General Election June 8th 2017

Keep 'em coming Frank, perhaps you could throw in a pie chart.

If I could I'd be happy to oblige such a reasonable request but Pie Charts don't work with qualitative data.

You should gen up a bit because data misrepresentation often deliberately misleads causing people to reach conclusions based on deliberately skewed data representations without even knowing it is happening.

Les Miserable wrote:

Keep 'em coming Frank, perhaps you could throw in a pie chart.

thanks for the chuckle Les, Seriously brightened up a very shit day

Yvette Cooper put it very well in PMQs yesterday.



That you choose to cut off her reply is so typical of you. You're a political bigot.

All of the opposition have since pledged to block her every move in dealing with Article 50.

What are you frightened of. The democratic will of the people?

Big Theresa bottling the TV debates could make things more interesting. Not that you can ever trust anything she says anyway.

Glad it isn't just me that thinks so.

And blame the edit on the BBC's Daily Politics not that her answer matters anyway (see previous post).

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Yvette Cooper put it very well in PMQs yesterday.



That you choose to cut off her reply is so typical of you. You're a political bigot.

All of the opposition have since pledged to block her every move in dealing with Article 50.

What are you frightened of. The democratic will of the people?

I listened to it live. That was not the point Yvette Cooper was making, she was putting forward a wider point that TM is untrustworthy. She is being hugely disingenuous by calling this election on the basis that whilst the country is coming together, whilst Westminster is not.

!. Firstly the country has never been more divided
2. Does May not understand the basic role of opposition anyway
3. The decision to trigger article 50 was passed by both opposition and the lords so to claim opposition are blocking her is utter tripe.

A few weeks ago May was fairly unambiguous about there being no need for an election, probably because a defeat might trigger a competent leader of the opposition. Now all of a sudden there is a need for an election for exactly the same reasons as there wasn't a need for an election, the only thing changing in this period is the fact that 15 Police Forces have passed their files to the CPS.

In answer to your points.

1/ have you forgotten Thatcher?

2/ seeing as she was in opposition for 13 years then I suspect so.

3/ They had no choice but to pass Article 50. It would have been political suicide not to. They should have blocked it then and then May would have called an election. But all the remainers were gutless. Turkeys do not vote for Christmas.

Les Miserable wrote:

Keep 'em coming Frank, perhaps you could throw in a pie chart.

And a quote or two aswell.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

If I could I'd be happy to oblige such a reasonable request but Pie Charts don't work with qualitative data.

You should gen up a bit because data misrepresentation often deliberately misleads causing people to reach conclusions based on deliberately skewed data representations without even knowing it is happening.

Do you watch person of interest ?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If that's her opinion surely she's allowed to say that

Elias wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

If I could I'd be happy to oblige such a reasonable request but Pie Charts don't work with qualitative data.

You should gen up a bit because data misrepresentation often deliberately misleads causing people to reach conclusions based on deliberately skewed data representations without even knowing it is happening.

Do you watch person of interest ?

I have seen it but I'm not an avid viewer.

I see that Labour is up to their old tricks again.

Corbyn's major financial supporter, Unite, has suspended Gerard Coyne who is challenging Len McCluskey for the leadership of Unite.

It's not clear why he's suspended but what is clear is that Coyne does not support Corbyn.

McCluskey is 100% behind Corbyn.

Can't wait for the excuses from certain posters on here.

Does it concern the MP for the constituency I live in?

Are 20 odd police forces involved?

Has it resulted in up to 30 MPs possibly being fraudulently elected thus giving a government a majority it has not earned?

Doesn't the fact that there is a very real chance that a general election might well have been "stolen" (for want of a better word) and we're being governed by an administration that has no such right to do so worry you just a little?

I don't know what is going on with Unite either but then as a non-member of Unite it is hardly my concern and sounds like small beer anyway: "Unknown Trade Unionist suspended" is hardly world shattering stuff, is it?

So that's excuse no 1.

" I'm not a unite member so doesn't concern me".

Three Labour Members of Parliament jailed for fiddling expenses, not my MP's, hardly world shattering stuff, sounds like small beer anyway....

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Sinn Fein will never take a seat at Westminster ergo it will never vote on anything nor will it ever coalesce with anybody.

Nor should we forget that it was John Major's government that started the negotiations with Sinn Fiein that eventually resulted in Blair's Good Friday Agreement (predicated on an open border and under-scored by EU law) which has delivered relative peace in Ireland ever since. Corbyn is not the only politician to have talked to Sinn Fein.

Brexit is what threatens the Union. How would you feel if you were Gbraltarian? They voted over-whelmingly to remain British and equally over-whelmingly to stay in the EU. Now they can't do both so whatever happens they have been shafted maybe they'll leave.

There was a majority for remain in Northern Ireland. The North could decide to merge with Eire.

Scotland is champing at the bit for a second Indy Ref.

These are all very real possibilities and they are all in the process of happening right now which is rather more than can be said for Corbyn's chances of forming such a coalition when one of the parties concerned will never take a seat at Westminster under any circumstances.

On the radio the other evening, there were one or two were one suggesting the main battle in Scotland is between the SNP and the Tories (even though the latter has only one MP at present). Is that a fair assessment ?.

Those that called for a united left on the radio did not clarify if it was for a united left in campaigning Labour only or a full-on united left in campaigning and eventual coalition Government.

It could have been the former that they were hinting at. Get the likes of the SNP, Sinn Fein, Greens et al to back Labour candidates and get them voted in to stop the Tories. My original post was aimed more at the former too.

I've just put £50 at 6-1 on a hung parliament there is going to be massive tactical voting and I might suggest Theresa May has made a bigger faux pas then Cameron did in calling for a referendum

VillageGreen wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Sinn Fein will never take a seat at Westminster ergo it will never vote on anything nor will it ever coalesce with anybody.

Nor should we forget that it was John Major's government that started the negotiations with Sinn Fiein that eventually resulted in Blair's Good Friday Agreement (predicated on an open border and under-scored by EU law) which has delivered relative peace in Ireland ever since. Corbyn is not the only politician to have talked to Sinn Fein.

Brexit is what threatens the Union. How would you feel if you were Gbraltarian? They voted over-whelmingly to remain British and equally over-whelmingly to stay in the EU. Now they can't do both so whatever happens they have been shafted maybe they'll leave.

There was a majority for remain in Northern Ireland. The North could decide to merge with Eire.

Scotland is champing at the bit for a second Indy Ref.

These are all very real possibilities and they are all in the process of happening right now which is rather more than can be said for Corbyn's chances of forming such a coalition when one of the parties concerned will never take a seat at Westminster under any circumstances.

On the radio the other evening, there were one or two were one suggesting the main battle in Scotland is between the SNP and the Tories (even though the latter has only one MP at present). Is that a fair assessment ?.

Those that called for a united left on the radio did not clarify if it was for a united left in campaigning Labour only or a full-on united left in campaigning and eventual coalition Government.

It could have been the former that they were hinting at. Get the likes of the SNP, Sinn Fein, Greens et al to back Labour candidates and get them voted in to stop the Tories. My original post was aimed more at the former too.

What is this Sinn Fein nonsense?

1. None of the Tories, Labour or LDs ever stand in Northern Ireland so there's no pact either pro or anti anybody involving Sinn Fein.

2. Sinn Fein never have and never will take their seats at Westminster because to do so they have to swear allegiance to the crown. It just won't happen.

All the rest might. Who knows? Sinn Fein aren't even in the game let alone trying to do deals within it.

All that happens if they win seats is that the total required for a majority by anybody alters a little. That's it. Same for everybody.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

So that's excuse no 1.

" I'm not a unite member so doesn't concern me".

Well no not really. It doesn't. Not any more than the internal machinations of, say, Tesco do.

Trade Unions exist for the sole purpose of representing their members. They are legally constituted, openly democratic and accountable for all actions to their members. They have all sorts of arcane procedures to ensure that there is no improper abuse of the rule book which are rigidly enforced. As a result of all of that somebody has been suspected of breaching the rules, been suspended and is under investigation to see whether or not there is a case to answer. Everything out in the open. The checks and counter-checks are all working perfectly it would seem.

Compare and contrast to the MPs under investigation: not suspended; free to fully enagage in Parliament; likely to be selected (or at least not de-selected) in the next General Election and fully endorsed by Theresa May in Parliament during PMQs. Everything swept under the carpet.

The two situations could hardly be more different.

PatDunne wrote:

Three Labour Members of Parliament jailed for fiddling expenses, not my MP's, hardly world shattering stuff, sounds like small beer anyway....

Again an entirely different situation.

Scumbags did wrong, were prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. Quite right too. Compare and contrast to the current election expenses saga.

Were they the only 3 fiddling their expenses? No. Was it only Labour MPs that were at it? No.

Seems to be all noses in the trough together.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

Three Labour Members of Parliament jailed for fiddling expenses, not my MP's, hardly world shattering stuff, sounds like small beer anyway....

Again an entirely different situation.

Scumbags did wrong, were prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. Quite right too. Compare and contrast to the current election expenses saga.

Were they the only 3 fiddling their expenses? No. Was it only Labour MPs that were at it? No.

Only 4 MPs faced criminal charges. All Labour.