Corbyn

[Mexicola]

Green Party member here, living in North Dorset.
Tory MP here every year since 1960-something.
Currently a huge Tory majority, with Simon Hoare (the wettest of Tory arseholes) enjoying something like 65% of the local vote.
Doesn't matter one jot who I vote for - Green, Labour, even LibDem.
I shall still vote, on principle and in hope.

If YOU have the slightest chance of voting out a Tory, PLEASE do not go spoiling your ballot paper.
When hope dies, 'they' have won.

[Valotonin]

There is quite a significant difference between spoiling a ballot and not voting.

It isn't just that there isn't a party aligned with my views, there isn't a party appearing on my ballot that I am not fundamentally opposed to to at least a notable extent. I will go to the polling station and exercise my rights, spoiled ballots are counted. People who don't go to vote are seen as an example of low turnout and not of apathy, but of people that can be convinced to vote one way or another or who otherwise aren't interested in politics.

There is nothing about modern society and the services that government provide that I view as set in stone and that I know couldn't be taken away. I take none of it for granted, but the choice is between two ways of decline. Good intentions on the part of Corbyn aren't going to change the fact that his policies will inevitably be as damaging as the Tories are. I really do like him.

[jcnporter]

If there's no party that you don't have a fundamental problem with, then I don't really understand what point spoiling your ballot makes.
Why do you think Labour's policies will be as damaging as the Tories?
The Labour manifesto actually isn't radical enough for me, but it is moving in the right direction. That's about as much as I can expect from a political party.

[Valotonin]

I understand where you are coming from. Primarily because a spoiled ballot isn't a sign of someone who is too apathetic or disinterested to vote. It is a record of someone who made the effort to register, go to the polling station and fill out a ballot. Spoiled ballots are tallied up and they say quite a lot.

The problem we face with the tories is of course the death of a thousand cuts. I am unemployed and technically disabled, so essentially and on a personal level, what I am being told is that people like me should disappear and die. That is awful.

Corbyn's agenda for industry is fantastic, a society in which it is near impossible to be homeless or go hungry is wonderful. Unfortunately, this can only work for the existing populace. It will become a beacon to those seeking to come from overseas to exploit said system, these people exist and they exist in higher numbers than our country could ever deal with, they also give those who are genuinely seeking refuge or the chance to work a bad name by association. Socialism combined with relaxed policies on borders will spell the end of the dream. Money that exists for the disabled and those between jobs or who are struggling to find work will be gradually siphoned away until there is a system by which those that work are essentially the slaves of those who have come into the country for a free ride on the taxes of people they have no kinship with. Barely any of those Syrian "refugees" were ethnically Syrian, on camera constantly talking about how when they get to the UK or Germany (surely those fleeing a war would go to the first point of safety rather than crossing countless countries with no war to get to the one that suits them) that they will be "in the money" and not have to work again. Meanwhile a family from India who come here wanting to work for our NHS have a difficult time. If the borders become any more relaxed, those who want nothing other than to never have to work and feel no guilt at doing so at the expense of others, citing some distant history of colonization from the 1800s as their justification of the hatred of their hosts, will arrive in abundance to bask in our new benefits system set up to help those who live here from becoming homeless or dead, or to help those fleeing war and torture. Not those abroad who already had enough money to pay off the traffickers who pay off the owners of the NGO "rescue" ships (most of which are ferries and deal directly with traffickers) The entire world can't thrive off the backs of Britain's working class.

I know that if you are a socialist, and entrenched in what people try to say that socialism should be, you will already have heard a lot of this and be made to feel a certain sense of anger. I understand that. I don't say this as a trope or with a hidden agenda and I don't say anything that I can't back up with hard data should you wish to ask for it. I haven't a problem with those who seek to come here to be upstanding members of society, who like our culture and who want to work.

Allowing people who exist in the millions, who have been schooled on what to say to game the system and who will do nothing but drain money from a country and people they hate will destroy even Corbyn's future economy. There is no way around it.

[jcnporter]

You've said this -

Corbyn's agenda for industry is fantastic, a society in which it is near impossible to be homeless or go hungry is wonderful. Unfortunately, this can only work for the existing populace. It will become a beacon to those seeking to come from overseas to exploit said system, these people exist and they exist in higher numbers than our country could ever deal with, they also give those who are genuinely seeking refuge or the chance to work a bad name by association. Socialism combined with relaxed policies on borders will spell the end of the dream. Money that exists for the disabled and those between jobs or who are struggling to find work will be gradually siphoned away until there is a system by which those that work are essentially the slaves of those who have come into the country for a free ride on the taxes of people they have no kinship with. Barely any of those Syrian "refugees" were ethnically Syrian, on camera constantly talking about how when they get to the UK or Germany (surely those fleeing a war would go to the first point of safety rather than crossing countless countries with no war to get to the one that suits them) that they will be "in the money" and not have to work again.

But we can't predict the future, so I can't help but feel, given below from
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/insights/migration-statistics-how-many-asylum-seekers-and-refugees-are-there-in-the-uk/ that you are hugely overstating your case.

Are Syrians counted as asylum seekers?
Syrian refugees are a special case within the statistics. Although many have applied for asylum through the UK’s in-country asylum process (919 in 2018), the majority of Syrian refugees in the UK have been resettled directly from abroad: specifically, from the countries surrounding Syria to which they had been displaced by the conflict.

From 2014 onwards, the UK began resettling Syrians under the Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme (VPRS), with the aim of resettling 20,000 by 2020. The current number resettled in the UK is around 15,000.

Resettlement is a different process to asylum-seeking
Resettled people are granted refugee status or another form of humanitarian protection by the UK while abroad and then brought to live in the UK.

While in refugee camps, people’s refugee status is determined by officials from UNHCR and the UK Government then selects who will be offered resettlement in the UK.

Given the scale of the VPRS (and other resettlement schemes in place), resettled people made up just over one quarter (27%) of those granted asylum in the UK over the last five years (2014-2018).

How have application levels changed over time?
In 2018, at least 20,000 people were granted asylum in the UK, including resettled people. This is around half the number granted in 2001 – at least 48,000 –the year with the most grants in recent decades.

‘Asylum’ is used here in a broad sense and includes those granted refugee status, humanitarian protection, and discretionary leave to remain on humanitarian grounds.

The present number is boosted by around 5,000 per year under resettlement programmes, the largest among them via VPRS.

A lack of official data over time means there are conflicting accounts of the total number of people granted asylum in the UK prior to the 1980s. Various estimates suggest that the periods with the most asylum grants were when:

Around 80,000 Jewish refugees came to the UK between 1933 and 1939, equivalent to around 11,000 per year.
Around 27,000 Asian Ugandans were resettled to the UK in 1972 and 1073, or 13,500 per year.
Between 17,000 and 22,500 Vietnamese refugees were resettled to the UK between 1979 and 1992, or around 1,400 per year.
For context, although these numbers are not directly comparable to those above, an average of around 15,000 people have been granted asylum in the UK per year, over the last five years. This includes an average of around 4,300 Syrians per year.

Meanwhile a family from India who come here wanting to work for our NHS have a difficult time.

But how is this statement consistent with the borders being 'relaxed', which you claim in your next sentence?

[Mexicola]

Tell you what. I'll delete the posts for you, in exchange for you giving your head a shake, getting off your arse, holding your nose and voting on the 12th! Do we have a deal?

[Valotonin]

We certainly have a deal. There isn't much of a chance of displacing the Tories in this seat, but I will put my vote in regardless.

[Mexicola]

Keep my side of the deal!

[Valotonin]

Aye I will. As it goes, the damage Boris and his henchmen are doing to this country is enough to motivate me, really. That is real and provable damage rather than some distant speculation as well.

[realspiel]

Please everyone vote to get rid of this Tory government on the12th and hand the absolute shit head fraud Boris Johnson his arse on a plate. Fuck the racist tories and Farage.

Have we all forgotten we deserve better?

[Mexicola]

Amen. Get behind whoever is most likely to kick a Tory out where you live. If that means holding your nose, do it. All the matters right now is stopping these evil fuckers.

[vballs]

Its so fecking frustrating, just been talking to my colleaugue, he wants to vote conservative even though he dislikes Ballbag Borris simply becuase "I want brexit done, been goin on too long now"... Fucking hell man arghh! Why are there so many fucking thick idots like this. Think im gonna get sacked today.

[Valotonin]

Did anyone else see that clip in which Boris talks about the "inevitability" of inequality due to IQ differences? He has to go. Even if I am someone who isn't under the illusion of everyone being born the same and knows that different people are destined to have an affinity with different roles based on the way they were born, that doesn't imply that they are any less equal or undeserving of finances. Most of the hardest work known is the least well payed at the moment.

Boris just seems to be speaking of it in a way to suggest that he feels that the homeless are there by their own doing instead of the government's failure to ensure the safety and security of all of its citizens. Every time you go to the shops, a significant percent of what you spend goes to the government. Every time a homeless person goes to the shops, the same applies. What exactly are they paying for?

[IanRedpoint]

I had lunch with my father, my godmother and some other family friends yesterday. I told myself that I wasn't going to talk politics... but they brought it up. Spent almost the whole 2 hours debunking their ill-informed prejudices (Corbyn is a Marxist who wants to turn the UK into a Soviet state, the baby on the floor of Leeds Infirmary photo was faked... etc.).

The problem is the Daily Telegraph. Because it was once a reputable newspaper (albeit always one with a Tory editorial bias) they believe everything it says. Those days are gone. All it is now is the Express or the Mail with longer words.

I'm not honestly voting the way I want to today (Green) but for the party that has the best, although astonishingly slim, chance of hurting the incumbent Tory MP. They voted over 60% Leave round here so so I fear we're fucked anyway.

[Negamuse]

Voted labour, which is good because they're the second place in our seat anyway, so who knows. It's funny, I think there's cause to be a bit hopeful. But I live in a Tory heartland and driving round some places that were overwhelmingly *performatively* flying little blue signs this time last year, there were almost none. Obviously those won't have all just flipped to Labour. But I'm gonna say that it shows that a lot of people on that side are sick of the current lot too, and a demoralised support is a support that doesn't go out in the rain to vote. I guess we'll see how well this post ages in a few hours.

[Techboy]

fuk it, i voted labour. snp / labour swing seat at this point (well, labour for several decades before 2015), there were like 300 votes in it last time, so either way i'd feel good about it. if you'd telt me in 2014 i'd vote labour... particularly scottish labour who spent months sharing a platform with the tories to support british unionism... i'd have telt you to fuck off. but back then they were to the right of the SNP. now the SNP look like neolibs in comparison.

gotta ask myself, what would i rather live in - a socialist UK or a liberal scotland. at this point probably a socialist UK. of course. the whole point in supporting scottish independence may be that looking at england i truly deeply believe it's just not possible and there will be a conservative majority or a tory coalition tomorrow. if you all prove me wrong, well. it'll be a beautiful day.

(i guess i should add i'm a scottish green party member so obviously in any election where i can vote for them i do. our council elections use STV where you rank all candidates in order of preference. personally i would love to see this rolled out to all general elections. the key to decent democracy on this island is probably convincing both the left and right that we want this.)

[jcnporter]

I had lunch with my father, my godmother and some other family friends yesterday. I told myself that I wasn't going to talk politics... but they brought it up. Spent almost the whole 2 hours debunking their ill-informed prejudices (Corbyn is a Marxist who wants to turn the UK into a Soviet state, the baby on the floor of Leeds Infirmary photo was faked... etc.).

The problem is the Daily Telegraph. Because it was once a reputable newspaper (albeit always one with a Tory editorial bias) they believe everything it says. Those days are gone. All it is now is the Express or the Mail with longer words.

I'm not honestly voting the way I want to today (Green) but for the party that has the best, although astonishingly slim, chance of hurting the incumbent Tory MP. They voted over 60% Leave round here so so I fear we're fucked anyway.

I've always had a fair amount of respect for principled, small-c conservatives. A couple of my friends would fall into this category and journalists such as Peter Hitchens and Peter Oborne.
The Daily Telegraph would have been the natural broadsheet for such people, but it's incredible how quickly it has descended into toilet paper.

Here's Peter Oborne, former Telegraph journalist -

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/11/boris-johnson-destroy-britain-conservative-revolutionary-sect

[Techboy]

get yourselves to fuck

[Mexicola]

Heartbroken.
My country is fucked.

[Valotonin]

An overall majority.
...Really? Fucking really?
For Boris?!

Did they count the results backwards or something.