Who will win the UK election tomorrow?

This was a pretty bad election. Neither Corbyn or Theresa May were particulary great candidates. Shame the worst candidate won though. Some of the stuff she has said, is worse than anything Donald Trump said.

Couple of news:

Theresa May has apparently reached a deal to form a government with DUP support, as expected. Now, the DUP is a bit of an eclectic bunch; socially very conservative, they're the reason gay marriage is legal everywhere in the UK except in Northern Ireland. However, they are economically populist and even a little left-wing, favouring more government spending, increasing the Living Wage, and opposing pension cuts. On Brexit, they campaigned for Leave, but represent a region that is 56% Remain, and favour an open border with the Republic of Ireland. That latter issue has become a particular obsession in Northern Irish politics since the referendum, but their highest priority, however, is returning devolution to Stormont as soon as possible, after the recent local elections left the power-sharing deal in limbo. Expect Northern Irish politics to feature more prominently nationally under the new May administration.

Add to that the Scottish Tories, who have always had to distance themselves from the national Tories to be electable in Scotland, and have traditionally been more pro-European, and basically, "Strong and Stable," this is not. The DUP have said May would be lucky to survive the year, and I'm not inclined to disagree.

Also, Paul Nuttall has resigned as UKIP leader after being reduced to 2% of the vote nationally with no seats, something I've been anticipating ever since they started cannibalising themselves and kicked out their only MP, somehow managed to lose the Stoke by-election, and got wiped out in the council elections. Bwahahaha. "Kippers" has never been a more apt moniker; they got filleted by the electorate today. They're pretty much done. Finished.

And finally, 207 female MPs have been elected, a new record. Yay to equality.

She blatantly talked about

• censoring the internet.
• potentially getting rid of human rights.

I dont think even Trump would go as far, at most he would conceal it or try to use honeyed words to conceal intent. The worst Donald Trump said was that he would take out the families of ISIS. Theresa May said she would get rid of human rights.

And I am talking about quotes, not comparing the political systems.

>May claims she wants to be hard on terrorism
>Goes into a coalition with DUP

buhahaha

Ahh yes, the rationalization.

Censoring the net and taking away human rights are censorship and human rights removal no matter how you spin it. Do you even realize how ineffective internet censorship is regardless? Hell, by trying to censor it, they may end up risking doing more for terrorists than they are doing to stop it.

Not like I wouldnt expect anything else from Theresa May. Who has indirectly supplied weapons to terrorists.

First of all the dark web makes up the vast majority of the internet. So right of the bat what you think it is they're trying to do is already incredibly flawed.

Secondly and more importantly, by creating backdoors that the government can use to access your facebook messages, emails, bank transfers, etc it greatly weakens security for everyone not just terrorists. If the police have those tools, it won't be long until criminals do.

The whole "I'm not a terrorist so I have nothing to worry about" argument doesn't work when it comes to online privacy and security.

For someone who claims to not like Theresa May, you sure are defensive about her.

And no, you are just throwing excuses and insults now. Its pretty sad to watch.

If you dont want freedom of speech for the guy you dont like, you don't believe in freedom of speech.

If you dont think human rights are universal, and want it full with double standards, you don't believe in human rights.

Funny you mention that. Did you hear what happened to CD Projekt RED as of late?

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/09/cd-projekt-reds-cyberpunk-2077-game-has-been-hacked-by-real-cyberpunks-6698641/

But yes, you are right, what Theresa May would propose would hurt the average brittish person.

Then you've completely misunderstood what it is they want to do.

They aren't just taking down websites made to host illegal stuff (there's nothing wrong with doing that) what they're doing is requiring all websites to create a backdoor so that it's easier to access peoples private messages. They also want to make ISP's keep a record of everything everyone says online for 12 months, which again would be prone to hacking. And they want to heavily censor what type of porn you can watch (no female orgasms for example)

A lot of this is even mentioned in their manifesto

https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto

If anyone needs a good laugh I recommend reading it. It's full of vague statements, terrible slogans, and absolutely terrifying and idiotic ideas being presented as something good. Whoever wrote it really needs to be sacked.

Is that porn list still a thing or what happened to it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_Communications_Data_Bill

May has always been a threat to privacy and security ever since the original Snoopers' Charter bill.

I can't believe May messed up as bad as she did.

@horgen:

She launched her manifesto, and it just went downhill from there. "Strong and Stable" became a punchline. Her Andrew Neil interview was just painful to watch.

But credit also has to go to Corbyn. The guy transformed himself from "Comrade Corbyn" into something resembling a semi-tolerable social democrat, and he came off as thoughtful and pragmatic in debates and interviews. I thought lines like "I'm not a dictator," "We're not going to do it because it's not in our manifesto," and "Leadership is as much about using this (points to ear) as using this (points to mouth)" were particularly effective.

Had Labour been led by someone with less historical skeletons in his closet, and had the SNP not f***ed up on IndyRef2, May would not be prime minister today.

I had a feeling this snap election would backfire for May but I did not expect it to backfire as hard as it did.

She refused to come to some debates, didn't she? It's a safe punchline if you can live up to it, I guess she could not.?

She wants a "hard" brexit, doesn't she?

@horgen:

She passed on one debate, then delegated to Amber Rudd for the second. Watching that, I was thinking maybe she should be PM instead of May.

Maybe. I'm just glad I don't have to hear anyone utter "Strong and Stable" or "Bloody Difficult Woman" again. Those lines make me want to rip my eardrums out.

Well, to be fair who could predict two terror attacks within a short time.

Because it wasn't just her bad performance and no to debates that hurt her.

Congratulations to the British for meeting smarter than the minority of Americans who voted Republican the last 4 years. You did yourselves a huge favor cutting out the cancer to society that is conservatism. Don't stop!

Amber rudd is never going to be PM in the UK. Her seat is not that safe. I don't think Boris Johnson should be British PM for the same reason.Johnson would lose his seat in a wave election for labour. Rudd would lose her seat in a similar election to thursday's one or if labour won an election.

@super600:

I know. I was just thinking at the time about who would be a better Tory leader and PM than May or Johnson. I had thoroughly soured on May at that point.

Some Tories have even been talking about Ruth Davidson being Tory leader in the wake of the election. A lesbian PM? Haha. I could get behind that. It would probably make millions of heads around the world explode in a mist of blood and brains.

Are you drunk?

May still has the biggest party and still is the PM. So what did they cut out? not to mention that they won a good chunk back in Scotland.

@Jacanuk:

Going by history, this government's days are numbered. In 1974, a Labour minority government lasted until a second election in October. That produced another Labour government which survived through a pact with the Lib Dems until that collapsed in 1977, after which Labour limped on in minority for two years before the Conservative landslide at the 1979 election. Then, in 1996, a minority Conservative government survived just six months until Tony Blair's Labour landslide in 1997.

The key word here is "survive." Minority governments don't so much govern as survive from day to day. This was why David Cameron went into a formal coalition deal in 2010 instead of a minority government.

And funny you should mention the Scottish Tories, because they are actually a major part of this government's stability problems. These guys spent nearly 30 years detoxifying their party's brand to the Scottish electorate, who have by all accounts, quote; "forgiven but not forgotten." They have done this largely by distancing themselves from the national party: Theresa May visited Scotland only once during the campaign, their manifesto is significantly different from that of their national counterparts, ideologically they are more like "blue Lib Dems" than traditional Tories, and they favour soft Brexit. This means they have every incentive to, if necessary, break ranks and wreak havoc if it's in their self interest. For example, if something comes up for a vote that is sure to be unpopular in Scotland.

All in all, a lot of people are saying Corbyn is PM-in-waiting, and as much as I find that prospect distasteful, I'm no longer inclined to disagree. The guy's​ growing in stature every day. I will never like him, but just today he went on Marr's show and looked relaxed and amiable. And that "jobs-first Brexit" line? Masterful. Just masterful.

Whether or not one agrees with his hard-left socialist policies, Jeremy Corbyn (the UK's Bernie Sanders) did a great job with his campaigning. Just over a month before the elections, May had huge double-digit leads over him in the polls. And the mass media and tabloids did everything they could to smear Corbyn, linking him with everything from IRA/Palestinian/Islamist terrorists to Marxist/Stalinist communists. Yet he quickly closed the gap in just a month, forcing a hung parliament.

It's also worth noting the age breakdown. Corbyn dominated the 18-39 age group, while also leading the 40-49 age group. In comparison, May led the 50-59 age group, while dominating the 60+ age group. This shows yet another generation divide, like with Brexit.

Labour need an overhaul first get rid of commie Corbyn. If he were PM he would sellout UK during brexit negotiations.

May let her lead slip some have said her days as tory leader are numbered and Boris Johnson has been hinted as a successor despite him saying there's no power play. I kind of like Boris people underestimate him based on his appearance but he is very intelligent while not PM material see him as a supporting role.

Boris is in a kinda unsafe seat right now. Someone in a seat with a majority closer to 20 percent has to become the next Conservative leader. If boris ends up as the next UK PM he will be a huge target for all left wing parties to take down in the next UK election and his majority of 10.8% will be easily overcome by the labour candidate he faces in his seat in the next election.

That's unlikely now, since he outperformed all expectations, catching-up to May's double-digit lead in the polls, winning the 18-49 age group, and increasing young voter turnout. If another election happens (possibly later this year), he has a strong chance of winning the election.

@Jag85: Then May needs to really work to win back those seats she lost. Rewriting that manifesto might be a good start.

The most recent poll has just put Labour ahead with a 3% lead, for the first time in years:

Poll shows Labour are ahead of the Conservatives

It will make no difference who the PM will be for Brexit "negotiations". Theresa May has nothing to negotiate with. The EU are going to take you to the cleaners and rightfully so lol. The UK and Brexit are a bad joke and everyone is laughing at the British. Little Englanders.

Yeah, pretty much. To be fair to the right-wing media, Corbyn's people did inexplicably talk about Karl Marx for absolutely no reason at the beginning of the campaign, he did have a pretty chummy, if brief, association with IRA and Sinn Fein in the past, and he did once describe Hezbollah and Hamas as organizations that worked for the benefit of Palestinian people. On that latter one, it is technically true; Hamas and Hezbollah do run schools, hospitals and charities that help Palestinians, but he kind of white-washed their equally undeniable terrorist activities a bit there.

That being said, it's nothing Britain hasn't seen before; this kind of stuff is very typical of a 1970s-style hard-left socialist. Credit to Corbyn, then, that he managed to largely move away from all of that, and transformed himself into something resembling a semi-acceptable social democrat who seems to run his party by consensus rather than by ideology. I'm still going to criticise him fairly heavily, but I have to be a bit more specific about it now; I can't just dismiss him as "Comrade Corbyn" the 70s Socialist any more. That's how far he's come.

And yeah, as the old saying goes, young people don't vote... ...until they do. YouGov reported that there was a 14% jump in youth turnout in the election, and clear evidence of that was even there on election night: the Canterbury seat, which the Tories held since World War I, somehow fell to Labour. Canterbury is a university town; there is no way that seat could fall to Labour unless the university kids came out to vote in huge numbers. And now the right-wing media like The Suck and The Daily Fail are going nuts and blaming young voters and calling them naive and stupid and such. I will never be happy with the prospect of PM Corbyn, but still: bwahahahaha.

Bwahahahaha! The only reason Boris Johnson was even elected Mayor of London was because he was running against Comrade Ken Livingstone. Just how bad is Comrade Ken? Over the last few years, that guy's contribution to political discourse has pretty much consisted of him going around calling everyone he doesn't like fascists. That's what Boris was up against. A dustbin with googly eyes painted on the side and a top hat glued on top could have beaten that mess.

Added to that, Boris remains a deeply divisive figure both inside the Conservative Party and among the general public. I've heard of a faction within the Tories who would instantly rise up to oppose him if he runs for leadership again. A common refrain among Labour voters I've heard is that Corbyn is "genuine" and not a "schemer" or an "opportunist" and that people are fed up with schemers and opportunists. Well, Boris Johnson is widely believed to be a closet Remainer who became a Leaver to advance his ambitions. Even George Osborne recently quipped; "when is he NOT campaigning for leadership?" He is the very definition of a schemer and an opportunist, and not even a very good one - see: Michael Gove.

So yeah, as much as I've thoroughly soured on May over the course of the election campaign, I'd still take her as Tory leader and PM over Johnson in a heartbeat. May vs Corbyn was personally excruciating for me; like the difference between a broken leg and an amputation. Johnson vs Corbyn would be like cancer versus AIDS.

The biggest surprise was Kensington, the UK's richest constituency. This is the first time in history that Kensington fell under the control of the Labour party, despite now being a socialist party that wants to raise taxes for the wealthy.

Kensington is a bit of a Yin-Yang constituency. The Grenfell Tower that burned down recently? That's in Kensington. It's a mix of affluent neighbourhoods like South Kensington and Notting Hill (yes, THAT Notting Hill), and deprived and impoverished social housing in North Kensington and Ladbroke Grove. This constituency is therefore a straight fight between rich versus poor. and this time the poor won. By 30 votes.

Yup, it just so happens that the UK's richest constituency is also home to some of the most deprived and impoverished homes in London, living in the same vicinity as some of the country's wealthiest.