Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: not on facebook on May 29, 2017, 08:36:22 pm
-
Corbyn up first getting asked about his terrorist policy's
-
I don't think he exactly has terrorist policies...
-
Well he did not make a fool of himself > could not understand why he or any government are concerned about ex pats living out of the U.K.They choose to up roots and f**k off to whatever land so why even mention them.
When you get corbyn on his own I guess the book is still open,it's when you bring his side kicks in the book gets closed.
With what has gone off in Manchester his thoughts on terrorists is going to go against him before many look at his other policy's.
-
I think the one definite conclusion that can be drawn from Paxman's interview with Corbyn is that Paxman is a compete bellend.
-
That's what pax man is there for to be that bell end.
The one question that sticks out for me was when corbyn was tripping over himself when asked what he would do with a 20 min window to take out a terrorist leader via a drone strike,his answer did not fill you with confidence.
May up next .
This is why these live debates have a die fall as they will be judged on who played the debate Bette or worse.
May getting hammered on the police cut back numbers
-
Why she spouting that the plan after a terror attack worked so well after the act ,when if the attack had been blocked in the first place we all be much more happy.
-
That's what pax man is there for to be that bell end.
No it's not. He isn't there to ask a question then interrupt his interviewee before they've even managed to finish a sentence.
-
If you go on the clap meter from the crowd after corbyn or may have answered their questions > corbyn is pissing this .
Got to point that some of the crowd burst out laughing during a may answer .
-
On the NHS debate here about it been under funding etc etc
Why don't the whatever government fix the NHS issues whstever they are ,then once that it done pay out money it gives away to third rate nations problems etc etc .
-
Wonder how the press will spin that. The crowd laughed at her, not with her, at her. She's a joke. :laugh:
-
Wonder how the press will spin that. The crowd laughed at her, not with her, at her. She's a joke. :laugh:
she is not as strong as thatcher was going on what I just saw.
The polls keep on bleating that torys are out in front but I will never trust a poll again after brexit
and trump outcomes.
-
Do you get a " proxy " from Norway to vote over here ?
-
Another car crash from the Tories, no wonder she's running scared of a head to head debate, Corbyn would tear her a new arsehole!
-
I think the interesting thing was the subjects Paxman chose to focus on.
Summary here that is about right;
Paxman Pushes 100% Tory Agenda - Craig Murray (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/05/paxman-pushes-100-tory-agenda/)
The tactic of constant interruption is intended to disrupt, and does not allow the development of a coherent argument.
-
Do you get a " proxy " from Norway to vote over here ?
If you have moved away from the U.K. to another country it should be se in stone that you
Loose your right to vote back in the U.K,unless you are been paid a U.K. Wage and paying tax and National insurance .
It don't sit right with me that I can vote in this election while I moved away 20 odd years ago and my vote will have a effect on how the people live back in the U.K.
I read somewhere that many expats wanted to got the brexit vote delayed so that they could get their option to vote in it.that was shocking that ex pats now living in whatever country we're kicking up a fuss as they could not vote on brexit.
-
What's the point of agreeing to go on a debate if you are not going to answer the questions? Is she going to do that in the Brexit negotiations?
'A blow-hard who collapses at the first sound of gunfire' was the second best line of the night though - second only to the bloke mouthing 'b*llocks' when she is talking about the NHS figures.
Which unfortunately puts 'because we are not going to do it' when asked why isn't the policy to abolish the monarchy in the Labour Manifesto down into third, but it was a difficult choice.
-
Some choice GIFs links of Teresa Maybot and her misspeak your weight performance;
Theresa May's TV performance mocked with #TheresaMayGIFs hashtag | Politics | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/29/theresa-mays-tv-performance-mocked-with-theresamaygifs-hashtag)
Likely to run and run until election day!
-
How is no deal better than a bad deal?
-
No deal IS a bad deal, probably the worst deal possible.
I have no idea why many people seem to think that this is a good position to take.
-
How is no deal better than a bad deal?
It might be a smoke screen to make the U.K. is happy to walk away with no deals from the EU anf inturn the U.K. Will not pay them a bean in separation money .suppose their legal team will keep them on the ball with that aspect.
The EU do seem to been as bitter as possible about this split .the first sum of payment they was asking was 86 billion £££££s which has now hit 100 billion ££££££££££s .i think they are just playing a numbers game here with the idea of the more they ask for the middle ground will be higher.
I keep on reading that the U.K. Is within its rights to ask to see all documentation of the money that the EU has been given over time and where it has been spent > is this correct? and if so the EU will not or can not show accounts of previous spending.
Also the U.K. Claim that they have money tied up in buildings across Europe via whatever scheme and there is a huge amount of money tied up there which is the U.K.s > is this correct ? As the EU seem to say different.
-
Do you get a " proxy " from Norway to vote over here ?
If you have moved away from the U.K. to another country it should be se in stone that you
Loose your right to vote back in the U.K,unless you are been paid a U.K. Wage and paying tax and National insurance .
It don't sit right with me that I can vote in this election while I moved away 20 odd years ago and my vote will have a effect on how the people live back in the U.K.
I read somewhere that many expats wanted to got the brexit vote delayed so that they could get their option to vote in it.that was shocking that ex pats now living in whatever country we're kicking up a fuss as they could not vote on brexit.
It was under Thatcher that ex-pats were given the right to vote. Because they were thought more likely to vote Tory.
-
What's the point of agreeing to go on a debate if you are not going to answer the questions? Is she going to do that in the Brexit negotiations?
On another messageboard, after May's disastrous Andrew Neill interview, someone asked what May should do at the next interview to repair the damage. I suggested that she just sit there with a paper bag on her head with 'Trust Me' written on it. I haven't seen this Paxo interview yet but it sounds like she should have followed my advice!
-
I thought she did ok last night and there was not much in it,certainly was not her worst interview
-
I thought she did ok last night and there was not much in it,certainly was not her worst interview
Agree. She's not a popular type of politician like Corbyn, Blair or Cameron were. Now that strikes a tone with some but not all that many.
I thought both were good and bad at times. JC for me says a lot of admirable things about fair society increasing funding etc but can't make it pay it's not the real world. He's weak on defence but strong on wanting to help the less advantaged.
May on the other hand is excellent on foreign policy, Brexit and making tough decisions. But the latter will never ever be popular. She makes excellent points on the ageing population and the challenge of paying for it, but how do you do that without being unpopular?
I do think labour have campaigned better, the Tories haven't done as well as they could have. A touch on over confidence perhaps as well as hoping they don't need to buy votes etc....
Time will tell.
-
The fact is, the Torys engineered this election date and the date for the start of Brexit negotiations, they thought it was going to be a landslide victory for them. They are now running scared and the best they can hope for now is a similar majority to now, possibly smaller, it's dawned on them that theres a good chance they might lose the election now, watch the Tory party decsend into civil war if that happens
-
In corbyns perfect world terrorist would not exist and we would all get on and he speaks a good game plan .
But problem is you can't fight a fire without doing anything ,you will never put the fire out but you need to controll it or the fire will controll you.thats where corbyns plans falls with likes of isis.
Talking has shown with the likes of the ira works ,but Iam not covinced at all it will ever work with isis ,hence corbyns downfall.
-
Corbyn's had a bit of a shocker today in this latest interview
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520
-
Corbyn's had a bit of a shocker today in this latest interview
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520
So al the good work he did last night on the live tv questions and answers with small steps forwards has now sent him back the same amount of small steps backwards.
What is it with many mps from either party that they keep on tripping them sens up when asked to explain how they will fund this and that in their policy's .
Christ they all get paid a decent wage to know their jobs ffs.
-
Corbyn's had a bit of a shocker today in this latest interview
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520
HEnce why this should be Tory attack line. Make it look like he is unorganised and can't run things adequately.
-
Corbyn's had a bit of a shocker today in this latest interview
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520
HEnce why this should be Tory attack line. Make it look like he is unorganised and can't run things adequately.
And Hammond getting the HS2 figures wrong by £20bn and sticking to it shouldn't be forgotten either.
-
I personally think that Labour will win this election ,not because I don't like but I just don't trust the polls anymore and would not belive what day it was if they told me.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
-
Corbyn's had a bit of a shocker today in this latest interview
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520
HEnce why this should be Tory attack line. Make it look like he is unorganised and can't run things adequately.
And Hammond getting the HS2 figures wrong by £20bn and sticking to it shouldn't be forgotten either.
It shouldn't but strategically it isn't the best thing for labour to use, they almost always lose an economic argument.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
He was asked for the figures, so it was relevant to the answer he was expected to give.
-
Well I'd rather he found out the correct figure and took 2 secs then gave a wrong figure like we've seen from both sides.
-
The higher up you go on the job scale you expect said persons to know they are talking about.
You can't really get any higher as the PM when it comes to importance even thou the pay is not too $$$$.
Corbyn and may have tripped them sens up when asked about the numbers and figures ,even that idiot Abbott made a fool of her self.
What gets my goat is when they know that they have or are fcuking up and swerve the issue and try to deflect their mistake as if it did not happen and we are the idiots who take it in.
For some reason I can't see the likes of my syme or Glynn ever getting caught with their pants down if put in same situations.
Not that bic & boc would ever get my vote .
-
Do you know, that cheers me up no end. :)
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
I would expect them to yes. It's integral to making the decision.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
I would expect them to yes. It's integral to making the decision.
Would you expect a manifesto to contain full costings, especially when you're saying your opponents figures don't add up
-
For those who missed it, you can see it on YT.
Here is Supreme Leader May dealing with the audience;
Sky News - May vs Corbyn | Theresa May Answers Audience Questions - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueiv52ZLxzA)
Apart from ignoring the question from the police officer, the best bit is the midwife at about 14 mins or so, who asks a good question, then takes her out with the reply after being waffled at.
Other sections of the programme in the side bar.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
I would expect them to yes. It's integral to making the decision.
Would you expect a manifesto to contain full costings, especially when you're saying your opponents figures don't add up
I actually would yes or at least a guide.....
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
I would expect them to yes. It's integral to making the decision.
Would you expect a manifesto to contain full costings, especially when you're saying your opponents figures don't add up
I actually would yes or at least a guide.....
So what are your thoughts on the Conservative manifesto and their lack of costings in relation to the Labour manifesto?
-
That bloke that claimed he was a salt of the earth Labour supporter then complained about Labour wanting to abolish Zero hour contracts and introducing VAT on his kids school tuition fees, his Net Worth is £91M!
-
Do you know, that cheers me up no end. :)
It's obvious that we both see things from completely different ends of our day to day life on numerous aspects.
Because I rarely I don't see things the way you do I can't dismiss that you whatever you post is well thought out and researched and that I tip my hat slightly towrads you.
-
What's wrong with checking figures? Rather that then guess and get them wrong. I don't expect any leader to know every figure off the top of their heads.
It makes no difference to the policy if he knows the exact figures or not does it.
I would expect them to yes. It's integral to making the decision.
Would you expect a manifesto to contain full costings, especially when you're saying your opponents figures don't add up
I actually would yes or at least a guide.....
So what are your thoughts on the Conservative manifesto and their lack of costings in relation to the Labour manifesto?
Exactly that? I've already said I think it's a bad move. I know it's radical to the left but you can be critical of the party you favour. Which I certainly am right now. The Tory campaign hasn't been good enough. But I suspect they'll still win easily.
-
That bloke that claimed he was a salt of the earth Labour supporter then complained about Labour wanting to abolish Zero hour contracts and introducing VAT on his kids school tuition fees, his Net Worth is £91M!
And he can still be a labour supporter. He makes a valid point, why should he having made himself successful now feel alienated by a party he's supported because he's successful? Can you only vote labour if poor?
He made a great point on zero hours contracts. They should not be abolished but equally they should be more tightly regulated. Sadly neither party is doing that.
-
That bloke that claimed he was a salt of the earth Labour supporter then complained about Labour wanting to abolish Zero hour contracts and introducing VAT on his kids school tuition fees, his Net Worth is £91M!
And he can still be a labour supporter. He makes a valid point, why should he having made himself successful now feel alienated by a party he's supported because he's successful? Can you only vote labour if poor?
He made a great point on zero hours contracts. They should not be abolished but equally they should be more tightly regulated. Sadly neither party is doing that.
Tell my lad they should n't be abolished, he has n't had any miney for 5 weeks because the company he's supposed to work for has n't given him any hours, despite them advertising vacancies in the area
-
For as much as Theresa May has tried to use slogans to build her legacy (Brexit means Brexit, Strong and Stable, Coalition of Chaos, No deal is better than a bad deal) it's a strong possibility that her legacy will be calling an election to strengthen her own position and losing.
She didn't have to call this election, she had a working majority, an opposition in dissaray and 3 more years under the fixed Parliament act. I still can't think why she did it.
Corbyn may lack certain leadership qualities but he's always been an activist. This is a man who has been elected as a trade union official, a local councillor, an MP in the same constituency for 8 consecutive general elections and two Labour Leadership contests. Jeremy Corbyn has a history of being better on the campaign trail than in the dispatch box.
This election has been a massive own goal by Theresa May, and honestly I can't wait to see her face wry in agony on the 9th June as she concedes the election.
-
It's fairly clear that May called the election because of her personal popularity over Corbyn and expected Tory landslide that would give her in a short campaign. What she clearly failed to understand was that the impression that most people have of Corbyn had come from his enemies and that the more people saw of him on his terms they might actually like him - and the more we saw of her the less we might like her.
Put that together with the misjudgement that Labour might actually have some policies that were popular when the Tories didn't have any and when questioned try to take the public for idiots - I think Mrs May's political life will be very short even if she does scrape a win.
Here is a totally partisan Theresa May translator to help you through her next appearance:
-
That bloke that claimed he was a salt of the earth Labour supporter then complained about Labour wanting to abolish Zero hour contracts and introducing VAT on his kids school tuition fees, his Net Worth is £91M!
And he can still be a labour supporter. He makes a valid point, why should he having made himself successful now feel alienated by a party he's supported because he's successful? Can you only vote labour if poor?
He made a great point on zero hours contracts. They should not be abolished but equally they should be more tightly regulated. Sadly neither party is doing that.
Tell my lad they should n't be abolished, he has n't had any miney for 5 weeks because the company he's supposed to work for has n't given him any hours, despite them advertising vacancies in the area
Again what I talked about, regulation not abolition.
-
That bloke that claimed he was a salt of the earth Labour supporter then complained about Labour wanting to abolish Zero hour contracts and introducing VAT on his kids school tuition fees, his Net Worth is £91M!
And he can still be a labour supporter. He makes a valid point, why should he having made himself successful now feel alienated by a party he's supported because he's successful? Can you only vote labour if poor?
He made a great point on zero hours contracts. They should not be abolished but equally they should be more tightly regulated. Sadly neither party is doing that.
Tell my lad they should n't be abolished, he has n't had any miney for 5 weeks because the company he's supposed to work for has n't given him any hours, despite them advertising vacancies in the area
Again what I talked about, regulation not abolition.
Does anybody have any regulation proposals?
-
I personally think that Labour will win this election ,not because I don't like but I just don't trust the polls anymore and would not belive what day it was if they told me.
It is virtually impossible for Labour to "win" a General Election because of their huge losses in 2015 in Scotland. Until they start making substantial gains there their best hope is to be the largest party in a hung parliament.
You make a fair point about polls, but some polling companies have a better track record than others. It is often worth looking at overall trends. At the moment I'm reckoning about a 50 seat CON majority. That's on the basis that the numbers will tighten a little more in the next week.
-
I would n't be surprised to see Labour nick it, Corbyn has out performed May on everything, Labour have momentum and the Tories are retreating at an alarming rate. My gut feeling is a hung Parliament though
-
I would n't be surprised to see Labour nick it, Corbyn has out performed May on everything, Labour have momentum and the Tories are retreating at an alarming rate. My gut feeling is a hung Parliament though
Wouldn't it be fun if we end up virtually exactly as we already are? How would May be able to say that she won't call yet another election to 'end the uncertainty' then? :lol:
-
You lot keep on banging on about which party as what policys etc etc ,who can't recall whatever facts or figures .basically you all seem to have some interest and different banks of knowledge on the election that will help you to which box you tick.
But I bet my last dollar that there are untold out there who don't give two shits about policy's and manifestos as they will vote on a party leaders image alone.
maybe that's why brexit got voted in or maybe not.
-
These are the same people that saw the big red bus with £350 million more to the NHS on it and believed it, these are the same people that believe everything they read in mainstream media and that the BBC tells them.
-
Most people who don't give two shits don't bother voting.
-
Well the turnout for the brexit vote was a record high if Iam correct ,so I have to assume that X amount who had never voted in previous elections got upto vote.
-
Do you think the General Election turnout will be as big as the Referendum, or back to the level of the 2015 election?
-
I would n't be surprised to see Labour nick it, Corbyn has out performed May on everything, Labour have momentum and the Tories are retreating at an alarming rate. My gut feeling is a hung Parliament though
Wouldn't it be fun if we end up virtually exactly as we already are? How would May be able to say that she won't call yet another election to 'end the uncertainty' then? :lol:
That's not an inconceivable scenario, Glyn. Personally I think the Tories will have a working majority, probably bigger than they have now. Two things are working in their favour. The UKIP vote has collapsed and will probably go mostly Tory. Also the Lib Dem vote doesn't seem to have picked up, so the Tories will be ok in the London suburbs and south west where otherwise they might have been vulnerable.
Have to say the Tories in general and May in particular have run a pretty wretched campaign. However I'm old enough to remember how poor their campaign was in 1987 (another occasion where they thought they only had to turn up) and they still won a sizeable majority then.
-
I reckon the higher the turnout the greater Labour's chance of winning. If you look at the campaigns they kind of mirror that too - May is trying to frighten people to not vote Labour (if you are not going to voet for me then at least dont vote for him) whereas Corbyn is trying to engage a lot of the people who dont often vote (under 25's - low earners). We wont know who is successful until next week but I will go for - a high turnout - Labour win, a low turnout - Tory win.
-
I wouldn't write off the LibDems yet. Their vote is traditionally highly regionalised and national polls don't really take that into account.
-
Have to say the Tories in general and May in particular have run a pretty wretched campaign. However I'm old enough to remember how poor their campaign was in 1987 (another occasion where they thought they only had to turn up) and they still won a sizeable majority then.
Only because they started off with an absolutely monumental majority to start with! They lost 40-50 seats of their majority then if I remember correctly, from roughly 144 to about 100..?
Imagine them losing that many seats this time!
-
I reckon the higher the turnout the greater Labour's chance of winning. If you look at the campaigns they kind of mirror that too - May is trying to frighten people to not vote Labour (if you are not going to voet for me then at least dont vote for him) whereas Corbyn is trying to engage a lot of the people who dont often vote (under 25's - low earners). We wont know who is successful until next week but I will go for - a high turnout - Labour win, a low turnout - Tory win.
I expect the turnout to be lower than the Referendum and similar to the last couple of GEs.
-
I wouldn't write off the LibDems yet. Their vote is traditionally highly regionalised and national polls don't really take that into account.
All the polling models I've seen (which factor in the localised nature of party support) suggest the LDs will pick up no more than a handful of seats. They may even lose a couple of current holds.
-
Have to say the Tories in general and May in particular have run a pretty wretched campaign. However I'm old enough to remember how poor their campaign was in 1987 (another occasion where they thought they only had to turn up) and they still won a sizeable majority then.
Only because they started off with an absolutely monumental majority to start with! They lost 40-50 seats of their majority then if I remember correctly, from roughly 144 to about 100..?
Imagine them losing that many seats this time!
That is true, but if you recall a number of polls were calling it a lot closer than that. I sat up watching TV on election night 1987 (as is my wont!) expecting an all-nighter. After the first dozen results or so it was clear the Tories were in for a comfortable night.
An example: I was living in Cambridge at the time, a rare example of a three-way marginal. No-one gave the incumbent Tory a price. It was going to be Labour or the Alliance. In the end the Tory hung on.
-
GE turnout.
http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
In last year's referendum, turnout was 72.2%
-
Have to say the Tories in general and May in particular have run a pretty wretched campaign. However I'm old enough to remember how poor their campaign was in 1987 (another occasion where they thought they only had to turn up) and they still won a sizeable majority then.
Only because they started off with an absolutely monumental majority to start with! They lost 40-50 seats of their majority then if I remember correctly, from roughly 144 to about 100..?
Imagine them losing that many seats this time!
That is true, but if you recall a number of polls were calling it a lot closer than that. I sat up watching TV on election night 1987 (as is my wont!) expecting an all-nighter. After the first dozen results or so it was clear the Tories were in for a comfortable night.
Aye, 2015 was a bit like that...
-
Re 2015, most of the polls called it wrong, hence the incredulity that met the forecast of the (very accurate) Exit Poll. I dare say we may have something similar this time.
YouGov, who produced the poll that showed the Tory lead at 4% (Hung Parliament territory) were notoriously off-beam in 2015. They consistently over-estimated the Labour vote and after the election they were sacked as The Sun's pollster.
-
Do you think the General Election turnout will be as big as the Referendum, or back to the level of the 2015 election?
I don't think it will be as high as the brexit vote turnout ,as for dropping down to the 2015 I could not say tbh as I don't know.
When it comes to casting your vote I will say that more older people will get off their backside and visit a polling station to vote.
as the many of the younger generation will not take a visit to their polling station as a serious duty.
The only time that the said younger generation will take their vote more serious is when they get older and their views might well have changed if that makes any sense.
-
I'm predicting a hung parliament. The only way a government will be formed is whoever can side with the SNP. That certainly won't be the Tories.
-
Now there is food for thought another hung parliament
Could Labour hook up with the SNP or vice versa ,or is that one never going to be on the cards.
-
That is true, but if you recall a number of polls were calling it a lot closer than that. I sat up watching TV on election night 1987 (as is my wont!) expecting an all-nighter. After the first dozen results or so it was clear the Tories were in for a comfortable night.
An example: I was living in Cambridge at the time, a rare example of a three-way marginal. No-one gave the incumbent Tory a price. It was going to be Labour or the Alliance. In the end the Tory hung on.
Me too! I did A-level Politics so am addicted to these too. I've even collected most of the BBC Election Night Specials as video files so I can revisit them occasionally. Sad I know, but it is interesting seeing politicians who later became important in their early days as humble spear-carriers! And seeing some of the great characters no longer with us - by 'eck we could do with a few of them these days when they all seem to have identikit personalities.
-
Now there is food for thought another hung parliament
Could Labour hook up with the SNP or vice versa ,or is that one never going to be on the cards.
I can see them having an arrangement where the SNP vote with a minority Labour government, but not a coalition. Any party going into national government in coalition with a regional party is asking for trouble.
-
I personally think that Labour will win this election ,not because I don't like but I just don't trust the polls anymore and would not belive what day it was if they told me.
It is virtually impossible for Labour to "win" a General Election because of their huge losses in 2015 in Scotland. Until they start making substantial gains there their best hope is to be the largest party in a hung parliament.
You make a fair point about polls, but some polling companies have a better track record than others. It is often worth looking at overall trends. At the moment I'm reckoning about a 50 seat CON majority. That's on the basis that the numbers will tighten a little more in the next week.
TRB bang on as usual,same as you were 12 months ago.
-
My clap and cheer readings that I put up and I did point out that the Torys candidate did not get one round of applause after whatever she said.
This has got to do with the make up of the selected bums on seats that were present in the crowd that night.
The fcuking bbc made out it was an equall share of a cross section in the crowd .what a load of b*llocks as Iam sure the crowd was stacked.
No longer can the bbc be said to be neutral ,the set of d**kheads .
My stance will now be to never pay a bbc leicence for their troubles and they can try and take it out of my nose.
-
The only people that are saying the people in the audience were bias are Farage and Boris from what I have seen. Personally I wouldn't believe a word either of them said. Inevitably the audience was always more likely to be slightly left wing sided due to the stances of the 5 parties involved. This is purely UKIP and the Tories being bad losers as they came out of the debate looking like tits!!
-
My clap and cheer readings that I put up and I did point out that the Torys candidate did not get one round of applause after whatever she said.
This has got to do with the make up of the selected bums on seats that were present in the crowd that night.
The fcuking bbc made out it was an equall share of a cross section in the crowd .what a load of b*llocks as Iam sure the crowd was stacked.
No longer can the bbc be said to be neutral ,the set of d**kheads .
My stance will now be to never pay a bbc leicence for their troubles and they can try and take it out of my nose.
Yet again you blurt without thought.
The audience wasn't chosen by the BBC at all. It was selected by an independent body, Comres, so that there was an equal number of party supporters across the boards as well as a number of undecideds; and it also selected them so as to get a representative brexit/remain balance as well.
-
Those of you that like to tinker with your majority might enjoy playing around on here;
Electoral Calculus (http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html)
Nowt better than adjusting your variables to give the outcome you want!
Trouble with all this debate is that people keep thinking that the past tells you information relevant to this election.
What if that does not hold good, and we are in a new (and more volatile) political landscape?
-
Those of you that like to tinker with your majority might enjoy playing around on here;
Electoral Calculus (http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html)
Nowt better than adjusting your variables to give the outcome you want!
Trouble with all this debate is that people keep thinking that the past tells you information relevant to this election.
What if that does not hold good, and we are in a new (and more volatile) political landscape?
That's what the science of psephology is all about!
-
Yes Glyn, thats why I put up the link.
The various methods are set out on the site;
Electoral Calculus Psephology (http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/psephology.html)
but the question I was putting is that the nature of political dialogue is changing, and so the voting intentions of electors may need a new approach to accurately capture future trends.
-
Part of psephology is to study changes and what their impacts may be, not just to wait until after they happen. But no prediciton, however well researched and weighted, has any guarantee of accuracy - and never has.
What changes in the nature of political dialogue are you thinking of in particular?
-
The most important at the moment is the use of social media as a communication tool, rather than a reliance on traditional broadcast media.
That is not to say that the latter are not important, but they are of declining importance. They also speak to a different demographic. Older voters are much less likely to get political information (and disinformation) from Twitter/Facebook and the rest.
All of which means that the flow of information, and its particular relevance to the individual receiving it, is more concentrated depending on the source.
Changes in voting intention are likely to be more volatile imo, and this is the key to understanding future predictive responses. All the political parties have got this, but how good they are at using it remains to be seen.
The issue for Labour this time is getting younger voters to the polls;
Turnout of younger voters holds key to election outcome | Alan Travis | Politics | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/how-pollsters-deal-with-turnout-rates-is-key-to-tories-reduced-lead)
The issue for the Tories is not to piss off the elders, so that they just don't turn out.
-
My clap and cheer readings that I put up and I did point out that the Torys candidate did not get one round of applause after whatever she said.
This has got to do with the make up of the selected bums on seats that were present in the crowd that night.
The fcuking bbc made out it was an equall share of a cross section in the crowd .what a load of b*llocks as Iam sure the crowd was stacked.
No longer can the bbc be said to be neutral ,the set of d**kheads .
My stance will now be to never pay a bbc leicence for their troubles and they can try and take it out of my nose.
Yet again you blurt without thought.
The audience wasn't chosen by the BBC at all. It was selected by an independent body, Comres, so that there was an equal number of party supporters across the boards as well as a number of undecideds; and it also selected them so as to get a representative brexit/remain balance as well.
How many Doncaster/South Yorkshire accents were in evidence when question time was screened from Doncaster?
-
The most important at the moment is the use of social media as a communication tool, rather than a reliance on traditional broadcast media.
That is not to say that the latter are not important, but they are of declining importance. They also speak to a different demographic. Older voters are much less likely to get political information (and disinformation) from Twitter/Facebook and the rest.
All of which means that the flow of information, and its particular relevance to the individual receiving it, is more concentrated depending on the source.
Changes in voting intention are likely to be more volatile imo, and this is the key to understanding future predictive responses. All the political parties have got this, but how good they are at using it remains to be seen.
The issue for Labour this time is getting younger voters to the polls;
Turnout of younger voters holds key to election outcome | Alan Travis | Politics | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/how-pollsters-deal-with-turnout-rates-is-key-to-tories-reduced-lead)
The issue for the Tories is not to piss off the elders, so that they just don't turn out.
Communication is communication, I don't think the medium used is that important at all. Did newspapers have an effect when they become popularly used? Or the telephone, radio, television, or the internet? Not as far as I can see. The message is the important factor, not how it's delivered and that's always been the case.
-
My clap and cheer readings that I put up and I did point out that the Torys candidate did not get one round of applause after whatever she said.
This has got to do with the make up of the selected bums on seats that were present in the crowd that night.
The fcuking bbc made out it was an equall share of a cross section in the crowd .what a load of b*llocks as Iam sure the crowd was stacked.
No longer can the bbc be said to be neutral ,the set of d**kheads .
My stance will now be to never pay a bbc leicence for their troubles and they can try and take it out of my nose.
Yet again you blurt without thought.
The audience wasn't chosen by the BBC at all. It was selected by an independent body, Comres, so that there was an equal number of party supporters across the boards as well as a number of undecideds; and it also selected them so as to get a representative brexit/remain balance as well.
How many Doncaster/South Yorkshire accents were in evidence when question time was screened from Doncaster?
What's Question Time got to do with the audience for the Leader debates, which is what NOF is talking about? Question Time audiences apply to attend, completely different to the debate.
-
If the BBC are so biased against the Tories why have they banned their stations playing the Captain Ska song - even though it is set to be No1 in the charts? There's not much Daily Mail reader anguish at this censorship is there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/liar-liar-ge2017-petition-radio-one-stations-force-play-theresa-may-protest-song-captain-ska-a7766621.html
-
If the BBC are so biased against the Tories why have they banned their stations playing the Captain Ska song - even though it is set to be No1 in the charts? There's not much Daily Mail reader anguish at this censorship is there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/liar-liar-ge2017-petition-radio-one-stations-force-play-theresa-may-protest-song-captain-ska-a7766621.html
They can't because of the political balance enforced on the BBC at Election times. They'll be free to play it after 10pm next Thursday.
-
If the BBC are so biased against the Tories why have they banned their stations playing the Captain Ska song - even though it is set to be No1 in the charts? There's not much Daily Mail reader anguish at this censorship is there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/liar-liar-ge2017-petition-radio-one-stations-force-play-theresa-may-protest-song-captain-ska-a7766621.html
They can't because of the political balance enforced on the BBC at Election times. They'll be free to play it after 10pm next Thursday.
It doesn't show any support to any party (just attacks the incumbent) and doesn't make any reference to constituency politics.
If a DJ on a BBC radio chooses to play it then he may be breaking the law. However the reason it should be played is because it's in the charts as chosen by the public.
I'd also strongly argue that I'm yet to see any political balance from the BBC on this whole campaign. They've been a bad as Murdoch in their anti Corbyn bias.
-
Glynn the bbc are basis towards a movement within the U.K. Society.
It is fead down from the top throu it's viens via different means .
-
If the BBC are so biased against the Tories why have they banned their stations playing the Captain Ska song - even though it is set to be No1 in the charts? There's not much Daily Mail reader anguish at this censorship is there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/liar-liar-ge2017-petition-radio-one-stations-force-play-theresa-may-protest-song-captain-ska-a7766621.html
They can't because of the political balance enforced on the BBC at Election times. They'll be free to play it after 10pm next Thursday.
It doesn't show any support to any party (just attacks the incumbent) and doesn't make any reference to constituency politics.
If a DJ on a BBC radio chooses to play it then he may be breaking the law. However the reason it should be played is because it's in the charts as chosen by the public.
I'd also strongly argue that I'm yet to see any political balance from the BBC on this whole campaign. They've been a bad as Murdoch in their anti Corbyn bias.
Reference to constituency politics in irrelevant as both the BBC and Ofcom guidelines both cover parties as well as constituency candidates. Mind you it could be argued that Theresa May is standing in her own constituency!
Something such as this doesn't have to show support for anybody, by attacking the PM and only the PM it is political and unbalanced. Perhaps you can recommend an anti-Corbyn song they can play alongside it to provide the balance?
Playing it just because it's in the charts is irrelevant as well. There's also the legal minefield of misrepresentation as I very much doubt that Theresa May has given her permission for her voice to be used in this way.
-
Glynn the bbc are basis towards a movement within the U.K. Society.
It is fead down from the top throu it's viens via different means .
Eh?
-
Tonight's Question Time crowd were a bit nuke happy.
-
Clearly the BBC got the memo from the right-wingers about their audience. Swivel-eye central tonight.
Why do so many f**kwits think a nuclear launch would be like a Tom Clancy novel? With a green radar and a red button and Corbyn turning a key and having to press it? It's easy to say "yeah nuke em, whatever" when you're a man on the street but when you have a small-to-middling chance of being in no 10 next week I think it's good to have someone who wants to think about it and won't commit to gleefully plunging the world into a fiery nuclear end 4.5 billion years ahead of schedule.
-
The interesting thing about the Trident trope is that it is not independent, and the UK does not control any decision over its possible use.
We never have had any control, it is a US support system whose value is purely symbolic.
The depressing aspect was the familiar rehearsal of set positions in a piece of theatre, with no significant exploration of policy choices. Sad and patronising.
-
Absolutely embarrassing to hear some of the comments from the audience regarding the use of nuclear weapons. Some people clearly letting their war boners get in the way of common sense.
Fair play to the woman who called the war-mongers out.
-
Question to Corbyn - why wont you condemn terrorists who kill people?
Question to Corbyn - why wont you use nuclear weapons to kill people?
I pity anyone who lives in York and has to meet these people on a daily basis.
-
3 answers about tonight's debate from york on bbc one and no body has mentioned how this debate was much more clean and to the point than the 7 party debate the other night.
I now see why may did not attended the 7 party leaders debate as that was all about nit picking and ended up in a farce at times.
Unlike tonight's debate where both leaders were put under the kosh via whatever questions.
Both may and corbyn seemed to do their best and were evenly matched in my opinion .the only downfall I could point out was when corbyn wasted time at the very start of his slot to dig out may for not attending the farce of the live 7 party tv debate.
Put the leaders up infront of the general public and you see a far more clear and better picture > put them up in front of each other and the general public and it becomes messy and school playgroundish.
7 party leaders debates only gains are the fcuking media .
Watch and learn as the saying goes.
-
Question to Corbyn - why wont you condemn terrorists who kill people?
Question to Corbyn - why wont you use nuclear weapons to kill people?
I pity anyone who lives in York and has to meet these people on a daily basis.
So how would you ask a question to raise the issue that they was trying to get across?
He was asked what's on many persons minds and corbyn answered it the way he believed in .
Some people will like his answer as some people will not like his answer ,that's the whole idea of the questions and answers so it can help decide on who you vote for.
Or do you think questions only should be asked that make him or her look comfortable and happy .
-
3 answers about tonight's debate from york on bbc one and no body has mentioned how this debate was much more clean and to the point than the 7 party debate the other night.
I now see why may did not attended the 7 party leaders debate as that was all about nit picking and ended up in a farce at times.
Unlike tonight's debate where both leaders were put under the kosh via whatever questions.
Both may and corbyn seemed to do their best and were evenly matched in my opinion .the only downfall I could point out was when corbyn wasted time at the very start of his slot to dig out may for not attending the farce of the live 7 party tv debate.
Put the leaders up infront of the general public and you see a far more clear and better picture > put them up in front of each other and the general public and it becomes messy and school playgroundish.
7 party leaders debates only gains are the fcuking media .
Watch and learn as the saying goes.
I agree that a 7-way debate was always going to be a shambles. The same happened in the 2016 Republican primaries in the US.
I don't, however, think this justifies there not being a debate between the leader of the Tories and the leader of the Labour Party. One of them will be PM.
-
The most important part of a debate of this importance is so the general public can watch listen and learn then vote.
Not watch listen learn then get side tracked by the party leaders wether it be 2,3,4,5,6, or 7 turning into a mud throwing exercise .
Before I had nothing but contempt for corbyn for whatever reasons ,but after tonight I type tip my hat too him as he believes in what he stands for .i don't get that impression with may.
But then I bring likes of Abbott into the fold and any positive that had for corbyn drifts away,and that is his fault .
-
Question to Corbyn - why wont you condemn terrorists who kill people?
Question to Corbyn - why wont you use nuclear weapons to kill people?
I pity anyone who lives in York and has to meet these people on a daily basis.
So how would you ask a question to raise the issue that they was trying to get across?
He was asked what's on many persons minds and corbyn answered it the way he believed in .
Some people will like his answer as some people will not like his answer ,that's the whole idea of the questions and answers so it can help decide on who you vote for.
Or do you think questions only should be asked that make him or her look comfortable and happy .
I'd rather questions were asked which haven't been repeated over and over this past week.
-
You have raised a valid issue there mr crippycooke as you can bet your last $$$$ that near enough the same questions will be asked on the next question time .
The leaders will answer bascially in the exact same way aswell ,so as you point out the general public learn nothing new.
But corbyn and may can only answer what they are asked I guess.
One thing I did notice about tonight is that may on numerous occasions recalled the exact name of the person who asked a previous question into her answer > corbyn did not .
If this was a boxing match may would have got extra points for that .
The question I ask is > was may coached into doing this or did it come from her heart ? as it certianly came across as a possitive tact.
Corbyn did not recall any names of people that asked him any previous question ,so I guess it will not go as a positive or a negative but they are trying to appeal to the non decided voters .
-
So you'd respond more positively if you asked me if I was going to stab you and I used your name in my answer than if I didn't?
-
It would have been even more illuminating if they'd both been asked the same questions so you could directly compare their answers.