2019 General Election Poll and Discussion

[Dave]

I’m not surprised Boris didn’t turn up for Channel 4’s ‘Climate Debate’; C4 haven’t exactly hidden their dislike of the Conservatives or Boris especially, and the audience that would be attracted to such a debate aren’t likely to vote Tory or Brexit Party anyway. So even if Boris did turn up I doubt he would’ve been given a fair hearing.

C4 haven’t shown any dislike of the Conservatives or the Brexit party, they are just the only Chanel willing to fact check and challenge politicians on their lies with any regularity (Sky has its moments and the BBC only do it when they are shamed into it). This certainly has a worse impact on the Tories and Brexit party but that’s just because they lie more frequently.

 

[Matt N]

I suppose that in the EU referendum, all of the polls were predicting a Remain win even on the day of the referendum; pretty much no one predicted the outcome there, so anything could happen...

 

[Rose Of Dawn]

C4 haven’t shown any dislike of the Conservatives or the Brexit party, they are just the only Chanel willing to fact check and challenge politicians on their lies with any regularity (Sky has its moments and the BBC only do it when they are shamed into it). This certainly has a worse impact on the Tories and Brexit party but that’s just because they lie more frequently.

I disagree; Channel 4 has certainly shown a bias against the Conservatives- and Boris Johnson - in the past. Which is perfectly fine so long as they don’t claim to be politically neutral.

A recent example is back in June, when a lesbian couple were attacked on a bus and were later subsequently interviewed by Cathy Newman. Despite very little known on the attack, comments made by Johnson almost twenty years ago (tank topped bum boys) were brought up and the whole piece was then changed to ‘Boris not fit to run country’. I’m not saying Boris doesn’t deserve to be free from scrutiny of previous comments made, but there was little relation there. It turned the focus away from a homophobic attack to a political point scoring excercise. The equivalent would be to drop Jeremy Corbyn into an interview following an antisemitic attack which had nothing to do with him. And I’m not the only one who noticed this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....ar-channel-4-news-biased-unfair-juvenile/amp/

 

[Dave]

I disagree; Channel 4 has certainly shown a bias against the Conservatives- and Boris Johnson - in the past. Which is perfectly fine so long as they don’t claim to be politically neutral.

A recent example is back in June, when a lesbian couple were attacked on a bus and were later subsequently interviewed by Cathy Newman. Despite very little known on the attack, comments made by Johnson almost twenty years ago (tank topped bum boys) were brought up and the whole piece was then changed to ‘Boris not fit to run country’. I’m not saying Boris doesn’t deserve to be free from scrutiny of previous comments made, but there was little relation there. It turned the focus away from a homophobic attack to a political point scoring excercise. The equivalent would be to drop Jeremy Corbyn into an interview following an antisemitic attack which had nothing to do with him. And I’m not the only one who noticed this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....ar-channel-4-news-biased-unfair-juvenile/amp/

You refer to a Telegraph article by Daniel Hannan, both the paper and the commentator are strongly aligned with the right and make no attempt to say otherwise so I wouldn’t see that as an unbiased source.

At the time of the attack there was a growing conversation about how the rise of the right and in particular how the rise of right wing politicians gaining power are influencing an increase in hate crime.

As it stands I don’t think any broadcaster is navigating neutrality perfectly but it’s massively in the favour of the conservatives. The BBC is shocking at the moment which is a real shame as I have always defended it and in the past felt it was unfairly attacked but recently they may as well be renamed the propaganda arm of the Conservative party HQ.

I suppose that in the EU referendum, all of the polls were predicting a Remain win even on the day of the referendum; pretty much no one predicted the outcome there, so anything could happen...

The thing you have to bare in mind with poling is there is always a margin of error. Newspapers and media outlets tend to ignore that. If you want to track polls properly you need to factor the error in.

 

[Sauron97]

Won't be voting, and didn't in 2017 either, only ever voted in the EU ref. There's nothing to vote for (especially when you live in what I think might be the safest tory seat in the country). I'm no fan or Corbyn or his plans, but I'll admit that he's clearly the result of a smear campaign in the media which is going a little too far. As a PERSON, I don't see him as a rabid anti semite hell bent on pursuing Stalinism like some of these angry bald men I keep seeing on Facebook seem to suggest, no offence to decent non-angry bald men. But his ineffectiveness in dealing with antisemitism, constant dodging of questions on TV (nuclear button question on ITV, immigration numbers, stance on the EU) is a big problem. Raising corporation tax also seems bizarre given the fact that of all the taxes, CT follows the laffer effect the closest and reducing rates has increased receipts. Given they also want rise in TLW to 10 quid an hour, and the fact that the tax affects businesses of all sizes with smaller profit margins, I don't see how this policy is promoting start ups. And then they plaster a meaningless 'fully costed' banner on the top of their manifesto as if they can understand the behavior of every person/business and their willingness to invest in the economy despite tax hikes left right and center. Not a comment on cuts over recent times, but on these plans alone it seems their solution to everything is to just throw money at it.
Nationalizing rail seems sensible in the short term as franchising has trashed us over and we need to change and reevaluate the railways as a whole(I have to commute to the UoB each day and there hasn't been one single day without either signal issues or lack of staffing) , but this clearly as always Corbyn goes too far and don't care about finding a separate way of sorting out how rail companies should compete instead of lowering prices in the long term. Instead he wants it to be one big beaurocratic money losing mess like British Rail, again relying on the idea that 'the rich /businesses will pay their taxes'.
Likewise, as someone who believes in Brexit, I don't trust the Tories whatsoever for the simple reason that most of them decided they were for leave a couple of months before the referendum happened, Gove and Boris included, and I'm not convinced that they will go for a Canada style deal at the end of the transition period anyway, as every other source is claiming we're heading for a TP extension to 2022.
I think what Boris' dad said about "the british general public not having a sense of literacy and can't spell Pinocchio" was extremely demeaning. Not because he's factually wrong on that point. Spelling Pinocchio correctly isn't something I think most people think about as they go through their daily lives, but it's the INSINUATION that common people are lesser and have less intelligence than the etonian snobs. What an arsehole
End of the day, we have a terrible first past the post system that gives us the illusion of choice and forces us to vote tactically rather than on principle, and both main parties aren't doing anything to change that. More direct democracy please

 

[speedy]

Won't be voting, and didn't in 2017 either, only ever voted in the EU ref. There's nothing to vote for (especially when you live in what I think might be the safest tory seat in the country). I'm no fan or Corbyn or his plans, but I'll admit that he's clearly the result of a smear campaign in the media which is going a little too far. As a PERSON, I don't see him as a rabid anti semite hell bent on pursuing Stalinism like some of these angry bald men I keep seeing on Facebook seem to suggest, no offence to decent non-angry bald men. But his ineffectiveness in dealing with antisemitism, constant dodging of questions on TV (nuclear button question on ITV, immigration numbers, stance on the EU) is a big problem. Raising corporation tax also seems bizarre given the fact that of all the taxes, CT follows the laffer effect the closest and reducing rates has increased receipts. Given they also want rise in TLW to 10 quid an hour, and the fact that the tax affects businesses of all sizes with smaller profit margins, I don't see how this policy is promoting start ups. And then they plaster a meaningless 'fully costed' banner on the top of their manifesto as if they can understand the behavior of every person/business and their willingness to invest in the economy despite tax hikes left right and center. Not a comment on cuts over recent times, but on these plans alone it seems their solution to everything is to just throw money at it.
Nationalizing rail seems sensible in the short term as franchising has trashed us over and we need to change and reevaluate the railways as a whole(I have to commute to the UoB each day and there hasn't been one single day without either signal issues or lack of staffing) , but this clearly as always Corbyn goes too far and don't care about finding a separate way of sorting out how rail companies should compete instead of lowering prices in the long term. Instead he wants it to be one big beaurocratic money losing mess like British Rail, again relying on the idea that 'the rich /businesses will pay their taxes'.
Likewise, as someone who believes in Brexit, I don't trust the Tories whatsoever for the simple reason that most of them decided they were for leave a couple of months before the referendum happened, Gove and Boris included, and I'm not convinced that they will go for a Canada style deal at the end of the transition period anyway, as every other source is claiming we're heading for a TP extension to 2022.
I think what Boris' dad said about "the british general public not having a sense of literacy and can't spell Pinocchio" was extremely demeaning. Not because he's factually wrong on that point. Spelling Pinocchio correctly isn't something I think most people think about as they go through their daily lives, but it's the INSINUATION that common people are lesser and have less intelligence than the etonian snobs. What an arsehole
End of the day, we have a terrible first past the post system that gives us the illusion of choice and forces us to vote tactically rather than on principle, and both main parties aren't doing anything to change that. More direct democracy please

Out of curiosity why don't you just vote tory? Obviously I don't want you to do that but since you're a Brexiteer it would be the best way to Get Brexit Done™.

 

[Dave]

Likewise, as someone who believes in Brexit, I don't trust the Tories whatsoever for the simple reason that most of them decided they were for leave a couple of months before the referendum happened, Gove and Boris included, and I'm not convinced that they will go for a Canada style deal at the end of the transition period anyway, as every other source is claiming we're heading for a TP extension to 2022.

I know this is not the brexit topic but no party will get a Canada style trade deal because it’s not available (certainly not before end of 2020). Trade deals are a negotiation of national interest, Canada is not geographically close to Europe so borders, fishing, immigration etc where not a problem. For the UK these will need factoring in, and France in particular will not let them go un-challenged (and as the EU works for all its members neither will the EU).

Obviously Johnson could do what he did with the transition agreement and do what he said he wouldn’t do and capitulate on the UK red lines (then claim he didn’t), things might get faster then.

 

[Sauron97]

Have you even read my post fella @speedy ?
I never even used the words 'get brexit done', most of my post was about my opinions on the general election. Brexit is a process that will take a lot of time, breaking down existing arrangements and writing new arrangements so those words are probably inappropriate; I believe in Brexit, yes, because I believe that the EU has shifted decision making to quangos and unelected bodies without giving the population a direct say or ability to choose its leaders. I don't trust the Tory party to do that primarily because most of them are pro big business remainers who only backed leave at the last minute to save their careers or look like 'anti establishment figures'. Their deal costs billions sent to the EU starting at 39 billion that we could be spending on sorting out essential services, and ties us to EU product directives that limit small businesses from becoming more competitive
CE standards that go in to copious detail on energy efficiency/ standards based on wattage, how 'smart' products are, product sizes and materials which don't cut energy use, inflate electricity prices, and raise the market barriers for entry for start up businesses having to comply with these standards. That's forgetting geographical indicator rules, and the bigger policies like the effect that the CAP on our food prices.
Anyway, if you're going to post sarcy messages instead of debate sensibly, why don't you just come out any explain why this whole thing should be dealt with by continuing the divisive period of inaction that has happened since 2016 and broken down trust in politics??
Or just throw in another ™ to try and get attention?™

I know this is not the brexit topic but no party will get a Canada style trade deal because it’s not available (certainly not before end of 2020). Trade deals are a negotiation of national interest, Canada is not geographically close to Europe so borders, fishing, immigration etc where not a problem. For the UK these will need factoring in, and France in particular will not let them go un-challenged (and as the EU works for all its members neither will the EU).

Thank you for a more sensible response than the dude above who had no substance to his points. I personally disagree, it was available whilst David Davis was Brexit Secretary until Theresa May shelved it in favor of giving the EU all the playing cards and compromising on everything. Borders, fishing and immigration shouldn't be a problem anyway; geographical proximity shouldn't make a difference to any of these things; well if we shared a land border or were in schengen, perhaps a different story but we're not. You've got to begin trade plans over the next year for a canada style deal, not necessary complete them, but begin them, and then there are WTO articles that can be used to eliminate tariffs for like 2 years to allow the deal to be completed.

As I said, I'm not voting for any party. Give me the Italian 5 star movement but a British version and I might reconsider. Did a uni project on them the other day and I've gotta say their approach to politics is something that needs to happen in the UK; direct democracy is so much better than representative democracy these days. All I've got on my ballot is Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green. That's first past the post for you. Absolute joke if you ask me

 

[Rick]

The saddest thing about Brexit for me now is that the majority of the country won't get what it voted for.

The 48% for obvious reasons and a not insignificant proportion of the 52% because the Brexit that would be delivered via a Tory majority won't be what they were promised.

 

[speedy]

Have you even read my post fella @speedy ?
I never even used the words 'get brexit done', most of my post was about my opinions on the general election. Brexit is a process that will take a lot of time, breaking down existing arrangements and writing new arrangements so those words are probably inappropriate; I believe in Brexit, yes, because I believe that the EU has shifted decision making to quangos and unelected bodies without giving the population a direct say or ability to choose its leaders. I don't trust the Tory party to do that primarily because most of them are pro big business remainers who only backed leave at the last minute to save their careers or look like 'anti establishment figures'. Their deal costs billions sent to the EU starting at 39 billion that we could be spending on sorting out essential services, and ties us to EU product directives that limit small businesses from becoming more competitive
CE standards that go in to copious detail on energy efficiency/ standards based on wattage, how 'smart' products are, product sizes and materials which don't cut energy use, inflate electricity prices, and raise the market barriers for entry for start up businesses having to comply with these standards. That's forgetting geographical indicator rules, and the bigger policies like the effect that the CAP on our food prices.
Anyway, if you're going to post sarcy messages instead of debate sensibly, why don't you just come out any explain why this whole thing should be dealt with by continuing the divisive period of inaction that has happened since 2016 and broken down trust in politics??
Or just throw in another ™ to try and get attention?™

Thank you for a more sensible response than the dude above who had no substance to his points. I personally disagree, it was available whilst David Davis was Brexit Secretary until Theresa May shelved it in favor of giving the EU all the playing cards and compromising on everything. Borders, fishing and immigration shouldn't be a problem anyway; geographical proximity shouldn't make a difference to any of these things; well if we shared a land border or were in schengen, perhaps a different story but we're not. You've got to begin trade plans over the next year for a canada style deal, not necessary complete them, but begin them, and then there are WTO articles that can be used to eliminate tariffs for like 2 years to allow the deal to be completed.

As I said, I'm not voting for any party. Give me the Italian 5 star movement but a British version and I might reconsider. Did a uni project on them the other day and I've gotta say their approach to politics is something that needs to happen in the UK; direct democracy is so much better than representative democracy these days. All I've got on my ballot is Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green. That's first past the post for you. Absolute joke if you ask me

I don't think it was snarky to be honest I think your response was far more snarky. Mine was a simple question, the "™" more to take the mic out of the Tories than anyone else.

How it should be dealt with? Labour's plan to negotiate the best deal they can then put it to a referendum would let us make an informed decision and to me at least is the fairest way to resolve the issue.

Certainly last thing I'd do is throw my vote away

 

[RoyJess]

Certainly last thing I'd do is throw my vote away

I agree, never throw your vote away or waste it on tactical voting. We are lucky to live in a country that allows us to cast a vote (unlike some countries other out there). Use your vote to voice your opinion.

My local area is always a Tory stronghold, but this still doesn't deter us from voting for the party that we would like to see in power instead.

Jess and I've already cast'd our vote via post.

 

[Sauron97]

@RoyJess That would be a valid point if there was a party that I agreed with. You say don't vote tactically, but also don't throw it away. So what are you supposed to do if you don't agree with any parties on there on a point of principle following that logic? As I said, parties standing where I live: labour, tory, green, lib dem. that's it. Not even an independent or monster raving loony. What are you supposed to do?

I don't think it was snarky to be honest I think your response was far more snarky. Mine was a simple question, the "™" more to take the mic out of the Tories than anyone else.

How it should be dealt with? Labour's plan to negotiate the best deal they can then put it to a referendum would let us make an informed decision and to me at least is the fairest way to resolve the issue.

Certainly last thing I'd do is throw my vote away

It wasn't a simple question so please don't try and spin it that way. I explained why I didn't want to vote for them in the first post I made and yet you still questioned me as if I was some sort of closet tory.

 

[Stuie]

Given they also want rise in TLW to 10 quid an hour, and the fact that the tax affects businesses of all sizes with smaller profit

Sure, there will be some small business casualties but there are many big profit making companies that pay shit wages which are topped up by working tax credits and housing allowance. These companies can pay more per hour to reduce the amount paid by the state. It’s absolutely the right thing to happen and if you argue otherwise you are either Mike Ashley or Paul Pomroy.

 

[GaryH]

I'm in a similar boat to @Sauron97 in that I may not bother voting either. People say don't waste your vote, but, what if there is no one you want to vote for? What then? I don't want Boris, I certainly don't want Corbyn, I don't want Lib Dem and I definitely don't want to the greens!

 

[jon81uk]

I'm in a similar boat to @Sauron97 in that I may not bother voting either. People say don't waste your vote, but, what if there is no one you want to vote for? What then? I don't want Boris, I certainly don't want Corbyn, I don't want Lib Dem and I definitely don't want to the greens!

policy-wise what do you want then?

and of course you actually vote for an MP, so you could look at your local candidates and their personal motivations rather than just their party affiliation. Unless you live in Islington North you aren't actually voting for Corbyn. Also you state you don't want the leaders Boris or Corbyn, so would you vote either of those parties if they had a different leader?

 

[GaryH]

Also you state you don't want the leaders Boris or Corbyn, so would you vote either of those parties if they had a different leader?

I would consider it yes!

 

[RoyJess]

@RoyJess That would be a valid point if there was a party that I agreed with. You say don't vote tactically, but also don't throw it away. So what are you supposed to do if you don't agree with any parties on there on a point of principle following that logic? As I said, parties standing where I live: labour, tory, green, lib dem. that's it. Not even an independent or monster raving loony. What are you supposed to do?

It wasn't a simple question so please don't try and spin it that way. I explained why I didn't want to vote for them in the first post I made and yet you still questioned me as if I was some sort of closet tory.

I'm in a similar boat to @Sauron97 in that I may not bother voting either. People say don't waste your vote, but, what if there is no one you want to vote for? What then? I don't want Boris, I certainly don't want Corbyn, I don't want Lib Dem and I definitely don't want to the greens!

Like I say, it about voicing your opinion regardless.

You are all happy to spend time to voice your opinion on here, but yet you are not going to actually vote? ... and your opinion on here won't count towards the final vote, so why not use up and spend as much time and effort to actually vote? We register for postal voting some years ago, so that we can vote in our own time without having to drag Jess out.

The party that I voted for will probably have no chance of getting in, but I will still show them my support.

 

[Rick]

I agree, never throw your vote away or waste it on tactical voting.

I think that suggesting tactical voting is a 'waste' is too simplistic of an approach given our electoral system. The outcome of this election more than most could be swayed by tactical voting.

If you live in a Lib Dem/Tory marginal and you're pro European, pro freedom of movement, support many progressive policies etc ... but your heart says to vote Green, I understand why people would, but by doing so you potentially allow a candidate representing a party at odds with your values to snag the seat.

That's lost on me, personally. Lost on most parties too!

I think tactical voting will play more of a role in future elections, if in this one parties who support remain/a referendum (don't support the Johnson treaty) win the popular vote, but don't hold the balance of power.

 

[RoyJess]

I think that suggesting tactical voting is a 'waste' is too simplistic of an approach given our electoral system. The outcome of this election more than most could be swayed by tactical voting.

If you live in a Lib Dem/Tory marginal and you're pro European, pro freedom of movement, support many progressive policies etc ... but your heart says to vote Green, I understand why people would, but by doing so you potentially allow a candidate representing a party at odds with your values to snag the seat.

That's lost on me, personally. Lost on most parties too!

I think tactical voting will play more of a role in future elections, if in this one parties who support remain/a referendum (don't support the Johnson treaty) win the popular vote, but don't hold the balance of power.

Spoiler: I've got news for you

Your vote alone is unlikely to make the difference between a party winning or losing. Your vote will be a drop in the ocean when it comes to voting, and because of the winning party that runs the country, will relies on us electing local candidates as oppose to proportional representation, then you are safe to use your vote for the party that you really want to govern as appose to the lesser of the two evils. Hence why I say use your vote to voice your opinion.

The problem with tactical voting, you end up creating a 2 horse race. Only in the Local and European elections that you will see a change in people voting habits and the other parties end up with more proportion of the votes.

 

[Lurker]

Spoiler: I've got news for you

Your vote alone is unlikely to make the difference between a party winning or losing. Your vote will be a drop in the ocean when it comes to voting, and because of the winning party that runs the country, will relies on us electing local candidates as oppose to proportional representation, then you are safe to use your vote for the party that you really want to govern as appose to the lesser of the two evils. Hence why I say use your vote to voice your opinion.

The problem with tactical voting, you end up creating a 2 horse race. Only in the Local and European elections that you will see a change in people voting habits and the other parties end up with more proportion of the votes.

Quite disagree, especially with your "Spoiler". 8 seats have a majority of less than 50 votes. The lowest is an SNP seat with a majority of 2 votes! 1 vote is not a drop in an ocean in a marginal constituency like that.

You don't know the votes in advance, any seat could be marginally won by someone you favour, or someone you dislike. So I believe it's worth keeping tactics in mind, though worth keeping your local area and own interests in mind too, of course.

1 vote is all it takes, make sure you cast yours.