Jump to content
270soft Forum

After the UK Prime Minister announced a snap General Election


Recommended Posts

It's interesting that Labour seems to have gone back to the good ol' Labour days with real leftist policies instead of the third way crap. I will look closely how well that'll fare among the British electorate. However the British electorate is probably just as molded by the mainstream media as the French electorate who didn't even know Le Pen's policies but just voted against her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

This will definitely be one of the seats to watch.  There haven't been any polls released from here yet, so it is difficult to tell.  I think that the Conservatives will gain this seat, but it is difficult to tell at this time.  I would like to hear what @wolves and @LegolasRedbard think about this.

Also, @LegolasRedbard, I see that you are from Scotland.  What do you think about the SNP and their push for independence?

I am absolutely opposed to it. I think though Sturgeon should re-consider her stance on a second referendum, as it'll destroy the SNP if she loses. I am a member of Young Labour, but if I could vote, I wouldn't back them at this election. UKIP are sadly now considered a spent force, the Greens probably won't gain anything, the Lib Dems are practically history now and Labour is unlikely to win in East Renfrewshire, considering that almost half of the Jews in Scotland live here and Labour has had problems with anti-Semitism. The Tories won my council in the local elections and intend to take back East Renfrewshire in parliament from the SNP. Having met both the Deputy Leader of the Conservatives in Scotland Jackson Carlaw, my MP and Tommy Sheridan (who was very entertaining) at a Question Time-style event in Eastwood, I would honestly say I would vote for Jackson. The Conservatives are now the main opposition. My dad, who's basically near the bottom left of the political compass and very nationalist, almost spat out his drink when I told him that Shettleston now had a Tory councillor (Shettleston being the last council in the nation to have a communist councillor). The SNP have also dropped 20% in the polls. So I think that the Tories won't only win in a landslide, they'll wipe out what's left of Labour and the Lib Dems in Scotland and seriously damage the SNP.

 

Although I still want to see UKIP do well

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, koneke said:

 

It's interesting that Labour seems to have gone back to the good ol' Labour days with real leftist policies instead of the third way crap. I will look closely how well that'll fare among the British electorate.

 

It'll sink like a rock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, koneke said:

It's interesting that Labour seems to have gone back to the good ol' Labour days with real leftist policies instead of the third way crap. I will look closely how well that'll fare among the British electorate. However the British electorate is probably just as molded by the mainstream media as the French electorate who didn't even know Le Pen's policies but just voted against her.

That comment makes it sound like far-right policies serve all demographics so well and are objectively so good for everyone that ONLY misleading media could possibly stock a Mugabe-style landslide (at least by OFFICIAL numbers) from occurring. Do you really believe this, or have you just been taught to by someone?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

That comment makes it sound like far-right policies serve all demographics so well and are objectively so good for everyone that ONLY misleading media could possibly stock a Mugabe-style landslide (at least by OFFICIAL numbers) from occurring. Do you really believe this, or have you just been taught to by someone?

the tories are predicted to win 48 to 50% of the vote that not Mugabe style landslide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LegolasRedbard said:

I am absolutely opposed to it. I think though Sturgeon should re-consider her stance on a second referendum, as it'll destroy the SNP if she loses. I am a member of Young Labour, but if I could vote, I wouldn't back them at this election. UKIP are sadly now considered a spent force, the Greens probably won't gain anything, the Lib Dems are practically history now and Labour is unlikely to win in East Renfrewshire, considering that almost half of the Jews in Scotland live here and Labour has had problems with anti-Semitism. The Tories won my council in the local elections and intend to take back East Renfrewshire in parliament from the SNP. Having met both the Deputy Leader of the Conservatives in Scotland Jackson Carlaw, my MP and Tommy Sheridan (who was very entertaining) at a Question Time-style event in Eastwood, I would honestly say I would vote for Jackson. The Conservatives are now the main opposition. My dad, who's basically near the bottom left of the political compass and very nationalist, almost spat out his drink when I told him that Shettleston now had a Tory councillor (Shettleston being the last council in the nation to have a communist councillor). The SNP have also dropped 20% in the polls. So I think that the Tories won't only win in a landslide, they'll wipe out what's left of Labour and the Lib Dems in Scotland and seriously damage the SNP.

 

Although I still want to see UKIP do well

I disagree with lib dems they are most likely going to get no more then 25 seats or no less then 15 seats because of remain strongholds that feel Labour are opposing brexit and that  the Conservatives are pro brexit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Presidentinsertname said:

the tories are predicted to win 48 to 50% of the vote that not Mugabe style landslide.

You misunderstood my criticism of his statement. You latched on to the wrong thing there...

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Patine said:

That comment makes it sound like far-right policies serve all demographics so well and are objectively so good for everyone that ONLY misleading media could possibly stock a Mugabe-style landslide (at least by OFFICIAL numbers) from occurring. Do you really believe this, or have you just been taught to by someone?

Le Pen's policies was by no extent far-right. Unless it is and then i am a proud far-right person who wants borders between countries and an end to untold amounts of third world immigration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, koneke said:

Le Pen's policies was by no extent far-right. Unless it is and then i am a proud far-right person who wants borders between countries and an end to untold amounts of third world immigration.

There are borders between nations, and have been since the beginning of recorded history. Though, somehow, they never seem to fully fix the problems there existence was meant. And, big walls have been tried too - Qin Shi Huangdi and Walter Ulbrect each built a famous one...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

There are borders between nations, and have been since the beginning of recorded history. Though, somehow, they never seem to fully fix the problems there existence was meant. And, big walls have been tried too - Qin Shi Huangdi and Walter Ulbrect each built a famous one...

The Schengen agreement have made open borders in Europe. The EU promised it would guard the outer borders towards the Third World. Which it unsurprisingly didn't. It is an awful mess. Count you lucky for being in Canada, so you won't have to worry about the things we Europeans have to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, koneke said:

Le Pen's policies was by no extent far-right. Unless it is and then i am a proud far-right person who wants borders between countries and an end to untold amounts of third world immigration.

Yes, extreme immigration measures and a distaste for and/or fear of the outside world (xenophobia) is typically associated with far-right politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Yes, extreme immigration measures and a distaste for and/or fear of the outside world (xenophobia) is typically associated with far-right politics.

A distaste for the outside world comes when all it brings you are economic migrants that are ruining your country.  While they're also telling you, that you are not allowed to stop it. (EU)

I think we'd get the Left out and demonstrating against immigration if a whole bunch of White Christian Southerners were trying to get into their country. As long as they're non-white and non-christians and comes from a country without a Western Tradition, then the Left is loving it i guess. The Left has no principles, and never have had.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Yes, extreme immigration measures and a distaste for and/or fear of the outside world (xenophobia) is typically associated with far-right politics.

Being against immigration doesn't necessarily make someone far right.  If a nation can sustain itself while having very low or no immigration, then that country would probably institute policies that greatly restrict immigration which would benefit the workers in that country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, koneke said:

A distaste for the outside world comes when all it brings you are economic migrants that are ruining your country.  While they're also telling you, that you are not allowed to stop it. (EU)

I think we'd get the Left out and demonstrating against immigration if a whole bunch of White Christian Southerners were trying to get into their country. As long as they're non-white and non-christians and comes from a country without a Western Tradition, then the Left is loving it i guess. The Left has no principles, and never have had.

Well, this sounds very uninformed. First, the "outside world" brings almost every nation on Earth something desirable. In fact, North Korea is notably SUFFERING for it's isolationist, "hermit nation" policies. No nation on Earth produces EVERYTHING they consume and use day-to-day in the demanded amounts within their borders. But I guess your myopic vision ONLY sees "economic migrants." And, as for "the Left has no principles, and never have had," although I've come to detest the right-left political divide and everything having to default to one or the other, and politicians and other leaders believing their more respectable and principled by such choosing a down-the-line right-wing or left-wing, and that centrist and mixed platforms are viewed by many as "non-committal," "fringe," "unworkable," "wishy-washy," or "without an effective platform," but that I think such mentalities (of right-wing or left-wing ideological and political purity) are non-productive, self-sabotaging, outmoded, obstructionist, and, even a bit stupid, to have in such a dominant and constantly defaulted to position instead of approaching each issue and problem with it's own practical, innovative, and workable solution, unshackled by right-wing or left-wing purist chains on thinking. I personally believe that any politician whose platform is based around being left-wing OR right-wing and not innovative, unique approaches to each problem is likely going to lack principles, and the true mentality and viewpoint to solve many of their polity's problems, many of which still lingering in many countries SHOULD have been solved long ago, if not for partisan and left-wing vs. right-wing incessant squabbling, obstructionism, and clinging forever to unproductive, failed polices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Well, this sounds very uninformed. First, the "outside world" brings almost every nation on Earth something desirable. In fact, North Korea is notably SUFFERING for it's isolationist, "hermit nation" policies. No nation on Earth produces EVERYTHING they consume and use day-to-day in the demanded amounts within their borders. But I guess your myopic vision ONLY sees "economic migrants." And, as for "the Left has no principles, and never have had," although I've come to detest the right-left political divide and everything having to default to one or the other, and politicians and other leaders believing their more respectable and principled by such choosing a down-the-line right-wing or left-wing, and that centrist and mixed platforms are viewed by many as "non-committal," "fringe," "unworkable," "wishy-washy," or "without an effective platform," but that I think such mentalities (of right-wing or left-wing ideological and political purity) are non-productive, self-sabotaging, outmoded, obstructionist, and, even a bit stupid, to have in such a dominant and constantly defaulted to position instead of approaching each issue and problem with it's own practical, innovative, and workable solution, unshackled by right-wing or left-wing purist chains on thinking. I personally believe that any politician whose platform is based around being left-wing OR right-wing and not innovative, unique approaches to each problem is likely going to lack principles, and the true mentality and viewpoint to solve many of their polity's problems, many of which still lingering in many countries SHOULD have been solved long ago, if not for partisan and left-wing vs. right-wing incessant squabbling, obstructionism, and clinging forever to unproductive, failed polices.

I agree that the left/right scale is flawed. However the media are the worst when it comes to it. Hearing over and over that Marine Le Pen was a rightwing candidate. Her stance on the age of pension was a lowering of the pension age, thus a leftwing stance. It shows that the media fails to give the real picture when she is a candidate that isn't rigidly right wing or leftwing. I have thought about to call myself a political anarchist because i don't want to take all the bad stuff with the good stuff from a political wing. Politics are probably just the way so that people are in camps and so they have to compromise themselves to find a camp.

Saying the outside world wasn't a very precise word to use. However i didn't know how to frame it. I mean that to call political stances xenophobic and extreme or far-right is a bit stupid. It is a kinda dehumanising for the people who support these things. To call people xenophobic and extreme doesn't help the dialog by any stretch but polarizes. There is nothing wrong with wanting national borders and a stop to immigration that hurts your country and a sovereign parlament which doesn't have interference from an unelected parlament full of elitists. I don't only see economic migrants as the outside world, but it was a bad communication tool to show that economic migrants is a threat posed by the outside world that outweighs the good things because it is a danger to the security of Europeans because of violence when the money slips up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

Well, this sounds very uninformed. First, the "outside world" brings almost every nation on Earth something desirable. In fact, North Korea is notably SUFFERING for it's isolationist, "hermit nation" policies. No nation on Earth produces EVERYTHING they consume and use day-to-day in the demanded amounts within their borders. But I guess your myopic vision ONLY sees "economic migrants." And, as for "the Left has no principles, and never have had," although I've come to detest the right-left political divide and everything having to default to one or the other, and politicians and other leaders believing their more respectable and principled by such choosing a down-the-line right-wing or left-wing, and that centrist and mixed platforms are viewed by many as "non-committal," "fringe," "unworkable," "wishy-washy," or "without an effective platform," but that I think such mentalities (of right-wing or left-wing ideological and political purity) are non-productive, self-sabotaging, outmoded, obstructionist, and, even a bit stupid, to have in such a dominant and constantly defaulted to position instead of approaching each issue and problem with it's own practical, innovative, and workable solution, unshackled by right-wing or left-wing purist chains on thinking. I personally believe that any politician whose platform is based around being left-wing OR right-wing and not innovative, unique approaches to each problem is likely going to lack principles, and the true mentality and viewpoint to solve many of their polity's problems, many of which still lingering in many countries SHOULD have been solved long ago, if not for partisan and left-wing vs. right-wing incessant squabbling, obstructionism, and clinging forever to unproductive, failed polices.

The problem with centrism in practice, in my experience, is that centrists seem to pick the worst bits from the left and combine them with the worst bits from the right (see: Bill Clinton, Michael Bloomberg, etc.). If someone took a passion for the protection of civil liberties/rights, EXTREMELY MODEST cuts to some programs, sensible/compassionate immigration reform, and significant cuts to the military (from "the left") and combined it with sensible economic policy like deficit reduction and EXTREMELY MODEST tax cuts, I would vote for that person in an instant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bruce Fischer said:

The problem with centrism in practice, in my experience, is that centrists seem to pick the worst bits from the left and combine them with the worst bits from the right (see: Bill Clinton, Michael Bloomberg, etc.). If someone took a passion for the protection of civil liberties/rights, EXTREMELY MODEST cuts to some programs, sensible/compassionate immigration reform, and significant cuts to the military (from "the left") and combined it with sensible economic policy like deficit reduction and EXTREMELY MODEST tax cuts, I would vote for that person in an instant.

I may have found my first voter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SirLagsalott said:

I may have found my first voter.

When, where, and for what are you running? You seem like someone I'd vote for

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to rewrite all of these so I don't start a flame war and get the thread locked :P

4 hours ago, koneke said:

A distaste for the outside world comes when all it brings you are economic migrants that are ruining your country.  While they're also telling you, that you are not allowed to stop it. (EU)

Any objective proof of this?

(if I couldn't cite the source in one of my college research papers I will not accept it as proof. Shouldn't be a high bar to pass)

4 hours ago, koneke said:

I think we'd get the Left out and demonstrating against immigration if a whole bunch of White Christian Southerners were trying to get into their country. As long as they're non-white and non-christians and comes from a country without a Western Tradition, then the Left is loving it i guess. The Left has no principles, and never have had.

Not even going to respond to this for obvious reasons

4 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

Being against immigration doesn't necessarily make someone far right.  If a nation can sustain itself while having very low or no immigration, then that country would probably institute policies that greatly restrict immigration which would benefit the workers in that country.

Being against illegal/undocumented/unauthorized/whatever immigration is not inherently right wing, no. I would argue that being against all types of immigration is rather extreme, and not in the left-wing direction (the extreme on that end is totally open borders).

1 hour ago, koneke said:

Hearing over and over that Marine Le Pen was a rightwing candidate. Her stance on the age of pension was a lowering of the pension age, thus a leftwing stance.

Donald Trump is against cutting Social Security, but that does not make him a liberal. Whether you're "left wing" or "right wing" (which I agree is a flawed way of looking at things) is decided by where you stand on all issues, not on one or two.

1 hour ago, koneke said:

Saying the outside world wasn't a very precise word to use. However i didn't know how to frame it. I mean that to call political stances xenophobic and extreme or far-right is a bit stupid. It is a kinda dehumanising for the people who support these things. To call people xenophobic and extreme doesn't help the dialog by any stretch but polarizes. There is nothing wrong with wanting national borders and a stop to immigration that hurts your country and a sovereign parlament which doesn't have interference from an unelected parlament full of elitists. I don't only see economic migrants as the outside world, but it was a bad communication tool to show that economic migrants is a threat posed by the outside world that outweighs the good things because it is a danger to the security of Europeans because of violence when the money slips up.

I fail to see how calling someone who holds political views that are rather outside the conservative norm "far-right" is dehumanizing but saying that people from the "third world" don't deserve to come to whatever European nation you live because of their "culture" in is not dehumanizing or elitist? Please don't take offense, I'm trying to keep the debate civil, but you must realize how contradictory that sounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2017 at 3:49 PM, Bruce Fischer said:

When, where, and for what are you running? You seem like someone I'd vote for

In Virginia, at some point, probably for U.S. Senate or for state Senate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SirLagsalott said:

Not old enough to run. But in Virginia, at some point, probably for U.S. Senate or for state Senate.

I'm not old enough either. I live in the state directly north of you, I'd like to run for state Senate and then either Governor of Maryland or the Senate. I probably wouldn't want to be in the House of Representatives since there are elections every 2 years, I don't feel like I would be able to get anything done.

My dream job is US Secretary of State, but that's not a job you can be elected to, obviously.

Plus as Secretary of State I could have an even better jumping-off point for a presidential campaign, maybe you could be my running mate. :P Fischer/Lagsalott 2040?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Being against illegal/undocumented/unauthorized/whatever immigration is not inherently right wing, no. I would argue that being against all types of immigration is rather extreme, and not in the left-wing direction (the extreme on that end is totally open borders).

I was referring to a hypothetical country that could function effectively without immigration.  I that instance, greatly restricting or stopping immigration wouldn't be far right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Fischer said:

I'm not old enough either. I live in the state directly north of you, I'd like to run for state Senate and then either Governor of Maryland or the Senate. I probably wouldn't want to be in the House of Representatives since there are elections every 2 years, I don't feel like I would be able to get anything done.

My dream job is US Secretary of State, but that's not a job you can be elected to, obviously.

Plus as Secretary of State I could have an even better jumping-off point for a presidential campaign, maybe you could be my running mate. :P Fischer/Lagsalott 2040?

Sounds good to me. What political party would you be?

Link to post
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.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...