Viking Supporters Co-operative

Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: tommy toes on June 09, 2017, 01:49:52 pm

Title: FAO The absent BST
Post by: tommy toes on June 09, 2017, 01:49:52 pm
You were certain that Labour would crash and burn under Corbyn. You wre scathing about him and the left of the party.
You went on and on about 1983 and just wouldnt accept that things were different now.
You just couldnt see it.
Come back and explain yersen spadge.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: selby on June 09, 2017, 02:49:03 pm
Tommy,someone so passionate about labour as BST will not be bothered about being wrong today mate.He will be bubbling.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: roversdude on June 09, 2017, 03:02:52 pm
Has anyone ever seen BST and Theresa May together- maybe BST has been busy for the last few months
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: mushRTID on June 09, 2017, 03:07:02 pm
Where is he anyway??

Didn't he always used to shoot people down for "babbying"?

Is he babbying?
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: GazLaz on June 09, 2017, 03:50:02 pm
But didn't Labour get beat? Aren't they celebrating just not getting spanked as badly as they thought they would?
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: NickDRFC on June 09, 2017, 04:05:27 pm
Look as though he's still lurking even if not posting - last online on 2nd June.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: drfchound on June 09, 2017, 04:29:34 pm
But didn't Labour get beat? Aren't they celebrating just not getting spanked as badly as they thought they would?




Gaz, come on, that can't be true can it.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: RedJ on June 09, 2017, 04:32:55 pm
But didn't Labour get beat? Aren't they celebrating just not getting spanked as badly as they thought they would?

They've done better than 2015. So no not really as they've made gains.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: drfchound on June 09, 2017, 04:48:06 pm
But didn't Labour get beat? Aren't they celebrating just not getting spanked as badly as they thought they would?

They've done better than 2015. So no not really as they've made gains.




RedJ, isnt that what he said but in different words.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: MachoMadness on June 09, 2017, 05:03:32 pm
Labour are the team that scraps and avoids relegation comfortably in the end. Tories are the team that throws millions, has the biggest ground at it and fails to make the play-offs. They're both mid table but relatively speaking only one can be considered to be a success. Only one team has a solid platform to build on in future, and an energised youth vote which many said was impossible.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: tommy toes on June 09, 2017, 05:05:50 pm
Biggest share of the vote - 41% since 1945.
I'd call that a good result.
BST was adamant Labour would be sunk without trace under Corbyn.
He couldn't have been more wrong.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: CrippyCooke on June 09, 2017, 05:21:13 pm
Preventing a Tory majority is worthy of celebration.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: bpoolrover on June 09, 2017, 05:27:44 pm
Thing is in 5 years Corbyn will be nearly 80 and there is every chance he won't be in charge, once he goes they will go back to how they were
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: MachoMadness on June 09, 2017, 05:38:12 pm
That may be true bpool however if the PLP get their act together and unite with Corbyn to put forward a genuine left wing alternative candidate, who can then be endorsed by Corbyn in an ambassadorial role then there's no reason that youth vote can't be retained. Granted a big part of Corbyn's appeal is his lack of deference to Britain's imperial past and his tendency to be on the right side of history, however if that support is lent to a young mp with no baggage it could be very successful.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: RedJ on June 09, 2017, 05:41:27 pm
But didn't Labour get beat? Aren't they celebrating just not getting spanked as badly as they thought they would?

They've done better than 2015. So no not really as they've made gains.




RedJ, isnt that what he said but in different words.
Not really, no. Not getting spanked as badly as you think suggests losing seats.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Bentley Bullet on June 09, 2017, 06:16:00 pm
Just in case people are getting deluded, the Tories still got nearly 60 more seats than Labour, and that was with possibly the most ineffective Tory leader in political history in charge.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: glosterred on June 09, 2017, 07:10:33 pm
Saw this and thought that it may be of interest

Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Bentley Bullet on June 09, 2017, 07:40:14 pm
Like one observer said this morning, Corbyn promised the young voters Freddie Mercuryism, I want it all, I want it now, something he could never have afforded had he actually won.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: BobG on June 09, 2017, 08:27:53 pm
Hear hear BB! I was just going to write the same thing. The most incompetant Tory campaign in decades and despite Jezza doing better than he ever gave much impression of doing, Labour were still roundly thumped. They are 65 seats away from even the tiniest majority. This isn't a victory. It's self congratulation that denies the evidence in front of all our eyes. Troubles for May does not equate to a triumph for Jeremy.

Cheers

BobG
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: tommy toes on June 09, 2017, 08:33:23 pm
Funny how May's campaign is seen as incompetent and Labour's brilliant only after the result is known.
Little mention of this til today.
Nice aftertiming Bob.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Herman Hessian on June 09, 2017, 08:41:03 pm
Hear hear BB! I was just going to write the same thing. The most incompetant Tory campaign in decades and despite Jezza doing better than he ever gave much impression of doing, Labour were still roundly thumped. They are 65 seats away from even the tiniest majority. This isn't a victory. It's self congratulation that denies the evidence in front of all our eyes. Troubles for May does not equate to a triumph for Jeremy.

Cheers

BobG

i did wonder how long it would take for folk to cotton on that labour have "won" nothing but the hollowest of, err, defeats

however unelectable the rightly reviled and ridiculed May might be, after what;s purported to be the worst election campaign in living memory, with the opposition jubilant to the point of unbridled ecstacy, she's still a massive fifty-odd seats closer to being able to implement her will than the new darling of the disenfranchised yoof...

and they say that the tories are the masters of spin - jesus !

and that's not aftertiming - it's f**king fact...
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: drfchound on June 09, 2017, 08:48:15 pm
I bet there was a moment last night when Jeremy thought " shit, we might win this, get Dianne back to work out how we can back up the promises I made".
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: tommy toes on June 09, 2017, 08:58:05 pm
Yes the Tories are 58 seats better off as you Tory gloaters are quick to point out. This is mainly due to the electoral system.
The Tories got 44%
Labour 41%.
From where Labour have come from and the weight of vitriol thrown at Corbyn from all and sundry, getting 41% is nothing short of remarkable.
Carry on ignoring that fact.


Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: drfchound on June 09, 2017, 09:01:36 pm
Not ignoring it Tommy but the fact is that the system is what it is and the Torys won.
Accept it.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Herman Hessian on June 09, 2017, 09:02:52 pm
I bet there was a moment last night when Jeremy thought " shit, we might win this, get Dianne back to work out how we can back up the promises I made".

see my earlier comments about may and her win/win scenario - she's been handed a way to back out of doing stuff that the didnt want to do in the first place under the guise of it being "at the will of the electorate" - stupid old bird must be laughing her way to an executive role at an un-named offshore investment bank...
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: drfchound on June 09, 2017, 09:27:32 pm
Lol, you may well be right eventually Herman.
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Herman Hessian on June 09, 2017, 09:29:01 pm
Yes the Tories are 58 seats better off as you Tory gloaters are quick to point out. This is mainly due to the electoral system.
The Tories got 44%
Labour 41%.

you do know that its exactly the same electoral system that's returned every labour government since the war (and beyond), don't you  - or were they equally untenable - for some spurious reason that only you are party to ?
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Herbert Anchovy on June 09, 2017, 11:19:20 pm
But this election wasn't like the majority of general elections in our history. It wasn't an election to necessarily choose a new government as we already had one in place. We didn't need to have it!

The vote was designed to provide the incumbent government with an increased majority first and foremost, not to endorse a new government. And they failed. Whilst they have the most seats their ability to govern effectively is seriously diminished. Labours goal was to ensure that the expected Tory landslide didn't happen. And they succeeded. That's why the election was actually a clear victory for Labour.

Kind Regards,
Mr Herbert Anchovy
Professor of political dark arts, propaganda, spin and bullshit
10 Druids Lane
Flamborough

Tel - 01-811-8055

Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Bentley Bullet on June 09, 2017, 11:57:23 pm
So Labours goal wasn't to win the election?
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: BobG on June 10, 2017, 12:27:59 am
So the country is going to be run by a party offering strong and stable leadership. The same party and leadership that created the instability that is Brexit by caving into UKIP, the right wing press and it’s Eurosceptic wing by offering an unnecessary referendum. The same party and leadership that then failed to make the case for remain and allowed discontent over immigration and globalisation to manifest itself as a vote to leave. Resulting in an opportunistic PM who supported remain but now positions herself as the only person able to lead the Brexit negotiations on the basis of “no deal is better than a bad deal”. The same PM who as Home Secretary failed to curb immigration and reduced police numbers putting our security at risk. Who as PM now offers to reduce immigration and used security co-operation as a bargaining chip with the EU. Who then holds hands with Trump and the Saudis as policy for the UK “taking back control”.  You really could not make it up.

And despite all this, Jezza is still 65 seats off even the tiniest majority. Some victory.... I'd hate to see him lose.

BobG
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: not on facebook on June 10, 2017, 07:51:26 am
Is it set in stone that another election will be called within a year ,as surely a hung parliament with the DUP lot or who ever don't help matters .

If the above is the case what do the Torys have to do to turn this election round and get the 326 seats they require.?

What will Labour have to do better the gains that they have just got?

Seems that the younger generation got off their backsides and voted in last election for a change ,which inturn helped Labour no end .

Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: bobjimwilly on June 10, 2017, 10:21:41 am
What exactly is stuck up the Tories arses so far that makes them think choosing austerity is a hard choice for them? Reducing benefits, privatisation, tax cuts and trickle down economics is their bread and butter! On the other hand creating a costed manifesto that actually increases spending (in a significant way) on the police, the NHS and education, whilst only increasing taxes for the 5% is much, much harder. And f**k me sideways if the Tories don't have f**king self-interests!
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: BobG on June 10, 2017, 09:03:32 pm
I'm sorry to repeat myself, but this made me laugh so much that I've just got to put it in this thread as well :)

Theresa May spent £100 million of public money to reduce her own majority. Still, I reckon she'll do a grand job negotiating Brexit.

BobG
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: Sprotyrover on June 14, 2017, 03:47:59 pm
What exactly is stuck up the Tories arses so far that makes them think choosing austerity is a hard choice for them? Reducing benefits, privatisation, tax cuts and trickle down economics is their bread and butter! On the other hand creating a costed manifesto that actually increases spending (in a significant way) on the police, the NHS and education, whilst only increasing taxes for the 5% is much, much harder. And f**k me sideways if the Tories don't have f**king self-interests!
Err what about the£50 billion they were going to borrow, the tax income was worked out to be £2 billion. You seem to forget they have Diane Abbot on their team!
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: RedJ on June 14, 2017, 04:16:25 pm
Aye, cabinets never change after an election do they...
Title: Re: FAO The absent BST
Post by: wilts rover on June 14, 2017, 04:30:33 pm
What exactly is stuck up the Tories arses so far that makes them think choosing austerity is a hard choice for them? Reducing benefits, privatisation, tax cuts and trickle down economics is their bread and butter! On the other hand creating a costed manifesto that actually increases spending (in a significant way) on the police, the NHS and education, whilst only increasing taxes for the 5% is much, much harder. And f**k me sideways if the Tories don't have f**king self-interests!
Err what about the£50 billion they were going to borrow, the tax income was worked out to be £2 billion. You seem to forget they have Diane Abbot on their team!

Err where have you got your figures from Sproty - the Diane Abbott school of statistics? The Manifesto costing were:
Spending - £48.6billion

To be paid for by:
Corporation tax raise - £19.4bn
Corporate tax efficiency review of relief - £3.8bn
Income tax £6.4bn
Excessive pay levy £1.3bn
Offshore company property levy £1.6bn
Tax avoidance £6.5bn
Stamp duty £5.6bn
Reversing tax giveaways £3.7bn
Other £2.6bn

Total £48.6billion.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/may/16/what-would-labours-manifesto-cost-pledges-money-guide-details