Let's Get Political!

[pauld]

The IFS have done an analysis of both Labour and Tories' spending plans and said neither are credible - the Tories' plans are an effective continuation of austerity (despite their flashy pledges, there would be real terms cut in spending on public services of 14% compared to 2010-11, in itself not a high point for public services), Labour's plans represent the greatest expansion of government spending in peacetime. So a choice between more austerity and a devastated NHS or massive increase in govt spending and debt. Hurrah!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/28/ifs-manifesto-verdict-neither-tories-nor-labour-have-credible-spending-plan

[Red Frog]

The idea that any party can make lavish spending promises when the true impact of Brexit remains so thoroughly in the balance is simply for the birds.

[Flashheart]

It's OK. It's all OK.

Boris likes scones. He's just like you and me.

[4D]

The idea that any party can make lavish spending promises when the true impact of Brexit remains so thoroughly in the balance is simply for the birds.

Except the Lib Dems? 

[horlock07]

The IFS have done an analysis of both Labour and Tories' spending plans and said neither are credible - the Tories' plans are an effective continuation of austerity (despite their flashy pledges, there would be real terms cut in spending on public services of 14% compared to 2010-11, in itself not a high point for public services), Labour's plans represent the greatest expansion of government spending in peacetime. So a choice between more austerity and a devastated NHS or massive increase in govt spending and debt. Hurrah!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/28/ifs-manifesto-verdict-neither-tories-nor-labour-have-credible-spending-plan

I see they have also picked up that the main beneficiaries under Labour would be the female elderly Daily Mail readers, which seems downright peculiar as a demographic they are hardly likely to ever vote Labour?

The idea that any party can make lavish spending promises when the true impact of Brexit remains so thoroughly in the balance is simply for the birds.

The Saj keep suggesting that no one neds to see an economic assessment of potential effects...

[michael]

The idea that any party can make lavish spending promises when the true impact of Brexit remains so thoroughly in the balance is simply for the birds.

True, but what about the much hyped "Brexit Dividend", and the famous "£350m a week to the NHS"?

[Red Frog]

Except the Lib Dems?  

They are at least coherent. Though they might have to contend with a level of protest that bears a greater threat of disorder than a well-turned pun on a placard.

True, but what about the much hyped "Brexit Dividend", and the famous "£350m a week to the NHS"?

I'll leave you to make your own judgment on that...

[Flashheart]

The IFS have done an analysis of both Labour and Tories' spending plans and said neither are credible - the Tories' plans are an effective continuation of austerity (despite their flashy pledges, there would be real terms cut in spending on public services of 14% compared to 2010-11, in itself not a high point for public services), Labour's plans represent the greatest expansion of government spending in peacetime. So a choice between more austerity and a devastated NHS or massive increase in govt spending and debt. Hurrah!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/28/ifs-manifesto-verdict-neither-tories-nor-labour-have-credible-spending-plan

Which is fine. These people are just doing their job and they know what they are talking about. They have criticised both parties, making it fair and equal and people deserve to know these things. No complaints here.

But why do the BBC not let people know about this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/general-election-labour-economy-spending-corbyn-boris-johnson-a9218041.html?fbclid=IwAR0rzdjmE-FQ9MGdMstOprmMblb-a36_z7ptweNWPiYRhEbzFjfnlGEN63o

[horlock07]

The joys of electioneering

https://twitter.com/HinduMonkey/status/1198924351795605508

The look on the face of the nurse who has been lumbered with sitting next to him is a treat, could she try and get any further away whilst remaining on the seat!

https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1199655368105836545

[Ardiles]

Don't you just love the politician's sleeves-rolled-up look?  There's no reason what ever for him to do that as he's sitting in a hospital drinking tea.  But conveys to the faithful that he's been toiling away for them.  Man of action.  Cufflinks in his pocket.

[horlock07]

Increasingly looking as though BJ won't be doing an interview with Andrew Neil.

If the chairman of the Spectator (Andrew Neil) really can’t get an interview with the ex-editor of the Spectator (Boris Johnson), he could always ask the current deputy editor to have a word with her husband (Dominic Cummings)?

Who's says the right have a strangle hold over the media...

(With thanks to James O'Brien on Twitter!)

[Flashheart]

It would not surprise me at all if it is deliberate. The BBC are appearing to be more sinister by the day.

He might still end up doing it, but I won't be holding my breath.

It infuriates me more than Boris himself or any of the other politicians; I've never been all that politically motivated. I have always held the media in contempt for their lies and propaganda, though. That's one of my main bugbears regardless of whether or not there's an election on. It's to be expected from the likes of the Daily Mail et al but that it's the BBC is another matter entirely.

I think kids should be educated to recognise it, I think the world would be a better place if more people can spot the bullshit. (not only in politics). That's not going to happen under the current lot though.

[Ardiles]

The most chilling aspect to this election is that (assuming the Tories do win) it will demonstrate that you can hide from the mainstream media, obfuscate, deliberately mislead and openly tell lies - and it won't harm you at the ballot box.  I'm not sure how you retreat from that once it becomes recognised & established.  Johnson would be eviscerated by Andrew Neil for the lies he has told on the campaign trail and before.  Solution: don't meet Andrew Neil. 

It's not about truth or the facts any more.  It's about which tribe you belong to.

[jayohaitchenn]

Don't you just love the politician's sleeves-rolled-up look?  There's no reason what ever for him to do that as he's sitting in a hospital drinking tea.  But conveys to the faithful that he's been toiling away for them.  Man of action.  Cufflinks in his pocket.

In fairness to BoJo, if it's a clinical area (it is) you have to have bare forearms as part of infection control.

[REDBUCK]

Indeed, as everyone else has in the video.