June 8th General Election

The difference in the polls seem to be down to young voters. Some pollsters such as YouGov, and I am guessing Survation, think they will come out in higher numbers this time based on what they've been told from those young people and also voter registration numbers. Other pollsters think their turnout will be largely the same as it has been.

I think the latter is certainly the case and I also think there will be a swing to the government over the next week. I would put money on a 80+ seat majority for the Conservatives based on the fact that I can't understand this actually happening.

Vote share is one thing but what seats will actually change hands for this to happen?

We can see a path to how Corbyn would do it though and that is via a unprecedented surge of young people going to the polls. In some ways it would be an epic blowback from the decisions the Tories made to disproportionately burden them with austerity but then everytime we expect this surge of young people voting it never happens.

One person told me today that when they were polled they said what they would prefer but come voting day they will vote for whats more sensible, it confirmed to me why I don't put much faith in the polls andvi think explains why they are often way off.

[Ramrod]

Taken from the comments in the Telegraph:

"Just imagine Corbyn, terrorist sympathizer, mingling with world leaders and dancing around Angela Merkel. Imagine Abbott ( a defeat of the British state is a victory for us all) in charge of the police and security services, Nicola Sturgeon backing Labour policy and Thornberry (remember that St George's flag tweet) as foreign secretary. And of course, least I forget McDonnell as chancellor (praising the bombs and the bullets of the IRA). It's ok he apologised. Good god."

Says it all, really

[MalteseFalcon]

I see after last night's attack on London, people have started a petition demanding the election be called off. Why let them ruin our democratic right to vote? That's giving in to their cowardly ways.

[ianch99]

I am not sure how this will impact the GE: on one hand, you could argue that the 20% cut in Police funding since 2010 was a mistake in these times of Islamic Terrorism together with the attacks that were not prevented and so the Tories could be impacted or you could argue that Corbyn et. al. are less trustworthy on matter of National Security and so Labour will be disproportionately hit.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by MarkC1984

I see after last night's attack on London, people have started a petition demanding the election be called off. Why let them ruin our democratic right to vote? That's giving in to their cowardly ways.

Indeed one should never give in to heinous evil.

Originally Posted by ianch99

I am not sure how this will impact the GE: on one hand, you could argue that the 20% cut in Police funding since 2010 was a mistake in these times of Islamic Terrorism together with the attacks that were not prevented and so the Tories could be impacted or you could argue that Corbyn et. al. are less trustworthy on matter of National Security and so Labour will be disproportionately hit.

Just to balance the statement on 20% frontline police cuts, the anti-terrorism funding was increased by 30% - it's important to view things in the round, not just on one thing.

In actual fact, it was 13% reduction in police numbers - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40060677

[ianch99]

Agreed but it is the front line policing that contributes the essential low grade intelligence needed to detect and track the people who are behind this evil.

In Manchester, a respected police Inspector resigned a number of years ago citing this very reason and addressed his resignation speech at a certain Mrs May, Home Secretary at the time:

Tory police cuts forced me to quit: Manchester inspector reveals effect of austerity policies on officers

Now he warns cutting community police will harm early steps to stop teenagers being radicalised.

He told the Home Secretary: “We run the risk here of letting communities down, putting officers at risk and ultimately risking national security.

“I’d ask you to seriously reconsider the budget and the level of cuts over the next five years.”

As for police numbers, here are the figures over the last few years:

https://fullfact.org/crime/police-of...s-have-fallen/



Other worrying reports from the biased left wing media:

From last year: Number of police marksmen down almost 20% despite 'Severe' terror threat

Forces have lost almost a fifth of their firearms specialists since 2009 with more than 200 leaving the role in the last year.

The total figure is currently 5,647, but this is down by 1,259 or 18 per cent over the past seven years, according to the Home Office.

The disclosure comes at a time when the police service's firearms strength has come under close scrutiny in the wake of terrorist atrocities in Europe.

From 2015: Tory cuts to police budget of 20% will leave public unprotected against crime and terror warns retiring senior officer

One way some forces are reportedly going to try to operate on smaller budgets is by reducing the number of officers.

Sir Hugh, who is due to stand down ahead of the creation of the National Police Chiefs' Council, told the Observer that taking police off the streets is a clear risk in the fight against extremism.

He said: 'The critical element, it seems to me, with dealing with people who will start to behave differently in their communities is the confidence in that community to speak to the local cops.

'If the cops aren't there and that relationship has not been built we won't get the intelligence.'

---------- Post added at 11:23 ---------- Previous post was at 11:22 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Just to balance the statement on 20% frontline police cuts, the anti-terrorism funding was increased by 30% - it's important to view things in the round, not just on one thing.

In actual fact, it was 13% reduction in police numbers - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40060677

BTW, I said it was 20% cut in Police funding not headcount ..

The disclosure comes at a time when the police service's firearms strength has come under close scrutiny

Perhaps the time has come for the majority of officers to have sidearms, certainly in urban areas.

I have just come back from the Canary Islands and all the officers you see over there have a sidearm, and no one even blinks at it, but if there were trouble, they could defend themselves, and anyone else.

All the offices injured or killed in London recently were unarmed, so unable to defend themselves or the public.

(Personally, I think our gun laws are far too restrictive anyway, if we ever had to defend ourselves against invaders we would have no chance, since most people would have no idea how to use weapons, nor any to use).

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Perhaps the time has come for the majority of officers to have sidearms, certainly in urban areas.

I have just come back from the Canary Islands and all the officers you see over there have a sidearm, and no one even blinks at it, but if there were trouble, they could defend themselves, and anyone else.

All the offices injured or killed in London recently were unarmed, so unable to defend themselves or the public.

(Personally, I think our gun laws are far too restrictive anyway, if we ever had to defend ourselves against invaders we would have no chance, since most people would have no idea how to use weapons, nor any to use).

Somehow l cannot see our woolly headed establishment ever allowing that to happen even though l think it should happen.

[gba93]

Originally Posted by Paul M

since most people would have no idea how to use weapons, nor any to use.

Thank God! Before you use that argument look at the USA - their "good men with guns" have done little to protect their citizens from the "bad men with guns".

I think guns risk escalating things where they don't need to be. I would increase the amount of armed police we have but I would want to keep the division between everyday police and armed police. The latter are specialist units and have the time and training that requires whereas in the US it's just one part of their job.

So increase, maybe dramatically, the number of armed police and have them deployed as a matter of routine in major areas/transport hubs/big events.

Our gun laws are stupid and no sensible police officer wants to join the armed units and can we blame them given the level of scrutiny and automatic blame that's thrown their way everytime there is a shooting that's why their numbers are falling. In the UK these days we shout about more protection and being happy with having a more routinely armed police until the public moves on from the latest attack and goes back to slamming the police when they shoot anyone. We need an attitude change in a few areas and personally i would welcome a relaxation of our gun laws to enable citizens to own and be able to use firearms in defence of themselves and others and it can be done in a way that we keep legal firearms out the hands of cowards who have no problem getting hold of them if they really want too anyway.

The reason the terrorists yesterday, and the one who attacked Westminster, used knifes is because it's hard to get guns in the UK. If you allow guns to be sold to civilians then terrorisrs, school shooters, thieves and gangs will be able to get them too. It clearly isn't easy to get them if you really want them because they are so rarely used in crimes.

Does anyone really think this country would be safer if there were more guns?

[Jimmy-J]

"Former Senior police officer says Government are Lying"