General British politics discussion thread

I think what you will find the Tory party are doing, is spinning as any party does after an election, people who do well play it up and people who do badly play down how badly they have done. This has something that has been going on for every election since the beginning of time. All parties do it. If you don't know that you're either totally naïve or are deliberately trying to spin.

And the most important people in an election are the voters and they have given their verdict which by the criteria specified by objective and independent analysts, is a disaster and even by the admission of the Daily Mail's own criteria is also a disaster. As much as you'd like to spin or use whataboutery, nothing can take away from that fact.

Labour are over egging how well they did because they need to do better in the North and the Midlands. The Greens and Lib Dems are talking a good talk but in reality they are benefitting from a protest vote or lent votes in many cases. The Tories are doing worse than their own biggest supporters in the media predicted and well renowned forecasters said they would. But they're never going to admit that, because lets face it, it hardly helps the party, the same way as the Lib Dems and the Greens are not going to admit that they have benefitted from protest votes.

Daily Express resorting to North Korea style propaganda is the worst take of them all. BBC Laura's take on the BBC news website is not really much better. Client journalism at it's finest.

Not sure how a loss of almost 500 seats can be described as being back on track, and being better than expected, when the Tory press was saying anything over 350 would be a complete disaster.

The Daily Mail once again are convinced they have the smoking gun against Labour.

Just because the visit itself was over, it doesn't mean he wasn't working after the visit was over, in the same way as last week I attended a work meeting off-site at a hired venue, but continued to work from a hot desk in the same building after the meeting part of my work had finished

Despite the Mail claiming he wasn't working after the Curry, at 10.13pm he was active on social media which surely has to be described as campaigning, and therefore work. Understandably, the Daily Mail, doesn't want to relay this fact to it's readers, because it is more interested in helping their paymasters, rather than actually presenting ALL of the story and letting their readers make their own mind up.

The problem for the Daily Mail right now, which has relied heavily on anonymous stories for it's coverage and has not been able to name any of them, now has started to contradict itself about what some of those sources have said and anonymous sources that conveniently support a certain narrative and changing stories really is not a good combination.

I wonder if the Mail will assist the police with their investigation and the cops are able to speak with these anonymous sources during their investigation, I mean, they are central witnesses to the case so surely the Mail will want these people to speak to the police to nail the evil lying man that they claim Starmer is.

These people who clearly believe that they have evidence need to tell everything they know the the police. If they don't, then one would ask why they are simply anonymous names in a Newspaper rather than people who are giving evidence to the police.