General Election 2019

[Dr Nowt]

Of course the only slightly less amusing thing about the Tory candidate caught lying by Michael Crick is that Ashfield is Daubney’s constituency and that insufferable twat in the House of Commons would be rancid.

 

Getting the strong impression it’s pure flat-earther Brexit central there. Hope to fuck the above two split their vote and let Labour in through the middle to take the seat.

[Red Phoenix]

Labour get best poll result in months via ICM.

 

*several hours pass*

 

"Chief Rabbi says Corbyn isn't fit for high office."

 

[cloggypop]

[ZonkoVille77]

The chief rabbi is clearly a racist, misogynistic philandering cunt. 

[aRdja]

Unprecedented.

 

 

[clockspeed]

Can I state from outset of this post that I am not racist nor xenophobic.

Personally I am fed up listening to this pro/anti Israel pro/anti Palestine pro/anti Islam etc.etc rhetoric every day this is a General Election for the next 4 to 5 years . 

As an example I had to give blood in hospital yesterday queues waiting etc etc i went into office nurse looked like she had been dragged through hedge backwards made polite conversation . Been working for 14 hours continuously,  slept on table during the one break she had had . Had seen 118 patients and looked completely worn out.  Then to cap it off the consultant I have had for 20 years is retiring to become a.landscape gardener because he cannot face the pressure being put on the nursing staff and is powerless to do anything about it. He is 53 what a waste of talent. These are the things we need to be addressing and they are fixable. 

 

On another note one of the things that pissed me off was the sign showing how many no shows in the consultation rooms. Quick maths about 18 to 20 percent of people with appointments did not show up. Apart from logistics of getting there what sort of cretin asks/gets appointment and doesn't weigh in . So on an already overburdened system I presume we have to reschedule extra appointment slots.  Depressing experience all round. 

[Bobby Hundreds]

So what your really saying is you hate Jews

[Creator Supreme]

20 minutes ago, clockspeed said:

Can I state from outset of this post that I am not racist nor xenophobic.

Personally I am fed up listening to this pro/anti Israel pro/anti Palestine pro/anti Islam etc.etc rhetoric every day this is a General Election for the next 4 to 5 years . 

As an example I had to give blood in hospital yesterday queues waiting etc etc i went into office nurse looked like she had been dragged through hedge backwards made polite conversation . Been working for 14 hours continuously,  slept on table during the one break she had had . Had seen 118 patients and looked completely worn out.  Then to cap it off the consultant I have had for 20 years is retiring to become a.landscape gardener because he cannot face the pressure being put on the nursing staff and is powerless to do anything about it. He is 53 what a waste of talent. These are the things we need to be addressing and they are fixable. 

 

On another note one of the things that pissed me off was the sign showing how many no shows in the consultation rooms. Quick maths about 18 to 20 percent of people with appointments did not show up. Apart from logistics of getting there what sort of cretin asks/gets appointment and doesn't weigh in . So on an already overburdened system I presume we have to reschedule extra appointment slots.  Depressing experience all round. 

Sickening, poor bastards, that's what so annoying, the working class Tories don't give a shit about stuff like this, until they need treatment of course! Then listen to the fuckers bleat!

[Marko121]

50 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

Sickening, poor bastards, that's what so annoying, the working class Tories don't give a shit about stuff like this, until they need treatment of course! Then listen to the fuckers bleat!

 But at that point it will be the immigrants fault that they are not happy with the treatment and/or how long it takes. They won’t blame the cunts they voted in 

[RobbieOR]

1 hour ago, viRdjil said:

Unprecedented.

 

 

 

I suppose they'll still say aren't a version of Tories with all those Tory defectors and a former Thatcher minister deciding to be one of them. 

[Creator Supreme]

45 minutes ago, Marko121 said:

 But at that point it will be the immigrants fault that they are not happy with the treatment and/or how long it takes. They won’t blame the cunts they voted in 

You are, of course, completely correct.

[Vincent Vega]

I see news reports with lifelong Labour supporters saying they’re voting Tory because of Brexit, like in Wrexham yesterday, and I get all depressed and thinking a Tory majority is a shoe-in. And then I see something like this and I start to feel all optimistic. 

 

[Jairzinho]

370k registered yesterday.

[Jairzinho]

And the newwwwww...

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

Chief Rabbi demands "every person vote with their conscience"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50554214

 

General election 2019: Child poverty 'will rise' under Conservative plans

 

Child poverty risks reaching a record high under the Conservatives, according to a Resolution Foundation report.

The party's manifesto does not propose changes to existing benefit policy and, as a result, relative child poverty could reach a 60-year high of 34% by 2023-4, the think tank said.

But none of the three main party manifestos would reduce child poverty from its current rate of 29.6% by then.

The Tories said 750,000 fewer children are in poverty since they took power.

The report, which was published on Tuesday, said: "It is notable that both the Labour and Liberal Democrat approaches could be expected to halt potential increases in relative child poverty over the next Parliament.

"We forecast that under current policy plans (ie the Conservative package) child poverty will rise from 29.6% in 2017-18 to 34.4% in 2023-24."

Under Labour's plans, which include around £9bn of extra social security spending, the foundation forecast there would be some 550,000 fewer children in poverty compared to Conservative plans.

Labour's plans would see child poverty remain roughly the same, with a rate of around 30.2% in 2023-4.

 

Not wishing to be accused of bias;

 

That figure under Lib Dems' plans, meanwhile, would be 29.7% in 2023-4.

Their social security pledges are slightly more progressive than Labour's and would see 600,000 fewer children in poverty than there would be under Conservative plans, the foundation said.

"However, this would not do enough to see child poverty fall from today's already high levels," the Resolution Foundation's Laura Gardiner said.

Ms Gardiner added: "Policy choices since 2010 have reduced the generosity of support for working age families by £34bn.

 

 

 

 

 

[aRdja]

This is quite heartwarming.

 

https://amp.ft.com/content/d6f56834-0f78-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae?__twitter_impression=true

 

Quote

The Labour party deserves to form the next UK government

From David G Blanchflower and others

© Getty

   

November 26, 2019 12:02 am

The UK economy needs reform. For too long it has prioritised consumption over investment, short-term financial returns over long-term innovation, rising asset values over rising wages, and deficit reduction over the quality of public services.

The results are now plain. We have had 10 years of near zero productivity growth. Corporate investment has stagnated. Average earnings are still lower than in 2008. A gulf has arisen between London and the South East and the rest of the country. And public services are under intolerable strain — which the economic costs of a hard Brexit would only make worse. We now moreover face the urgent imperative of acting on the climate and environmental crisis.

Given private sector reluctance, what the UK economy needs is a serious injection of public investment, which can in turn leverage private finance attracted by the expectation of higher demand. Such investment needs to be directed into the large-scale and rapid decarbonisation of energy, transport, housing, industry and farming; the support of innovation- and export-oriented businesses; and public services. It is clear that this will require an active and green industrial strategy, aimed at improving productivity and spreading investment across the country.

Experience elsewhere (not least in Germany) suggests a National Investment Bank would greatly help. With long-term real interest rates now negative, it makes basic economic sense for the government to borrow for this, spreading the cost over the generations who will benefit from the assets. As the IMF has acknowledged, when interest payments are low and investment raises economic growth, public debt is sustainable.

At the same time, we need a serious attempt to raise wages and productivity. A higher minimum wage can help do this, alongside tighter regulation of the worst practices in the gig economy. Bringing workers on to company boards and giving them a stake in their companies, as most European countries do in some form, will also help. The UK’s outlier rate of corporation tax can clearly be raised, not least for the highly profitable digital companies.

As economists, and people who work in various fields of economic policy, we have looked closely at the economic prospectuses of the political parties. It seems clear to us that the Labour party has not only understood the deep problems we face, but has devised serious proposals for dealing with them. We believe it deserves to form the next government.

David G Blanchflower
Bruce V Rauner Professor of Economics, Dartmouth College; Professor of Economics. University of Stirling; former member, Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee

Victoria Chick
Emeritus Professor of Economics, University College London

Lord Meghnad Desai
Emeritus Professor of Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science

Stephany Griffith-Jones
Emeritus Professorial Fellow, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex; Financial Markets Director, Initiative for Policy Dialogue, Columbia University

Simon Wren-Lewis
Emeritus Professor of Economics and Fellow of Merton College, University of Oxford

On behalf of 163 signatories. The complete list of signatories is here

 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

The Tories have pledged to curb the use of judicial review “to ensure that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays” and expand the use of the royal prerogative.

 

Less democracy, it'll be a hit with all those Brexit fans. 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-brexit-latest-boris-johnson-article-50-second-referendum-a9217656.html?fbclid=IwAR39xESR9rIsFITMQrnlvjBM5e3bVKfrInfk0jqD5_pTWNwQqru7BTm8i-w

 

Boris Johnson is planning an extraordinary attack on the courts if he wins the general election, prompting accusations he is determined to prevent a repeat of judges thwarting Conservative Brexit plans.

The alarm has been raised over proposals in the Tory manifesto to curb the power of people to mount legal challenges – after historic defeats over the triggering of Article 50 and the unlawful shutdown of parliament.

 

A little-noticed section also hints at expanding the use of the royal prerogative to allow, it is claimed, the next government to ram through plans for the future relationship with the EU without proper scrutiny by MPs.

 

 

The moves appear designed to prevent a repeat of the damaging setbacks inflicted by the courts on both Theresa May, over invoking Article 50 without MPs’ approval, and Mr Johnson himself, over the prorogation of parliament.

 

Gina Miller, the businesswoman who mounted and won the Article 50 case, told The Independent: “Is Boris Johnson intending to get a majority, change the scope of the royal prerogative and become a dictator?”

Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative attorney general, now running as an independent, said he feared a “clear intent to attack the power to go for judicial review, which would be a very serious matter indeed”.

 

“The worst-case scenario is that this would be a monstrous attack on the courts and its clear role in interpreting and upholding our constitution,” he warned.

The controversy has been sparked by the wording of the Tory manifesto, unveiled on Sunday, which also hints at curtailing the power of the House of Lords to hold up government legislation.

 

It reads: “After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the government, parliament and the courts; the functioning of the royal prerogative; the role of the House of Lords; and access to justice for ordinary people.

 

And it adds: “We will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.”

 

The accusation that the courts were “abused to conduct politics by another means” has echoes of the notorious headline in one right-wing tabloid that judges had shown themselves to be “enemies of the people”.

 

 

It followed the case, brought by Ms Miller, which led to the historic Supreme Court ruling that MPs and peers must give their consent before the government could trigger Article 50.

Mr Johnson suffered an even more humiliating Supreme Court defeat in September, over his attempted five-week shutdown of parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis.

 

Mr Grieve attacked the whiff of revenge, saying: “There was nothing that the courts have done in the course of Brexit that could be faulted, either in the Miller case or over prorogation.”

Ms Miller said she was even more “alarmed” by the implication that the royal prerogative could be extended, perhaps from international affairs to also incorporate domestic matters.

 

The campaigner and entrepreneur said it was crucial to recognise that the withdrawal agreement bill already gave the government extensive prerogative, or “Henry VIII”, powers over swathes of the post-Brexit relationship.

 

This included retroactive application of the law, the creation of new criminal offences or tax implications, the establishment of new authorities and creating time-limited powers.

“The scope of those powers is extremely broad – just a broad, subjective discretion on the minster to ‘make such provisions as he considers appropriate’,” Ms Miller said.

“In many instances, there are no limits on the exercise of the power. In some cases, it appears that the House of Lords has been written out of the process altogether.”

 

The Article 50 case was won because rights embedded into domestic law by the 1972 Act which took the UK into the-then European Economic Community, could not – the Supreme Court decided – be overridden.

Ms Miller pointed out: “The royal prerogative can only be used on the international plain, but not on the domestic plain. Is Boris Johnson now changing that?”

The Conservative party has been asked to respond to the criticisms that it intends an attack on the courts to thwart future challenges over Brexit policy.

The section, on page 48 of the manifesto, also proposes to “update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government”.

That has already drawn stinging criticism from the Liberal Democrats as a clear intention “to weaken it”.

[Colonel Bumcunt]

10 hours ago, cloggypop said:

 

I tell you what, the Jewish community can do without this cunt.  This is abuse of his office, and it's not a good look for him, or the plight of anti-semitism in the UK.

 

You don't weaponise a religion or a race of people.  You certainly should think very carefully about doing it when you're a very small minority in the country you want to exert influence on. 

 

I can't begin to do justice to the rage I feel about this nonce.  

 

 

 

[aRdja]

Jesus Christ... has it really come to this now? “If you’re Muslim vote for Labour, but if you’re Jewish vote for Conservative.”
 

 

[magicrat]

Our secular system of government and the role of the courts under threat . All from the Bannon play book . Just waiting for Boris’s black shirts to take to the streets 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

13 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Jesus Christ... has it really come to this now? “If you’re Muslim vote for Labour, but if you’re Jewish vote for Conservative.”
 

 

I am expecting this to be the top story on BBC and get front page coverage on all the papers tomorrow.

[aRdja]

It’s scary as now a conservative win will be seen as the country have voted against the Muslims, and a Labour victory will be interpreted as the country don’t care for the Jews

[SasaS]

3 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

It’s scary as now a conservative win will be seen as the country have voted against the Muslims, and a Labour victory will be interpreted as the country don’t care for the Jews

Oh, come on.

[M_B]

5 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Oh, come on.

He does have a point though. Its incredibly dangerous for a religion to become publicly political because it adds fuel to the fire that a religion is an enemy of the state. If one side wins by a margin, racists around the country will blame the religion for swaying the vote. "If it hadn't been for the " etc etc.

[aRdja]

7 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Oh, come on.

How do you mean? They’re clearly asking the voters to choose. I have very little time for religions but I usually just ignore them... but what they’re doing is awfully dangerous and has potentially terrifying consequences.