You name a hostile audience Corbyn has spoken to since the election was announced? Scottish Unions and the Teaching unions are hardly hostile - your support for Corbyn is noted?

Why does May need to even be out there - as the incumbent her priorities are different to that of Corbyn - but both are addressing very compliant audiences. Where has Corbyn addressed a very right audience?

Semantics - I'm not expecting May to go and speak at the Unite offices, but going to a factory after the workers have left and talking to your own entourage is a bit strange no?

Similarly I'm not expecting Corbyn to rock up at a bankers convention, but at least he's addressing people outside of his own staff. He was talking with NHS staff the other day.

So he was speaking to a group a people who he was saying that he was going to remove the shackles on their pay and that is really that different to May hand picking her audience - really?

Definitely, plenty of high earners in the NHS who would be wary of plenty of his policies. Granted the Tories are starving the NHS to make way for complete privatisation so maybe a tad more Labour friendly.

I'd imagine a poll of NHS employees would be massively pro Labour given the fact that the vast majority are not on high wages at all. Doctors and some administrators/managers might be on a lot but they'd be dwarfed by the number of people not in high earning roles.

There is a world of difference in speaking to a cherry picked audience, taken from the organisation that you are speaking to compared with "rent an audience" who dont even work for said organisation.

Do you actually think this is acceptable ?
In commerce, you could involve trading standards in such a fraudulent situation but,
you think its ok ???

I find that utterly incredible.

Many people laughed at Trump for his "fake news" outbursts but YOU are condoning it.
Sorry pal but, my standards are higher than that.

For the record, read my posts regarding Corbyn and you will see my opinions of him so, maybe i'm a little less myopic than you

A bad morning for both campaigns today; Diane Abbot fluffs her lines on LBC re the cost of Labour's extra police pledge, and May bans the media from another event, this time in Cornwall - so a local outlet blogs about it and it goes viral.

This is politics - MPs will never answer a question with straight answer - I am not surprised or put out by Mrs May having an invited audience - I would be very surprised if those attending Corbyn's pronouncements are not seriously vetted to ensure he get the reaction he is looking to portray to the media - its the same. Labour have seen what happens when you let them loose with the general public e.g. Brown in Rochdale.

These people are the lowest of the low I just think May is slightly better than Corbyn but its not saying a lot.

FFS, there is nothing wrong with an invited audience as long as we know that is what they are.
However, if the invited audience is pretending to be part of the work force, that is just wrong (unless the public are informed that its just "play acting".

Can you not see the difference



Your credibility is falling faster than Corbyns popularity.

I'm not sure it's quite the same; Mrs May is deliberately avoiding the public, managing the media to an unprecedented level, and refusing televised debates.

At least Corbyn is able to talk to normal people - he's far form a polished political performer, but he does at least seem willing to engage the electorate.

I am more realistic than you I suppose as I said these people are the lowest of the low and nothing they do surprises or upsets me. For me Corbyn will have had a hand picked audience - have Labour come out and said that - no but that is OK with you? The level of deception is on a par - both are equally guilty IMO.

If the Tories want to engage in the way they are good luck to them - personally I don't like it. We have two Labour MP's screw up Diane Abbot today and Dawn Butler when you see this stuff you can understand why the Tories try and keep it tight.

But nothing on the scale of the election fraud that see's 30 MP's facing charges - one of whom is Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary; and now May is being investigated in relation to her hedge fund hubby profiting from Brexit related activities.

I agree that politics is broadly a stinking mess in this country, and that Corbyn has a presentational problem, but he does at least appear to be an honest broker; if there was dirt of this nature on him, they'd have found it by now.

Amazing how Abbott makes a mistake and says 300k instead of 300m and its headline story at nearly every news agency. Tories are under investigation for widespread election fraud (hence the early call for election - after May categorically said she wouldn't before election fraud came to light) and it's swept under the carpet!

Not to mention the HSBC loans finding their way into Tory party coffers.... but no, the story is all about Abbotts poor interview preparation.

I agree about Corbyn but he is an idealist and he is beholden to the likes of McClusky so he will cause chaos and years of debt if he ever got into power. You look at their policies - spend, spend, spend if he thinks he can simply put CT up and increase the take he is bonkers.

The problem is it isn't £300m its closer to £500m when you take into consideration uniforms and training and this is where Labour are so off the pace - nothing is properly calculated why 10k way not 8 or 12 - its schoolyard stuff.

The election fraud is so small scale as not to be even worth bothering about its just a way of those on the left grasping at straws is it any different from what Labour were fined for?

The whole lot of them are not worthy of their status and as the expenses scandal showed they are vermin eating out of the trough.

Yeah - it only undermined the democratic process and bought an election; what's the big deal?

And just delve into the HSBC issue a little bit under your own steam; it's a classic example of the 1% looking out for each other - and further evidence, if more were needed, that the working classes in this country are treated with scorn and contempt by those who consider themselves entitled to lead.

Very well put Bren

No it didn't - that rubbish you think spending a few thousand extra was the difference between Amber Rudd winning/losing her seat - seriously?

Its like the Democrats saying the Russians influenced the vote and allowed Trump to win!!

In Bradford we had a scandal about postal votes and who is actually doing the voting - but Labour won all the wards so that is OK to rig the election in that way!!

I have no truck with any rule bending but it happens across all spectrum of society, the black economy in the country is huge and who would you say are the major benefactors to that - it certainly isn't the 1%, drug money in this country dwarfs anything that HSBC did. I think you would do well to consider the whole of society not just those who you think have privilege beyond where you think they should have.

Ah yes, you are going for the 2 wrongs make a right theory.

Are you saying that it's ok for the country's elite to help line each other's pockets because there are criminals making money out of drugs ???

If we dont protect those people at the bottom of the pile, they will be more likely to look for other ways to make a living, many of which may not be legal.
Just look across "the pond" and see what happens without a decent welfare system.
The city of Chicago has 10+ murders every week, mainly drug related and it barely gets a mention.
All that we see is the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and New York.

You seem to be advocating anarchy for the super rich, whilst, at the same time, beig happy to squeeze the life out of the poor folk at the bottom. Why ?

The national debt is currently horrific and increasing by over £5,000 per second. I doubt whether Corbyn would make things worse. Conservative governments have consistently borrowed more and at a faster rate than Labour ones.

Actually it was £182,000 in 33 constituencies, and there are 30 Tory MP's implicated; I think the electorate has a right to know if they may be voting for an MP who is facing criminal charges - don't you? Your belief in democracy may be suspended because some people are *real* criminals - but mine isn't.

It's academic now however, since Alison Saunders, the DPP, has been got at; she's said this morning that there'll be no announcement from the CPS until *after* the result of the election - how very convenient.

Small scale election fraud!?

Oh well that's fine then, shall we just turn a blind eye to corruption that doesn't meet our own bar for warranting attention.

As you say, all pigs in the trough but Corbyn's voting record is always in favour of the working class and against the interests of the super wealthy. He has also got a track record of speaking in favour of policies the benefit your average Joe. He's not the most polished fella, but compared with the wanton destruction of our services by May & Co - I can't vote for anyone else in good conscience.

So did Labour not get fined for the same thing?

As I mentioned postal voting is open to corruption - it should only be open to those who physically cannot get to a polling station e.g. UK citizens living abroad. Not for people you can't/wont/not allowed to go to the polling station on the day.

I agree Corbyn is a very idealistic politician would you prefer him running the country rather than May not a chance for me. You say destruction of public services the Tories are putting more money into health and education than anyone ever has. The issue is where do you stop and how do you fund it. Yes increase the tax take if you think putting up CT will yield more revenue and taxing the rich more unless its via PAYE will yield more I personally think you are wrong. Taxes have to be equitable or people will find a way of avoiding them.

£182k is peanuts in the grand scheme of things not a lot different to the irregularities in the Labour campaign spending during the same election - All the MPs implicated are known so the people voting for them will be able to make a judgement call on them.

Yes it is a relatively small amount of money overall - but the principal is important. And the HSBC dirty money issue is far from peanuts - and neither is the profit made by Mrs May's hedge fund husband on Brexit related activities.

But I guess so long as there are enough people like you prepared to overlook the excesses of the elite, they'll always get away with it and nothing will change.

Personally, I like to think that there's a better way - and Mrs May and her cronies will not offer anything other than further swingeing cuts to the things that less well off people rely on, whilst ensuring that for the privileged, the status quo remains.