UK General Election 2017

[Nearly Sane]

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?

It's a throwaway line because there is no indication why any human rights legislation would get in the way of any sensible piece of action. It's only in to appeal to those who dislike the human rights legislation whether for good reasons or bad.

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.

Are you suggesting that because you categorise yourself as middle of the road then you become an arbiter on whether a policy is xenophobic of not? That seems odd? Surely as I posted this is a matter of opinion and perspective? if the Green party rep saw it as xenophobic then why wouldn't they say so?

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?

Does it? Again surely this is your opinion, just as that might be Abbott's opinion. If you agree that society is xenophobic and racist, and it seems that you do, I don't get what point you are trying to make about when/how it is correct in your view to say that.

[floo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40184826

I see Diane Abbott has stepped down from campaigning , apparently due to ill health, hmmmmm!

[Nearly Sane]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40184826

I see Diane Abbott has stepped down from campaigning , apparently due to ill health, hmmmmm!

See post 922.

[jakswan]

It's a throwaway line because there is no indication why any human rights legislation would get in the way of any sensible piece of action. It's only in to appeal to those who dislike the human rights legislation whether for good reasons or bad.

I don't think you can say that without knowing what the proposals would be. I'm not prepared to dismiss or accept an changes to human rights until those proposals are forwarded. I would think that in any legalisation you would not be prepared to consider refining human rights laws, a fair and valid position to hold, May would, a fair and valid position to hold.   

Are you suggesting that because you categorise yourself as middle of the road then you become an arbiter on whether a policy is xenophobic of not? That seems odd? Surely as I posted this is a matter of opinion and perspective? if the Green party rep saw it as xenophobic then why wouldn't they say so?

Which is why I got a more concrete example.

Does it? Again surely this is your opinion, just as that might be Abbott's opinion. If you agree that society is xenophobic and racist, and it seems that you do, I don't get what point you are trying to make about when/how it is correct in your view to say that.

No, its impossible to know that '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'.

There are those in society that want to portray much of the Muslim population as extremists and there are those in our society that want to portray much of society as holding that view, both are wrong and part of the problem.

[Nearly Sane]

I don't think you can say that without knowing what the proposals would be. I'm not prepared to dismiss or accept an changes to human rights until those proposals are forwarded. I would think that in any legalisation you would not be prepared to consider refining human rights laws, a fair and valid position to hold, May would, a fair and valid position to hold.   

And in the absence of any proposals, the line about human rights legislation 'not stopping' those proposals is precisely a dog whistle throwaway line to those who think that the human rights legislation is a bad thing, in many cases while not understanding what they are.  I'm not dismissing any proposals either but currently in their absence it's only a dog whistle to suggest that any sensible changes might be stopped by human rights legislation .

Which is why I got a more concrete example.

No, its impossible to know that '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'.

There are those in society that want to portray much of the Muslim population as extremists and there are those in our society that want to portray much of society as holding that view, both are wrong and part of the problem.

It's impossible to know anything, but most people express their opinion in a similar way to Abbott. Indeed you then do it yourself by stating that it is what people want to say rather than actually think, as if you have divined some dubious intent in exactly the same way as Abbott's quote does. Further you then express what is yourf opinion, I.e. that they ate wring as a fact in the sane way Abbott's quote does.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Laura Kuensberg partying like it's 18th April 2017. Kuensbergs conclusion of the election campaign........ May triumphant, Corbyn as inconsequential as ever. Little mention of Conservative fall in polling. BBC political bias at it's finest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40184817

[jakswan]

And in the absence of any proposals, the line about human rights legislation 'not stopping' those proposals is precisely a dog whistle throwaway line to those who think that the human rights legislation is a bad thing, in many cases while not understanding what they are.  I'm not dismissing any proposals either but currently in their absence it's only a dog whistle to suggest that any sensible changes might be stopped by human rights legislation .

From Wiki: Dog-whistle politics is political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup.

We will have to disagree, I think it is a legitimate position to hold and not a dog whistle, maybe it has the effect of dog whistle but we can't know intent. 

It's impossible to know anything, but most people express their opinion in a similar way to Abbott. Indeed you then do it yourself by stating that it is what people want to say rather than actually think, as if you have divined some dubious intent in exactly the same way as Abbott's quote does. Further you then express what is yourf opinion, I.e. that they ate wring as a fact in the sane way Abbott's quote does.

No not saying Abbott is doing anything with intent, her sweeping statement lends credence to the view that society is endemically racist.

[jakswan]

Laura Kuensberg partying like it's 18th April 2017. Kuensbergs conclusion of the election campaign........ May triumphant, Corbyn as inconsequential as ever. Little mention of Conservative fall in polling. BBC political bias at it's finest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40184817

'Over the course of the campaign it's been Labour with most of the momentum, the more enthusiastic crowds, and the more radical agenda.'

Bias?

Also I think this:-

What do the parties themselves really think is going on? Remember they have their own huge swathes of data gathered door-knock by door-knock that informs their decisions. The most basic of all - where it is worth turning up to campaign. Parties don't traditionally send their leaders to places where they think they have no chance of winning, or where they don't think they are in danger of losing. Essentially, leaders only go to seats that are in play.
So consider the pattern of where Mr Corbyn has been visiting - the huge crowds have often been in Labour-held seats. For perhaps the biggest clue in this election look at the trail of the leaders' visits themselves.
Jeremy Corbyn has been to 63 seats - 27 Labour including 20 safe seats, 34 Tory seats, 1 SNP and 1 Liberal Democrat. By contrast, Theresa May has visited 62 seats - 41 of them Labour, 15 Tory, 5 SNP and 1 Liberal Democrat. She has been to no safe Tory seat other than her own constituency.
The heavy hint from those choices tell you who is playing an attack game, and who is trying to defend their ground.

Is a great piece of journalism.

[Robbie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40184826

I see Diane Abbott has stepped down from campaigning , apparently due to ill health, hmmmmm!

I looked at post 922.
Someone else said they thought it was wise of her.
It is wise, for a little while she has seemed to be a bit out of her depth -NOT the only one by any means! At least she has the sense to step down before she becomes ill with stress.

She's a valuable politician in her constituency and that's something she can continue to nurture. A few weeks and she'll be back on form hopefully but in the campaigning game you can only make so many faux pas.

[Nearly Sane]

I looked at post 922.
Someone else said they thought it was wise of her.
It is wise, for a little while she has seemed to be a bit out of her depth -NOT the only one by any means! At least she has the sense to step down before she becomes ill with stress.

She's a valuable politician in her constituency and that's something she can continue to nurture. A few weeks and she'll be back on form hopefully but in the campaigning game you can only make so many faux pas.

You are implying thst she isn't ill and is only saying it because she is out of her depth in your opinion and is therefore lying. Can you substantiate that?

[wigginhall]

Lots of people become medical experts, and just know that she is faking.   Weird.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I don't think Abbott was functioning properly and there is an argument that that can be described as illness.

[jakswan]

You are implying thst she isn't ill and is only saying it because she is out of her depth in your opinion and is therefore lying. Can you substantiate that?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/06/diane-abbott-appears-fall-victim-hoax-email-conversation-online/

http://talkradio.co.uk/news/corbyn-ally-barry-gardiner-diane-abbott-has-long-term-illness-im-not-sure-what-it-17060714816

Not saying it is conclusive.

Her replacement, famed for telling a blind man to 'f off', is sure to do better than Abbott.

btw cashed out of betting markets now have hedged a big Tory majority.

[Nearly Sane]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/06/diane-abbott-appears-fall-victim-hoax-email-conversation-online/

http://talkradio.co.uk/news/corbyn-ally-barry-gardiner-diane-abbott-has-long-term-illness-im-not-sure-what-it-17060714816

Not saying it is conclusive.

Her replacement, famed for telling a blind man to 'f off', is sure to do better than Abbott.

btw cashed out of betting markets now have hedged a big Tory majority.

Conclusive? it is indicative of the opposite. Abbott says they shouldn't add colour and it wasn't to do with her diabetes and that she wouldn't say anyhing that could easily be caught out due to untruth. why do you think that might support the idea that she isn't ill?

[Robbie]

I didn't mean to imply she wasn't ill NS!

Looking at my post I wish had said "before she becomes more ill with stress". I've no doubt she is ill, we don't know what the problem is but stress can cause all sorts of physical illnesses & what she has been doing recently can only pile it on. So I think she is very wise to step down now rather than collapse in a few weeks.

I'm a great fan of Diane Abbott, always have been, but she's only human.

[wigginhall]

But we don't know if it is stress.   That is another guess.   

[jakswan]

Conclusive? it is indicative of the opposite. Abbott says they shouldn't add colour and it wasn't to do with her diabetes and that she wouldn't say anyhing that could easily be caught out due to untruth. why do you think that might support the idea that she isn't ill?

You can spin it that way I guess.

Given I'm predicting Tory bigger majority, I think some winners losers from this. May, loser, firstly has been pretty dire and I think the Tory campaign she has led has been awful, the Tory party winners on two fronts, they keep Corbyn as opposition and increased majority. Corbyn, winner, have to give him credit he has played a blinder!

The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour, they could have hung Corbyn out to dry, instead they have towed the line and I think this gamble won't pay off and will actually cost them the very soul of the Labour party.

If I was into conspiracy theories.....

[Nearly Sane]

You can spin it that way I guess.

Given I'm predicting Tory bigger majority, I think some winners losers from this. May, loser, firstly has been pretty dire and I think the Tory campaign she has led has been awful, the Tory party winners on two fronts, they keep Corbyn as opposition and increased majority. Corbyn, winner, have to give him credit he has played a blinder!

The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour, they could have hung Corbyn out to dry, instead they have towed the line and I think this gamble won't pay off and will actually cost them the very soul of the Labour party.

If I was into conspiracy theories.....

In what  way is using what was said in your links spinning it, why can you not actually engage in the discussion here rather than cast aspersions on my motivation?

[jakswan]

In what  way is using what was said in your links spinning it, why can you not actually engage in the discussion here rather than cast aspersions on my motivation?

I'm still waiting for you comment on the last discussion we had. Not really seeing how you spinning something casts an aspersions on your motivations?

We all spin, its not conclusive, you could read/listen to the links I posted and then could lead you to think that she is actually ill or not.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You can spin it that way I guess.

Given I'm predicting Tory bigger majority, I think some winners losers from this. May, loser, firstly has been pretty dire and I think the Tory campaign she has led has been awful, the Tory party winners on two fronts, they keep Corbyn as opposition and increased majority. Corbyn, winner, have to give him credit he has played a blinder!

The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour, they could have hung Corbyn out to dry, instead they have towed the line and I think this gamble won't pay off and will actually cost them the very soul of the Labour party.

If I was into conspiracy theories.....

It'll be Jeremy's last election and May's poor performance cannot have gone unnoticed. I think it leaves Labour on the up and trust in and within the Conservatives on the down. The tories will turdpolish any Conservative victory into a landslide (see Kuensberg's election conclusion) but I can't see how the old tory Chutzpah can remain or the trust that folk will continue to take it up the rear.
The last hope will now be that the word ''Tory'' is so ingrained that people automatically touch their toes as if by magic that or Boris.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm still waiting for you comment on the last discussion we had. Not really seeing how you spinning something casts an aspersions on your motivations?

We all spin, its not conclusive, you could read/listen to the links I posted and then could lead you to think that she is actually ill or not.

You mean the long posts? I am on a mobile just now so hadn't replied because it would be time consuming and difficult on a mobile. Why would that be relevant to this anyway?


As to spinning, are you actually saying that spin doctors are telling what they see as the trith? I wouldn't, which is why I don't read spinning as equalling expressing your opinion.

Further no matter what we call it, I can see no way of having a discussion of whether an opinion might be correct without referring to what was written. I can see nothing in the links you posted which indicate the illness is a lie for the reasons I have explained. What do you think is supportive of your viewpoint?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour, they could have hung Corbyn out to dry, instead they have towed the line and I think this gamble won't pay off and will actually cost them the very soul of the Labour party.

Didn't the centrists in labour try that after Brexit and failed and before that, how far did Ed Milliband get?

Corbyn's achievement is undeniable and Tory light has not proved to have been very successful for ten years now.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm struggling with jakswan's idea here that in creating an implosion, an unimaginably large Tory majority possibly leading to complete demise of Labour Party, Labour party 'centrists' would have won.

[jakswan]

I'm struggling with jakswan's idea here that in creating an implosion, an unimaginably large Tory majority possibly leading to complete demise of Labour Party, Labour party 'centrists' would have won.

Not following, I wrote 'The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour,'

[Nearly Sane]

Not following, I wrote 'The biggest losers will be centrists in Labour,'

And the alternative to what has happened seems to be what I wrote about which is surely worse for them. If you ate saying they were fucked from the get go, I agree but then May wanted everyone to be like that