Shock UK exit poll suggests Britain's May fails to win majority

[brewsterbudgen]

2 minutes ago, nontabury said:

O.k, so your a bit slow. I'll explain it to you again.  Last weeks result had nothing to do with Brexit.  May had a parliamentary majority, yet because she wanted a larger majority, she called a general election. At that time it was estimated that her majority would increase to maybe 180.

 Then the Conservatives published their suicdal manifesto, this Immediately resulted in support for her taking a big and understandable hit. 

This was shown in last Thursday result. Even though she did increase her popular vote by a couple of million. Understand now.

I understand what you're saying, but that wasn't my point.  The huge turnout by young voters, who predominantly voted Labour (see Canterbury's result) was a direct result of them regretting their apathy at the referendum and being saddled with the result.  Voting Lib Dem would not have had much effect, and although Labour cleverly kept a pro-Brexit message in order to get disgruntled UKIP votes, it is obvious that Labour would commit to a much softer Brexit than the Tories.  To say it had nothing to do with Brexit is a misreading of the wider picture.

[vogie]

20 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

And the revenge of the young at last week's election has been sweet.

I wouldn't really bring the young into this, they didn't have much of a clue what the were voting for anyway (oops controversial.) Corbyn offering them free this and free that, they thought it would come from the Santa Claus tree, they didn't realise it would have to be paid for by tax rises and borrowing.

[Prbkk]

13 minutes ago, nontabury said:

O.k, so your a bit slow. I'll explain it to you again.  Last weeks result had nothing to do with Brexit.  May had a parliamentary majority, yet because she wanted a larger majority, she called a general election. At that time it was estimated that her majority would increase to maybe 180.

 Then the Conservatives published their suicdal manifesto, this Immediately resulted in support for her taking a big and understandable hit. 

This was shown in last Thursday result. Even though she did increase her popular vote by a couple of million. Understand now.

In fairness to May, the election was a cabinet decision: she wasn't even the main proponent of it but rather it was the power brokers who were scenting 15 more years. As PM she has to "carry the can". Obviously very few people anticipated such a result....but it's hardly shocking or a landslide ( govt in power for a term and half, the other guy promising the world on a stick without any real costings, poorly motivated conservative constituency, millions of millennials manage to drag themselves out of bed for this as they hadn't done for Brexit).

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, AlexRich said:

 

I think most people can accept the results of elections, they might be unhappy at not winning but they also know that they can have there chance again in 4-5 years time ... when people can see if what was promised by the winner has actually been delivered. No complaints then.

 

But the EU referendum was a decision that we could never go back on in practical terms, it not only tied in this generation but all the ones that are coming through for years to come. But if what was promised ... £350m per week extra into public services, trade deals with the world, low immigration, etc etc was not delivered on, there would be no opportunity to vote again. A bit like having Donald Trump as President forever. Your a, b and c comments were bang on ... a very poorly debated referendum with no clear idea where we would end up. But after the negotiations are complete we will be much better informed about what Brexit actually means, as we will have the deal in front of us. And if that is not what you want you should have the right to vote again. The difference being that the facts are on the table and what we are getting into is clear. If you support Brexit and you believe it is the right policy for the country in the long term you should have no fear of that vote. And if people vote to throw it out that is also democracy.  

 

 

"But the EU referendum was a decision that we could never go back on in practical terms"

 

I disagree insofar as the EU would (can't say "will" as I doubt this will happen....) miss the UK monetary contribution and, if the EU abandoned the most disliked aspects - the UK electorate would likely vote to join again.

 

Everybody happy - apart from the 'troughers'/those looking for more power of course!

Edited June 12, 2017 by dick dasterdly

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I don't think the 18.5k level is an issue. They've recently published U.K. Salaries and if you are not making 18.5k how can you support a wife?

 

The immigration issues are our own fault. An EU migrant should have a job with a salary above a certain level or be a seasonal working. May slashed border force manpower so we don't keep track. The Thais do a better job!

Better still, we go back to the old system whereby workers need to be offered a well paid job by an employer before being allowed in - for that job.

[citybiker]

And the revenge of the young at last week's election has been sweet.

The result for many young still leaves a bitter sour taste.

Some call it revenge, others view it as bothered to make the effort.

Next challenge, political unity for the Queens speech later this month.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, Basil B said:

Yes, we could have insisted all those from the EU staying here more than 3 months register, part of the registration could have been proving they had the means to support themselves.

 

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

But would that have helped big business, to keep wages down.

Not really, as sufficient income should preclude those on minimum (if that...) UK wages?

[AlexRich]

25 minutes ago, vogie said:

I wouldn't really bring the young into this, they didn't have much of a clue what the were voting for anyway (oops controversial.) Corbyn offering them free this and free that, they thought it would come from the Santa Claus tree, they didn't realise it would have to be paid for by tax rises and borrowing.

 

No, they knew how it would be paid for ... it would come from the rich and wealthy pensioners who voted to screw up their lives.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, AlexRich said:

 

No, they knew how it would be paid for ... it would come from the rich and wealthy pensioners who voted to screw up their lives.

Link?

[AlexRich]

6 minutes ago, citybiker said:

 

The result for many young still leaves a bitter sour taste.

Some call it revenge, others view it as bothered to make the effort.

Next challenge, political unity for the Queens speech later this month.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

Not a hope in hell. Especially if it's a rehash of no deal is better than a bad deal. May will be gone by Conference season.

[AlexRich]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Link?

God! Could you not just enjoy the sarcasm? As was said above by another poster, they voted for Corbyn to give TM and all those people who called them snowflakes and remoaners a slap in the face. They know that a Corbyn EU deal will be a soft one. That and they liked the manifesto ... whether the numbers add up or not. I don't care for Corbyn but I'm glad they did.

[citybiker]

 
Not a hope in hell. Especially if it's a rehash of no deal is better than a bad deal. May will be gone by Conference season.

What makes you so confident of that?

I agree May won't be in office for the whole 5 years, no chance.

The Queen's speech is designed to benefit the UK and it's a foundation of government's aim of how to achieve this.

Brexit is far bigger than any political party, the electorate have had enough of political in house bitching, bickering and point scoring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dick dasterdly]

40 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Frankly, they just want educated and trained people. 600,000 open vacancies in digital tech.

And this is where our opinions differ.

 

I have little objection to those with needed skills being offered jobs - apart from being seriously annoyed that the UK allowed those 'skill shortages' to develop.  A flaw in the education system.

 

On the other hand, I do tend to get annoyed at unskilled people from the EU being allowed into the UK to drive down wages even further .

[vogie]

1 minute ago, AlexRich said:

God! Could you not just enjoy the sarcasm? As was said above by another poster, they voted for Corbyn to give TM and all those people who called them snowflakes and remoaners a slap in the face. They know that a Corbyn EU deal will be a soft one. That and they liked the manifesto ... whether the numbers add up or not. I don't care for Corbyn but I'm glad they did.

That is 'your' interpretation of it, others might say that Corbyn promised them wonders and they all thought he could sh|t cucumbers. It was down to the tory manifesto that gave Corbyn his new found followers, I doubt brexit had very little to with it anyway as most people voted out anyway. But people like you are still clinging to idea that brexit will not happen. The will of the people must be respected. One day you might wake up to reality, but you are so intransigent, I don't think you will.

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

And this is where our opinions differ.

 

I have little objection to those with needed skills being offered jobs - apart from being seriously annoyed that the UK allowed those 'skill shortages' to develop.  A flaw in the education system.

 

On the other hand, I do tend to get annoyed at unskilled people from the EU being allowed into the UK to drive down wages even further .

We are having a heated agreement here!

 

Seasonal workers OK

 

Train our own people OK

 

Limit immigration in accordance with EU rules

[AlexRich]

8 minutes ago, citybiker said:

 

What makes you so confident of that?

I agree May won't be in office for the whole 5 years, no chance.

The Queen's speech is designed to benefit the UK and it's a foundation of government's aim of how to achieve this.

Brexit is far bigger than any political party, the electorate have had enough of political in house bitching, bickering and point scoring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

You have an even greater divide in the Tory party than you had before the referendum ... amazing that such a scenario is even possible. The new Scottish MPs don't want hard Brexit, the DUP don't want hard Brexit, and the majority of the English MPs don't want it either (although they toed the line when May had the upper hand). May is now seriously weakened ... and unfortunately the Tories are once again going to tear themselves apart over Europe.

 

A few rebellions, a by election or two, being held over a barrel by your new friends in the Orange Order ... not to mention a strengthened opposition in Parliament ... it's just not sustainable. May has been crying a lot lately ... with much more to come.

[AlexRich]

8 minutes ago, vogie said:

That is 'your' interpretation of it, others might say that Corbyn promised them wonders and they all thought he could sh|t cucumbers. It was down to the tory manifesto that gave Corbyn his new found followers, I doubt brexit had very little to with it anyway as most people voted out anyway. But people like you are still clinging to idea that brexit will not happen. The will of the people must be respected. One day you might wake up to reality, but you are so intransigent, I don't think you will.

Unfortunately it all went very wrong for you and your merry band of hard Brexiteers. You are in denial about what this election was about ... strengthening May's hand for a hard Brexit ... a strategy that would be toxic for our businesses and our economy, and one from which there would be no way out. Most people who voted in 2016 did vote out ... but the youth of this country are now "taking back control" and the mood has changed. If people don't like the way the negotiations are going the "will of the people" might well change completely. You seem to think that this scenario is not possible ... but who would have predicted Friday? We will have soft Brexit or no Brexit ... as much as I detest the referendum decision I will settle for either. At least with soft Brexit we don't destroy our economy for no discernible benefit, and we can build up our working population to pay for the demographic time bomb that's on the horizon. 

[dick dasterdly]

56 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

The vote was 100% about strengthening her hand to force through a hard brexit ... and that was rejected!

 

Disagree entirely as I believe it was the unbelievable poor campaign and the even more unbelievable policies (cue 'dementia tax') that led to the loss of votes.

 

I'm sure that one day we'll hear a good explanation as to why the tories came out with the dementia tax as part of their campaign policy ,

 

Others have already pointed out that May never said she was looking for a 'hard brexit' - only that 'no deal was better than a bad deal'.  And that has to be right.

 

We're now looking at a very bad 'deal' indeed.  Even 'leaving' whilst still paying similar sums to the EU and the only change being that the UK doesn't have to abide by workers' rights......

 

Again, I hope I'm proven wrong.

[citybiker]

You have an even greater divide in the Tory party than you had before the referendum ... amazing that such a scenario is even possible. The new Scottish MPs don't want hard Brexit, the DUP don't want hard Brexit, and the majority of the English MPs don't want it either (although they toed the line when May had the upper hand). May is now seriously weakened ... and unfortunately the Tories are once again going to tear themselves apart over Europe.
 
A few rebellions, a by election or two, being held over a barrel by your new friends in the Orange Order ... not to mention a strengthened opposition in Parliament ... it's just not sustainable. May has been crying a lot lately ... with much more to come.

A greater Tory divide being 5 hard core Conservatives?

Not bad out of 300+ (even Boris says back TM, stop plotting)

What new Scottish MP's? The SNP just lost 20+ seats.

As for the rest, I've already stated the clear indifference's, challenges and facts, so I'll leave you to ponder your thoughts & reanalyse between fantasy and reality..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Disagree entirely as I believe it was the unbelievable poor campaign and the even more unbelievable policies (cue 'dementia tax') that led to the loss of votes.

 

I'm sure that one day we'll hear a good explanation as to why the tories came out with the dementia tax as part of their campaign policy ,

 

Others have already pointed out that May never said she was looking for a 'hard brexit' - only that 'no deal was better than a bad deal'.  And that has to be right.

 

We're now looking at a very bad 'deal' indeed.  Even 'leaving' whilst still paying similar sums to the EU and the only change being that the UK doesn't have to abide by workers' rights......

 

Again, I hope I'm proven wrong.

What is hard Brexit? It's leaving the single market, leaving the customs union. Keeping immigration to the tens of thousands, not having any deal with the EU ... the reason we got the slogan "no deal is better than a bad deal" is because May's red lines in the negotiation would only lead to one particular deal - no deal. The "they need us more than we need them" argument was another big lie in the referendum ... the Brexit team realised very quickly that the EU was far more intransigent than they had imagined. 

 

So so why call an election? May knew that she would end up with no deal, and with such a small majority realised it would be difficult to get support for that with such a small majority. The reason she wanted a landslide was to force hard Brexit ... no deal ... through Parliament. That strategy is now dead in the water. And that was the only reason for the election - to strengthen her hand.

[dick dasterdly]

17 minutes ago, Grouse said:

We are having a heated agreement here!

 

Seasonal workers OK

 

Train our own people OK

 

Limit immigration in accordance with EU rules

Quite !

 

Seasonal workers - not OK, the poorer segment of society used to fill that role very well, and they appreciated the much-needed income.

 

Allowing every EU economic migrant into wealthier countries is "in accordance with EU rules" - unless I've missed a fundamental point.

[AlexRich]

8 minutes ago, citybiker said:

 

A greater Tory divide being 5 hard core Conservatives?

Not bad out of 300+ (even Boris says back TM, stop plotting)

What new Scottish MP's? The SNP just lost 20+ seats.

As for the rest, I've already stated the clear indifference's, challenges and facts, so I'll leave you to ponder your thoughts & reanalyse between fantasy and reality..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I think it is you who is indulging in fantasy ... the fantasy that it is somehow business as usual. When Davidson spoke of "open" Brexit it was a rejection of the May approach and a warning that her new MPs would not support her hard Brexit strategy. These new Scottish MPs. Davidson has already informed the whips office that they would not be following their instructions. You didn't know that fact? 

 

Five hardcore conservatives? You really are in fantasy land. The majority of Tory MPs are remainers. And bear in mind that if the public mood changes on Brexit there will be many more jumping on that bandwagon. Do you really think that the public will stay stoic with a 50 to 100 billion exit bill? I suspect that in the not too distant future the hardcore Brexiteers will be put firmly back in their box. 

 

As for Boris Johnson ... you place any faith in his statements? He's the biggest liar and plotter of the lot. The reason he pulled back from challenging is that he was advised the public would punish him for putting them through another election. If that wasn't the case he'd be stabbing her in the back. The Tories hate May but are stuck with her for now.

 

Thats reality ... and the tearful May knows it.

[dick dasterdly]

2 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

What is hard Brexit? It's leaving the single market, leaving the customs union. Keeping immigration to the tens of thousands, not having any deal with the EU ... the reason we got the slogan "no deal is better than a bad deal" is because May's red lines in the negotiation would only lead to one particular deal - no deal. The "they need us more than we need them" argument was another big lie in the referendum ... the Brexit team realised very quickly that the EU was far more intransigent than they had imagined. 

 

So so why call an election? May knew that she would end up with no deal, and with such a small majority realised it would be difficult to get support for that with such a small majority. The reason she wanted a landslide was to force hard Brexit ... no deal ... through Parliament. That strategy is now dead in the water. And that was the only reason for the election - to strengthen her hand.

Very good question - what exactly is 'hard brexit'?

 

Nobody (as far as I know) has ever defined the term - all we know is that May said something along the lines of 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.

 

I've no doubt that all parties prefer to remain within the single market - as long as we're only talking about an open customs union?

 

But then we start going round in circles again as its pointed out that the EU will not accept this without the whole EU 'package'.

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Very good question - what exactly is 'hard brexit'?

 

Nobody (as far as I know) has ever defined the term - all we know is that May said something along the lines of 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.

 

I've no doubt that all parties prefer to remain within the single market - as long as we're only talking about an open customs union?

 

But then we start going round in circles again as its pointed out that the EU will not accept this without the whole EU 'package'.

The sticking point is freedom of movement - and the mood music is changing.

[AlexRich]

"May signals soft Brexit in cabinet reshuffle" ... headline from The Times.

[evadgib]

9 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

The sticking point is freedom of movement - and the mood music is changing.

This would be dramatically reduced if we could automatically backload the undocumented illegal hoards turning up at Dover etc back to France/last country prior to UK who could do same until they're back in the UN camps where they can apply to enter via the front door after suitable vetting. If France etc would agree to that & make it as quick as an arrest warrant without all that 'youman rights' guff the Brits might actually swallow it.

Edited June 12, 2017 by evadgib

[vogie]

18 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

Unfortunately it all went very wrong for you and your merry band of hard Brexiteers. You are in denial about what this election was about ... strengthening May's hand for a hard Brexit ... a strategy that would be toxic for our businesses and our economy, and one from which there would be no way out. Most people who voted in 2016 did vote out ... but the youth of this country are now "taking back control" and the mood has changed. If people don't like the way the negotiations are going the "will of the people" might well change completely. You seem to think that this scenario is not possible ... but who would have predicted Friday? We will have soft Brexit or no Brexit ... as much as I detest the referendum decision I will settle for either. At least with soft Brexit we don't destroy our economy for no discernible benefit, and we can build up our working population to pay for the demographic time bomb that's on the horizon. 

Alex, I don't really want to get bogged down discussing any topic with you, you never move an inch, I'm still having bad dreams and I have been advised to have councilling after our last debate on expats vs immigrants.

 

I agree with you that the election might have been to strengthen Mrs Mays hand on Brexit, but what I am saying that in my opinion is what the electorate voted for, they were more focused on JCs give everyone everything manifesto and compared to Mays manic manifesto, it was a no contest especially among the young. They have never lived through a Lefty Labour government. So to put things into perspective, the conservatives had a stinker of a campaign, whilst Labour had a very good campaign, and they still lost, so really it does not say a lot for Labour. So hopefully the torys will get their act together and by the next election Corbyns Cowboys will fade into obscurity.

If brexit ends up being a soft brexit, this is not what the majority of the UK want, we might as well have stayed in the EU, our position will be the same as not leaving.

[rixalex]

2 hours ago, AlexRich said:

 

I think most people can accept the results of elections, they might be unhappy at not winning but they also know that they can have there chance again in 4-5 years time ... when people can see if what was promised by the winner has actually been delivered. No complaints then.

 

But the EU referendum was a decision that we could never go back on in practical terms, it not only tied in this generation but all the ones that are coming through for years to come. But if what was promised ... £350m per week extra into public services, trade deals with the world, low immigration, etc etc was not delivered on, there would be no opportunity to vote again. A bit like having Donald Trump as President forever. Your a, b and c comments were bang on ... a very poorly debated referendum with no clear idea where we would end up. But after the negotiations are complete we will be much better informed about what Brexit actually means, as we will have the deal in front of us. And if that is not what you want you should have the right to vote again. The difference being that the facts are on the table and what we are getting into is clear. If you support Brexit and you believe it is the right policy for the country in the long term you should have no fear of that vote. And if people vote to throw it out that is also democracy.  

 

 

Negotiating from the position of uncertainty that another referendum would cause, would put the country on the back foot. The approach required for a good deal to be made is one of confidence and certainty. (That's if you want a good deal and a successful exit of course.)

 

I can though appreciate why for some people, setting the country up to fail in its negotiations, by having another referendum, has an appeal.

 

You arrogance on the matter of why people voted the way they did is noted.

[yardrunner]

8 minutes ago, vogie said:

Alex, I don't really want to get bogged down discussing any topic with you, you never move an inch, I'm still having bad dreams and I have been advised to have councilling after our last debate on expats vs immigrants.

 

I agree with you that the election might have been to strengthen Mrs Mays hand on Brexit, but what I am saying that in my opinion is what the electorate voted for, they were more focused on JCs give everyone everything manifesto and compared to Mays manic manifesto, it was a no contest especially among the young. They have never lived through a Lefty Labour government. So to put things into perspective, the conservatives had a stinker of a campaign, whilst Labour had a very good campaign, and they still lost, so really it does not say a lot for Labour. So hopefully the torys will get their act together and by the next election Corbyns Cowboys will fade into obscurity.

If brexit ends up being a soft brexit, this is not what the majority of the UK want, we might as well have stayed in the EU, our position will be the same as not leaving.

 if 48% of the electorate voted to remain in the referendum and 52% voted to leave it would only need 3% of the people who voted leave to want a soft brexit for the majority of the electorate to want a soft brexit if they had no choice but brexit so i don't think that you saying most of the people want a hard brexit can be true

Edited June 12, 2017 by yardrunner

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, yardrunner said:

 if 48% of the electorate voted to remain in the referendum and 52% voted to leave it would only need 3% of the people who voted leave to want a soft brexit for the majority of the electorate to want a soft brexit so i don't think that you saying most of the people want a hard brexit can be true

We can all speculate, oh I know it's been said so many time before, but the question in the referendum was stay or leave The UK voted to leave, so it is up to the negotiators to get the best deal they can, if that deal does not include the reasons why the UK voted to leave, then that deal is not satisfactory. If having a soft brexit means a status quo, it is totally pointless.