National News Official 2019 General Election Thread

Problems I can see with voting for Johnson n his right wingers are, are worries about a no deal Brexit crash out, another ten years of crippling and unnecessary austerity, along with one of my biggest concerns as set out page 48 of the tory manifesto ....

Ive cut and pasted probably the best assessment of it doing the rounds on FB ....

If you're a Conservative voter, this post is not for you. If, after everything that this government has done, you're still not convinced to stop voting for them, then there's nothing that my words can do for you. You are lost, as far as I'm concerned. Johnson could shoot a child in the middle of Broad street and you'd still be clutching your blue ribbon, crying "...but Corbyn would be worse!" Feel free to continuing reading, of course; just know that I've given up trying to convince you. I consider it a lost cause.
This is for all the young voters that have registered to vote, but might not actually go out and make a difference on the day. We need you. The country needs you. If you don't vote this time, you may not get a chance to vote, in any meaningful way, again. Yes, the situation really is that grave.
Page 48 of the Conservative manifesto is one of the most dangerous things I've read in recent times.
This page promises to remove power from parliament, in several areas, and places it in the hands of the executive instead. This is specifically designed to stop Boris Johnson from being brought back into the situation when he deselected so many of his own MPs that he couldn't get anything through parliament. In short, it gives power to a government that doesn't have a majority in seats. This is demonstrably undemocratic, but it's only just beginning.
To make matters worse, they're also looking to nullify the courts. It talks about ministers being able to rewrite laws as and when they like. About to do something illegal? Simply change the law and do it anyway. That's the Conservative majority you have to look forward to. A government that can write laws at will, without ever having to ask for parliamentary approval. Remember Brexit being about giving more sovereignty to our parliament, and more power to our courts? Vote for Johnson and you will see both of these things get annihilated. You'll be voting to rip those qualities away.
It also promises to remove the 'Fixed Term Parliament Act', claiming that it has caused "paralysis" in the country. This isn't true, of course. The conservative leaders not respecting the will of parliament, without a decent enough majority to dismiss it, has caused that paralysis. If Johnson hadn't been a coward, and pulled his own bill from parliament, it could have gone through by now, but why would he ever admit to his failings when he can just blame parliament for his own incompetence?
Without the act, Johnson can choose to call a General Election whenever he wants, dissolving parliament for weeks at a time for any reason he chooses. He has already been caught attempting to abuse the current system, trying to force through a huge constitutional change to our country (that will inevitably end with the breakup of the UK) against the will of parliament.
It doesn't stop there, though! They're also introducing honest-to-God gerrymandering! Changing constituency borders to remove as many marginals, between themselves and other parties, as possible. They'll rewrite the constituency boundaries to produce lots of conservative safe seats, ensuring that the game is rigged against their future opponents. The system, combined with the introduction of IDs to vote, is specifically designed to reduce the amount of people that, if they were allowed to vote, would do so against the Conservatives in their thousands.
This is the direction of dictatorship; the trajectory of totalitarianism.
These are not the words I want to use, however. Most can work out which word I'd rather use. Unfortunately, it's not a word that's taken seriously anymore, because we don't think it could ever happen again. We didn't think it would happen in the 1930s either, but the parallels are undeniable.
Page 48 is all about ensuring that, if people vote for a Conservative government this time, you will never be able to get rid of then, no matter what they do. They will be free to do as they please, and there will be no way to stop them. Even if you're a Tory supporter (and, if you are, well done for reading this far! Usually, people don't like reading something that's against their own belief system) you must be able to recognise the fundamental dismantling of our democratic system going on here. One good General Election result for Boris next week, and he might never need another one again.
They're also promising to "champion freedom of expression", which sounds great, but essentially means you can be as racist, homophobic, transphobic, and all-the-other-kinds-of-phobic as you like, without reprisal or consequence. Anyone keeping up with Johnson's glowing written record could probably infer why that's being implemented. It also means that you can continue to deceive the public, produce lies and misinformation about your opponents, pretend to be objective fact checking websites, and you'll be perfectly fine. All bets are off. All is permitted. Truth, decency and accountability die.
It also removes any restrictions on social media collecting data on us, to exclusively share with the Conservatives. What happens when big businesses and powerful governments get so tightly knit? You get "That Word": the word I really want to say, but will never be taken seriously, until it's too late.
There's also a large piece on "sweeping changes to the constitution", talking in general terms about changes to the monarchy, the courts, parliament and every other institution that can currently hold the government to account. They will all be stripped of that power; the Prime Minister will be accountable to no one. No checks and no balances.
I don't need to tell you how serious and terrifying this would be. To put this in perspective, the Prime Minister would have more power to do as he pleases, than the President of the United States of America. Think about that. I don't think the road to dictatorship can be made any clearer.
Though, maybe there is a way that history can make this even more obvious. There is, after all, another '48', from another constitutional change. I talk, of course, about 'Article 48' of the 'Consitution of the Weimar Republic of Germany' (1919 - 1933), which allowed the President to take emergency measures without consent of the Reichstag (the German parliament). It was described in general, abusable terms , just as 'Page 48' is. They both include very similar processes.
I don't have to tell you how it went the first time. I don't have to tell you that history repeats for those that ignore it. I don't have to tell you what "The Word" is.
You already know.


that ^^ should be serious matters of concern for anyone who believes in democracy IMO


So whilst I would never vote for Boris Johnson, and I do have some concerns about a government of his undermining the constitution.....this analysis is massively overexaggerated. Like most things in this election campaign. And therefore I feel the need to rail against it.

First is the suggestion that abolishing the Fixed Term Parliament Act is a big attack on our democracy.
It's a piece of legislation that's been in place for nine frickin' years, and was designed exclusively to prop up the Con/Lib Dem coalition.
Getting rid of it is just taking us back to where the country always used to be before 2011. If the same party, and many of the same politicians, that introduced it, now want to get rid because it's not working as they imagined - this should not be a massive controversy.

Secondly, p48 of the Tory manifesto does not suggest gerrymandering. It's actually more the opposite - it suggest redrawing the boundaries so that every vote counts the same. At the moment, much as people might not want to admit it, the parliamentary boundaries are drawn up in a way that's mostly unfair to the Tories. The electorate size in various constituencies varies wildly - in 2017, the smallest constituency (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) had an electorate population of 21,200 whilst the largest (Isle of Wight) was 109,900. In other words, your vote was more than five times more impactful if you happened to live in the former rather than the latter. There's logistical reasons for this - but it also is not exactly the fairest system. One person, one vote.....but your vote means more if you live on a distant Scottish isle.
Addressing that imbalance is undeniably self-serving for the Tories, but it's hard to argue that it's fundamentally unfair. You want unfair, I'll show you a picture of how they draw up the House seats in Delaware or North Carolina!
 
So whilst I would never vote for Boris Johnson, and I do have some concerns about a government of his undermining the constitution.....this analysis is massively overexaggerated. Like most things in this election campaign. And therefore I feel the need to rail against it.

First is the suggestion that abolishing the Fixed Term Parliament Act is a big attack on our democracy.
It's a piece of legislation that's been in place for nine frickin' years, and was designed exclusively to prop up the Con/Lib Dem coalition.
Getting rid of it is just taking us back to where the country always used to be before 2011. If the same party, and many of the same politicians, that introduced it, now want to get rid because it's not working as they imagined - this should not be a massive controversy.

Secondly, p48 of the Tory manifesto does not suggest gerrymandering. It's actually more the opposite - it suggest redrawing the boundaries so that every vote counts the same. At the moment, much as people might not want to admit it, the parliamentary boundaries are drawn up in a way that's mostly unfair to the Tories. The electorate size in various constituencies varies wildly - in 2017, the smallest constituency (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) had an electorate population of 21,200 whilst the largest (Isle of Wight) was 109,900. In other words, your vote was more than five times more impactful if you happened to live in the former rather than the latter. There's logistical reasons for this - but it also is not exactly the fairest system. One person, one vote.....but your vote means more if you live on a distant Scottish isle.
Addressing that imbalance is undeniably self-serving for the Tories, but it's hard to argue that it's fundamentally unfair. You want unfair, I'll show you a picture of how they draw up the House seats in Delaware or North Carolina!
fair comment

first past the post IMO has run its course and usefulness ... a form of PR would be a far better , and more inclusive system

Re Page 48 of the tory manifesto ... Im still very concerned about the implications myself
 
One of the richest economys in the world treats its most vunerable like this (below) .... another decade of austerity and punitive measures imposed on the sick & the disabled , no thanks ....

 
I think the only part of that I'd strongly disagree with is that Johnson has 'Brexit views'!

He has a mantra, it's not the same thing.

(Oh, and the idea that the middle might lose voters who are seeking change to the Conservatives seems odd, but you didn't explicitly say that)
If he didn't have Brexit views of some sort, he's doing a great job of not showing it. Now is there a great deal of expediency in there? Absolutely, but even so.

The middle ground, in relation to Labour & the Lib Dems, then yeah, the Tories investing in areas they have not done previously, could be attractive to some voters who simply cannot touch Comrade Corybn's stank. Labour's sprint to the left has left a lot of fertile ground, and Brexit has really shaken up a lot of things. Tradition is no longer a convention.
 
Corbyn, McDonnell and the very left wing (ok some disagree with that) policies.
More to the point, based on the 2 main parties becoming more radical why havent the LibDems taken the centre ground?
For me, they've struggled to connect with people when it's not Euro election time or local elections - when the vote counts, people seem to be reluctant to vote for them in great numbers. Swinson has quickly gone backwards from a bright start, and the extreme position on Brexit can't have helped them either.
 
If he didn't have Brexit views of some sort, he's doing a great job of not showing it. Now is there a great deal of expediency in there? Absolutely, but even so.

My point is that he has seized Brexit as a career opportunity and that he has no core belief on the subject.
 
Imagine how shockingly bad you have to be to lose two elections, two years apart, against a Tory government THIS awful. There aren’t even a handful of people capable of doing this badly under the opposition banner, but Corbyn is absolutely one of them. Almost any bog standard backbencher with half a brain would’ve had the Conservatives either out in 2017 or hurriedly packing their bags this week. Corbyn had his fun last time and failed, and that should’ve been the moment he jogged on while the rest of the party moved back towards the centre, which would’ve put them in a great position to head up a coalition government if they couldn’t quite get an outright majority. I think the Brexit ticket was always going to give the Conservatives at least a half decent platform which may have made an outright Labour majority unlikely, but they absolutely should be in a position to be the largest party on Thursday, given the domestic horrors of the last nine years and the repeated failings of the Tories to even get a Brexit deal through their own parliament. They could hardly have done more to help Labour take the keys off them, and Corbyn and the socialists who have seized control of the party in the last few years have done everything they can to keep dropping them down the drain. It’s beyond incompetent.

As for the Lib Dems... well, they picked their own hapless leader in Swinson, who has squandered a golden opportunity to make them a genuine third party again, and perhaps have a second crack at being the king makers as a result. Her voting record is more Conservative than some of the actual Conservatives, and her total lack of charisma and fundamental lack of ability to drive a firm narrative and debate with purpose has firmly relegated them back to the basement of British politics. If you’re going to take such an extreme stance on Brexit as “we will straight up cancel it”, you better be able to work the catwalk with some serious, serious swagger.

Yes, there are still too many people who should be far smarter than to ever vote for Boris Johnson, and who are about to do so regardless of the absurdity of such an act, but for the love of God, somebody could’ve at least tried to beat the bloke.
 
If he didn't have Brexit views of some sort, he's doing a great job of not showing it. Now is there a great deal of expediency in there? Absolutely, but even so.

The middle ground, in relation to Labour & the Lib Dems, then yeah, the Tories investing in areas they have not done previously, could be attractive to some voters who simply cannot touch Comrade Corybn's stank. Labour's sprint to the left has left a lot of fertile ground, and Brexit has really shaken up a lot of things. Tradition is no longer a convention.
OMG Gary Baldi you really believe him!!!!
 
NHS is supposed to be 'free' at the point of service. Reality is all those of us that work, or have worked already pay towards the funding of NHS ....via National Insurance contributions

Of course IF things go a certain way on Thursday we'll all be paying a considerable amount more for healthcare than we currently do in National Insurance contributions

IMO its up to individual surgeries/ health centres etc IF they choose to 'fine' patients for not showing up

for the few with money to burn the NHS is already bypassed by private healthcare at a sizable outlay anyway
That's not what I am saying Sarge.
If those who CAN AFFORD it pay some allowing more operations ...
The trouble is , in my view, we cant have an adult conversation about the health service ...
I.will probably give up on.this one!!
 
A grown up debate is certainly what's needed, but I'm not sure that we should necessarily charge for GP/Hospital appointments without some massive caveats that stop the less well off
We are hardly allowed to discuss.
I am not saying hospital. I am saying that I would not mind paying £10 ,to see a GP if it allowed more operations to people who need them. I can afford it ( and nobody who cant should pay)
But I accept I am in a minority of 1!!!
 
I’m not surprised about the result at all. And I don’t think Labour can do much more given the fight against the media.
In the article from the bbc above
37ECDE06-786A-4050-BFDD-79B14828F4B2.png

88% of Tory ads were either lies or misinformation.
0% of Labour ads were.

Even this article makes my point - that should probably have been a headline - as opposed to a mild point right by the bottom, which is then purposefully undermined by fake news which wasn’t funded by Labour. (The whole point of the article was about parties purposefully misinforming the public ffs)

It’s been discussed previously on this thread but Tories have slammed down people’s throats the ‘threat of Labour’ and they’ve done it by lying.
The amount of studies regarding the media’s relationship with this election show how much of a farce this election has been where it’s literally been - pull out all the stops to ensure Corbyn isn’t PM.

Boris Johnson has similarly helped Labour tremendously - I knew he was bad but wow.
The Tories could have had a child murdering rapist & Labour could have had Mother Theresa as leaders and the media would still have turned this election to an imminent Tory victory.
People can only build a view on the information they see on a daily basis & due to social media where real incidents are made public & scrutinised very quickly - the papers & tv companies have had to step it up to a level I’ve not witnessed in my time.

The first election I really remember was Gordon Brown one - and I’m the f*****g idiot who thought Cameron was a good idea.

The amount of stuff Labour has done that hasn’t been reported on - likewise the amount of stuff Tories have done (in a negative sense) that gets brushed over.

I’m not surprised whatsoever. Embittered - definitely. But if you’re earning 1billion & putting it in the Cayman Islands, and now there is the threat of paying tax on your earnings - you’re gonna be the sort of c**t who would spend £100m on ensuring that doesn’t happen.
 
We are hardly allowed to discuss.
I am not saying hospital. I am saying that I would not mind paying £10 ,to see a GP if it allowed more operations to people who need them. I can afford it ( and nobody who cant should pay)
But I accept I am in a minority of 1!!!
That's kind of how it works in Oz. If you earn a certain amount you have to have private health insurance, or pay the govt a levy. Free Gp access is available for those who can't afford it, kids etc. Pathology tests etc are typically free. I live in an area where most people can afford it and so we end up paying more for a better service (e.g. all of the GPs round here you can choose to see your usual doctor - the free "bulk-billed" service wouldn't provide for that). I end up about 20 quid out of pocket every time I go to the GP. There is more use of specialists here than I recall from the UK. That costs me more: I have to see an endocrinologist twice a year and it costs me about 120 quid each time. If I couldn't afford it there would be a free option with no choice of appointment time and location. People often pay for a private obstetrician so that they can guarantee who will be looking after the birth of their kids. We didn't do that and the govt-funded service was outstanding, just like the NHS was.
I have mixed feelings about it overall. It is certainly less "free at the point of care" than the NHS, but it does ensure that more bells and whistles and options are available to those who can pay without too much degradation of the basic health provision for all.
 
Looking at the polling I dispair for Britain. If I saw that distribution in Oz I would be confident of having a Progressive govt on Friday: the Tory+Brexit vote is less than the Labour+LibDem+Green+SNP vote.
 
Back
Top Bottom