All the shy (embarrassed to say/admit it in conversation) Tory voters will get May over the line with a majority. Everybody knows it.

COYP

When it comes to Trump's opponents I think they just use the wrong strategy with him all the time. All this 'Trump's an idiot' doesn't help them. Instead a focus upon the policies and how their own are better would help them more.

Like you say with Trump and the republican's health bill...there are plenty of angles of attack.

Trump is a master at confrontation and bluster. Sure they can politically stand toe to toe with a puncher but it's generally not advised....Not unless you also have a politician who can generally hold their own doing that...otherwise it never crosses over.

I'm generally fascinated with how Trump is going to do...I want to see how American protectionism works....Will he actually do it or just strike 'better' deals ....America almost has the capacity for self reliance.

If a miracle happened and Corbyn won...a small part of me would be excited about it...despite all my defence and economic fears about him. What would be exciting is the completely different approach to everything.

I suppose...if nothing else...You can occasionally get that with politics.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

It sounds like you're about to start singing a 'John Lennon' song.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

This sums it up for me. The outlook, whoever wins, is utterly ghastly so the only real choice is which particular brand of ghastliness you can more comfortably live with. This is a game I choose not to play.

I won't be voting. My conscience simply won't permit it.

I don't ever remember moaning about May being unelected. She is as elected as any party leader can be: she won the support of Tory party members, so fair play.

If you don't think May called this because she was certain of a landslide then I can't help you. Why else would she call it now, rather than 6 months ago? Her stock was high, and she thought she'd be coronated. Any loss would be penance for such hubris. Democracy shoudln't ever be taken for granted.

If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4

No she didn't Leadsom pulled out before the members had a say, so she was elected by coronation, the very same thing she wrote an open letter in 2013 criticising Gordon Brown for and trying to goad him into a snap election. She's much less elected as a party leader than all of the others.

She should have called it prior to article 50 then it would really have been a Brexit election. This is not a Brexit election. The majority have now accepted Brexit and want to get on with it. Calling this election now was about nothing other than wanting to give herself a bigger majority and wiping out the opposition as an electoral force. She's tried to make this a presidential election but has made quite a poor fist of it so far. She believed she was so untouchable that she could fill her manifesto with unpopular and unfair policies and say virtually nothing about Brexit strategy.

A week is a long time in politics though and she could easily still get her landslide despite her deceit and hubris. Corbyn could make a hash of tonight's debate. The information we all get is from our own networks and from news outlets (i.e. second/third hand) so it's very hard to truly say how this is all playing out in people's minds and decision making across the country.

It's interesting to look at the breakdown of polling demographics that suggest that the biggest predictor of voting intention is age, which is also the biggest indicator of how likely someone is to vote. It's a much bigger divide now than ever before and a much bigger divide than social class.

I've not read anything that satisfactorily explains why. It will be interesting to see how this evolves in 10-20 years time as those in 18-25 age brackets arrive into the middle aged brackets.

This would perhaps suggest that it's the low(er) of turnout in younger (and BME) voters that will get May her majority.

People vote if they are interested in politics.

The older someone gets and the more sh1t they acquire the more likely they are in wanting to keep hold of it...ie income and assets....hence why more older voters turn to Tories.....The interest in politics ...when seen over large populations is....primarily self interest.

It's not going to change.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I'm voting Green, because they actually responded to local issues such as closures of the Arthur Hill Swimming Pool, Children centres (9 of the 13) and The After Dark. Which I supported. Also back in the day, I'm pretty sure I copped off with her (ironically at the After Dark). Active bunch our local Green and Councillors.

Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have ever really responded to any of these issues, or any emails I've ever sent them (well except one of the Councillors on the After Dark, who said I probably should contact the Greens).

Plus Rob 'Still campaigning after 12 years on the same third f**king Bridge' Wilson is a smug c**t who'd get a shoeing from Ghandi.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Interesting points. Why do other countries (Nordics and France for instance) consistently vote for much more socialist and higher tax, higher welfare, lower inequality governments in that case? It's perfectly plausible to argue that people can be better off in such states and so to vote for such a system would be in one's own interest. I totally get what you mean though. It's the Allais paradox; if you see more cash in your pocket day one and would rather have that than a better outcome on day 1001.