General Election 2024

[CharlesTuckerTheThird]

Getting accosted by one of those Reform Party fucksticks was definitely an experience. Apparently we need to "keep those leftie luvvies out of power to preserve our national identity." If these people represent our "national identity", it's no wonder more and more people are fucking leaving the UK.

[Jazzy G]

We've had our local Worker's Party candidate and his hangers on in the pub the last two Fridays. A couple of our regulars had been getting into arguments with them, and they've been doing my head in by taking forever to bugger off after I've closed. Fortunately I know they're all staying at the Premier Inn in town, so once they've managed to not get elected, and hopefully lost their deposit, they'll be gone from our doorstep forever. I appreciate the money they've put over the bar, but not them sitting in until gone 2am loudly singing presumably racist songs in Afrikaans. 

[Devon Malcolm]

Hark at Neville Chamberlain here.

[LaGoosh]

Kind of a bullshit article and headline. Every government has to work with international partners that they don't share the same values with. "Work with" doesn't mean "endorse and support". There's not really any way the UK can't engage with France.

[Devon Malcolm]

3 minutes ago, LaGoosh said:

Kind of a bullshit article and headline. Every government has to work with international partners that they don't share the same values with. "Work with" doesn't mean "endorse and support". There's not really any way the UK can't engage with France.

I just think a supposed left-leaning government should draw the line at working with actual fascists whose party originated from Nazi collaborators.

[LaGoosh]

Yeah I understand but there's just not really a realistic way to not work with France in some capacity unfortunately. There's plenty of fascists and dictatorships this country has been working with for decades. There's not a single political party in this election that wouldn't work with France so it's kind of weird to mark it specifically against Starmer.

[Nexus]

In Banbury, our Labour candidate is a bit of a knob. I won't be voting for the Lib Dems, and the Green Party member is not really engaging me. However, we do have an independent who is an ex-Labour councillor who seems pretty switched on, pro-trans rights, pro-Palestine, so fits my ideology for the majority of it. Might vote for her, even though she won't get in, just because I cannot face voting the majority of the other parties. 

[Jazzy G]

I found out our local Lib Dem candidate is a friend's husband so might vote for him just out of politeness, although in a previous general election the Lib Dems were beaten by a friend of mine who ran for the "Venky's Out" party on a platform of getting new owners for the Rovers. He came third, but kept his deposit. 

[MungoChutney]

We have a very good SNP incumbent at the moment, which has decided my vote. It would be great to be in a position to back Labour for the first time in a decade and bit but sadly I don't trust Keir Starmer. He strikes me as a complete careerist whose position on the two child limit won't change even when (in his view) it's financially viable. Child poverty is a political choice and he has made his with his policy positions. I can't back Labour while they are so centrist and so willing to accommodate right wing views within the party.

My seat will be a two way fight between SNP and Labour but if not for the incumbent I may have went for the SSP candidate as he's local and sensible. The SNPs record on child poverty is actually very good but education and health are blemishes that are harder to ignore given the apparently poor management of the party. They now look much less competent in a way that suggests they possibly need a bit of time to regroup in opposition when it comes to the Holyrood elections. 

[Carbomb]

13 hours ago, MungoChutney said:

I may have went for the SSP candidate as he's local and sensible

Anyone doing an SSP can't be sensible, although it is spectacular

[JNLister]

A lovely piece on mathematically correct historical parallels for the scale of the Tory losses (eg 160 losses is the same proportion as the Black Death, 119 is Charge of the Light Brigade)

 

https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/electoral-disaster-metaphor-guide_

[SuperBacon]

This is so embarrassing. 

[FLips]

14 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

This is so embarrassing. 

Your campaign being "we're going to lose but please don't go too hard on us" is really pathetic.

[garynysmon]

43 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

This is so embarrassing. 

Putting to one side anyone’s personal views on the party, be it positive or negative, for this to be the messaging of such a historically successful party at the ballot box is absolutely bonkers.

I remember on election night 2019 we were talking a two election cycle before Labour would even become competitive again. They looked safe as houses.

How they completely fucked it without Labour doing anything at all really will be written about for years.

In 1997 the Tories weren’t conceding anything and seemed to be genuinely shocked at the scale of the defeat once it became clear. If they’re now already at the stage of giving up it suggests to me that the response on the doorstep must be absolutely dire and will be an even bigger collapse.

Edited July 2, 2024 by garynysmon

[Chest Rockwell]

1 hour ago, FLips said:

Your campaign being "we're going to lose but please don't go too hard on us" is really pathetic.

What's even more pathetic is that the narrative doesn't hold up because they're not even going to get the second most seats if the current predictions are anything to go by.