Will Friday's result be accepted?

[Churchill]

This link seems very odd to me.  It's illegal in the UK for political party adverts to be on television, so this story makes no sense whatsoever.

Not odd it was part of an official political Labour Political Broadcast if I recall correctly

[cromwell]

This link seems very odd to me.  It's illegal in the UK for political party adverts to be on television, so this story makes no sense whatsoever.

Odd is it,reported by the nursing times bbc and other news organisations.https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/policies-and-guidance/welsh-labour-campaign-video-featuring-fake-nurse-pulled-15-11-2019/">//https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/policies-and-guidance/welsh-labour-campaign-video-featuring-fake-nurse-pulled-15-11-2019/

[Barry]

In other news, Dianne Abbott has been spotted out and about having her photograph taken wearing 2 left shoes of different styles.  :roll:

It does show 2 things:

She is truly of the extreme left.

She is unlikely to be capable of being the Home Secretary.

[Javert]

Really so the Labour ad in Wales where an NHS nurse told everyone that the tories planned to sell the NHS to trump and had to be pulled because she wasn't a nurse at all but an actress and drama teacher is a figment of imagination.

https://worldpoliticsnews.blogspot.com/2019/11/uk-wales-labour-party-tv-ad-pulled.html">//https://worldpoliticsnews.blogspot.com/2019/11/uk-wales-labour-party-tv-ad-pulled.html

This link seems very odd to me.  It's illegal in the UK for political party adverts to be on television, so this story makes no sense whatsoever.

[cromwell]

Where are you getting these numbers from?



I recent article I saw with an analysis of social media adverts placed by the 3 main parties showed that the majority of Conservative adverts contained misleading or wrong claims that had already been called out by independent factcheckers.



For Labour ads they found zero misleading claims (although they did qualify this by stating that Labour placed significantly less of these type of ads than the other parties).



For Libdems I think they found a low percentage contained misleading claims less than 10%.

Really so the Labour ad in Wales where an NHS nurse told everyone that the tories planned to sell the NHS to trump and had to be pulled because she wasn't a nurse at all but an actress and drama teacher is a figment of imagination.

https://worldpoliticsnews.blogspot.com/2019/11/uk-wales-labour-party-tv-ad-pulled.html">//https://worldpoliticsnews.blogspot.com/2019/11/uk-wales-labour-party-tv-ad-pulled.html

[BeElBeeBub]

Labour 90 lies

Tories 104 lies

and I suppose you have a source for that?



Not saying you made them up, but devoid of context the numbers 90 and 104 mean nothing.

But you're shocked by the level of Torie lies!!



You must really hate it when a party breaks the 100 mark.



Lovin the new philosophy, just blatantly make stuff up.

I don't really understand where this last comment is coming from.



In my opinion, taking the various adverts and statements I have seen (and it's entirely possible I have missed Corbyn claiming that Tories are lizard people from dimension X or Swindon claiming to have scored the winning goal in the 1966 world cup) the Tory campaign has indulged in a different scale of deception this time around.



Fudging graphs, quoting cash instead of real terms etc are all the usual run if the mill.  The LDs are famous for using misleading bar graphs.



But things like flat out lying repeatedly about NI checks is new.  It's not surprising as it's exactly the same tactics Vote Leave used and the Tories are basically now run by vote leave.



Who do you believe is telling the truth? Johnson or the Irish government, EU, his own withdrawal agreement text, multiple government departments and pretty much any expert on borders you can find

[Javert]

Labour 90 lies

Tories 104 lies



But you're shocked by the level of Torie lies!!



You must really hate it when a party breaks the 100 mark.



Lovin the new philosophy, just blatantly make stuff up.

Where are you getting these numbers from?



I recent article I saw with an analysis of social media adverts placed by the 3 main parties showed that the majority of Conservative adverts contained misleading or wrong claims that had already been called out by independent factcheckers.



For Labour ads they found zero misleading claims (although they did qualify this by stating that Labour placed significantly less of these type of ads than the other parties).



For Libdems I think they found a low percentage contained misleading claims less than 10%.

[Major Sinic]

I agree with you Cromwell our Democracy has been badly damaged, the majority who voted for Brexit have been ignored and often insulted racists, little Englanders by some who voted against leaving the EU, that is why I feel why bother voting in the future, will my vote be ignored and dismissed in the future.



The day to day running of our country has been disrupted for over three years because of the infighting in Parliament over Brexit weakening both Mays and Boris's hand when trying to negotiate with the EU, the anti leavers have actually sowed division in the country and created a lot of anger.



Many people IMO have had enough of this childish arrogant nonsense, I suspect many will not bother to vote why would they if they think their vote will not count or be ignored.



We could end up with another hung Government or one with a narrow majority which will mean the farce will continue for longer, what do we have to do to make our poloticians listen to the people, take to the streets like the French ? I do hope that never happens but it might.



If Corbyn and his far left Comrades win tomorrow, Brexit will be the least of the nations problems

 :hattip I do argue, passionately, that we should each use our vote; that to do so is both a privilege and a duty in a democracy. Agreed that the conduct of parliament over the last 42 months has compromised that democracy and not for the good of the nation, but look at those countries where democracy has become a bad joke and we should realise what a cornerstone of civilisation it really is.



Your final statement is the truest in the thread.

[Churchill]

It is easy to tell when any Politician is lying, their lips move

[Nick]

And i'm the condecending one?...



You still seem to under the mistaken impression that I'm a Corbyn supporter.



I'm not, I dislike him, I don't trust him and I think many of (not all) his policies are problematic.



nope, although the scale and quantity of the lies from the Labour and LD sides has been about what I would normally expect.



I have been taken back by the sheer number of and scale of the conservative party's lies.



no, i think labour has a massive problem with anti-Semitism from the Corbyn wing of the party. It is extremely worrying and an excellent reason why I do not think he is fit to be PM.



As an aside, I think the conservative party also has a problem with anti-Semitism, although more from the grass roots than the leadership.  In addition it has a much bigger (than labour) problem with racism and islamaphobia.  That is in no way am excuse for Labour's problem, but it illustrates why I also think the conservative party and Johnson are *also* not fit to be in power.

no I don't.  Again I think there is more nuance and context than the simple "Corbyn luvs the IRA/Hamad etc" Tory line, but it is pretty undeniable that Corbyn has associated with some unsavoury people.



I'll say again, I don't think he is a fit person to be our PM.

i agree.  As I said, I think Labour's plans have flaws. Your description of the linkages between their policy and the economic effects is very reasonable and in line with my own expectations.



I will point out that your assertion here is based on *exactly* the same sort of economic forecasting that you also say is impossible when assesments show the negative impacts of Brexit.  This is a point I have brought UK before, not in support of Corbyn, but to illustrate the double think that some here manage to pull of



Predictions of economic harm from Brexit = impossible, too many variables.



Predictions of economic harm from Labour policies = see how obvious it is.



as one of those likely to be hit by Labour's "expropriation" no I don't find it acceptable at all.  Which is why I don't support labour and I don't relish the thought of Corbyn as PM

actually Indo have some sympathy with this view although I am not sure a sunken "4 day week for all" would work.  But I do see value in examining measures along these lines. Of course being me, what I would want to see is a rigorous and known minded study to trips this to see if there are benefits (and what the inevitable downsides were) and then to consider (if the evidence warrants it) what policy changes might be made.

yes, i see the diversion of investment away from the UK as a very real risk of corbyn's policies.



I find it odd that you give this potential outcome a lot of weight when it stems from an assessment of the impacts of corbyn's policies yet when the very same.outcome comes from assesments (and in some cases actual events) of Brexit's impacts you give the outcome.veey much less weight.



A diversion of inward investment is either good or bad.  If you are defining it as bad when caused by Corbyn and unimportant if caused by Brexit, you are not really making a judgement based on the impact on investment.  You're making a judgement based on your like/dislike of  Corbyn/Brexit and then post rationalising it as a judgement based on investment impact

. I look forward to seeing your discussions on my Therese's on alternatives to FPTP etc...





Again, I (sadly) agree.  If one had wanted to take a prosperous and relatively harmonious nation (albeit with some underlying problems) and weaken it, it would be hard to find a better example than brexit, except possibly the USA.



If only there were a common thread between cases like this. Some entity who would benefit from the USA and UK becoming disunited and turning iinward thus weakening NATO and the EU respectively? ... 🤔



To conclude, you are mistaken in your belief that I like it even support Corbyn.



I don't..



But there is a choice (which because of FPTP I have no part in) between a loose coalition which might have Corbyn as PM, but will not be able to enact the extreme end of his manifesto and an extremist Johnson government.



if I did have a choice i would choose the former.  Not because I want it but because I don't want it less than I don't want the latter.



This is a choice between the shiniest of two turds....



Addendum



If I could pick my absolute ideal outcome it would be both the conservatives and Labour losing seats to the LDs, greens and others.  Nktnhecaue infavour Seinson. But because the losses would force both Corbyn and Johnson to go. The extreme wings of both parties could be out back in their boxes (in the case of Conservatives splitter off to the BXP).



Maybe then, with some electoral reforms, legislation around press reporting, political honesty etc and some center left/right parties we can start to bring the country together again (and incidently stop brexit).

Labour 90 lies

Tories 104 lies



But you're shocked by the level of Torie lies!!



You must really hate it when a party breaks the 100 mark.



Lovin the new philosophy, just blatantly make stuff up.

[Major Sinic]

And i'm the condecending one?...



You still seem to under the mistaken impression that I'm a Corbyn supporter.



I'm not, I dislike him, I don't trust him and I think many of (not all) his policies are problematic.



nope, although the scale and quantity of the lies from the Labour and LD sides has been about what I would normally expect.



I have been taken back by the sheer number of and scale of the conservative party's lies.



no, i think labour has a massive problem with anti-Semitism from the Corbyn wing of the party. It is extremely worrying and an excellent reason why I do not think he is fit to be PM.



As an aside, I think the conservative party also has a problem with anti-Semitism, although more from the grass roots than the leadership.  In addition it has a much bigger (than labour) problem with racism and islamaphobia.  That is in no way am excuse for Labour's problem, but it illustrates why I also think the conservative party and Johnson are *also* not fit to be in power.

no I don't.  Again I think there is more nuance and context than the simple "Corbyn luvs the IRA/Hamad etc" Tory line, but it is pretty undeniable that Corbyn has associated with some unsavoury people.



I'll say again, I don't think he is a fit person to be our PM.

i agree.  As I said, I think Labour's plans have flaws. Your description of the linkages between their policy and the economic effects is very reasonable and in line with my own expectations.



I will point out that your assertion here is based on *exactly* the same sort of economic forecasting that you also say is impossible when assesments show the negative impacts of Brexit.  This is a point I have brought UK before, not in support of Corbyn, but to illustrate the double think that some here manage to pull of



Predictions of economic harm from Brexit = impossible, too many variables.



Predictions of economic harm from Labour policies = see how obvious it is.



as one of those likely to be hit by Labour's "expropriation" no I don't find it acceptable at all.  Which is why I don't support labour and I don't relish the thought of Corbyn as PM

actually Indo have some sympathy with this view although I am not sure a sunken "4 day week for all" would work.  But I do see value in examining measures along these lines. Of course being me, what I would want to see is a rigorous and known minded study to trips this to see if there are benefits (and what the inevitable downsides were) and then to consider (if the evidence warrants it) what policy changes might be made.

yes, i see the diversion of investment away from the UK as a very real risk of corbyn's policies.



I find it odd that you give this potential outcome a lot of weight when it stems from an assessment of the impacts of corbyn's policies yet when the very same.outcome comes from assesments (and in some cases actual events) of Brexit's impacts you give the outcome.veey much less weight.



A diversion of inward investment is either good or bad.  If you are defining it as bad when caused by Corbyn and unimportant if caused by Brexit, you are not really making a judgement based on the impact on investment.  You're making a judgement based on your like/dislike of  Corbyn/Brexit and then post rationalising it as a judgement based on investment impact

. I look forward to seeing your discussions on my Therese's on alternatives to FPTP etc...





Again, I (sadly) agree.  If one had wanted to take a prosperous and relatively harmonious nation (albeit with some underlying problems) and weaken it, it would be hard to find a better example than brexit, except possibly the USA.



If only there were a common thread between cases like this. Some entity who would benefit from the USA and UK becoming disunited and turning iinward thus weakening NATO and the EU respectively? ... 🤔



To conclude, you are mistaken in your belief that I like it even support Corbyn.



I don't..



But there is a choice (which because of FPTP I have no part in) between a loose coalition which might have Corbyn as PM, but will not be able to enact the extreme end of his manifesto and an extremist Johnson government.



if I did have a choice i would choose the former.  Not because I want it but because I don't want it less than I don't want the latter.



This is a choice between the shiniest of two turds....



Addendum



If I could pick my absolute ideal outcome it would be both the conservatives and Labour losing seats to the LDs, greens and others.  Nktnhecaue infavour Seinson. But because the losses would force both Corbyn and Johnson to go. The extreme wings of both parties could be out back in their boxes (in the case of Conservatives splitter off to the BXP).



Maybe then, with some electoral reforms, legislation around press reporting, political honesty etc and some center left/right parties we can start to bring the country together again (and incidently stop brexit).

OK, a balanced and fair post.



You are quite correct; I misinterpreted a number of your views as a result of a couple of posts which were, quite frankly, less balanced than this one. I therefore apologise for being both superior and condescending in my response, albeit to give you a taste of what I perceived to be your own medicine.



There are  areas of agreement and certainly some of disagreement but that is healthy. Whether I will be shown to be naive or not, time will tell but while Boris was not and would not be my first choice as leader of the Tories, I believe that to date he has succeeded in moving the parliamentary logjam that had rendered parliament a moribund and ineffective bad joke when no one would or could and will prove to be less of an extremist than you seem to fear. There is a lot more room to the right of Boris than there is to the left of Corbyn and perhaps more telling McDonnell.



You are correct that I will view your thoughts on political and electoral reform with interest.

[BeElBeeBub]

Seems you don't like being put on the spot Beelelebub. Plenty of posts from you on other topics but none addressing the issues raised in my response to you. How about one of your condescending master pieces where you lecture down to us mere plebs, many of whom have greater knowledge, experience and success in life than you! Go on give it a go! You might even persuade one or two of the economically illiterate to vote or Grandpa Jezzah with you!

And i'm the condecending one?...



You still seem to under the mistaken impression that I'm a Corbyn supporter.



I'm not, I dislike him, I don't trust him and I think many of (not all) his policies are problematic.

I suppose it is human nature, and I certainly acknowledge my own tendency to adopt a partisan position, although I make no secret of my right of centre Conservative ideology so while I may be biased in my views I am certainly not hypocritical.



You on the other hand when you first appeared as a forum poster appeared to attempt to project yourself as objective, open-minded, non-partisan and moderate. In doing this you of course, and possibly inevitably, adopted an air of superior condescension.



However you have now moved on to a blatantly partisan position while still demonstrating your superior condescension. It has been a vicious and dishonest campaign, but all and the only evidence or examples you proffer are anti-Conservative. Are you blind to the lies, half truths of Corbyn and Swinson.

nope, although the scale and quantity of the lies from the Labour and LD sides has been about what I would normally expect.



I have been taken back by the sheer number of and scale of the conservative party's lies.

Do you really not see the vile and hateful anti-semitism endemic in the Labour Party (according to a recent leak 136 cases identified 18 or more months ago have still not been investigated).

no, i think labour has a massive problem with anti-Semitism from the Corbyn wing of the party. It is extremely worrying and an excellent reason why I do not think he is fit to be PM.



As an aside, I think the conservative party also has a problem with anti-Semitism, although more from the grass roots than the leadership.  In addition it has a much bigger (than labour) problem with racism and islamaphobia.  That is in no way am excuse for Labour's problem, but it illustrates why I also think the conservative party and Johnson are *also* not fit to be in power.

Do you really find it acceptable that the leader of the main opposition party has for most of his political life supported terrorist organisations, or are you like smurf who declares any proven events with which he disagrees as 'propaganda and lies'?

no I don't.  Again I think there is more nuance and context than the simple "Corbyn luvs the IRA/Hamad etc" Tory line, but it is pretty undeniable that Corbyn has associated with some unsavoury people.



I'll say again, I don't think he is a fit person to be our PM.

Do you not recognise that it is quite simply impossible for Labour to carry out its programme of economic vandalism, without the less well off being hit with tax rises and for uncosted promises leading to further uncosted borrowing.

i agree.  As I said, I think Labour's plans have flaws. Your description of the linkages between their policy and the economic effects is very reasonable and in line with my own expectations.



I will point out that your assertion here is based on *exactly* the same sort of economic forecasting that you also say is impossible when assesments show the negative impacts of Brexit.  This is a point I have brought UK before, not in support of Corbyn, but to illustrate the double think that some here manage to pull of



Predictions of economic harm from Brexit = impossible, too many variables.



Predictions of economic harm from Labour policies = see how obvious it is.

Do you find it acceptable that a Labour government can rob its citizens of their own property legitimately earned or gained, without paying market value compensation? Do you honestly believe that confiscating 10% of the share value of any company with 250 employees or more and increasing Corporation Tax by 37% to 26%,

as one of those likely to be hit by Labour's "expropriation" no I don't find it acceptable at all.  Which is why I don't support labour and I don't relish the thought of Corbyn as PM

reducing the working week to four days (except for nurses it seems) is going to result in increased productivity?

actually Indo have some sympathy with this view although I am not sure a sunken "4 day week for all" would work.  But I do see value in examining measures along these lines. Of course being me, what I would want to see is a rigorous and known minded study to trips this to see if there are benefits (and what the inevitable downsides were) and then to consider (if the evidence warrants it) what policy changes might be made.

a flow of much needed foreign investment (whether we are in or out of the EU)? the halting of capital flight abroad closely followed the mega wealthy leaving these shores and justifiably sticking two figures up at Labour?

yes, i see the diversion of investment away from the UK as a very real risk of corbyn's policies.



I find it odd that you give this potential outcome a lot of weight when it stems from an assessment of the impacts of corbyn's policies yet when the very same.outcome comes from assesments (and in some cases actual events) of Brexit's impacts you give the outcome.veey much less weight.



A diversion of inward investment is either good or bad.  If you are defining it as bad when caused by Corbyn and unimportant if caused by Brexit, you are not really making a judgement based on the impact on investment.  You're making a judgement based on your like/dislike of  Corbyn/Brexit and then post rationalising it as a judgement based on investment impact

.

About the only sensible and unbiased point you have made is that our electoral system is broken, in my view irretrievably, and needs extensive reform. Contrary to your suggestion in another post I do not defend FPTP and have been a regular supporter of PR, the disestablishment of the C of E from politics, the reform of the Lords, the abolishment of peerages. The first measure I would wish to see repealed is the Fixed Term Parliament Act, introduced or no other reason than Clegg and Cameron distrusted each other.

I look forward to seeing your discussions on my Therese's on alternatives to FPTP etc...

Beyond politics I can't see much of the tragic social division which has riven our nation being healed even in the next decade. The respect which the majority of the British once had for their fellow citizens' views, even if recently little more than a veneer has gone. Intolerance, insult and violent disorder are increasingly becoming the norm.

Again, I (sadly) agree.  If one had wanted to take a prosperous and relatively harmonious nation (albeit with some underlying problems) and weaken it, it would be hard to find a better example than brexit, except possibly the USA.



If only there were a common thread between cases like this. Some entity who would benefit from the USA and UK becoming disunited and turning iinward thus weakening NATO and the EU respectively? ... 🤔



To conclude, you are mistaken in your belief that I like it even support Corbyn.



I don't..



But there is a choice (which because of FPTP I have no part in) between a loose coalition which might have Corbyn as PM, but will not be able to enact the extreme end of his manifesto and an extremist Johnson government.



if I did have a choice i would choose the former.  Not because I want it but because I don't want it less than I don't want the latter.



This is a choice between the shiniest of two turds....



Addendum



If I could pick my absolute ideal outcome it would be both the conservatives and Labour losing seats to the LDs, greens and others.  Nktnhecaue infavour Seinson. But because the losses would force both Corbyn and Johnson to go. The extreme wings of both parties could be out back in their boxes (in the case of Conservatives splitter off to the BXP).



Maybe then, with some electoral reforms, legislation around press reporting, political honesty etc and some center left/right parties we can start to bring the country together again (and incidently stop brexit).

[Major Sinic]

I suppose it is human nature, and I certainly acknowledge my own tendency to adopt a partisan position, although I make no secret of my right of centre Conservative ideology so while I may be biased in my views I am certainly not hypocritical.



You on the other hand when you first appeared as a forum poster appeared to attempt to project yourself as objective, open-minded, non-partisan and moderate. In doing this you of course, and possibly inevitably, adopted an air of superior condescension.



However you have now moved on to a blatantly partisan position while still demonstrating your superior condescension. It has been a vicious and dishonest campaign, but all and the only evidence or examples you proffer are anti-Conservative. Are you blind to the lies, half truths of Corbyn and Swinson. Do you really not see the vile and hateful anti-semitism endemic in the Labour Party (according to a recent leak 136 cases identified 18 or more months ago have still not been investigated). Do you really find it acceptable that the leader of the main opposition party has for most of his political life supported terrorist organisations, or are you like smurf who declares any proven events with which he disagrees as 'propaganda and lies'?



Do you not recognise that it is quite simply impossible for Labour to carry out its programme of economic vandalism, without the less well off being hit with tax rises and for uncosted promises leading to further uncosted borrowing. Do you find it acceptable that a Labour government can rob its citizens of their own property legitimately earned or gained, without paying market value compensation? Do you honestly believe that confiscating 10% of the share value of any company with 250 employees or more and increasing Corporation Tax by 37% to 26%, reducing the working week to four days (except for nurses it seems) is going to result in increased productivity? a flow of much needed foreign investment (whether we are in or out of the EU)? the halting of capital flight abroad closely followed the mega wealthy leaving these shores and justifiably sticking two figures up at Labour?



About the only sensible and unbiased point you have made is that our electoral system is broken, in my view irretrievably, and needs extensive reform. Contrary to your suggestion in another post I do not defend FPTP and have been a regular supporter of PR, the disestablishment of the C of E from politics, the reform of the Lords, the abolishment of peerages. The first measure I would wish to see repealed is the Fixed Term Parliament Act, introduced or no other reason than Clegg and Cameron distrusted each other.



Beyond politics I can't see much of the tragic social division which has riven our nation being healed even in the next decade. The respect which the majority of the British once had for their fellow citizens' views, even if recently little more than a veneer has gone. Intolerance, insult and violent disorder are increasingly becoming the norm.

Seems you don't like being put on the spot Beelelebub. Plenty of posts from you on other topics but none addressing the issues raised in my response to you. How about one of your condescending master pieces where you lecture down to us mere plebs, many of whom have greater knowledge, experience and success in life than you! Go on give it a go! You might even persuade one or two of the economically illiterate to vote or Grandpa Jezzah with you!

[johnofgwent]

We accepted the result of the referendum.  The non-binding advisory result was that the UK split nearly down the middle and narrowly favoured leaving, given the promises about how wonderful and easy it would be.



We also exercised our democratic rights to disagree.  The exact same one that levers have been exercising in the face of the 1975 referendum to remain which showed that the UK wished to remain by 2:1 on the terms of a known and ratified treaty.



Every single step in this saga has been democratic.



The government asked the electorate to give it a mandate for brexit, and the electorate replied by eliminating the existing majority



If a hung Parliament is returned and the government calls a 2 ref and we end up remaining I didnt expect you to like it. I expect a hard core of Brexiters will continue to fight until demographic drift dwindles them away. But I did expect you to abide by the result.



However you are now implying that "we need bloodshed on the streets" if you don't get your way in a democratic election.



Have a look at what you are advocating and ask yourself



https://media.makeameme.org/created/are-we-the-5a2a92.jpg">

Bullshit.



You know damn well what the reality is...

[Churchill]

I agree with you both, Gormless also made the Income Tax legislation even more complicated , and raided workplace pensions the savers lost an awful lot of money