Britain - The Official Thread

[homeforsummer]

We had a leaflet through from our local Lib Dem candidate that just banged on about Corbyn. Oddly I was unaware Corbyn was a candidate for Teesside...

I've only had two local candidate leaflets through my letterbox. One for the Greens, the other Lib Dem.

The Green leaflet doesn't mention other parties but doesn't say anything more specific (or nothing more local at least) than the Greens' general policies (environmentalism, affordable housing, free education, NHS support, better public transport).

The Lib Dem leaflet is mostly a moan about Brexit, throwing darts at the other parties and a third of a page on some PaddyPower betting odds that the Lib Dems are more likely than Labour to beat the Tory who has won (by a large margin) the seat for the last three general elections.

 

[Famine]

Our Libdem one is just non-stop bitching about Corbyn:

(yes, he badly needs a designer on staff; also, spot the deliberate error).

The UKIP one is just non-stop bitching about May - and she's not a candidate for Teesside either.

 

[Scaff]

Our Libdem one is just non-stop bitching about Corbyn:

​

(yes, he badly needs a designer on staff; also, spot the deliberate error).

The UKIP one is just non-stop bitching about May - and she's not a candidate for Teesside either.

They wouldn't get my vote purely on the appalling use of those fonts. That makes my eyes hurt.

 

[Dennisch]

It's worth remembering though what the polls said for the 2015 General Election, Brexit and Trumpton (why did nobody make that joke during the US Presidential Election?)

And currently, Mayhem?

 

[Famine]

They wouldn't get my vote purely on the appalling use of those fonts. That makes my eyes hurt.

It's his second Clipart campaign leaflet in a row...

 

[Scaff]

It's his second Clipart campaign leaflet in a row...

View attachment 650679

Oh that just makes it all the worse.

 

[Lizard]

I realise now why there is such a difference between the polls. @Spurgy 777

YouGov asks people if they will vote, the rest use historical data.

Thing is Labour's primary voter is the young, and it is the young who suddenly came in their millions to register to vote.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Our Libdem one is just non-stop bitching about Corbyn:

Ours is called Denis Healy. I met him the other day, he doesn't seem to have enough brains to blow his eyelids open. Not that it really matters here, all uber-Tory farmer voters for the most part.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

I honestly don't know how people can't see how biased they all are to the Conservatives.

Really? All of them? I don't think thats true........

Theresa May wouldn't attend the debate, and yet not 1 paper mentioned it.

This definitely isn't true: it's on the front pages of the i, Guardian, Metro, and FT.

And as an aside, in the digital world - where the reach of some outlets, particularly on social media, rivals many papers' circulations - May's no show is covered (among other criticisms) on the front pages of the Independent, Buzzfeed, VICE, EvolvePolitics, Skwawkbox and The Canary.

I agree that partisanship and stupid in the media is always a concern, but it absolutely isn't exclusive to right-wing politics. As you'd expect in a mostly free press it can come from anywhere. It's also very difficult to determine to what extent the media actually has influence on public opinion. Papers bought, or clicks/shares online don't automatically translate to changed opinions/votes. Not all content is designed to change minds, rather just to pander to the views their readers already hold. And despite all the political garbage thrown at young people these days, a lot of them still dont even bother to turn up and vote.

I'm not aware of any study thats conclusive on this matter (if anyone knows of any recent ones I'd be interested to read them), but I'd be pretty certain it's just not as simple as people blindly doing what the newspaper/website headlines tell them to.

 

[Pezzarinho17]

I was talking about the ones I saw in that particular shop. The range is fairly limited, though I thought they sold the Guardian there. It's good knowing people can still rely on the newspaper for news if they know the ones to look for though...

 

[homeforsummer]

Had a play with the Political Compass:

Can't remember where my dot fell last time, but seem to recall it was fairly similar. Possibly a tiny bit further to the left of the scale and a tiny bit higher, but I think I've fallen in the purple each time.

I think the test is generally good, but it struck me that while I would probably always answer the same way to certain questions, some of the answers to the questions would cause contradictions if someone was actually drawing up policy. I suppose that's the skill of an ideal political party (not something we have at the moment, natch): being able to compromise to best effect for all citizens.

 

[TenEightyOne]

In news that will make Farage snort with anger (like most things) Craig Mackinlay has been charged over his 2015 election expenses.

 

[m8h3r]

Our Libdem one is just non-stop bitching about Corbyn:

​

(yes, he badly needs a designer on staff; also, spot the deliberate error).

The UKIP one is just non-stop bitching about May - and she's not a candidate for Teesside either.

It's his second Clipart campaign leaflet in a row...

View attachment 650679

Talking of campaign leaflets:

On paper, black and white, and out of focus.

 

[Lizard]

Our Libdem one is just non-stop bitching about Corbyn:

​

The UKIP one is just non-stop bitching about May - and she's not a candidate for Teesside either.

You keep going on about how you don't vote for May or Corbyn but the fact of the matter is, unless you live in their constituency then your local MP isn't going to be PM, hell unless it's someone significant then they are unlikely to be on the front bench at all. And you voting for them is one vote towards either May or Corbyn being PM unless you vote for another party or spoil your vote.



I want the Monster Raving Loony Party to get in once. It would be funny as hell. Although then they would not have a clue on how to govern and they would be scared that they actually won.

 

[Famine]

You keep going on about how you don't vote for May or Corbyn but the fact of the matter is, unless you live in their constituency then your local MP isn't going to be PM

That's literally the point, yes.

We cannot and do not elect a Prime Minister. We elect a representative for us who is supposed to represent us to the national parliament. Instead we have representatives who represent their boss to us, and that's why they go on and on about their boss and the other people's bosses, rather than themselves.

I don't want to know what Tim Farron, Jeremy Corbyn, Paul Nuttall, Theresa May or Caroline Lucas/Jonathan Bartley think about Teesside - and frankly I'd be amazed if any of them knew it existed. I want to know what Josh Mason, Anna Turley, Chris Gallacher, Peter Gibson or Couldn't Be Bothered To Field A Candidate will do to represent the people of Teesside to the national parliament.

 

[Tired Tyres]

A new YouGov poll puts Labour just 3 points behind the Tories...

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/31/voting-intention-conservatives-42-labour-39-30-31-/

I'm not sure if the poor old NHS could cope with a Labour win - so many people will laugh so hard that they could do themselves an injury.

If the unlikely does happen and the Tories are kicked out (possibly by a Labour/Lib Dem or Labour/SNP coalition) of No.10 next week, it will be the icing on the cake of one of the silliest periods in UK political history - firstly, the Tories win an unexpected overall majority on the strength of promising an in-out EU referendum; the (popular) PM backs Remain, though, and steps down when most of his supporters vote Leave. The Tories then appoint another minister who backed Remain to lead the party through the Brexit negotiations, but despite still holding an overall majority, she decides that it would be a good idea to hold a largely unnecessary election in order to increase the Tory majority (even though they already had an unexpected overall majority!), despite their leader having zero charisma and being unwilling to take part in national televised debates. Now, one week before the election and one of the UK's largest political pollsters have put Labour just three points behind the Tories, and elsewhere it is being reported that it is now much more likely that there will be a hung parliament. One could be mistaken for thinking that Theresa May doesn't actually want to win this election...

The trouble with polls they are not done properly anymore. It's always the media saying gimme a poll yesterday we want news to talk about. These things need time and lots of it to track trends properly.

 

[homeforsummer]

Talking of campaign leaflets:
View attachment 650962
On paper, black and white, and out of focus.

We live in the same constituency. My leaflet's a bit nicer though.

Couldn't Be Bothered To Field A Candidate

My vote's on that guy.

Given the big cloud of god-knows-what permanently hanging over Teesside I'm guessing this is the Greens?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Given the big cloud of god-knows-what permanently hanging over Teesside...

I think that's Hai Karate.

 

[Famine]

Given the big cloud of god-knows-what permanently hanging over Teesside I'm guessing this is the Greens?

Yep. The ironing here is that the Greens are the least far away from me ideologically at the moment, and the only reason they're as far away as they are is because of their economic policies which they can promise to fund the universe with for all the chance they have of ever getting to enact them.

Second is Lib Dem, and you've seen their asshat of a candidate.

Voteforpolicies.org gave me UKIP first, Green second and Labour third. UKIP are first because my economic answers rejected every single party that suggested nationalising anything or spending more on things, so I agreed with about a third of their 'manifesto', but the other two-thirds which have them as actual Nazis is not something I'd ever put a cross against. And I can't vote Green.

So, I guess it's spoiled again.

 

[homeforsummer]

Voteforpolicies.org gave me UKIP first, Green second and Labour third.

Green (about 43%) > Tory > Lib Dem > Ukip for me. Have been naturally leaning towards Green this time around so that tallies somewhat.

 

[jake2013guy]

Yep. The ironing here is that the Greens are the least far away from me ideologically at the moment, and the only reason they're as far away as they are is because of their economic policies which they can promise to fund the universe with for all the chance they have of ever getting to enact them.

Second is Lib Dem, and you've seen their asshat of a candidate.

Voteforpolicies.org gave me UKIP first, Green second and Labour third. UKIP are first because my economic answers rejected every single party that suggested nationalising anything or spending more on things, so I agreed with about a third of their 'manifesto', but the other two-thirds which have them as actual Nazis is not something I'd ever put a cross against. And I can't vote Green.

So, I guess it's spoiled again.

I have a similar thing from voteforpolicies.org and am considering the same outcome although swapping Green for Lib Dem. The only reason I would vote for Green is for environmental policies only and even that's a stretch and considering the very same outcome.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

With all the fuss (and the usual spinning/misunderstanding) that's been made about recent polls, one thing that's been overlooked imo is they're also suggesting the combined Tory-Labour vote share could be around 80-85%.

If they're accurate (jumbo-sized if, of course), it would be the largest support for government + opposition since the 1970s. Scotland and Northern Ireland are an exception since they're dominated by regional parties, but in England (and to a lesser extent Wales) it would be a significant political realignment, reversing the post-war trend of voters gradually moving away from the main two parties.

 

[PeterJB]

My Lib Dem candidate is a trans woman. Thats the gay vote secured then.

 

[TenEightyOne]

My Lib Dem candidate is a trans woman. Thats the gay vote secured then.

Where's that? I knew there was a trans Labour candidate in East Worthing and Shoreham, didn't know about a Liberal candidate.

Well spotted that those gays will always vote for trans (not sure what being trans has to do with being gay but there you go).

 

[PeterJB]

Chippenham. If we're going to be pedantic there is a causal link between homosexuality and transgenderism, but that's besides the point, someone who is active in LGBT issues is probably going to draw the attention of the gay/LGBT community.

 

[TenEightyOne]

someone who is active in LGBT issues is probably going to draw the attention of the gay/LGBT community.

Thanks for the clarification, I see it's now a fair way from "trans secures gay vote".

 

[Tired Tyres]

Yep. The ironing here is that the Greens are the least far away from me ideologically at the moment, and the only reason they're as far away as they are is because of their economic policies which they can promise to fund the universe with for all the chance they have of ever getting to enact them.

Second is Lib Dem, and you've seen their asshat of a candidate.

Voteforpolicies.org gave me UKIP first, Green second and Labour third. UKIP are first because my economic answers rejected every single party that suggested nationalising anything or spending more on things, so I agreed with about a third of their 'manifesto', but the other two-thirds which have them as actual Nazis is not something I'd ever put a cross against. And I can't vote Green.

So, I guess it's spoiled again.

I got Green 30.8%, UKIP 30.8%, Lib Dem 23.1%, Conservatives 7.7% and Labour 7.7%. So it's either 7.7% party then.

 

[m8h3r]

We live in the same constituency. My leaflet's a bit nicer though

Clearly someone ^ is in a more favourable section of the constituency....

Strange I had no idea any GTP's were this close other than one who's Kettering I believe.

 

[Famine]

I've done a couple more.

whoshouldyouvotefor.com reckons I'm split between Conservative and Liberal Democrat, and very much not Labour:

... but I'd hardly call that microscopic support an indicator of who I should vote for.

isidewith.com was more interesting, but flawed for its own reasons.

This site gives you individual policies, and you answer yes, no or contribute your own view. At the end of that test I had:

This is interesting as it gives the categories you agree most with. Apparently I agree slightly with everyone's social policies, which is bollocks, because everyone bar the Greens and Labour are closer to Hitler than to me in social policy matters. That just tells me that there's a spread of pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-legalisation/decriminalisation of drugs policies across everyone, which isn't helpful. Otherwise it's as you'd expect - financially I agree with the parties proposing conservatism (including the funding of education, health, prisons and transport, which are reflected in other categories) and socially I agree with the parties proposing liberalism (including surveillance powers, policing, immigration and crime, which are reflected in other categories).

Where this site is interesting is the 'other parties' button:

Don't know why Libertarian is ranked second with the highest score, but still...

Clicking on a party shows where it falls down a bit. It shows all of the categories where your answer was identical, giving your ranking. It also shows where your answer wasn't - and if you insert your own answer at any point, you're marked as disagreeing.

It turns out that all but two of my disagreements with Libertarian were me putting a yes though or no but answer, where they had yes or no. The other two were a straight disagreement and a question they had not answered...

 

[TenEightyOne]

Slightly left of centre, no surprises for anybody there