ****** deleted my final opinion polls thread but i listed a few polls and they all had the Tories ahead outside the margin of error. Except Survation which is nuts and probably controlled by anarchists.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:55 am

Dom wrote:In the past they have been scared to be labelled racist when it came to prosecuting paedophile gangs, there was evidence that proved that in Rotherham. I don't think that's the case anymore, and especially when it comes to terrorism. When they have credible evidence, they act upon it. They can only supervise them if they have the resources to do so. Which is why I think Labour would be the better bet to take us forward, they are willing to spend the money needed to add extra police.

Just can't risk Corbyn, and Abbott mate

Claretski · Post by **Claretski** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:55 am

There is a lot of childish mud slinging on this site which really doesn't do justice to what is likely to be one of the biggest decisions this country makes for many years, in fact in many ways bigger than the Brexit vote.

Whilst agreeing that Theresa May has had a pretty awful campaign her biggest folly is opening the Pandora's box that could let the most left wing Labour party in my lifetime have a say in the future of the country.

I appreciate that the policies propagated by Labour are in many cases laudable aims but they have to be balanced against what the country and economy can support and provide rather than a political dogma.

Should Mr Corbyn be given the reins then the UK is likely to face the worst financial crisis in decades which will actually cause tremendous hurt to those in society who he professes to support.

It is a fact that behind Mr Corbyns current affable exterior lies a party who are willing to prostrate the country to achieve their own aims of a socialist state that has been discredited in pretty much every country that has adopted similar ideals.

We have a stark choice today and yes Mrs May has not made a good fist of her position but the alternative is likely to haunt us for many years.

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:57 am

BleedingClaret wrote:Just can't risk Corbyn, and Abbott mate

Abbott I totally understand, she's hopeless. It's a big worry about Corbyn's leadership and judgement that he's got her in the role she's in. But in fairness to him, she wasn't in such a prominent role when he first came to be leader. He's contended with resignations from his shadow cabinet and there isn't a huge pool to choose from. Corbyn has impressed me with his resilience.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:57 am

BleedingClaret wrote:Just can't risk Corbyn, and Abbott mate

It's not really about getting him elected, though it's be nice. This election is about preventing the Tories from running wild and destroying the rights and values that made this country a world leader.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:00 am

Dom wrote:I misread what you wrote, I thought you meant there hadn't been any muslim terrorist attacks before 2016 in the UK.
I think you're totally wrong about the number of muslims willing to inform on terrorist sympathisers. In the "Jihadi next door" documentary, the people most vocal against the Islamic extremist groups were fellow muslims, that's obviously just a snapshot into the World but it shows that they are willing to stand up against it.

Fair enough Dom, glad it made sense on a second reading.

Regards the documentary, without wanting to repeat myself. Maybe they were the 33%.

All im doing is quoting a survey. Its not Ringo gobbing of saying "I reckon half of em wouldn't even tell the old Bill! Grrrrr" without anything to back up my assumptions

I'm simply pointing out the shocking results of a survey that I presume was done in good faith and scientifically. It was published in an Asian Voice newspaper. Hardly the BNP Express.

And perhaps in Westminster bridge, the Arena and London were seeing the appalling results of the silence of the 66%.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:00 am

What IT said

If the Tories get an election result similar to last time, then even the most right wing nutter will realise that there is a limit to just how far they can go.

Hopefully some common sense will then prevail, and May will actually begin to unite the country.

And of course, pigs might fly but you've got to hope haven't you?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:05 am

The problem with the 3% "margin of error" is that if the true position is 46-40, for example, one poll can report it's dead level at 43-43 while another reports one side ahead 49-37, and both can be argued that they were right. Back in the day, the exit poll was basically the result. John Major's majority was (to my memory) the first one in my lifetime where that didn't work. It's much better this way!

(For what it's worth, my theory is that people have realised they don't have to tell the truth to pollsters. GIGO.)

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:06 am

Exit poll was spot on at the last election.

Certainly beats staying up all night

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:07 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:Fair enough Dom, glad it made sense on a second reading.

Regards the documentary, without wanting to repeat myself. Maybe they were the 33%.

All im doing is quoting a survey. Its not Ringo gobbing of saying "I reckon half of em wouldn't even tell the old Bill! Grrrrr"

I'm simply pointing out the shocking results of a survey that I presume was done in good faith and scientifically.

And perhaps in Westminster bridge, the Arena and London were seeing the appalling results of the silence of the 66%.

Yeah apologies, got the wrong end of the stick.
You could be right in that it is the 33% that's reporting it, from what we know of the recent attacks, all the attackers were known to MI5 - that's because they'd been reported from people close to them. It wasn't the "66%" lack of reporting that contributed to the recent atrocities, it's the failure (through no fault of their own IMO) of the police/MI5 not acting upon the intelligence given to them. If they were all unknowns and it happened, then your argument would have more merit, but they had all been reported.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:14 am

dsr wrote:The problem with the 3% "margin of error" is that if the true position is 46-40, for example, one poll can report it's dead level at 43-43 while another reports one side ahead 49-37, and both can be argued that they were right. Back in the day, the exit poll was basically the result. John Major's majority was (to my memory) the first one in my lifetime where that didn't work. It's much better this way!

(For what it's worth, my theory is that people have realised they don't have to tell the truth to pollsters. GIGO.)

Yes, and if the final result was within the MoE for both polls then they can both be considered accurate.

You have this terrible habit of demanding unreasonably precise levels of accuracy from data collection, not just in opinion polling but also climate science and despite my best efforts to explain why your thinking is wrong you're still repeating the same logical mistakes.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:15 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Exit poll was spot on at the last election.

Certainly beats staying up all night

Not quite. It expected a hung parliament with 316 Tory seats. But it was far closer to the outcome than anyone else who had it as a toss up as to which party had the most seats.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:15 am

Dom wrote:Abbott I totally understand, she's hopeless. It's a big worry about Corbyn's leadership and judgement that he's got her in the role she's in. But in fairness to him, she wasn't in such a prominent role when he first came to be leader. He's contended with resignations from his shadow cabinet and there isn't a huge pool to choose from. Corbyn has impressed me with his resilience.

I accept your views, but Corbyn et al are too much of a risk for me, too much to the other extreme.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:20 am

Dom wrote:Yeah apologies, got the wrong end of the stick.
You could be right in that it is the 33% that's reporting it, from what we know of the recent attacks, all the attackers were known to MI5 - that's because they'd been reported from people close to them. It wasn't the "66%" lack of reporting that contributed to the recent atrocities, it's the failure (through no fault of their own IMO) of the police/MI5 not acting upon the intelligence given to them. If they were all unknowns and it happened, then your argument would have more merit, but they had all been reported.

Well you could well be right regards the mi5. Maybe somebody dropped a boll*** and we now see the ramifications in the carnage of innocents.

I'll sign off for the time being. But I'll go back to my original point. Simply throwing 1000s of more coppers at islamic terrorism is no guraneteee of stopping it, given the attitude of 66% of muslims.

I take your point though fella

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:22 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Yes, and if the final result was within the MoE for both polls then they can both be considered accurate.

You have this terrible habit of demanding unreasonably precise levels of accuracy from data collection, not just in opinion polling but also climate science and despite my best efforts to explain why your thinking is wrong you're still repeating the same logical mistakes.

And you have this "terrible habit" of reading whatever you want into other people's posts without regard to what they actually say. I wasn't demanding unreasonable accuracy, I was saying that with all the accuracy they can provide they aren't accurate enough to be useful.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:22 am

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:24 am

dsr wrote:And you have this "terrible habit" of reading whatever you want into other people's posts without regard to what they actually say. I wasn't demanding unreasonable accuracy, I was saying that with all the accuracy they can provide they aren't accurate enough to be useful.

They why do they exist? If they aren't useful then why do private companies spend upto tens of thousands for each poll?

Of course they're useful.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:27 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:It's not really about getting him elected, though it's be nice. This election is about preventing the Tories from running wild and destroying the rights and values that made this country a world leader.

As I Said to Dom, Corbyn is too much of a risk for me, too far to the other extreme.
A PLP lightning Coup just after the election was called, when Corbyn was seen as a no hoper, a David Milliband Andy Burnham combo could have taken this election, a hung Parliament at worst.
At best Corbyn gets a hung Parliament, thus the government is weak either way then.
Off to vote Tory for the first time and then coming home to self flagellate.
Can't believe predictive didn't change that to fellate.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:30 am

Labout voters today...

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:34 am

IT to a politics thread is just like aids to a homosexual.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:35 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:It's not really about getting him elected, though it's be nice. This election is about preventing the Tories from running wild and destroying the rights and values that made this country a world leader.

If Labour had a credible leader with party backing, they would win this just as they would have done the last time if they had backed the right Miliband. With this subversive at the helm, they don't stand a chance. What is the point of just being a protest party. If you want to win, you field your best team.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:36 am

Right_winger wrote:IT to a politics thread is just like aids to a homosexual.

Poor guy, were you recently diagnosed?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:41 am

dermotdermot wrote:If Labour had a credible leader with party backing, they would win this just as they would have done the last time if they had backed the right Miliband. With this subversive at the helm, they don't stand a chance. What is the point of just being a protest party. If you want to win, you field your best team.

If we had a credible press instead of one so rabidly far-right that they can get away with lying through their teeth about Corbyn with the help of a Prime Minister who will blatantly lie about him by taking his words out of context, then Labour would have won this easily.

And this is why we don't have much of a democracy. People still buy papers who lie to them so gleefully, because we like being told what to think.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:43 am

Is there a reason Corbyn won't take legal action against any journalist or paper lying about him ?

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:55 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:If we had a credible press instead of one so rabidly far-right that they can get away with lying through their teeth about Corbyn with the help of a Prime Minister who will blatantly lie about him by taking his words out of context, then Labour would have won this easily.

And this is why we don't have much of a democracy. People still buy papers who lie to them so gleefully, because we like being told what to think.

The press have always been predominantly right wing and it hasn't stopped Labour winning before. I don't see 'lies' anyway. I see facts. Facts that point Corbyn being subversive, hypocritical, anti-semitic, an IRA supporter, an advocate of Hamas and Hezbollah and someone that I wouldn't vote for in a million years.

I'm playing my protest card and voting Consrvative for the first time in my life on account of the Labour Party being so incredibly stupid by placing this cretin in charge.

Mala591 · Post by **Mala591** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:56 am

Just about to vote. My priorities for this election are:

Zero NET immigration over the next 5 years
Reduce foreign aid budget by half and transfer the £5 billion per year to the NHS
Allow families to keep at least £100,000 of their parents estate
Reduce university tuition fees by half but don't make them free
Massive investment in quality building/engineering/science apprenticeships

taio · Post by **taio** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:01 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If we had a credible press instead of one so rabidly far-right that they can get away with lying through their teeth about Corbyn with the help of a Prime Minister who will blatantly lie about him by taking his words out of context, then Labour would have won this easily.

And this is why we don't have much of a democracy. People still buy papers who lie to them so gleefully, because we like being told what to think.

Poppycock.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:02 pm

dermotdermot wrote:The press have always been predominantly right wing and it hasn't stopped Labour winning before. I don't see 'lies' anyway. I see facts. Facts that point Corbyn being subversive, hypocritical, anti-semitic, an IRA supporter, an advocate of Hamas and Hezbollah and someone that I wouldn't vote for in a million years.

I'm playing my protest card and voting Consrvative for the first time in my life on account of the Labour Party being so incredibly stupid by placing this cretin in charge.

Just take a look at this and tell me you're not embarrassed that Theresa May has so few positive qualities that even the Daily Mail couldn't print a single one in their 14 page spread on why to vote for her.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/j ... eason-why/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:38 pm

Turtle, it's one thing to get involved in every political thread but it's quite another to start posting the same picture on each page as per #59 and #103

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:39 pm

Darthlaw wrote:Turtle, it's one thing to get involved in every political thread but it's quite another to start posting the same picture on each page as per #59 and #103

I didn't. I guess the other thread got merged, i thought it had been deleted.

Clarets4me · Post by **Clarets4me** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:46 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If we had a credible press instead of one so rabidly far-right that they can get away with lying through their teeth about Corbyn with the help of a Prime Minister who will blatantly lie about him by taking his words out of context, then Labour would have won this easily.

And this is why we don't have much of a democracy. People still buy papers who lie to them so gleefully, because we like being told what to think.

It's curious that Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott seem to be the only Politicians in history who don't want to be remembered for their speeches !!

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:52 pm

Well if my echo chamber on facebook is to believed there's going to be a unprecedented swing to Labour this year...

Just goes to show how much facebook only shows you stuff you already believe in when it comes to politics

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:55 pm

Falcon wrote:Well if my echo chamber on facebook is to believed there's going to be a unprecedented swing to Labour this year...

Just goes to show how much facebook only shows you stuff you already believe in when it comes to politics

That's why you should make an effort to seek out people you disagree with and tell them how much of a **** they are.

Wait, no. Listen to their point fo view.

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:57 pm

Falcon wrote:Well if my echo chamber on facebook is to believed there's going to be a unprecedented swing to Labour this year...

Just goes to show how much facebook only shows you stuff you already believe in when it comes to politics

I am trying to be as optimistic as I can and can't see past a big Tory victory, don't think Corbyn will attract many of the over 50 vote. Con majority of 50+

COYC73 · Post by **COYC73** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:01 pm

This time tomorrow we will be drinking Corbynistas tears.....

Fill your glasses people

Will be glad to see the back of Corbyn..!!! The end is in sight

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:03 pm

COYC73 wrote:This time tomorrow we will be drinking Corbynistas tears.....
Fill your glasses people

Will be glad to see the back of Corbyn..!!! The end is in sight

Won't be the end of left-wing politics though, so you can expect to be told what to think by the Mail for the foreseeable future. This election has been a big success for the left in terms of getting our agenda back into the discussion, despite the hurdles places in our way by a toxic press.

Dom · Post by **Dom** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:03 pm

COYC73 wrote:This time tomorrow we will be drinking Corbynistas tears.....
Fill your glasses people

Will be glad to see the back of Corbyn..!!! The end is in sight

Don't think many people expect Labour to win, even the most ardent Corbyn supporter. If Corbyn can keep the tories to a narrow majority it'll be seen as a success considering the polls 6 weeks ago which predicted a landslide victory.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:06 pm

For years and years we have been crying out for politicians who aren't just in it for the career, who are honest, humble and down to earth. Then the minute we get one (Corbyn) we give them nothing but abuse and vitriol.

We'll just end up with the politicians we deserve rather than the ones we need, and that's a real shame.

Look at this goon above (COYC) gloating about the inevitable Tory majority, as if politics were like a game of football. Pathetic.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:09 pm

Falcon wrote:For years and years we have been crying out for politicians who aren't just in it for the career, who are honest, humble and down to earth. Then the minute we get one (Corbyn)

Foshiznik · Post by **Foshiznik** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:27 pm

I'm looking forward to waking up tomorrow under a Tory government to find that my human rights have been stripped in the name of fighting terrorism, snooper laws enacted, privatisation of everything from the child protection services and prisons to domestic abuse and other mental health care centre's, the continuing targeting of the dignity and pride of the disabled, Homelessness continuing to rise (it has doubled since 2010), continuing cuts in education and all of this whilst lead by a robotic, flip floppy Trump and Saudi brown-nosing, wannabe Thatcher 2.0 who has fallen out with the EU before the negotiations have even started.

... and people are voting for them because Corbyn spoke to some naughty people in the 80s.

Excellent.

No Ney Never · Post by **No Ney Never** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:32 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Vote Corbyn and get a free sense of humour on the NHS.

Vote Corbyn

The Monster Raving Labour Party

As if.
You have posted so much drivel on this board, it makes it hard to say if this is the most stupid thing you've ever written.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:36 pm

Foshiznik wrote:... and people are voting for them because Corbyn spoke to some naughty people in the 80s.

Excellent.

To be fair, the fact that he's telling me I've won the Spanish lottery without buying a ticket is a bit offputting as well.

(There are better words for mass murder than "naughty", incidentally.)

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:37 pm

No Ney Never wrote:Vote Corbyn
The Monster Raving Labour Party
As if.
You have posted so much drivel on this board, it makes it hard to say if this is the most stupid thing you've ever written.

You took that post literally and then have the nerve to call it stupid?

You do know that the NHS don't supply senses of humour, right?

No Ney Never · Post by **No Ney Never** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:41 pm

If you say so.... Corbyn