Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

General Election 2019


Bjornebye
 Share

Who are you voting for?   

142 members have voted

  1. 1. Who are you voting for?



Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, SasaS said:

And if some liberal, centrist party was traditionally the strongest opposition to the Conservatives, as in Whigs and Tories, they would be saying to left wingers, you are just enabling Tories with your talk about democratic socialsim and voting for some "social democracy"?

What?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SasaS said:

And if some liberal, centrist party was traditionally the strongest opposition to the Conservatives, as in Whigs and Tories, they would be saying to left wingers, you are just enabling Tories with your talk about democratic socialsim and voting for some "social democracy"?

Yeah probably. Here’s Chomsky’s answer to your question.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/noam-chomsky-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-a7438526.html

 

Speaking to Al-Jazeera, the celebrated American philosopher and linguist argued the election was a case of voting for the lesser of two evils and told those who decided not to do so: “I think they’re making a bad mistake.” 

Donald Trump's four biggest U-turns

“There are two issues,” he said. “One is a kind of moral issue: do you vote against the greater evil if you don’t happen to like the other candidate? The answer to that is yes. If you have any moral understanding, you want to keep the greater evil out. 

“Second is a factual question: how do Trump and Clinton compare? I think they’re very different. I didn’t like Clinton at all, but her positions are much better than Trump’s on every issue I can think of.” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

I think the best thing that could happen to this country is a new party is formed that is up-front, honest, strong and smart. They put the people of the country first but appreciate the need for trade and global relationships. Tax is fair and every penny is spent wisely. No corruption, no media bias and no pissing about. 

 

Leader - AoT

Secretary of State - Pistonbroke

Chancellor - Woolster 

Secretary of State - Lifetime Fan

Chancellor of the Duchy - Captain Turdseye

Secretary of State for Justice - Rubble Rouser

 

Rubble Rouser? Well, fuck you. Jobs for the boys already. You’re as corrupt as all the other political parties and you’re not even formed yet.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Rubble Rouser? Well, fuck you. Jobs for the boys already. You’re as corrupt as all the other political parties and you’re not even formed yet.

I haven't finished the jobs yet for heavens sake. You're down for Public Services Minister. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Well, once upon a time, Labour was the third party. So was it wrong to vote Labour in the early 20th century for fear of letting the Tories beat the Liberals?

Can we just deal with the current reality. I’m not interested in airheaded distractions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

The only thing stopping the Lib Dems being relevant in the election is the Lib Dems themselves.  They can't create a narrative that supports what it is they are that fits between Labour and Tory, that's so different to either party that it necessitates the creation of a new party.  And 6m of you seem to fall for it.  

 

Their flagship policy to cancel Brexit is retarded logic.  You can't just ignore the 2016 referendum, because you will create a subset of millions of people that fucking hate you forever.  How the fuck is their flagship policy going to work unless they win a majority?  Neither the Tories or Labour will entertain the idea in a coalition or supply and confidence arrangement.  So, what then?  You've lost your flagship policy, its gone.  And then you're left with what? Oh, roughly the same policies as Labour.

 

But you've just rammed Labour off the road in some seats, so what are  you left with?  That's right, a fascist government in bed with UKIP and Brexit Party.  You've also just helped elect loads of new Tory MP's, some of which are hardcore fascist bastards, who will look to implement things a lot worse than Brexit. 

 

 

 

 

 

You've hit the nail on the head here. In the last ten years, the Lib Dems have lied to, and lost the students forever and now plan to lose leave voters forever. They may as well just form a government with the Tories again so that they can have one last hurrah and ensure that they lose Remain voters and 100% of  the Electorate forever.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

“Second is a factual question: how do Trump and Clinton compare? I think they’re very different. I didn’t like Clinton at all, but her positions are much better than Trump’s on every issue I can think of.” 

 

Syria, Ukraine, Russia. At least so far anyway, the clown still has a year to fuck it all up.

 

Chomsky is great I agree with him on almost everything, but I think he was wrong on that part. Sanders is ahead in California now apparently too, don't be surprised if the US establishment shit themselves and wheel her out again for another run shortly.

 

edit : he's partly messed things up in Syria already by leaving the Kurds like he has done. He's at least not gone down the route of bombing the crap out of the country though so far. And yes I still think Trump is a horrible bastard and am sick of him. If only the Dems and the US media would stop being so biased against Sanders. He could easily win the nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Yeah probably. Here’s Chomsky’s answer to your question.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/noam-chomsky-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-a7438526.html

 

Speaking to Al-Jazeera, the celebrated American philosopher and linguist argued the election was a case of voting for the lesser of two evils and told those who decided not to do so: “I think they’re making a bad mistake.” 

Donald Trump's four biggest U-turns

“There are two issues,” he said. “One is a kind of moral issue: do you vote against the greater evil if you don’t happen to like the other candidate? The answer to that is yes. If you have any moral understanding, you want to keep the greater evil out. 

“Second is a factual question: how do Trump and Clinton compare? I think they’re very different. I didn’t like Clinton at all, but her positions are much better than Trump’s on every issue I can think of.” 


But that's not the same is it? Clinton and Sanders went against each other and Clinton won, it wasn't a 3-way where Clinton pressurized Sanders voters to vote for her and not for Sanders because otherwise they are letting Trump in.

Labour has moved considerably to the left since Corbyn and now has a number of policies and positions that are probably unpalatable to Lib Dem voters. So it's their job to convince the electorate that these policies are a good thing. You can also say to Green Party voters, why would you not vote for Labour, you are enabling fascists, or to SNP, or Sinn Fein, parties that are ideologically much closer to Labour than Lib Dems. That's just political bullying.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SasaS said:


But that's not the same is it? Clinton and Sanders went against each other and Clinton won, it wasn't a 3-way where Clinton pressurized Sanders voters to vote for her and not for Sanders because otherwise they are letting Trump in.

Labour has moved considerably to the left since Corbyn and now has a number of policies and positions that are probably unpalatable to Lib Dem voters. So it's their job to convince the electorate that these policies are a good thing. You can also say to Green Party voters, why would you not vote for Labour, you are enabling fascists, or to SNP, or Sinn Fein, parties that are ideologically much closer to Labour than Lib Dems. That's just political bullying.

 

Political bullying? Boo fucking hoo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SasaS said:


But that's not the same is it? Clinton and Sanders went against each other and Clinton won, it wasn't a 3-way where Clinton pressurized Sanders voters to vote for her and not for Sanders because otherwise they are letting Trump in.

Labour has moved considerably to the left since Corbyn and now has a number of policies and positions that are probably unpalatable to Lib Dem voters. So it's their job to convince the electorate that these policies are a good thing. You can also say to Green Party voters, why would you not vote for Labour, you are enabling fascists, or to SNP, or Sinn Fein, parties that are ideologically much closer to Labour than Lib Dems. That's just political bullying.

 

There were other parties to the left of the Dems that the people could vote for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SasaS said:

You can also say to Green Party voters, why would you not vote for Labour, you are enabling fascists, or to SNP, or Sinn Fein, parties that are ideologically much closer to Labour than Lib Dems. That's just political bullying.

 

I argued the same last US election with Stein and voted Green in the UK election. In this one I think it's too important to keep Tories out. There's not been a government as bad as this Tory one for a long time. Molly Scott Cato is a Green that I've always liked and think she's a great MEP. But she's currently campaigning in Stroud which is a marginal and enough votes for her could let the Tories in. I think it's fucking stupid and her along with any other Green doing similar should have a good think about what they're doing. Or as would be more fitting here : to give their fucking heads a good wobble.

 

Corbyn does not compare with Johnson. The difference between the two when it comes to the environment is huge, or even the chance at a 2nd vote on the EU, and the Greens again should be well aware of this. It is really so hard to just stand down in marginals? Apparently even for the Greens in some cases, even when faced with what Johnson could do, it is. Well fuck that this time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, viRdjil said:

There were other parties to the left of the Dems that the people could vote for.

And if you lived in an electoral college state or an area where your vote actually counts for something and you didn’t vote for Clinton, as unpalatable as it was to some, you let trump in. It’s the same argument. There’s a binary choice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, moof said:

If you’re not voting for Jeremy corbyn, and you’re not a millionaire or oligarch or something. You’re a sucker of the highest degree 

I'm voting Labour but would hold my nose and vote LD if I was in a constituency where tactical voting could keep out a Tory. This election is pivotal and seeing the Tories defeated ranks above anything else.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, magicrat said:

I'm voting Labour but would hold my nose and vote LD if I was in a constituency where tactical voting could keep out a Tory. This election is pivotal and seeing the Tories defeated ranks above anything else.

Yep thats fair enough. But only in a constituency where labour literally doesn’t have a chance. Otherwise tactical voting is a crock of shit for this election 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, moof said:

Yep thats fair enough. But only in a constituency where labour literally doesn’t have a chance. Otherwise tactical voting is a crock of shit for this election 

The information on who is best placed to beat the Tory is all out there for every constituency . People should check and act accordingly and I think a lot of right minded people will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, magicrat said:

The information on who is best placed to beat the Tory is all out there for every constituency . People should check and act accordingly and I think a lot of right minded people will. 

The information isn’t always accurate and doesn’t account for new voters. There are plenty of examples of people being badly advised which way to vote tactically and bullshit electoral pacts between Lib Dem’s and greens or plaid that dilutes vote for Labour, even remain labour MPs. So, I take that tactical voting advice with a pinch of salt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...