there's an election

[Renegade]

Thought Corbyn did well, stayed calm under the Paxman barrage of nonsense. As entertaining as Paxman is, he adds nothing of value to the public debate, he appears to only be a factor for television ratings. I mean, how many times does Corbyn have to answer that it's the Labour manifesto, not the Jeremy Corbyn manifesto before he stops asking about policies that Corbyn doesn't personally agree with? No politician agrees with all of their party's policies, it's a democracy you gimp.

 

[Stringy]

May's sentences contained lots of false starts and her voice was shaking all the way through. The audience laughed at her on several occasions and it was understandable as her performance was shocking.

As I see it, Labour's manifesto is better and Corbyn is showing himself to be the stronger candidate. Prying into Corbyn's past isn't working because he can simply explain it away as fostering discussion between those would otherwise remain embittered. This might be a closer fight than we thought.

I'm starting to feel more apprehensive about Brexit now. Whoever is in charge will do well to get a good deal. Certainly there shouldn't be jingoistic cheering at the prospect of 'no deal over a bad deal'.

What will happen if we can't get a deal while we sit on the edge of a protectionist EU? I'm not an expert but surely it will be extremely difficult to import/export anything at a reasonable cost, which will ruin all kinds of industry if we can't find other more developed economies with which to trade. I fear we may have traded prosperity for restrictions over travel.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

I didn't catch this but from what I've read both here and elsewhere it does rather sound as though Paxo ought to be put out to pasture. In truth I've never been very fond of his adversarial style. It just makes for a frustrating watch more often that not.

 

[Veggie Legs]

A Conservative candidate for the seat formerly held by the murdered MP Jo Coxhas apologised and blamed fatigue for telling a hustings: “We’ve not yet shot anybody so that’s wonderful.”

I think you might have shot yourself in the foot...

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...x-seat-batley-spen-gun-joke-apology-ann-myatt

 

[shane]

Morons clapping "no deal is better than a bad deal"

Err, no it isn't, it'd be literally the shittest decision this country could possibly make.

But what does "no deal" actually look like? Genuine question.

I think May played to par. No one expected her to be affable and engaging but I thing she came away looking like the "difficult woman" the Tories are happy for her to be perceived as.

Corbyn did very well. That Paxman used the program as a vehicle to show he "still has it" played right in to Corbyn's hands as he didn't lose his cool and with his answers to questions like the abolition of the monarchy, came away as likeable.

 

[Alty]

Main thing I took away from it was that being a politician would be fucking horrible. I thought in their own ways they both did okay, actually.

May has had a poor campaign thus far but as soon as the discussion comes down to the logistics of Brexit negotiations, which is the crucial issue facing us over the next few years, she shows much more self-assurance. It's quite esoteric but when she brings up the stuff about JHA negotiations in recent years she's right - she does have a decent record in this area.

I sympathise with Corbyn because he clearly hates the EU and is in favour of Brexit, but he has absolutely no record of negotiating for Britain internationally and the bulk of the PLP would be delighted with an EEA arrangement. I just don't believe he has the tools or the support to negotiate a good deal.

The Northern Ireland stuff is getting a bit tiring now. I sort of wish it was the kind of issue that could be opined on by Full Fact or someone, but the bottom line is that Corbyn believed (and, I suspect, believes) in Irish unity. He wasn't a 'cheerleader' or a proponent of violence, but nor did he ever come out and condemn the IRA unequivocally. His closest allies seem to hold similar views (in McDonnell's and Abbott's cases, even ropier ideas, TBH). People should know that and make of it what they will. Honestly, with no realistic prospect of a united Ireland or armed conflict, I suspect most won't think it's that relevant.

 

[Captain Scumbag]

But what does "no deal" actually look like? Genuine question.

No one knows for certain, but 99.99% of the people carping about that slogan don’t even have a vague idea. If put on the spot, they couldn’t even identify the few obvious pros and cons of the so-called WTO option.

More importantly, literally no one knows what the “bad deal” would involve, since at this stage it’s nothing more than an abstract hypothetical.

“Any deal is better than no deal” – the implied position of those who rubbish the “no deal is better than a bad deal” idea out of hand – is actually even more idiotic when you really think about it. If you hired someone to negotiate on your behalf, would you instruct them to secure your preferred deal at any price? I doubt it. No one with half a brain would. In one of her least awful moments last night, Mrs May actually got this point over fairly well.

 

[Alty]

But what does "no deal" actually look like? Genuine question.

I think May played to par. No one expected her to be affable and engaging but I thing she came away looking like the "difficult woman" the Tories are happy for her to be perceived as.

Corbyn did very well. That Paxman used the program as a vehicle to show he "still has it" played right in to Corbyn's hands as he didn't lose his cool and with his answers to questions like the abolition of the monarchy, came away as likeable.

Trading on World Trade Organisation rules. Duties (mostly low, a bit higher in certain areas) on goods going between the UK and the EU.

Clearly this is a better deal than something like tariff free access in some areas, but not others, plus having to accept Free Movement, plus having to pay a £100 billion 'divorce bill'.

The prospect of no deal whatsoever seems utterly implausible to me, not least because both parties (the EU even more so than us) are keen to continue security cooperation, but the ignorance/naivety of people who say up front we should guarantee EU residence rights without any reciprocation AND broadcast that we're desperate for any sort of deal because no deal would be a catastrophe is quite amazing. I actually think in the longer arc of history this is the kind of mind-set we need to change as a nation. The idea that little England [sic] is of no international relevance and can achieve nothing as a self-governing country has become quite entrenched.

I can't wait for all this to be over now. Assuming there's no backsliding and the negotiations aren't botched, I think people might grow to like being part of an independent country in the future. With the Europe issue settled, we could even move on to the next layer of undemocratic systems and practices like the House of Lords and the electoral system.

 

[Abertawe]

No one knows for certain, but 99.99% of the people carping about that slogan don’t even have a vague idea. If put on the spot, they couldn’t even identify the few obvious pros and cons of the so-called WTO option.

More importantly, literally no one knows what the “bad deal” would involve, since at this stage it’s nothing more than an abstract hypothetical.

“Any deal is better than no deal” – the implied position of those who rubbish the “no deal is better than a bad deal” idea out of hand – is actually even more idiotic when you really think about it. If you hired someone to negotiate on your behalf, would you instruct them to secure your preferred deal at any price? I doubt it. No one with half a brain would. In one of her least awful moments last night, Mrs May actually got this point over fairly well.

Well no it isn't. If we can't get a deal then we shouldn't fucking leave. The consequences of a no deal would be appalling.

 

[Alty]

Well no it isn't. If we can't get a deal then we shouldn't fucking leave. The consequences of a no deal would be appalling.

No they wouldn't. But even if they were, would you go into negotiations saying "any deal is better than no deal"? This isn't difficult stuff to understand, surely?

 

[Gladders]

I see Jezza has now stumbled in an inteview and has no idea how much his free childcare policy will cost.

Is labour really the party you want in control of the country's money?

 

[Abertawe]

No they wouldn't. But even if they were, would you go into negotiations saying "any deal is better than no deal"? This isn't difficult stuff to understand, surely?

No deal isn't an option, therefore it's non sensical to even throw it out there as one. This isn't difficult to understand, surely?

 

[Abertawe]

I see Jezza has now stumbled in an inteview and has no idea how much his free childcare policy will cost.

Is labour really the party you want in control of the country's money?

Using that logic three cabinet members have gotten their figures wrong too thus can't be trusted. It's a sad sad situation.

 

[BeesKnees]

But what does "no deal" actually look like? Genuine question.

I think May played to par. No one expected her to be affable and engaging but I thing she came away looking like the "difficult woman" the Tories are happy for her to be perceived as.

Corbyn did very well. That Paxman used the program as a vehicle to show he "still has it" played right in to Corbyn's hands as he didn't lose his cool and with his answers to questions like the abolition of the monarchy, came away as likeable.

These are the treasuries figures

 

[BeesKnees]

Using that logic three cabinet members have gotten their figures wrong too thus can't be trusted. It's a sad sad situation.

I'm tired of interviewers having a list of numbers in front of them and performing maths tests.

If a party has published the figures then just get on with challenging the figures and the policy.

So far a dozen politicians have been caught out, but the reality is it doesn't matter as the figures are publicly available. It's cheap tricks by reporters to get themselves noticed.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Was very impressed with Corbyn's ability to engage with the audience. Paxmans one liner is going to hurt May.

New poll out as well
Westminster voting intention:

CON: 43% (-)
LAB: 37% (+3)
LDEM: 8% (-)
UKIP: 4% (-)

(via @Survation / 26 - 27 May)

That survation poll is kinda bizarre. 82% of the 18-24's surveyed said they were certain to vote. They also asked whether they voted remain or leave and 86.5% of the 18-24s said they voted (one way or the other) - turnout was actually 64%. So I reckon there's sampling bias somewhere there that they're not fully accounting for (turnout for over 65's matched - by contrast).

What I'm saying is don't get your hopes up.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

With the Europe issue settled, we could even move on to the next layer of undemocratic systems and practices like the House of Lords and the electoral system.

The Conservatives want to bring in voter ID laws (which would not have prevented significant recent cases of electoral fraud but do limit access to the ballot box), first past the post in elections that currently use supplementary systems.

I wouldn't hold your breath for the tories doing anything to address any "undemocratic systems".

 

[BeesKnees]

That survation poll is kinda bizarre. 82% of the 18-24's surveyed said they were certain to vote. They also asked whether they voted remain or leave and 86.5% of the 18-24s said they voted (one way or the other) - turnout was actually 64%. So I reckon there's sampling bias somewhere there that they're not fully accounting for (turnout for over 65's matched - by contrast).

What I'm saying is don't get your hopes up.

Not changed my view yet, still expecting a 50 seat tory majority.

There does seem to be a boost to young people voting, but seeing is believing

 

[Alty]

The Conservatives want to bring in voter ID laws (which would not have prevented significant recent cases of electoral fraud but do limit access to the ballot box), first past the post in elections that currently use supplementary systems.

I wouldn't hold your breath for the tories doing anything to address any "undemocratic systems".

Which is handy, because I'm most certainly not.

Funnily enough, I do not anticipate the Tories winning every single election from now until eternity. Few if any Brexiteers think everything is going to be brilliant the day after we leave. This is a longer term issue about democracy, trade and nationhood.

Bit of a side issue but even the Lib Dems were advocating an EU referendum not that long ago, for precisely this reason. We need to decide once and for all whether that's the direction we want for the country. Then once it's put to bed, we can focus on everything else rather than harking back to this great question about independence vs integration every 5 years.

Funny how having advocated it Cleggers than said it was a terrible idea once Cameron did it, and is now backing calls for a second referendum. I suppose with that record we shouldn't be surprised the party are making no progress in the polls.

 

[Alty]

No deal isn't an option, therefore it's non sensical to even throw it out there as one. This isn't difficult to understand, surely?

Suspect you're being deliberately obtuse here, but I don't think you're actually an idiot. How good a deal do you anticipate the EU offering if our opening gambit is as follows?

"Look, Michel, just so you know our position at the outset, if you give us any sort of deal that'll be better than nothing. Right, let's get down to it."

Favourable terms to follow, do you think?

 

[Abertawe]

Suspect you're being deliberately obtuse here, but I don't think you're actually an idiot. How good a deal do you anticipate the EU offering if our opening gambit is as follows?

"Look, Michel, just so you know our position at the outset, if you give us any sort of deal that'll be better than nothing. Right, let's get down to it."

Favourable terms to follow, do you think?

How about "Look, Michel, were all fucking adults here. What's good for us is ultimately good for you. How about we bang something out that benefits people on both sides of the channel rather than declining their living standards"

You don't negotiate by proposing a scenario that you wouldn't follow through with. That's first day stuff in the art of negotiating school. If that's really how a Conservative government would approach this then we should all be very very worried. Our bluff would be called straight off the bat. What happens then? We leave (scumbag talking like WTO wouldn't be anything other than complete catastrophic limbo LOL) or they U turn and we look completely weak and the EU play with us like a cat with a ball of string.

Shape up Alty.

 

[Stringy]

We need access to that single market. I know this. You know this. The EU knows this. Whether May goes into the negotiations all guns blazing or Corbyn goes in with complimentary tea and biscuits it makes no difference. The alternative for Britain is forging new trade deals and finding new partners. This will take time. As the first to leave we are in a very, very weak position. From the perspective of the EU it makes no sense to help us. They don't need to giveaway what we want. It makes sense for them not to give us access.

Perhaps we do need to be more positive but at the moment it seems bleak. Maybe some positive stuff on potential trade deals would improve our bargaining position.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Suspect you're being deliberately obtuse here, but I don't think you're actually an idiot. How good a deal do you anticipate the EU offering if our opening gambit is as follows?

"Look, Michel, just so you know our position at the outset, if you give us any sort of deal that'll be better than nothing. Right, let's get down to it."

Favourable terms to follow, do you think?

The best way to approach any sort of negotiation is that to assume that you both want to do a deal that is of mutual benefit, rather than ranting on about how you'll walk away if you don't get what you want all the time. That just comes across weak and desperate - tacit acknowledgement you're negotiating from a position of weakness.

I don't believe that Corbyn would accept *any* deal, no matter how bad - it's a rhetorical positioning thing. "No deal" is an option of last resort for both us and the EU, though, so it seems bizarre that May is threatening it before they've even begun.

I also think the outcome of Brexit negotiations will be affected by public opinion in Europe and the UK. I think the way Theresa May is positioning herself benefits her election campaign but potentially does a lot of damage to the perception of the UK and makes any eventual deal less favourable.

 

[Stringy]

We need access to that single market. I know this. You know this. The EU knows this. Whether May goes into the negotiations all guns blazing or Corbyn goes in with complimentary tea and biscuits it makes no difference. The alternative for Britain is forging new trade deals and finding new partners. This will take time. As the first to leave we are in a very, very weak position. From the perspective of the EU it makes no sense to help us. They don't need to giveaway what we want. It makes sense for them not to give us access.

Perhaps we do need to be more positive but at the moment it seems bleak. Maybe some positive stuff on potential trade deals would improve our bargaining position.

Sorry, I realise this sounds like I'm preaching doom. I think this means like what others have said that we need to be kind and promote the benefit of reciprocity, rather than antagonising others.

We are the buyer and the seller doesn't want to sell.

 

[Alty]

The best way to approach any sort of negotiation is that to assume that you both want to do a deal that is of mutual benefit, rather than ranting on about how you'll walk away if you don't get what you want all the time. That just comes across weak and desperate - tacit acknowledgement you're negotiating from a position of weakness.

I don't believe that Corbyn would accept *any* deal, no matter how bad - it's a rhetorical positioning thing. "No deal" is an option of last resort for both us and the EU, though, so it seems bizarre that May is threatening it before they've even begun.

I also think the outcome of Brexit negotiations will be affected by public opinion in Europe and the UK. I think the way Theresa May is positioning herself benefits her election campaign but potentially does a lot of damage to the perception of the UK and makes any eventual deal less favourable.

Of course. Which, as I stated earlier, is why I think a deal will be done. But I don't think stating a fundamental principle that you're prepared to walk away is particularly inflammatory or damaging. TBH it's the EU who are being most difficult here. All sensible people agree it would be mutually beneficial for British and EU citizens to be guaranteed the right to remain. We've gone to the EU in the spirit of cooperation saying we'll guarantee their 3 million right now if they do the same for our 1 million. They've point blanked refused. And have also put out malicious briefing designed to undermine the PM's position.

Our mob are far from perfect but the idea that the EU are only too keen to be helpful and we're throwing it back in their face is horse shit.

 

[NorthernSoul]

I see Jezza has now stumbled in an inteview and has no idea how much his free childcare policy will cost.

Is labour really the party you want in control of the country's money?

Could be worse, could have guessed and been wrong by 20bn. Oh wait didn't Philip Hammond do that? The current Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Is that really the party you want in control of the Country's money?

 

[Aber gas]

Sat in 'Spoons after work earwhigging on a Tory activist admitting that they've all but lost in Bristol and South Glos. Good stuff

 

[mowgli]

I can't think of anything worse for our country than having Abbott and Thornberry as ministers in government. Seeing them both on Question Time since The EU referendum shows they both should never be anywhere near being in government,they are both clowns who have no respect for democracy as it goes against their own views.

 

[Aber gas]

I can't think of anything worse for our country than having Abbott and Thornberry as ministers in government. Seeing them both on Question Time since The EU referendum shows they both should never be anywhere near being in government,they are both clowns who have no respect for democracy as it goes against their own views.

I'm sure you can think of worse things. How's about 5 more years of disabled people being persecuted and killing themselves because of vindictive benefit cuts, how's about thousands ( millions) of children being plunged into a never ending cycle of poverty, how's about the services that millions of us rely on being cut to the point that we have to make decisions based on budget rather than need. Don't panic, Brexit is happening. Think on the bigger picture.

 

[BeesKnees]

I can't think of anything worse for our country than having Abbott and Thornberry as ministers in government. Seeing them both on Question Time since The EU referendum shows they both should never be anywhere near being in government,they are both clowns who have no respect for democracy as it goes against their own views.

I feel the same about Truss, Ledsham, Johnson and Fallen so I'm definitely not making my decisions based on quality of the cabinet. Although I am certain Kier Starmer is more effective than David Davis.