RugbyRebels

canta_brian wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I think May's plan for working age, working class UKIPpers did work, as can be seen in a few Conservative gains, some very close calls and the swings in predominantly working class Leave constituencies. The problem is she pissed off the retired UKIPpers whilst Corbyn promised to keep paying the well off amongst them money they don't need. Plus the yoof vote, obviously.
Remember, the Conservatives increased their vote share, just not as much as Labour. I read somewhere that the Conservatives were 4,500ish votes from forming a majority such were the number of close calls. Most of these were Labour held constituencies targeted by May's policies for 'JAMS'.

Don't take this as me defending May. She has royally ****ed up.

As an aside, if someone can explain to me how the hell Goldsmith regained Richmond Park I'd much obliged.

Fair few close calls the other way as well. My constituency had a 2500 odd tory majority cut to just 31. (labour). Amber Rudd's constituency just kept recounting until the ended up on a number where she had more votes (still don't know how recounts work), and there must be a few others.

Sandydragon wrote:So, today the Times is alleging that there are moves to get Ruth Davison into a position where she could be party leader.

Meanwhile, there are cross bench discussions on Brexit taking place under the radar. In all seriousness, if there are enough moderate MPs who agree to a softer form of Brexit and the crazies on both sides can be kept contained, then a hung parliament might not be such a disaster.

Banquo wrote:By the by, anyone know about how the checks and balances around voting work; I wasn't asked for any form of ID, just address and street number. Both my children were on the same list that was checked for me, yet I know they both had postal votes as well (in my son's case, he got three! but used only one). Seemed sloppy, and open to fraudulent voting if you wanted to.

Before visiting Number 10, Mrs Foster met her 10 MPs for a photocall in Westminster.
"The future's bright", she said - prompting one of them, Ian Paisley junior to respond: "The future's orange"

Zhivago wrote:

Banquo wrote:By the by, anyone know about how the checks and balances around voting work; I wasn't asked for any form of ID, just address and street number. Both my children were on the same list that was checked for me, yet I know they both had postal votes as well (in my son's case, he got three! but used only one). Seemed sloppy, and open to fraudulent voting if you wanted to.

My colleagues here in NL were appalled when I mentioned that we don't need ID to vote in the UK. Makes is look like a banana republic.

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:So, today the Times is alleging that there are moves to get Ruth Davison into a position where she could be party leader.

Meanwhile, there are cross bench discussions on Brexit taking place under the radar. In all seriousness, if there are enough moderate MPs who agree to a softer form of Brexit and the crazies on both sides can be kept contained, then a hung parliament might not be such a disaster.

.....and see UKIP reappear quick sharp. Farage would love it (establishment conspires to thwart the will of the people blah blah). Cross party consensus outside of the govt would likely kill May/Davis too (huzza). Don't get me wrong, anything that de-brexit's brexit is desirable, but is it palatable to the 52%?

Interesting times. Not good times.

Mellsblue wrote:Conservatives did moot the need for ID to vote. Labour responded that it was a ploy to stop those without a passport or driving licence, and therefore those more likely to support Labour, from voting.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:So, today the Times is alleging that there are moves to get Ruth Davison into a position where she could be party leader.

Meanwhile, there are cross bench discussions on Brexit taking place under the radar. In all seriousness, if there are enough moderate MPs who agree to a softer form of Brexit and the crazies on both sides can be kept contained, then a hung parliament might not be such a disaster.

.....and see UKIP reappear quick sharp. Farage would love it (establishment conspires to thwart the will of the people blah blah). Cross party consensus outside of the govt would likely kill May/Davis too (huzza). Don't get me wrong, anything that de-brexit's brexit is desirable, but is it palatable to the 52%?

Interesting times. Not good times.

And here is the conundrum. How many of those who voted to leave would be happy to stay in the single market?

jared_7 wrote:

Before visiting Number 10, Mrs Foster met her 10 MPs for a photocall in Westminster.
"The future's bright", she said - prompting one of them, Ian Paisley junior to respond: "The future's orange"

This is going to end well.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Conservatives did moot the need for ID to vote. Labour responded that it was a ploy to stop those without a passport or driving licence, and therefore those more likely to support Labour, from voting.

Good work.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Conservatives did moot the need for ID to vote. Labour responded that it was a ploy to stop those without a passport or driving licence, and therefore those more likely to support Labour, from voting.

Good work.

'Tis true.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Conservatives did moot the need for ID to vote. Labour responded that it was a ploy to stop those without a passport or driving licence, and therefore those more likely to support Labour, from voting.

Good work.

I did hear reports of students voting more than once; not that it would make any difference in all likelihood, but it seemed to me very easy to vote a couple of times either post duplication or simple impersonation.

skidger wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Conservatives did moot the need for ID to vote. Labour responded that it was a ploy to stop those without a passport or driving licence, and therefore those more likely to support Labour, from voting.

Good work.

I did hear reports of students voting more than once; not that it would make any difference in all likelihood, but it seemed to me very easy to vote a couple of times either post duplication or simple impersonation.

I voted for myself and for someone else who could not make it to the poll station. Thought i would give it and a go and was merely asked for my name,well the name of the person i was pretending to be. They looked up the number,ticked it off and let me vote.

Banquo wrote:

skidger wrote:

Banquo wrote: Good work.

I did hear reports of students voting more than once; not that it would make any difference in all likelihood, but it seemed to me very easy to vote a couple of times either post duplication or simple impersonation.

I voted for myself and for someone else who could not make it to the poll station. Thought i would give it and a go and was merely asked for my name,well the name of the person i was pretending to be. They looked up the number,ticked it off and let me vote.

QED, That can't be right. You get around Jezza

skidger wrote:

Banquo wrote:

skidger wrote:
I voted for myself and for someone else who could not make it to the poll station. Thought i would give it and a go and was merely asked for my name,well the name of the person i was pretending to be. They looked up the number,ticked it off and let me vote.

QED, That can't be right. You get around Jezza

I did have their polling card but did read that i did not need that anyway.

Peat wrote:The right wing press is already starting the fight back against a softer Brexit. Problem is, any government May puts together collapses without guarantees of a soft Brexit and so does any goverment Corbyn puts together. An alliance between the two is about the only way you'd force a hard Brexit through and I would collapse laughing if that happened.

Do the 52% kick off? I feel like this country has severe politics fatigue, as shown by the way they punish every politican dragging them to polls unnecessarily. What sort of Brexit they were getting was never specified. I dunno. Maybe they don't. Maybe they demand another referendum on it - not sure they'd win.

If I was a politician, I'd just go with the soft Brexit and take my chances.

jared_7 wrote:

Before visiting Number 10, Mrs Foster met her 10 MPs for a photocall in Westminster.
"The future's bright", she said - prompting one of them, Ian Paisley junior to respond: "The future's orange"

This is going to end well.

Oi! We already used that joke here for one of the Ulster threads.

Banquo wrote:

skidger wrote:

Banquo wrote:
QED, That can't be right. You get around Jezza

I did have their polling card but did read that i did not need that anyway.

no you didn't. It just seems....strange. My son and daughter were both on the same list as me, and I know they had postal votes.

Digby wrote:I don't think we need to worry about people simply turning up to vote in polling stations without ID. The real problem, and the Labour government at the time were told it would be an issue is the bloody postal voting, and the Tories have ensured it remains broken under their watch.

We know there are blocks of the country with stupidly high levels of postal voting being requested and far too many anecdotal accounts of just a handful of people controlling hundreds if not thousands of postal votes.