Snap General Election?

[alfie2244]

Evanivitch said:

It's the focus on Dianne Abbott I find remarkable, and the personal attacks when in reality she's little worse than any other politician.

How many have gotten away with numerous blatantly racist comments and yet still, potentially, be in line for one of the most important Govt jobs?

[gooner1]

Burwood said:

Evanivitch said:

Moonhawk said:

Must be that - somebody cannot possible hold genuinely critical views on her based on her apparent incompetence and arguably racist attitudes can they.

'it's cos she's black innit'

She's appeared no more incompetent than Fallon in the last 48 hours, but no one on here is attacking his appearance on here or his association with Assad only 10 years ago...

What nonsense. Abbott is the car crash queen. Have you been absent these past few years? She can't add. She lies, racist comments. Supports dictators. Is a terrorist apologist.

Fallon was tricked with a comment that was De-contextualised.

It's your vote- do as you wish, just don't come on here, talk st and expect to go unchallenged

Can't disagree with the Abbott comments but Fallon was most certainly not tricked. He was just seemingly incapable of listening to the interviewer, even when it was pointed out that it was
fact Johnsons quotes that had been read out, he carried on with the assumption that it was Corbyn's.

[anonymous-user]

Evanivitch said:

It's the focus on Dianne Abbott I find remarkable, and the personal attacks when in reality she's little worse than any other politician.

Not sure about "little worse". I'd say she's comfortably the worst performing front line politician, but then everyone comes to these things with their own set of preconceptions.

Listening to her this morning my reaction was that she is flat out lying, having decided now it is time to say what she thinks she needs to say to get Labour in. Same with Corbin on Friday evening. And McDonnell, well he has been beyond the pale for a while now.

OTOH, May continues to keep a very low profile. Too low, IMO. Perhaps she is scarred from the "nothing has changed" tetchiness but I don't see how hiding in a bunker can be thought to be a winning strategy. Which brings me onto Hammond. Where the fk has he been all campaign? In the same bunker as May?

And the further concern is that the Conservatives are running what is basically another "project fear" against Labour's "free stuff forever" campaign. Trouble is, there are far more people who stand to gain from the free stuff than there are who should be afraid at having to pay for it.

The Conservatives' happy hunting ground has been Brexit, and it seems they are going to try to refocus on that over the close of the campaign. Fine, unless the electorate have already fully "priced in" that factor and are looking for other things now, in which case big error.

It's often said that the winner is almost always the party which is best on the economy and which has the leader most thought to make a good PM. The Cons trounce Labour on both fronts there. But is this the time when the promise of free shiny things will win the day?

[Jonmx]

Evanivitch said:

It's the focus on Dianne Abbott I find remarkable, and the personal attacks when in reality she's little worse than any other politician.

She's the only British politician I've heard stand up for someone who murdered 45 million of his own people. If a potential home secretary thinks that leading his country from the feudal system justifies mass murder on a biblical scale, then they do not have my vote.
The reason for the focus on her is not just her utter, utter incompetence and blatant racism. It's more that she's running to hold arguably the most important position in government after the PM. MI5, the Police, Immigration and Borders are just a few of the things she would be responsible for. Many on here feel that she has demonstrated herself to be unsuitable for the role. You obviously hold opposing views, so I'd be interested to hear why you think she'd be a suitable candidate for that role.

[Vaud]

sidicks said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

NLW is already more than 60% of average earnings I believe, what is median earning?

Really?!

For 2015, the average salary UK for the tax year ending 5 April 2015 was £27,600 (I couldn't find 2016)

For 2016, NLW = £7.20 - at 40hrs /week = £14,976 (excluding possible overtime, bonuses, etc)

= 54% so close to 60%

[PurpleMoonlight]

Vaud said:

For 2015, the average salary UK for the tax year ending 5 April 2015 was £27,600 (I couldn't find 2016)

For 2016, NLW = £7.20 - at 40hrs /week = £14,976 (excluding possible overtime, bonuses, etc)

= 54% so close to 60%

Average earnings March 2017 was £26,624

NLW is now £7.50 ph, so £15,600

58.5%

Agree, not over 60% yet, my mistake.

[London424]

desolate said:

London424 said:

That's because Fallon is irrelevant. They'll be lucky to get 10 MPs.

I think he means the Defence Secretary, not the leader of the Lib Dems.

Ah yes...assumed a typo.

[johnxjsc1985]

London424 said:

Ah yes...assumed a typo.

A timely reminder though where is he?

[B'stard Child]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Are pensioners really the wealthiest section in society? The state pension is not a benefit, its an entitlement base on NI history.

It's an income - wherever it comes from

Anyone on a basic state pension wouldn't get close to the tax allowance of £11,500

My father pays 40% tax on his income (mostly pension and a small amount of earnings as he's still working at 80)

PurpleMoonlight said:

What is deemed wealthier and therefore to lose the winter fuel payment?

Yet to be determined but I'm damn sure my father shouldn't receive an automatic winter fuel allowance as he does at the moment.

[9xxNick]

Question for anyone who's been polled prior to voting day for their voting intention at this or a recent election: is any attempt made to find out if you can be overheard when naming your preferred party?

[bitchstewie]

Evanivitch said:

I have defended Abbott in the past because some of the comments directed at her on this site have been borderline racist/sexist. But I do feel she performed incredibly badly today and it makes me reconsider whether I could vote for Labour in good faith.

Have you decided whether you could?

If you read the manifesto in isolation a lot of stuff makes sense, no arguments on that one at all and other than if you simply do tribal "they said it so it's wrong" politics there is some sensible stuff in there.

But then I look at Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbot and their views and the mix of total lies and distraction when they're tackled over them and I can see exactly why they don't seem to appear on any of the campaign literature.

[Garvin]

Evanivitch said:

She's appeared no more incompetent than Fallon in the last 48 hours, but no one on here is attacking his appearance on here or his association with Assad only 10 years ago...

Abbott no more incompetent than Fallon? You're 'avin a laff' are you not? I've seen some shonky statements on this thread but this one 'takes the biscuit' - ridiculous in the extreme.

[anonymous-user]

Its fair to say that among the group I was with we thought Ms Abbot came out of the Andrew Mar interview badly. At the least she is extremely patronising.
I thought Mr Mar was pretty tough today

[bitchstewie]

Bit childish but.. https://twitter.com/JamieRoss7/status/868764222859...

[Moonhawk]

Vaud said:

For 2015, the average salary UK for the tax year ending 5 April 2015 was £27,600 (I couldn't find 2016)

For 2016, NLW = £7.20 - at 40hrs /week = £14,976 (excluding possible overtime, bonuses, etc)

= 54% so close to 60%

But that's gross salary. Surely what people actually take home is what is important.

The take home pay after income tax and NI for somebody on minimum wage is £13,463 whereas for somebody on average wage it would be £22,047.

NMW take home pay represents 61.1% of the average.

[FiF]

PurpleMoonlight said:

JagLover said:

Median incomes 5% higher in pensioner households after adjusting for housing costs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance...

Does that mean that pensioners have more disposable income than non pensioners because they have paid off their mortgage?

Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Sunday 28th May 11:18

It's all part of an attempt by an element to demonise pensioners. For example some time ago there were negative reports referring to millionaire pensioners, except the millionaire part included the value of their home plus the theoretical capital value required to pay their pensions. Just divisive tribalism at its worst.

[Vaud]

Moonhawk said:

But that's gross salary. Surely what people actually take home is what is important.

The take home pay after income tax and NI for somebody on minimum wage is £13,463 whereas for somebody on average wage it would be £22,047.

NMW take home pay represents 61.1% of the average.

True, my error.

[anonymous-user]

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

[edh]

techiedave said:

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

Perhaps they think that this will encourage Labour to put up the Shadow Home Sec? Abbott needs to be hidden away for the next 2 weeks IMO.

[turbobloke]

edh said:

techiedave said:

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

Perhaps they think that this will encourage Labour to put up the Shadow Home Sec? Abbott needs to be hidden away for the next 2 weeks IMO.

It's too late, she's done enough damage already.