Both parties having equally shit ideas about what Brexit means, as RNATB says, is not the same thing as both parties having equally shit Brexit plans. Labour’s Brexit plans include a referendum with an option to Remain, so their plan allows the people to veto their shit Brexit idea. The Tories’ brexit plan involves implementing their shit Brexit idea without giving the people any say in the matter. Therefore, if you think both parties have equally shit ideas about Brexit, you should vote Labour.
And, if you think both parties Brexit plans are equally shit, the conclusion is not that you should vote for whichever party aligns closer to your interests. Your vote isn’t given to you for your personal advantage. You have the same duty as any citizen who is given any degree of political power or influence; to exercise it for the common good. If you use your vote to advance your personal interests, you can hardly object to elected officials using their office to advance their personal interests.
For those following along, last night the UK had its first election debate for the upcoming election. It was limited to the two main contenders, Corbyn and Johnson. Both did alright, although neither gained any ground in my opinion. It opened with Corbyn looking into the wrong camera, which made him seem bit clueless. They each had opening statements, with rebuttals of their opponent’s opening statement. In my opinion, Johnson had the better opening statement, but Corbyn had the better rebuttals. The next half-hour was a debate on Brexit which Johnson clearly won. He was emphatic that the UK would exit the EU under his Brexit plan if the Conservatives won the election. Corbyn failed to produce a coherent Labour plan. Instead, he just said that Labour would come up with a new plan and would hold a second referendum. He tried to attack Johnson on the fact that post-Brexit trade negotiations would take years to accomplish, but failed to say how his new plan would avoid these negotiations (presumably by staying in the customs union). Johnson’s attack was to ask Corbyn numerous times if he would support leaving or staying under the Labour second referendum. Corbyn declined to answer by dodging the question.
The next portion of the debate involved questions on several topics. Corbyn was the better of the two in this portion of the debate. He answered questions by stating what Labour would do if they won, and emphasised the areas, especially the NHS, he wanted to spend more on. He also gave a strong answer denouncing antisemitism, which has been an issue for the Labour party. Corbyn tried attacking Johnson on privatisation, but Johnson’s counter that Corbyn was making things up was effective. Johnson, during this part of the debate, kept trying to steer the debate back to Brexit which annoyed the moderator. One interesting segment was a question on honesty. The crowd actually laughed at Johnson when he started his answer. It was a clear chance for Corbyn to hammer Johnson on his reputation, but Corbyn handled the question pretty mildly.
Closing statements were pretty non-descript. Overall, I’d say the result of the debate was a draw. If I had to pick a winner, I’d say Johnson because Corbyn’s refusal to answer which way he’d vote in a second referendum was pretty glaring.
I didn’t view the follow-on when the other party leaders had the chance to make election speeches.
The Corbyn Cult believes he walked on water. Unfortunately, I think the ‘Get Brexit done’ appeal from Boris is going to win. The average person is likely just sick of the whole thing and Labour’s waffling all over the place hasn’t helped at all, plus all the squabbling among the other remain parties.
Anyway, just an observation from across the pond. I don’t even comment on the U.K. election on Twitter because I’m tired of waking hi and being torched by Corbyn’s Cult.
<blockquote>If I had to pick a winner, I’d say Johnson because Corbyn’s refusal to answer which way he’d vote in a second referendum was pretty glaring.</blockquote>
No Corbyn fan, me, but I think one’s opinion on how effective Corbyn’s strategy was is largely determined by one’s opinion on Brexit. Corbyn clearly believes there are voters who don’t want the government to determine the final outcome of Brexit. What if he’s right? A clear majority support a second referendum even though support for remain vs leave is still as close as it ever was.
My (Labour) constituency voted 80% Remain. Mr Johnson’s banging on about getting Brexit done is not going to win him any votes around here. What about all those Tory seats in London and the Home Counties that voted remain? Clearly Corbyn wants to win some of those without alienating the Labour Leave seats up north.
Will it work?
I doubt it, but it doesn’t seem like an obviously stupid strategy to me.
When you try to play both sides of the street, you just wind up being hit by traffic in both directions. Labour’s failure to come up with a coherent Brexit policy is why they’re losing so badly.
The labour party’s Brexit position is OK (now) - labour are boxed in something savage on Brexit, prime Tony Blair would be struggling to communicate a convincing message here, let alone JC. It’s his ownself that bolloxes things up - matter of record that he is anti-EU and has been for decades. So he’s having to articulate a relatively nuanced position with no personal conviction and it’s just deadly.
Labour manifesto out today:
McDonell did a superb job last time out so be interesting to see how this one goes over. Already received a very sceptical response from the Institute of Fiscal Studies but they may be a bunch of Tories, not sure.
If Labour actually managed to have a position on Brexit, they might be able to communicate it. As it is, their position is to let other people decide. As for the rest of their manifesto, I too could write a document promising everybody a pony that farts rainbows, but I doubt even in my wildest fantasies I could come up with so many financial contradictions…
Jeremy Corbyn, Nicola Sturgeon, Jo Swinson, and Boris Johnson each faced half an hour of tough, serious questions from informed members of the public, with the moderator keeping the focus and not letting them off the hook. It was an excellent format.
Sturgeon did well, Corbyn so-so, Swinson did pretty badly, Johnson - bluster and waffle. Johnson was laughed at when he said telling the truth was important, and ‘get Brexit done’ produced a loud groan from the audience. He had a hard time.
I think it’s more the Cult of Corbyn that will be the damage of Labour. You either have to be 100 percent with Corbyn or you’re a Blairite or a Tory. I don’t even comment on the U.K. election on Twitter because I know I’ll wake up being torched by the red rose brigade. I am American but I’ve been studying UK politics since before most of them were born.
I don’t know how much the UK electorate will a) accept that Corbyn’s Labour have an anti-semitism problem or b) care. But: Corbyn is handling this appallingly. A letter from a Chief Rabbi is a big deal, and needs a response on the same scale. Continuing to insist that he has already apologised (when?) and therefore not apologising now and struggling to do something as easy as outright condemn statements that Zionist Rothschilds secretly control the world with something stronger than “People shouldn’t say that” doesn’t do anything to kill the story. Journalists will keep asking him if he’s going to apologise, he’ll keep on deflecting and the story will stay alive.
Even from a purely cynical point of view, even if he believes he’s done nothing wrong wrt anti-semitism, he would be well advised to make an apology, sit down with the Chief Rabbi, make a joint announcement about how much he’s learned and try to put the issue to bed.
As it is, every policy announcement and appearance he wants to make can now be thrown off course by questions about what he’s going to do about anti-semitism in his party. This is what will be damaging - his message (which is always harder for Labour to get out than for Tories) will be derailed, voters won’t get the view of him and Labour that his campaign wants, and he’ll struggle to cut through accordingly.
In 2017 Corbyn was way behind in the polls (hence why the election was called). But throughout the campaign he surged massively, the Tories lost their majority and he looked like an impressive campaigner whose policies appealed to a large slice of the electorate. But it was also true that the Tory campaign was awful, not just in terms of being fronted by the robotic May but also in terms of content. In particular the manifesto launch was a spectacular own goal with major policies which would negatively impact core Tory voters, and which had to be walked back.
So the question always was, to what extent was 2017 a reflection of Corbyn/Momentum’s campaigning skill, and to what extent a reflection of an unbelievably shite Tory campaign?
I think (tentatively!) that we’re getting an answer to that now. The Tories produced a dull and unimaginative manifesto that made barely any ripples. Boris hasn’t done anything amazing as a campaign front man, but he hasn’t done anything awful either. The Tory lead is holding up in the polls. It may have shrunk slightly in the past week, but it’s still healthy. Depending on which turnout model the pollster is applying, their lead is between 7 and 13 points. By contrast, the Labour campaign has (I feel) failed to ignite. I just don’t have the same sense of momentum. In particular, 2017 was notable for Corbyn’s rallies. Dismissed as preaching to the choir (by me among others) they turned out to be an effective way of a) getting social media footage of Corbyn barnstorming to a pumped up crowd and b) energising supporters to hit the doorstep. I don’t know if I’m just missing it, but I don’t get the feeling those rallies are happenign with the same frequency or energy.
In short, I think a lot of 2017 was down to the Tory campaign imploding, and in the absence of something of that scale to jolt people out of their current view of the parties/candidates, the Tories will hold on to their lead.
I agree, I think that 2017 was a result of the Maybot and magic money trees plus that too many people put faith in Labour as a stop Brexit party.
I’m not seeing much positive about Labour on social media, there’s none of the optimism in the clips of Corbyn rallies from 2017. All I’m seeing is vitriol from Twitter accounts with a red rose and a lot of it is directed towards the Liberal Democrats
I’m not sensing a seachange coming, and with two weeks left to go, it’s a bit late for one to start. If Boris doesn’t trip over his own dick (always a possibility), and without some ‘black swan’ event like the Grenfell Tower fire (which happened seven days after the last election), he is probably rolling home.
To be fair, there is a MASSIVE amount of anti-Corbyn disinfo being promulgated on social media at the moment, so I wouldn’t at all be surprised if some of the polls were genuinely rigged. There was also the Conservatives getting caught changing one of their Twitter accounts to look like a fake fact-checking site and using it to potshot Corbyn during the television debate. Corbyn is running an awful campaign but the Tories keep getting caught out engaging in blatant lies and dirty tricks, and it’s not doing them any favors either. It has been noticed that Jacob Rees-Mogg has been removed from the public eye for the duration, and even Boris is cutting back on public appearances as his support drops every time he talks in front of a camera (a problem that, apparently, Jo Swinson also suffers from).
I think there’s going to be an anti-Conservative swing but the extent to which it will benefit Labour, the Lib Dems, Brexit Party or other parties remains to be seen (although the SNP will almost certainly do well).
Also, it looks like Sinn Fein and the SDLP are gunning for the DUP and frankly I can’t get too upset about the thought of Arlene Foster being handed her own backside even if it benefits Sinn Fein.
BTW, the irony of republicans pushing a Remain agenda and unionists pushing Leave when Brexit would likely increase republican sentiment in NI is not lost on me.
Boris Johnson (and Nigel Farage) decided not to participate in a climate change debate between party leaders on Channel 4. So they were replaced with ice sculptures. Unfortunately, “earlier speculation that the ice would be carved in a representation of the prime minister proved wide of the mark.” Instead, they were replaced by ice sculptures of the planet Earth.
I really don’t think Boris wants to get into a war with the media right before a GE; even the Boris-friendly media outlets know that letting the government punish the media for unfavourable coverage (and especially for something so trivial) sets a very bad precedent that could bite them later. And it’s not going to do him much good with the public either; it’s a big baby move from a big sulky baby Boris.