We are going to bring things to a close here above the line now, but as mentioned you can continue the discussion in the comments. If you are just arriving, do look back at some of the highlights of the debate we’ve been posting in this space, including important points raised by readers as well as our columnists’ thoughts.
Many thanks for joining us and taking part.
Updated
'Corbyn has posed a challenge to the entire media establishment'
Gary is responding to some of your thoughts on media coverage of Jeremy Corbyn.
Here is his latest response below the line:
Guardian staff I hear you. Corbyn's election has posed a challenge to the entire media establishment, including The Guardian. These are debates we have in the paper all the time and while we're far better than any other broadsheet in terms of the range of voices, I'm not convinced we've got the balance right yet. But as well as people you disagree with, we'll keep publishing Paul Mason and occasional pieces by myself, Akala, Giles Fraser, Emma Rees, Joseph Harker, Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett, Matt Zarb-Cousin, Charlie Brinkhurst Cuff, Maurice Mcleod as well as pieces by shadow cabinet members including Angela Rayner, Diane Abbott, Emily Thornberry, Rebecca Long-Bailey - so not regular uncritical Corbyn bashing even if it's not quite the mix you're happy with
One more thought from Gary here – a reader asks:
If Corbyn had been afforded half the favourable media treatment that Cameron and May have received, would May be able to make up the 10% that Labour would be in front by?
Guardian staff Probably not. But then we knew that going in. The British media has a huge right-wing bias. Anyone on the Left who wants to make headway is going to have to find a way to deal with that.
Updated
Gary Younge is still reading your comments, and has another response here, regarding the narrowing of polls and reaction on the doorstep:
What do you make of the recent narrowing of the polls? Does this contradict anything you may have heard from Labour/Tory campaigners on the doorsteps?
Guardian staff Not all the polls are narrowing at the same rate. The truth is nobody really knows. It's very volatile. I've certainly seen and heard more Labour voters feel more confident about their vote and seen Labour support firm up. There are two key elements to the polls to bare in mind. The first is, assuming there is a Labour surge in voting intentions - will they actually vote. Alot of the focus has been on the young who don't have a particularly impressive record of getting out there. The second is will they vote in the right place. It's possible for Labour to get an impressive vote share but to run up majorities in places it already has. So it doesn't contradict what I've seen. But it's difficult to tell with any certainty what impact it will ultimately have.
That’s almost all we have time for in this space for now. Many thanks for joining us and adding your questions and comments. You can continue to discuss below, and we’re still collecting questions about the election via the callout referenced earlier. We hope to put these to other colleagues, including the team who put together the Election Daily podcast, who are looking forward to answering more of you.
'This has to be the vaguest general election in the history of general elections'
I would like to see a discussion about Brexit negotiation and differences in approach between our parties. Differences in terms of contents or wishlist what is being desired and difference in approach - confrontational and threatening tactics or not. Also, what do parties feel they are gaining with their approach.
Detailed discussion about Conservatives, since that has been their focus in this campaign and reason for elections: why do they think that their voters think it is a good idea to be secretive with goals and 'bloody difficult' in behaviors.
Also, Article 50 triggering with forgetting Gibraltar and trying to threaten with security cooperation.
I would like to see that too, but I think the fact of the matter is that nobody actually knows. The EU hold all the cards, so politicians are avoiding any kind of detail not because they really think it is harming their negotiating strategy and that it’s important to be secretive for that reason but because they know there’s a high likelihood that their “wishlist” is unlikely to come to pass, and they don’t want that thrown back in their faces.
This has to be the vaguest general election in the history of general elections, and the negotiations begin just over a week after the result. It’s a dispiriting business.
Smart work managing to get three questions in here, and neatly numbered too! Over to you, Rhiannon ...
Respect for you entering the lions den below the line Rhiannon. I notice that your colleagues that have been resolutely anti-Corbyn for the past 18 months have not ventured out.
I've got several questions
1. Do you think the Conservatives have actively sought to sabotage their own campaign. I get the feeling that they don't want to be in power and push through Brexit.
2. With regard to Corbyn's rather miraculous catch-up in the polls. Considering the polls have shown Corbyn to be massively unpopular (dispite racking up record support in the leadership contest and the Labour Party growing substantially) for the past couple of years do you think this massive catch-up is rather bogus? Are the polls being used to control political memes rather than reflect the voting intentions of the electorate? (tin hat turned to 9 and 3/4s :D)
3. So what is it going to be a May win, NOM or Labour win.
1. No – see the answer I give above. Never underestimate the ability of politicians to fuck things up for themselves!
2. This is an interesting one. There’s been a lot of anecdotal stuff around about Corbyn being extremely unpopular on the doorstep, but people I know who have been canvassing in Bolton, the North-East and Cheshire say that, while they expected rabid anti-Corbyn sentiment, this hasn’t really been the case at all. This is all anecdotal, of course.
I’m no expert in poll methodology but I think it’s unlikely that polling organisations would risk sabotaging their standing like that in order to swing a democratic election. I think the tide has been turning somewhat. Whether it’s enough is hard to say. Probably not, in my opinion.
3. May, but then I am an eternal pessimist and nothing in politics ever goes my way.
This reader refers back to Rhiannon’s earlier response, and has a question about voter apathy.
I am so used to things not going my way in politics that I refuse to get my hopes up (plus the polls aren’t looking great, though I can understand why people no longer pay much attention to those).
Do you think voter apathy is part of the problem? (The 'My choice won't matter anyway' attitude)
I get the feeling the Conservatives thrive on it.
Absolutely! But then I would never not vote.
I was talking to a friend who is 33 and has never voted yesterday. This time, he has registered, and is voting for Corbyn. This made me really happy, because he used to be in the “they are all the same, what’s the point?” category. The Tories definitely thrive on it, but I do hope this new Labour leadership has at least galvanised some people.
Gary Younge, who has been reporting from Harrow West as part of our Voices and Votes series, exploring six key constituencies across the country, is also below the line and has responded to this comment:
The overwhelming topic of conversation in relation to this election amongst my fairly wide circle of friends, colleagues, family, etc, has been about the lack of ANY candidate for PM that we even want to hold our nose and vote for. Most of these people, myself included, would normally vote Labour, pretty much without question. We can't be that unrepresentative but I don't see this reflected in the comment and analysis. What impact do you think this might have on results?
Here’s that response:
Guardian staff It's impossible to know how representative you might be. But in my reporting most regular Labour voters who were put off by Corbyn were sufficiently enthused by the manifesto and simultaneously repelled by what they regard as May's stumbles to put those concerns aside and vote Labour. The central reservation that remains, and could well be Corbyn's biggest problem, is that trouble people have imagining him as the chief negotiator for the country in Brexit. Even many people who voted Remain think they would rather have her do that than him.
'There are several PhDs to write on the politics of nuclear arms and the left'
Here’s another answer from Anne Perkins, to the question asked here:
With all the focus on 'affordability' from the opponents of the Labour manifesto, I'm surprised and a little disappointed that Corbyn has not pledged to cancelling hugely expensive white elephant projects such as HS3 and Hinckley Point, thereby saving billions. Cancelling Trident - another grotesque atavistic white elephant - might be too risky a pledge to make at the moment from a campaigning perspective, despite his beliefs, as the right wing media would go bonkers.
Guardian staff Hi hothead, I agree there has not been nearly enough debate around these major infrastructure investments - or the future shape of the economy more widely.
I can see that cancelling Hinckley Point C at this point would a) be immensely expensive economically and in terms of relations with China, and b) leave a gaping hole in future energy supplies for which no alternative plans currently exist. Still worth arguing about, though.
You mention HS3, the northern powerhouse link - I have doubts about HS2 although any long journey is a reminder of how antiquated the road network is becoming, and how much more investment is needed in rail. Just not this rail.
As for Trident.... there are several PhDs to write on the politics of nuclear arms and the left (probably have been dozens already). It's almost as divisive as it was in the 1980s: a willingness to accept the costs of the UK being a nuclear power still means recognising and appreciating our continuing importance as a (sort of) world power ; rejecting them can either be seen as act of self indulgent folly or a recognition that it is as you say a white elephant, a view shared by quite a lot of very senior military personnel. But it would, as you point out, be a moment for the right to smash through all previous records for moral outrage as well as causing what might again be an irreparable split in Labour
Considering her words and actions in the last few weeks, can you explore the hypothesis that Theresa May - having realized the path to brexit is akin to the path to doom - is in fact trying very hard to lose the election?
I don’t think this is the case, because I don’t think any politician would deliberately relinquish power. It just isn’t how they are built.
If we are to assume for a moment that this was the line of thinking, and that May was deliberately sabotaging the Tories’ chances of winning the election, then to what end?
I don’t think they secretly want to remain in the EU, that sounds like conspiracy theorising to me. So are you suggesting that you think they want Labour to take the baton, cock it up, and make the Tories a shoo-in for the next election? I think the much more simple answer is that they probably do realise, like you said, that Brexit is a doomed path, and that’s why she won’t be drawn on any real detail as to what the plan is, and so people are realising that there is very little behind her empty soundbites.
On this one, I’m falling on the side of accidental incompetence, rather than craven Machiavellian plotting.
A few of you have been thinking about what happens to various people after the election.
Here are some of Anne’s thoughts on this, and recent polling many of you are also discussing.
Guardian staff Interesting to read all the speculation about who would be in a Corbyn cabinet etc etc. Here is a bucket of icy water.
While the headline polls are narrowing, apart from YouGov they all show a significant Tory lead. YouGov's methodology is novel, and if you have time look at this https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/labours-reliance-on-non-voters-9f88c516310a by the political scientist Chris Hanretty which is a chapter and verse examination of the data.
It is also worth considering that there is usually a correlation between personal approval ratings of party leaders and the eventual outcome. I can't find an up to date tracker, but this http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/party-leader-approval-ratings-and-election-outcomes/ makes the point.
Again, the gap between May's approval rating and Corbyn's has shrunk (mainly because Corbyn wins friends when they get to know him, and less because May loses them) but it is still comfortably in May's favour. Anecdotally, people are hearing on the doorstep that whatever they think of the manifesto, voters don't have confidence in Corbyn as a leader. They do think May would be competent (I know, I know).
May's continuing appeal could be because of the lack of cut through of the things that preoccupy people like us who follow politics closely. It could be - to pick up on another comment - that elections are not won or lost during the campaign, and May began so far ahead that she had plenty of slack to lose.
All the same, it's an interesting thought experiment, composing Corbyn's first cabinet. Would McDonnell be allowed by the rest of the party to become chancellor?
Here’s an interesting exchange in response to a rather long comment based on the premise the Tories are “deliberately trying to lose the election”. Is it just a conspiracy theory, as some others have suggested below the line?
Guardian staff Occam's razor on this for me. They didn't expect to have to fight very hard to win this election, so weren't ready to fight very hard for it. And May's close-knit small team have not fought a national election before.
I agree that May's team probably thought that and rightly so (24 points lead is incredible, and even if the polls were 50% out it was still an extremely comfortable majority), and I'll accept that this small team around May is not experienced or competent enough. But, if that is the case, and not what I suggested, why risk an unnecessary election in the first place?
But still, this simpler explanation you provided, that they simply messed it up, -that has of course occurred to me as well and have considered up to a point- seems to come remarkably short in my opinion;
I believe that May (and her close team) probably didn't know what was going on behind the scenes and she was baited in (with those polls) to take the fall; Her and the small group of people were abandoned to fight this alone. After all the Tory party is a party hugely divided, despite appearances, and for those sidelined (that are probably the majority among them) my "conspiracy theory" of sorts would be a double whammy;
Is Corbyn dismissing the prospect of Labour making deals in the event of a hung parliament merely as an election tactic, or would he genuinely refuse help from the Lib Dems, SNP etc. even if was necessary to keep out the Tories?
There’s a slim chance there could be another one in September, if the election is close and the Lib Dems and SNP refuse to support a Labour Queen’s speech (which I believe Tim Farron has already ruled out). If they’re unable to form a government then there is a small chance we’ll be in for another one. But I hope to God this doesn’t happen, because personally I really don’t think that I could take much more.
Will we be eating humble pie this time next week?
Anne Perkins has joined us below the line now – we’ll be posting some of her answers to your questions shortly, but firstly a few points in response to some of your comments so far
Guardian staff Morning all,
Several of you have suggested that those of us who have been less than enthused by Jeremy Corbyn's leadership should be eating humble pie. So here's a pledge: if Labour has a majority - or is the largest party - on June 9th, I will be at the font of the queue for humbling.
Corbyn is an effective campaigner. He actually seems to like people, and to be interested in them, which is a lovely change from many party leaders although actually quite common among most MPs who do go into the job to try to make people's lives better. Even Tories.
But I am still unconvinced by his capacities as a leader, his ability to make decisions under pressure that are based on weighing a whole series of likely outcomes and consequences, his capacity for sustained hard work and careful thought, and his interest in restoring the coalition without which the party cannot function. I acknowledge he could have had more help, but at the same time, even those who don't share his politics but tried to work with him gave up in despair.
What I have loved about this campaign, and it is mainly due to Corbyn although May has also set out to rethink Conservatism, is the sense that politics could be different. I think it would be enormously difficult, economically, to give effect to many of Corbyn's manifesto commitments. A lot of it felt backward looking (why tuition fees, gift to middle classes, and not more for early years, essential for least well off, for example, and why go on giving rich pensioners cash they don't need) but I am genuinely thrilled at the sense of potential that is beginning to open up politics.
It’s a catchy line at least – but do you think it will happen? With all the talk of polls this week our colleague James Walsh has been asking not who you want to win the election, but who you think will win, and how. Here’s his callout if you’d like to get involved:
Rhiannon, do the people at the Guardian treat you any differently now that you've declared your love for Jezza?
Hi Boojay. Yes: I have to sit on my own in the canteen now.
Honestly though? Not really. The staff is made up of people with all kinds of different views and opinions. There are quite a few Corbyn enthusiasts amongst us, and quite a few people spoke up for him at the meeting we just had. Saying that, I am definitely on the more “lefty” end of the spectrum!
Updated
Why are issues that affect disabled and sick people(who are a large part of the electorate) not being covered by the parties?
I’ve seen Corbyn talk about it, and members of audiences have been raising it as well, but honestly? As someone with several disabled family members, I think it’s because what’s happening to disabled people is invisible to most of the electorate.
The Guardian has been working tirelessly to expose what is happening to disabled people – I’m a particular fan of Frances Ryan’s columns – but you’re unlikely to read about it in many other newspapers, and those are what most of the people in the country are reading. I think a large majority of people don’t know how bad it is, and then also you have the people who really don’t care – such has been the demonisation of people who claim benefits. It breaks my heart.
Are surprised at how well Labour appear to be doing and in particular how increasingly credible Corbyn is being seen as.
Yes! I am so surprised. As I wrote here yesterday, despite being a keen Corbyn supporter at the outset I had pretty much bought into the narrative that he was useless.
Whoever did his media training deserves a medal. I think it’s partly because he’s actually getting some airtime, so people can actually see what he’s about rather than just reading about him, but it’s also that he seems a lot calmer and more relaxed, with policies that he is passionately speaking up for.
'I have been pleasantly surprised by Corbyn'
Doris Johnson is another reader who asked a question in advance via our callout:
Having watched various TV debates and interviews, does the panel think that the standard of political discourse and their ability to answer a question honestly is at an all time low?
I’m not sure it’s all that much lower than 2015 – I’m recalling the attacks on Ed Miliband’s father as “the man who hated Britain”, the bacon sandwich brouhaha, and a thousand other petty little distractions from policy. Or indeed the awful lies during the referendum campaign.
But certainly Theresa May has given new meaning to the word “vague” in her responses, and that’s if she just turns up at all. We’re all used to political soundbites but this year has seen them repeated over and over at the expense of any real policy discussion – see May’s recent Plymouth Herald interview, which is so ridiculous it seems like a spoof.
Saying that, I have been pleasantly surprised by Jeremy Corbyn, who is at least making an effort to talk about inequality, food banks, and the NHS, while seeming a lot calmer and more measured than previously. Caroline Lucas and Leanne Wood have been good as always. The fact that the audience was openly laughing at Amber Rudd during the TV debates does seem to indicate that the public have had it up to here with political rhetoric, and are just looking for some honesty for a change.
Updated
Can the Prime Minister explain why her poll ratings have fallen so dramatically, and why there is talk of a Labour victory. Hasn't she made a huge mistake calling this eletio?
I think we’d all like her to explain that, but it’s difficult to hold someone to account when they are refusing to go on air or meet members of the general public. All part of her strategy, I’m sure.
Victor Draper asks:
Are we seeing the beginning of a new political surprise such as Brexit or the Trump victory?
If you’re talking about a Corbyn win, then obviously I would absolutely love that, but I am so used to things not going my way in politics that I refuse to get my hopes up (plus the polls aren’t looking great, though I can understand why people no longer pay much attention to those). Wouldn’t it be a shock to the system if it did happen, though? Anything is possible, but it doesn’t seem very likely.
The previous reader referenced the work John Harris has been doing up and down the country – here’s the latest film from him and John Domokos in Scotland.
'The simple fact is that the media is too London-centric'
Here’s another question from the comments:
As an Irish citizen, I feel like Northern Ireland is being referenced in this election pretty much only as a rhetorical stick to beat Jeremy Corbyn with. I feel this is pretty irresponsible.
Why is decent coverage of Northern Ireland so absent from mainstream UK discussions?
Looking forward to John Harris's video though!
I can see why you would be frustrated. I agree with you.
The simple fact is that the media is too London-centric. Look at how, after the Brexit vote, journalists were suddenly woken up to the fact that the North actually exists and that there are people there who want to be part of the discussion. I’m Welsh and the coverage of Wales has me in despair.
Re Northern Ireland, it is incredibly irresponsible, because the border is one of the most important aspects of the Brexit negotiations, and politicians are just burying their heads in the sand. I don’t think they have the remotest clue what to do about it.
Rhiannon is also posting in the comments here. A reader asks:
After six & a half years at the Home Office, is there one thing that Theresa May can point to as something she has done to improve anything at all under her remit?
She slashed police numbers, border force officer numbers, the passport fiasco, the immigrants go home vans etc, etc, etc.
Why hasn't anyone actually attacked her competency?
I agree – it’s frustrating, isn’t it? But I suppose it’s partly because the more authoritarian of her initiatives as home secretary were popular with voters (even Labour recognised this – remember the “Controls on immigration” mugs?)
This election campaign is interesting because it has been so focused on Brexit that May’s track record has been all but forgotten (with the exception of police numbers, which is something that has been raised). I would love to see her challenged over the conditions at Yarl’s Wood, for instance. That said she seems to be doing a rather good job of exposing her incompetence all by herself, which is enjoyable to watch.
'Is voting Green a wasted vote?'
First up, columnist Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett has been looking at some of the questions you are asking through our callout. Linda Seru asks:
Is voting Green a wasted vote? Or is it better to abstain rather than vote for a local Labour candidate who may have some chance of beating the longstanding Tory candidate?
Well, I can’t tell you how to vote. It sounds as though you aren’t going to vote Labour, despite them having a chance of beating the Tory candidate, which is what I would be doing, because I feel as though we have been given a clear choice between two very different societies and I feel passionately that Labour’s vision is the one of the two that’s better for the country.
But if you’re opposed to tactical voting then I think all you can really do is vote for the candidate whose policies that you agree with, and if that is the Green party candidate then that should be your choice. Even if they have no hope of winning at least you’ve voted for someone whose views you respect. But like I said, personally I would vote Labour in this situation.
Updated
Thanks for joining us and providing some questions for our colleagues to get stuck into. As well as our columnists responses to your debate points and questions, we’ll also highlight some of the best discussion you’ve been having below the line.
Updated
Post your questions now
After debates on the party manifestos in this space over the last few weeks (here’s our discussion on Labour and here’s the Conservative manifesto dissected by readers and writers) we’ve reached a critical point in campaigning – with less than a week before the nation heads to the polls on 8 June.
How do you think it’s been going? What do you make of recent polling that has surprised many? Did you watch the TV debates? Are there any issues that you feel haven’t been discussed as much as you’d like?
We’re inviting readers to join a team of Guardian columnists in this space to debate these points and more. You can ask your questions either in the comments below or via our dedicated callout and we’ll do our best to answer as many of them as we can, posting some of the most interesting discussions here between 11am-1pm (BST) on Friday.
Updated
Will the Guardian return to it's previous standard of regular uncritical Corbyn bashing once the election period is over?