UK General Election 2017

[jakswan]

Betting on no overall majority, the young will turn out and give Corbyn a chance at No.10. Perhaps we need to have socialists in charge once in a generation.

Watched Chuka Umunna on Newsnight last night, Labour do have some very capable politicians, then watched Dianne Abbott.

[floo]

Dearest British public in General,

"A Corbyn for me, a Corbyn for me,
If ye're no a Corbyn ye're no use to me.
The Liberal Democratics are braw, the SNP and a'
But the cocky wee Corbyn the pride o' them a'."

Gonnagle.

My middle daughter would agree with you. She would like your little verse, she is married to a Scot.

[Robbie]

I thought Gonnagle had written it himself  .

[floo]

I read that latest opinion polls suggest there is only a point between the Tories and Labour. If that is correct, bearing in mind just how fallible these polls are, we could have a hung parliament. Now that be a turn up for the book.

[Aruntraveller]

I read that latest opinion polls suggest there is only a point between the Tories and Labour. If that is correct, bearing in mind just how fallible these polls are, we could have a hung parliament. Now that be a turn up for the book.

The polls are all over the place Floo. Yesterday there was one that gave the Tories an 11% advantage. Today 1%. I hope for a miracle but I fear, as they nearly always seem to do, the British people will go in for yet more self-flagellation and vote the despicables in to power.

Maybe it's an appeal to the baby in us that wants a Nanny - albeit that the Nanny is more Rebecca de Mornay than Julie Andrews.

[floo]

The polls are all over the place Floo. Yesterday there was one that gave the Tories an 11% advantage. Today 1%. I hope for a miracle but I fear, as they nearly always seem to do, the British people will go in for yet more self-flagellation and vote the despicables in to power.

Maybe it's an appeal to the baby in us that wants a Nanny - albeit that the Nanny is more Rebecca de Mornay than Julie Andrews.

We shall see, TM hasn't exactly done herself any favours in the last few days.

[Nearly Sane]

Was asking for it


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/election-tory-strong-stable-van-overturns-conservatives-theresa-may-advert-a7776136.html

[Nearly Sane]

'What's that, Lassie? You are hearing a dog whistle?'
,


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40181444

[Udayana]

It's a tactic that has worked many times. Ignore the actual problems and carry on with creating more un-policed or unenforceable laws.

Since 2006 we have had laws against condoning and glorifying terrorism, why weren't these used against Butt et al? Possibly he could have been in prison since 2013 -  oh wait, they only get worse in there and make more converts to idiot jihad-ism. Why is that?

[Nearly Sane]

It's a tactic that has worked many times. Ignore the actual problems and carry on with creating more un-policed or unenforceable laws.

Since 2006 we have had laws against condoning and glorifying terrorism, why weren't these used against Butt et al? Possibly he could have been in prison since 2013 -  oh wait, they only get worse in there and make more converts to idiot jihad-ism. Why is that?

As to your last question, it would seem to me that our ongoing like for prison solely as retribution is part of the issue. Note, that is a generic issue not aspwcific one with jihadism but we seem to want to ignore recidivism and 'graduation' to higher levels of crime, as long as we lock lots of people up.


On your first point, wholely agree but would suggest this fetishisation of law has been going on since the late 70s. Making things that are already covered in general laws, specific makes it look and feel as if things are being done. I see Corbyn is being attacked for voting against 'anti terror legislation' as ifsimpky calling it that means it is actually anti terror and not posturing. To slightly adapt the old saw it's more 'We must be seen to be doing something, this legislation is something, therefore we must be seen to be doing this'


 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

We shall see, TM hasn't exactly done herself any favours in the last few days.

I reckon she will step down after the election even if they win and then it will be between Rudd and Johnson.

[jakswan]

'What's that, Lassie? You are hearing a dog whistle?'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40181444

Whilst I might agree that this may not address the issues society faces, blowing a left wing dog whistle in response doesn't help.

[Nearly Sane]

Whilst I might agree that this may not address the issues society faces, blowing a left wing dog whistle in response doesn't help.

Is it a left wing dog whistle? Surely pointing out that this is mere posturing and hints at a vacuous Human Rights bad idea is perfectly valid. You seem to be taking the position that pointing out issues with what May said is then somehow to be dismissed simply because of the tone that you (a) don't like and (b) continually indulge on here against the people you are talking to.

The continued muddying of the waters on the ECHR as being something to do with the EU rather than something based on our laws in its initiation and completely separate from the EU has been a lazy trope of both 'right' and 'left' over the years.

[ProfessorDavey]

Whilst I might agree that this may not address the issues society faces, blowing a left wing dog whistle in response doesn't help.

I think this is more about May blowing a right wing dog whistle.

As has been pointed out in the media countries already have the ability to remove certain elements of their obligations on security grounds, and France in particular have done so. So why doesn't May just do it, rather than make a big deal about 'changing human rights laws' (classic Daily Mail, right win dog whistle).

Actually, more to the point, rather than shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted why didn't she do her job over the past 7 years to keep us safe. The notion that every one of the terrorists who committed the attrocities in Manchester and on both Thames bridges were know to the authorities, having been reported by members of their communities or by Italian authorities, yet not one was appropriately monitored (or in one case refused entry to the UK) frankly beggars belief.

Under different circumstances (a general election tomorrow and a new home secretary) there is no doubt in my mind that the home secretary would have been writing their resignation letter, or having it written for them.

[Ricky Spanish]

I agree about Abbott Jak.. for some reason every party needs a BoJo.



Although did you know that Boris was; "Born in New York City to wealthy upper-middle class English parents, Johnson was educated at the European School of Brussels, Ashdown House School, and Eton College. He studied Classics at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was elected president of the Oxford Union in 1986. He began his career in journalism at The Times but was sacked for falsifying information. He later became The Daily Telegraph's Brussels correspondent, with his articles exerting a strong influence on growing Eurosceptic sentiment among the British right-wing.

He was an assistant editor from 1994 to 1999 before taking the editorship of The Spectator from 1999 to 2005. Joining the Conservatives, he was elected MP for Henley in 2001, and under party leaders Michael Howard and David Cameron he was in the Shadow Cabinet. He largely adhered to the Conservatives' party line but adopted a more socially liberal stance on issues like LGBT rights in parliamentary votes. Making regular television appearances, writing books, and remaining active in journalism, Johnson became one of the most conspicuous politicians in Britain."

[floo]

I wish Johnson would employ a decent barber!

[Harrowby Hall]

As to your last question, it would seem to me that our ongoing like for prison solely as retribution is part of the issue. Note, that is a generic issue not aspwcific one with jihadism but we seem to want to ignore recidivism and 'graduation' to higher levels of crime, as long as we lock lots of people up.

I agree. I believe that if we are not at the top of the European league table for imprisonment, we are close to it. As is so often the case, we seem to be looking towards the USA for instruction. The Netherlands has a well-established programme of re-education and re-orientation of prisoners and there is a low recidivism rate and empty cells in prisons.

As ever, it is the obsession with cost control and financial "efficiency" at the expense of effectiveness which is the problem, leading to agencies like the police, prison service, education and the health service struggling to perform adequately with reduced budgets.

And Professor Davey is correct. Mrs May's behaviour is right-wing whistle blowing. The more I see of her, the more convinced I am that she is well out of her depth.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I see the BBC are still putting out Eleanor Garnier before the 9pm watershed.

[Nearly Sane]

It would appear that May has refused to be interviewed by Jon Snow on Channel 4 News. First PM to refuse in 7 GEs he has covered on there.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It would appear that May has refused to be interviewed by Jon Snow on Channel 4 News. First PM to refuse in 7 GEs he has covered on there.

Where's Theresa?

[Aruntraveller]

Where's Theresa?

Who is she?

[jakswan]

Is it a left wing dog whistle? Surely pointing out that this is mere posturing and hints at a vacuous Human Rights bad idea is perfectly valid. You seem to be taking the position that pointing out issues with what May said is then somehow to be dismissed simply because of the tone that you (a) don't like and (b) continually indulge on here against the people you are talking to.

The continued muddying of the waters on the ECHR as being something to do with the EU rather than something based on our laws in its initiation and completely separate from the EU has been a lazy trope of both 'right' and 'left' over the years.

Could right an essay on this try be succinct. First will acknowledge you now make a more substantive points and will come back to them.

Last night I watched some of the Newsbeat debate and at one point a woman stood up and said she was afraid to go out in light of the racist and xenophobic abuse she gets on-line. If you listen to Maajid Nawaz a former extremist this is what drove him down the path of extremism. 

We do have an issue with the far right and other forms of extremism in this country and they tend to feed of each other.

So back the debate I was watching, what followed I'll speak of in general tones, the UKIP put forward a right wing solution, the Green party borderline bracketed that as far right.

Meanwhile I was thinking of the woman, she quite understandably thinks that she lives in an xenophobic racist society, and some our leading politicians have pretty much confirmed that. So should she meet an Islamic extremist who will tells her that the UK is a racist xenophobic society, she looks at a right wing party who almost sounds xenophobic and racist, and some of the left wing confirming that it is.

I don't agree with UKIP I think their solutions are counter productive and some of them downright nonsensical but its important to deal with the policy's they forward on the basis of rational argument not by blowing dog whistles even if that is what you think the opposition are doing. 

Yes May was posturing, she is right-wing and likely to come up with right-wing solutions which will involve a crackdown on the results of extremism, I think it could be counter productive, it is still valid to debate though?

[Nearly Sane]

I have to say that her interview on with Dermot Murnaghan looked something beyond being badly briefed. The way she said 'bridges' as if it was a new concept to here felt very odd to watch.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-labour-replaced-sacked-lyn-brown-general-election-2017-jeremy-corbyn-a7776491.html

[Nearly Sane]

Could right an essay on this try be succinct. First will acknowledge you now make a more substantive points and will come back to them.

Last night I watched some of the Newsbeat debate and at one point a woman stood up and said she was afraid to go out in light of the racist and xenophobic abuse she gets on-line. If you listen to Maajid Nawaz a former extremist this is what drove him down the path of extremism. 

We do have an issue with the far right and other forms of extremism in this country and they tend to feed of each other.

So back the debate I was watching, what followed I'll speak of in general tones, the UKIP put forward a right wing solution, the Green party borderline bracketed that as far right.

Meanwhile I was thinking of the woman, she quite understandably thinks that she lives in an xenophobic racist society, and some our leading politicians have pretty much confirmed that. So should she meet an Islamic extremist who will tells her that the UK is a racist xenophobic society, she looks at a right wing party who almost sounds xenophobic and racist, and some of the left wing confirming that it is.

I don't agree with UKIP I think their solutions are counter productive and some of them downright nonsensical but its important to deal with the policy's they forward on the basis of rational argument not by blowing dog whistles even if that is what you think the opposition are doing. 

Yes May was posturing, she is right-wing and likely to come up with right-wing solutions which will involve a crackdown on the results of extremism, I think it could be counter productive, it is still valid to debate though?

Thanks for this, much appreciate the possibility of writing an essay, which surely indicates that it's incorrect to puck up one liners. Yes, my comment was a throwaway but the point it was making is that if politicians like May indulge in throwaway lines as she did on human rights legislation, it's definitely a dog whistle and is a reaction to the issues revealed in her time as Home Sec and PM.

As previously covered I think 'left' and 'right' are often if not always too simplistic. You write that you think of the UKIP solution, whatever it was, as being right wing but that the Green Party rep portrayed it as 'far right' as if you are obviously correct and the Green party rep wrong rather than it surely being a matter of opinion and perspective?

I have to admit to finding your post confusing as it seems to state that the woman is correct to find society racist and xenophobic but that it is somehow a 'dog whistle' if someone calls out what ate racist and xenophobic remarks/policies as being racist and xenophobic. I am sure that isn't what you mean so unfortunately you may have to write the essay.

[jakswan]

Thanks for this, much appreciate the possibility of writing an essay, which surely indicates that it's incorrect to puck up one liners. Yes, my comment was a throwaway but the point it was making is that if politicians like May indulge in throwaway lines as she did on human rights legislation, it's definitely a dog whistle and is a reaction to the issues revealed in her time as Home Sec and PM.

Why was it throwaway line? She is stating that if human rights legislation gets in the way she will review it, I think that is counter productive personally but its a valid position to hold?

As previously covered I think 'left' and 'right' are often if not always too simplistic. You write that you think of the UKIP solution, whatever it was, as being right wing but that the Green Party rep portrayed it as 'far right' as if you are obviously correct and the Green party rep wrong rather than it surely being a matter of opinion and perspective?

No, as ever being of the middle I tend to sit on the fence on most of these issues, mostly envious of the certainty that people seem to have. I think the UKIP policy was wrong but to dismiss the policy as xenophobic, when it was not, doesn't address why the policy was wrong.

I think you are forced to categorise political schools of thought when talking about wider society, hence use of the right/ left.

I have to admit to finding your post confusing as it seems to state that the woman is correct to find society racist and xenophobic but that it is somehow a 'dog whistle' if someone calls out what ate racist and xenophobic remarks/policies as being racist and xenophobic. I am sure that isn't what you mean so unfortunately you may have to write the essay.

Ok lets look at a more concrete example Diane Abbott 'The people that complain about the freedom of movement will not be satisfied because what they really want is to see less foreign looking people on their streets.'

Do you accept that this plays up how racist / xenophobic society actually is?