Olddog wrote:

We decided long time ago than postal voting was too easy to abuse, same for internet voting today. We use proxy voting if needed.

Sorry, who is "we" in this context?

scbriml wrote:

Olddog wrote:

We decided long time ago than postal voting was too easy to abuse, same for internet voting today. We use proxy voting if needed.

Sorry, who is "we" in this context?

Just from his other comment, I think it is the French, or at least, the French Government.
"We in France" sort of thing. I think!

Exactly. There was a huge debate theses years about internet voting, and for now it was decided it was not safe enough.

Olddog wrote:

Exactly. There was a huge debate theses years about internet voting, and for now it was decided it was not safe enough.

Anyone in the UK can apply for a postal vote. My wife and I shall be because we'll be out of the country on the day of the election.

In France dead people used to vote in great numbers so something had to be done.

KLDC10 wrote:

So it seems like the UK is saturated with polling stations - it must take a tremendous level of disinterest/laziness to avoid them all!

In general, you don't avoid them - you can't simply go to any polling station in the UK and exercise your right to vote on election day, you are allocated a specific polling station in your district where you can vote.

moo wrote:

In general, you don't avoid them - you can't simply go to any polling station in the UK and exercise your right to vote on election day, you are allocated a specific polling station in your district where you can vote.

I was being somewhat facetious
But you're right of course. Still, if the polling station is located close to you, then it isn't too much of a hardship to drag yourself there. According to the Government website, they're open from 07:00-22:00 - it isn't even like you have to get out of bed early to do it

Another election topic:

UK retail sales see biggest drop in seven years

It was the biggest quarterly decline since the first quarter of 2010, and is likely to reinforce the view among many economists that household spending - the main driver of the economy - is now slowing sharply

http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/04 ... ail-sales/

Hypothetically speaking, let's say this election backfires on Theresa May and the conservatives lose their majority to the Lib Dems (or another party that was against Brexit). What would that mean for the negotiations with the EU? Can the Article 50 trigger be rescinded? Could the UK extend the negotiation period beyond 2 years? If Le Pen becomes French president, would the EU be more likely to work with the UK on retaining membership?

LittleFokker wrote:

Hypothetically speaking, let's say this election backfires on Theresa May and the conservatives lose their majority to the Lib Dems (or another party that was against Brexit). What would that mean for the negotiations with the EU? Can the Article 50 trigger be rescinded? Could the UK extend the negotiation period beyond 2 years? If Le Pen becomes French president, would the EU be more likely to work with the UK on retaining membership?

I was under the assumption that rescinding A50 requires the unanimous approval of the rest of the EU member states.

scbriml wrote:

Olddog wrote:

Exactly. There was a huge debate theses years about internet voting, and for now it was decided it was not safe enough.

Anyone in the UK can apply for a postal vote. My wife and I shall be because we'll be out of the country on the day of the election.

And in France, we use proxy voting for that.

LittleFokker wrote:

Can the Article 50 trigger be rescinded? Could the UK extend the negotiation period beyond 2 years? If Le Pen becomes French president, would the EU be more likely to work with the UK on retaining membership?

An EU spokesman said yesterday that a new government would be allowed to reverse Article 50.

Nothing pretty much has been done aside from shouting matches, so there is no doubt in my mind Article 50 could be rolled back.

I must say the fact the Tories are so high in the polls is very surprising. Are so many people living so well they want to continue the same policies ? If so, why did Brexit pass ? There is a logical disconnect.

We see across the developed world more and more people are disillusioned with globalization, May only promises more globalization, and that works. What gives ?

Aesma wrote:

I must say the fact the Tories are so high in the polls is very surprising. Are so many people living so well they want to continue the same policies ? If so, why did Brexit pass ? There is a logical disconnect.

Despite the crazy conspiracy theories of some here, the Tories are setting about delivering what the country voted for - leaving the EU. I think this has surprised many and has garnered the Tories considerable new support.

That support has to be seen in context though - what are the alternatives? Frankly there are none - UKIP is history, Labour is a joke with a leader who is wanting to take us back to the late 1970s (I lived and worked through that and have no desire to go back there!) and the Lib Dems will be lucky if they end up with more than a handful of MPs.

IMHO, May summed it up quite well - it's a stark choice between a stronger Tory government or a Labour-led coalition comedy show. I'll be surprised if the Tories don't end up with a significantly increased majority (then again, my recent vote prediction record is not good! )

scbriml wrote:

Labour is a joke with a leader who is wanting to take us back to the late 1970s (I lived and worked through that and have no desire to go back there!)

You did not like the "Life on Mars" tv show?

I'm sorry but Brexit is not a set of policies. Especially when May wasn't even in favor herself.

Aesma wrote:

I'm sorry but Brexit is not a set of policies. Especially when May wasn't even in favor herself.

It seems like she was lukewarm at best in her support of 'Remain'. Didn't some people come up with the nickname 'The Submarine' for her, on account of her disappearing almost completely into the background during the referendum campaign? Clearly she doesn't have any problem implementing Brexit, and that is the sign of a good politician - she has committed herself to delivering what the British people chose.

Olddog wrote:

You did not like the "Life on Mars" tv show?

It was great, but it was fiction. The reality was nowhere near so great.

Aesma wrote:

Especially when May wasn't even in favor herself.

How does her preference that the UK remained in the EU adversely affect her ability to do the best she can to take the UK out of the EU? Do you really think she's determined to do a bad job because she didn't want us to leave?

IMHO, she was the best choice of those available to lead the Government once Cameron resigned. I've seen nothing to make me change my view, certainly not from any of the Brexiteers.

I think it helps when the leader has a vision, yes.

I sure hope the campaign will force her (and other candidates of course) to tell what she wants to do, exactly.

One opinion poll out tonight puts the Tories on 50%. The last time they (or any major party) hit those numbers in a national poll was September 2008 if I've read through the records correctly. Another poll puts them on 40% but even that poll (which also has a separate Scottish poll attached) theoretically gives them a 50 seat majority and TEN (yes, TEN) MPs in Scotland. The idea a few years ago you could possibly end up in a situation where the Tories would have more MPs in Scotland than Labour would have had people laughing at you.

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi- ... ndary=2015

KLDC10 wrote:

Didn't some people come up with the nickname 'The Submarine' for her, on account of her disappearing almost completely into the background during the referendum campaign?

I think it was ConservativeHome who gave Osborne the "Submarine" nickname.

Aesma wrote:

I sure hope the campaign will force her (and other candidates of course) to tell what she wants to do, exactly.

Well, never mind about all this Brexit nonsense, it seems Labour's plan is to give us more public holidays!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39682388

A Labour government would seek to create four new UK-wide bank holidays, Jeremy Corbyn says.

The holidays would be on each nation's patron saint day - St David's Day on 1 March, St Patrick's Day on 17 March, St George's Day on 23 April and St Andrew's Day on 30 November.

Mr Corbyn believes the move will "celebrate the national cultures of our proud nations".

Well Jeremy seems to be a bit of a closet commy.

There is literally no other alternative ... Although I do hope the SNP lose some of there seats as Nicola kept moaning TM was unelected.

To me the Tories are looking for a stronger mandate as to the process of the Brexit. They know a narrow majority of those that voted for Brexit were motivated by too many work migrants from the poorer countries of the EC, 'refugees' from the Islamic world, fears of terrorism and believing the EC undermines UK/English sovereignty. A narrow plurality of those that voted against the Brexit may have similar feelings but believe to exit the EC may make things worse. Tories know and thrive on Nationalism to keep the UK separate from the EU, even to the point of 'divorcing', they never accepted the Euro or a number of financial, travel and other rules. The Tories know the Brexit vote can be a way to gain power like they haven't had since Thatcher. Going for a stronger mandate with more power in Parliament will help the party even if many suffer from it.

Arion640 wrote:

Well Jeremy seems to be a bit of a closet commy.

He is, but he isn't in the closet.

Arion640 wrote:

Although I do hope the SNP lose some of there seats as Nicola kept moaning TM was unelected.

A decrease in SNP MPs is more likely than an increase (given their current near monopoly) and May being re-elected will be one less thing that Sturgeon can moan about. I had to laugh at something that Ruth Davidson said this week - "Nicola Sturgeon would rather complain about Tory policies than use the power she has to change them!"

KLDC10 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

I'm sorry but Brexit is not a set of policies. Especially when May wasn't even in favor herself.

It seems like she was lukewarm at best in her support of 'Remain'. Didn't some people come up with the nickname 'The Submarine' for her, on account of her disappearing almost completely into the background during the referendum campaign? Clearly she doesn't have any problem implementing Brexit, and that is the sign of a good politician - she has committed herself to delivering what the British people chose.

No, that was what former Chancellor George Osborne said about himself, (May sacked him), she does not like over confident posh boys like him and Cameron.
Not that she was much better at the Home Office, sure she took on the Police Federation but they had acted in a way against ministers, from both main parties for years so had set themselves up for a dressing down. On every other measure - most notably immigration - she failed. It gets difficult to implement the figures to reduce the numbers (a purely headline grabbling political target anyway) when you are slashing the numbers of people who actually have to do it. (No doubt they were told to do 'more with less' and other such management speak BS).
Therein lies the heart of support for Brexit and the danger, they have had decades to blame Johnny Foreigner for most cock ups done right here at home, post Brexit, who will they blame next?

Another factor in May lying about her 'reasoning' for this election, is possibly the looming scandal about election expenses, this might sound odd especially to members in the USA, however there are strict guidelines in how much a party can spend per seat in an election.
Though not totally confined to the Tories, the fact is that a few weeks ago the police were investigating 20 seats at the last election, all won by the Tories, many only just. 13 of these were likely to go to the Crown Prosecution Service, meaning the police think there is a case to answer and if the CPS agreed, they'd be arrests, trials etc.
That's one more seat than her majority.

I honestly thought an election should have been called after DC resigned, after all, no one in the ruling government or opposition expected the population to vote leave. Since the sitting government essentially used the machinery of government to push the Remain vote, the confidence of the people in said government to follow through on the peoples wishes would have been very low, same for the opposition. An election would give the citizen the ability to elect persons who shared their views and would "put their backs into it", not "hold their noses" while doing the job.
Yes MP's are supposed to be the peoples servants and implement their wishes, but they also give their views and run on those, and since they do not as a rule resign when their views conflict with their constituents....an election allows a cleaning / clearing out of the ranks.

Latest headline:

Conservatives open up biggest lead over Labour in nine years, new poll shows

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04 ... poll-shows.

My guess is Corbyn will have to step down once he leads Labour into near obscurity.

11725Flyer wrote:

Latest headline:

Conservatives open up biggest lead over Labour in nine years, new poll shows

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04 ... poll-shows.

My guess is Corbyn will have to step down once he leads Labour into near obscurity.

I don't think he will.

I believe he will continue bumbling along still in the belief that he won 2 labour party leadership elections, and that he is the chosen one.

The real power is with the "Unite" union, Labours biggest monetary donor. Figures show that Unite gave Labour just under £19million (2015 figures).

The Union has just re-elected its leader Len McCluskey (12% turnout), and he wants labour to continue in the direction it's headed in. At the last general election Mr McCluskey cited that Labour lost because "because it was insufficiently left-wing".

I think that the labour party will split after the election, with Corbyns lot headed in the hard left wing direction, and the others more of Tony Blair based policitics i.e. "Conservative Lite"

For the record - I'm a UNITE union member, I ticked the box so my monthly subscriptions does not go to political causes, nor did I take part in the union leadership election.

Dano1977 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Latest headline:

Conservatives open up biggest lead over Labour in nine years, new poll shows

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04 ... poll-shows.

My guess is Corbyn will have to step down once he leads Labour into near obscurity.

I don't think he will.

I believe he will continue bumbling along still in the belief that he won 2 labour party leadership elections, and that he is the chosen one.

The real power is with the "Unite" union, Labours biggest monetary donor. Figures show that Unite gave Labour just under £19million (2015 figures).

The Union has just re-elected its leader Len McCluskey (12% turnout), and he wants labour to continue in the direction it's headed in. At the last general election Mr McCluskey cited that Labour lost because "because it was insufficiently left-wing".

I think that the labour party will split after the election, with Corbyns lot headed in the hard left wing direction, and the others more of Tony Blair based policitics i.e. "Conservative Lite"

For the record - I'm a UNITE union member, I ticked the box so my monthly subscriptions does not go to political causes, nor did I take part in the union leadership election.

All good points. Thanks for the insights. I lived and worked in the U.K. for three years, so I'm watching this one closely. One advantage to having Amazon Prime is that Sky News is available on their FireTV platform real time.

Dano1977 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Latest headline:

Conservatives open up biggest lead over Labour in nine years, new poll shows

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04 ... poll-shows.

My guess is Corbyn will have to step down once he leads Labour into near obscurity.

I don't think he will.

I believe he will continue bumbling along still in the belief that he won 2 labour party leadership elections, and that he is the chosen one.

The real power is with the "Unite" union, Labours biggest monetary donor. Figures show that Unite gave Labour just under £19million (2015 figures).

The Union has just re-elected its leader Len McCluskey (12% turnout), and he wants labour to continue in the direction it's headed in. At the last general election Mr McCluskey cited that Labour lost because "because it was insufficiently left-wing".

I think that the labour party will split after the election, with Corbyns lot headed in the hard left wing direction, and the others more of Tony Blair based policitics i.e. "Conservative Lite"

For the record - I'm a UNITE union member, I ticked the box so my monthly subscriptions does not go to political causes, nor did I take part in the union leadership election.

If you can, join another union. Quite a few at BA did. Me, I was never in Unite or it's predecessors. I do have one of their buildings, logo included, at the top of my road.
I would say 'you should have voted' but Comrade Len likely would have fixed it, as his actions since 'winning' show. Happy that your Union subs have gone towards a £417,000 grace and favour pad in a fashionable part of London for Len?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... y-far-left

(Len has stated how 'proud' he was to have taken part in the 1978/79 'Winter Of Discontent', the series of strikes which brought down the most pro union PM the UK had ever, will ever have. And brought in Maggie Thatcher. Len is too thick to see what part he played in that).

GDB wrote:

(Len has stated how 'proud' he was to have taken part in the 1978/79 'Winter Of Discontent', the series of strikes which brought down the most pro union PM the UK had ever, will ever have. And brought in Maggie Thatcher. Len is too thick to see what part he played in that).

IMHO, McCluskey and Corben are peas from the same pod. They're both political dinosaurs from the 1970s.

GDB wrote:

Dano1977 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Latest headline:

Conservatives open up biggest lead over Labour in nine years, new poll shows

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04 ... poll-shows.

My guess is Corbyn will have to step down once he leads Labour into near obscurity.

I don't think he will.

I believe he will continue bumbling along still in the belief that he won 2 labour party leadership elections, and that he is the chosen one.

The real power is with the "Unite" union, Labours biggest monetary donor. Figures show that Unite gave Labour just under £19million (2015 figures).

The Union has just re-elected its leader Len McCluskey (12% turnout), and he wants labour to continue in the direction it's headed in. At the last general election Mr McCluskey cited that Labour lost because "because it was insufficiently left-wing".

I think that the labour party will split after the election, with Corbyns lot headed in the hard left wing direction, and the others more of Tony Blair based policitics i.e. "Conservative Lite"

For the record - I'm a UNITE union member, I ticked the box so my monthly subscriptions does not go to political causes, nor did I take part in the union leadership election.

If you can, join another union. Quite a few at BA did. Me, I was never in Unite or it's predecessors. I do have one of their buildings, logo included, at the top of my road.
I would say 'you should have voted' but Comrade Len likely would have fixed it, as his actions since 'winning' show. Happy that your Union subs have gone towards a £417,000 grace and favour pad in a fashionable part of London for Len?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... y-far-left

(Len has stated how 'proud' he was to have taken part in the 1978/79 'Winter Of Discontent', the series of strikes which brought down the most pro union PM the UK had ever, will ever have. And brought in Maggie Thatcher. Len is too thick to see what part he played in that).

For me personally UNITE served a purpose. I don't subscribe to their politics, and I wouldn't pee on McCluskey if he was on fire.

The company I worked for, wanted to renegotiate contracts, the union of which my colleagues were with, seemed a bit "lightweight", So I joined UNITE.