Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

I agree that application for the "raffle" is at state level, so you can't get into the game unless youre in specific states. But that is so with most state lottires in USA int it? If you're in Missouri you can't enter the state lottery of Maine??

Beyond that anyone can surely sign up to the Tusk requirements and be eligible for the lottery without having to prove which way the voted which would violate one amendment or another??

Of course you’re right about ‘State lotteries’ but this isn’t a State lottery is it? It’s a politically motivated ‘lottery’ that is only open to registered voters in selected ‘swing states’ which I incorrectly numbered as 6 earlier. Actually there are 7/50 such states as I forgot Wisconsin…apologies for that.

In addition Musk is now giving voters in PA $100 for signing his petition plus a further $100 for any referred signatories. The amount elsewhere appears to be $47. Is that okay too?

Would you have been happy if either the Tories or Labour had been offering people money to win their support and incentivise them to vote accordingly in the ‘Red Wall’ seats at the last election? I doubt it…and I wouldn’t either.

[SithHappens]

It's more like someone like Lord Alli offering an incentive to voters, but irrespective of that it's not right in my opinion, but it's not exactly a surprise.

Musk seems set in Trump being president. Hopefully he can put him on a one way trip to Mars.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Of course you’re right about ‘State lotteries’ but this isn’t a State lottery is it? It’s a politically motivated ‘lottery’ that is only open to registered voters in selected ‘swing states’ which I incorrectly numbered as 6 earlier. Actually there are 7/50 such states as I forgot Wisconsin…apologies for that.

In addition Musk is now giving voters in PA $100 for signing his petition plus a further $100 for any referred signatories. The amount elsewhere appears to be $47. Is that okay too?

Would you have been happy if either the Tories or Labour had been offering people money to win their support and incentivise them to vote accordingly in the ‘Red Wall’ seats at the last election? I doubt it…and I wouldn’t either.

No I wouldn't be happy for what is clearly buying votes in this country or in USA for that matter - but USA do have a far dodgier history of voting malpractice. Doesn't make it right but a little more predictable perhaps. Trump's accusations vs Dominion voting machines may have been unproven but no smoke without fire?

[ramAnag]

No I wouldn't be happy for what is clearly buying votes in this country or in USA for that matter - but USA do have a far dodgier history of voting malpractice. Doesn't make it right but a little more predictable perhaps. Trump's accusations vs Dominion voting machines may have been unproven but no smoke without fire?

Pleased we agree. I don’t know enough about Dominion machines to comment. I believe the criticism has been discredited.

[swaledale]

No I wouldn't be happy for what is clearly buying votes in this country or in USA for that matter - but USA do have a far dodgier history of voting malpractice. Doesn't make it right but a little more predictable perhaps. Trump's accusations vs Dominion voting machines may have been unproven but no smoke without fire?

Actually in reality it is perfectly possible t ahve smoke and no actual fire, but I digress. Dominion actually reached a $787 million settlement over claims made about their voting machines by Fox News.

[MadAmster]

... and now, it's surfaced that Jenrick has accepted a £25K donation from a firm, Access Industries (UK) Ltd, 6th floor, Marble Arch House, 66 Seymour Street, London W1H 5BT, owned by a sanctioned oligarch.

That Rizla paper is still the right thickness.

[Trickytreesreds]

... and now, it's surfaced that Jenrick has accepted a £25K donation from a firm, Access Industries (UK) Ltd, 6th floor, Marble Arch House, 66 Seymour Street, London W1H 5BT, owned by a sanctioned oligarch.

That Rizla paper is still the right thickness.

I agree completely. Remember when they leave the commons, they all mix and drink like old chums

[Andy_Faber]

In the Labour Party manifesto they stated ‘we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT.’ That’s a direct lift from the manifesto, no rewording by me

This mornings news suggests they will

If they do, logic suggests they have lied their way to an election win just as much as the Leave campaign lied their way to Brexit

I repeat my mantra, ‘there are no clean hands in politic

[swaledale]

In the Labour Party manifesto they stated ‘we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT.’ That’s a direct lift from the manifesto, no rewording by me

This mornings news suggests they will

If they do, logic suggests they have lied their way to an election win just as much as the Leave campaign lied their way to Brexit

I repeat my mantra, ‘there are no clean hands in politic

Well if you live in the real world and not in some fantasy created by yourself, you'd realise that indeed there are no clean hands in politics, but that's partly because the majority of voters don't like reality and partly because to achieve any thing a range of vested interests have to be at least partially satisfied for anything to happen. Not to mention with the Labour party a level of hostility, scrutiny and indeed absolute falsehoods being constantly pushed out by the largely right wing media and associated internet sources and think tanks. Even the apparently "left wing" BBC is focusing on stuff that is largely irrelevant but apes the right wing media attacks.

Now of course you are being disingenuous because in the Manifesto, Labour had a "get out" which was the phrase "working people". Now ambiguous as that is it does mean your assertion that they lied is not true and certainly not anywhere near the total lies that the Leave Campaign put out, which were complete untruths.

As for why your feeling aggrieved, mm I'd hazard a guess that you might end up paying a bit more tax, as indeed might I. But there again I wasn't so naïve as to believe that the disastrous state of the country could be resolved without some tax rises somewhere.

Of course, Labour could reverse much of the economic damage and encourage growth by re-joining the customs union and also the single market, though the latter would mean freedom of movement which would spark howls of betrayal from the gammons, even though net migration has through necessity risen since Brexit.

[Geoff Parkstone]

It never fails to amaze me how politicians can't manage the basics of due diligence in the rush to grab cash. Surely a simple rule of thumb should be that if you can't identify the beneficial ownership of a corporate donor, just say "no"