Looking at the regional breakdown of tonight's Comres poll the Tories have a huge lead in the South (albeit this includes London), 45% to Labour's 27% and in the Midlands where they lead on 50% to Labour's 24%. In the North the Tories and Labour are tied on 40% each. Tories lead with ABs, C1s and C2s and the over 45s. Labour lead with DEs and 18 to 44 year olds
By contrast, 57% either agree with the government on tax credits or are neutral / don't know. That's enough. You'll never persuade everyone and realistically, you don't need to.
LMAO, taking "don't know" to mean tacit agreement is a new peak of spin even by PBTories' standards. By that logic, I might as well say 60% of people think Corbyn is a strong leader.
If there is a prize for pb stupidity, then I'm afraid it must go to lefties who support Corbyn in the face of truly catastrophic polling, like this.
I don't get it. You're clearly not an actual moron, yet you express apparently moronic opinions. Corbynism is a most peculiar pathology.
It's a desire for ideological purity. Although many on the left go on about the Nasty Tories' ideological need to destroy anyone poorer than them, to wipe their shoes on the frozen hair of homeless people, and to make the world's most EVIL baby purée, the truth is that the left is far more ideological than the right.
In the UK at least.
It's why NPXMPMPMPXX and others are supporting Corbyn: they never really lost their ideology, however perverted and twisted that ideology is.
It's why leftists can go around saying - and excusing - all the things we have seen and heard recently, such as the spitting. It's okay because their hideous and bankrupt (in every sense of the term) ideology allows it.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
I'm surprised more aren't against cutting the tax credits. I still think a tinkering to try to avoid a PR mess is coming, but perhaps there is more scope than I thought for pushing ahead.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
Generally I would say the European Left is more ideological than the European right, whereas in the US it is the right which is more ideological than the left
That seems plausible to me. I'm yet to be convinced this government is as ideological as is claimed - there seems a lot of scaremongering about what this first all-Tory government might get up to, and also wishes from the right on what it should do, and the reality still seems pretty standard with a dusting of ideology as per usual - but in general, at the present time at least, the Left are being open about sticking to ideology (not that it need be consistent ideology IMO, but then the Right hardly have that either), but the Right in the US seem to put their desire for purity to shame by comparison. Give it a few more months and perhaps the Tories will slip and reveal an uncompromising ideological basis, but given the Cameroons are currently dominant, for a time, I don't think they can be accused of that at present - it's been a key complaint against him from his own side for a long time, can they have been wrong the whole time?
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
What about ideological lefties such as Corbyn, who found it perfectly reasonable to befriend terrorists who not only attempted to kill Thatcher and the government, but many innocent civilians as well? And that's just one small part of his hideous ideology.
"Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded."
Rubbish. Absolute, utter rubbish.
But if you believe that, then surely you must also believe that Labour are showing how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector needs to be shredded, and anything related to the state is amazing and wonderful ?
I rest my case.
I didn't really say the Left weren't ideological; I simply said the Right were just ideological as them. Despite your 'utter rubbish' retort I stand by my words, and I agree that the exact same in reverse applies to Labour.
The whole cemetery worth of skeletons doesn't seem to have provoked Labour MPs into action - it's all so surreal.
Any other leader of any party bar would've been forced out for just one or two of them - Jezza has coffins worth and somehow it's just reset the unacceptable limbo bar to under the barrel.
I honestly can't comprehend it. Even being found in bed with a dead boy wouldn't change things. Watson would find a way to blame Murdoch for it.
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
All Blax are in a different class, playing a different game.
How do they do it? Year after year. It's a fascinating phenomenon.
Only Oz can possibly stop them.
So rugby's not my sport, but I guess it's because they play a very aggressive style and - importantly - all of their domestic teams I guess have a similar philosophy. It's like they have a conveyor belt of players ready to come into the national team.
Must be something in that, but it doesn't seem like an entire explanation. There is some psychology at work. There must be. Especially when you see the disparity in resources. There are possibly more people who've played rugby in England than actually live in New Zealand
Rugby is the religion in New Zealand, it is the one thing they lead the world in so that is not surprising!
A lot of teams must be beaten before they walk on the pitch. It's a bit like Barca in soccer at their peak under Pep. I was lucky enough to see that team twice at Arsenal and it was like they were playing a different game...yet we somehow didn't lose either home game. Such teams are often so used to dominating that they can find it hard to adjust if an opponent has some success against them.
Indeed, France have had some success against New Zealand before but they seem to have erased all that tonight. If New Zealand win this year they will have 3 World Cups, more than any other team, which would entrench their position as the best rugby nation. Mind you the same could be said of S Africa or Australia so a lot to play for
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
Generally I would say the European Left is more ideological than the European right, whereas in the US it is the right which is more ideological than the left
I wasn't thinking of Europe incidentally, more just the British Left/Right. On the European Right, those within Eastern Europe for example are definitely very ideological. In Germany, on the other hand I'd agree the Right there aren't as ideological as the Left.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
What about ideological lefties such as Corbyn, who found it perfectly reasonable to befriend terrorists who not only attempted to kill Thatcher and the government, but many innocent civilians as well? And that's just one small part of his hideous ideology.
"Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded."
Rubbish. Absolute, utter rubbish.
But if you believe that, then surely you must also believe that Labour are showing how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector needs to be shredded, and anything related to the state is amazing and wonderful ?
I rest my case.
I didn't really say the Left weren't ideological; I simply said the Right were just ideological as them. .
In the sense that I don't think either is, in the usual times (ie not now, given Corbyn and co), that ideological at all, I'd be inclined to agree in part. It seems like when they are most ideological parties might do their best to say they are not, and when they are not ideological, their opponents do their best to pretend they are.
In both being ideological is portrayed either offensively or evaded defensively as doing stupid things, so I wonder why some on the extremes care about ideology at all if that is what being accused of being so inclined is seen as. I guess it gives some loose identity to believe it is more important than it is.
I'm surprised more aren't against cutting the tax credits. I still think a tinkering to try to avoid a PR mess is coming, but perhaps there is more scope than I thought for pushing ahead.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
Generally I would say the European Left is more ideological than the European right, whereas in the US it is the right which is more ideological than the left
That seems plausible to me. I'm yet to be convinced this government is as ideological as is claimed - there seems a lot of scaremongering about what this first all-Tory government might get up to, and also wishes from the right on what it should do, and the reality still seems pretty standard with a dusting of ideology as per usual - but in general, at the present time at least, the Left are being open about sticking to ideology (not that it need be consistent ideology IMO, but then the Right hardly have that either), but the Right in the US seem to put their desire for purity to shame by comparison. Give it a few more months and perhaps the Tories will slip and reveal an uncompromising ideological basis, but given the Cameroons are currently dominant, for a time, I don't think they can be accused of that at present - it's been a key complaint against him from his own side for a long time, can they have been wrong the whole time?
Indeed, I still would just about favour Cameron and Hillary to be PM and President by January 2017
I think the key point is that Boris isn't THAT far ahead of Osborne.
MPs will go for Osborne (*) as long as they don't think he is a significant negative.
(*) By go for Osborne I mean not let Boris into the final two.
Osborne's numbers look OK given he has four years to mature / grow into the role / do the things that will help him settle into the public's mind as the next PM.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
England is still the one northern hemisphere nation to have won a rugby world cup, on this evidence I think it will stay that way by the end of the final
The amazing thing is that notwithstanding the tax credit problems, the Junior Doctors dispute, Redcar and steel making, sunday opening, etc, Labour are if anything going in reverse. There must come a time when a large number of labour MP's rebel on an important vote and keep rebelling until Corbyn's authority is shot to pieces.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
They will not have the attack to live with the Australian defence. They might win a penaltyfest.
Farron really needs to get a move-on with the Lib Dems. He's a leader, and should be leading. Instead, he's invisible. (Annoyed as I backed him for leader two or three years ago, and I'm starting to fear I was wrong).
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
Generally I would say the European Left is more ideological than the European right, whereas in the US it is the right which is more ideological than the left
I wasn't thinking of Europe incidentally, more just the British Left/Right. On the European Right, those within Eastern Europe for example are definitely very ideological. In Germany, on the other hand I'd agree the Right there aren't as ideological as the Left.
Yes I agree. It would be fair to say Europe has a far right and anti immigrant right, Front National, Alleanza Nazionale, PVV, the Swedish Democrats, even UKIP and the AfD which has never had as strong a presence in the US. The US right is more anti state and socially conservative, populist anti immigration campaigns from the likes of Pat Buchanan or David Duke have never really had as much traction, though Trump is sometimes trying a similar platform
Farron really needs to get a move-on with the Lib Dems. He's a leader, and should be leading. Instead, he's invisible. (Annoyed as I backed him for leader two or three years ago, and I'm starting to fear I was wrong).
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
The findings as a whole show labour as a busted flush. The regional leads to the tories are impressive and even in the north they are level with labour. Corbyn needs to go for the sake of a genuine opposition party
Farron really needs to get a move-on with the Lib Dems. He's a leader, and should be leading. Instead, he's invisible. (Annoyed as I backed him for leader two or three years ago, and I'm starting to fear I was wrong).
Seems a reasonable policy, but granted it's not a huge vote winner among groups likely to vote much I suspect.
It's the classic case of what the policy says about the party. I happen to think that legalising cannabis would be okay (in fact, I couldn't care less). But it's symptomatic of their priorities.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
New Zealand are a unique force.
e.g. only three teams have ever topped the rugby world rankings - NZ, SA, and England.
NZ have been top for more than 80% of the time. This is unprecedented in any major sport.
England need to rediscover whatever theyhad when Woodward was in charge, when they learned - for a few years - to boss the Southern Hemisphere. Only England and France have the resources to do this. But it should be do-able.
Each country will only produce a very small number of international level athletes. In England they are spread across probably more sports than any other country in the world. There is almost no sport we Brits don't play.
In NZ these athletes play rugby. If they are not strong enough they might be given a cricket bat or sent to run around the track but the big and the strong play rugby.
The size of the English population and their apparent resources is somewhat illusionary.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
What about ideological lefties such as Corbyn, who found it perfectly reasonable to befriend terrorists who not only attempted to kill Thatcher and the government, but many innocent civilians as well? And that's just one small part of his hideous ideology.
"Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded."
Rubbish. Absolute, utter rubbish.
But if you believe that, then surely you must also believe that Labour are showing how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector needs to be shredded, and anything related to the state is amazing and wonderful ?
I rest my case.
I didn't really say the Left weren't ideological; I simply said the Right were just ideological as them. Despite your 'utter rubbish' retort I stand by my words, and I agree that the exact same in reverse applies to Labour.
Would you not admit to a wee bit of hyperbole in "this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded"?
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
Anything to avoid reality - I know you don't support Corbyn - but you might as well you'll be talking up demos and twitter next.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
By contrast, 57% either agree with the government on tax credits or are neutral / don't know. That's enough. You'll never persuade everyone and realistically, you don't need to.
LMAO, taking "don't know" to mean tacit agreement is a new peak of spin even by PBTories' standards. By that logic, I might as well say 60% of people think Corbyn is a strong leader.
If there is a prize for pb stupidity, then I'm afraid it must go to lefties who support Corbyn in the face of truly catastrophic polling, like this.
I don't get it. You're clearly not an actual moron, yet you express apparently moronic opinions. Corbynism is a most peculiar pathology.
I don't think that's true. It's a different world-view. Polls measure popularity with the electorate. Supporters of Mr Corbyn aren't concerned with what the electorate thinks of him - it's his world-view that enthuses them.
BTW - hilarious the way the thread header basically ignores all the key messages of the poll to focus on the Tory 'negatives' - it's like Don Brind on steroids.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
New Zealand are a unique force.
e.g. only three teams have ever topped the rugby world rankings - NZ, SA, and England.
NZ have been top for more than 80% of the time. This is unprecedented in any major sport.
England need to rediscover whatever theyhad when Woodward was in charge, when they learned - for a few years - to boss the Southern Hemisphere. Only England and France have the resources to do this. But it should be do-able.
If New Zealand win this World Cup they are the undisputed champions of world rugby union, 3 world cups and 2 back to back
Looking at the regional breakdown of tonight's Comres poll the Tories have a huge lead in the South (albeit this includes London), 45% to Labour's 27% and in the Midlands where they lead on 50% to Labour's 24%. In the North the Tories and Labour are tied on 40% each. Tories lead with ABs, C1s and C2s and the over 45s. Labour lead with DEs and 18 to 44 year olds
Do corbynistas care? They wish to take over the labour party. They will be interested getting to 2020 so they can deselect the MPs they hate. Once that is done they then can dictate the candidate to rep!ace Corbyn when he decides to retire as leader. I am pleased if I opened a discussion on the last thread about if they could replace Corbyn before the election. My take on the balance of it is that Corbyn would automatically stand even if someone opposes him. So effectively labour are stuffed. They will be taken over by CND/Stop the War uber lefties. I am pleased because this surely has betting connotations. Just how realistic is it that Corbyn will be replaced? Which is more important to Corbynites, winning in 2020, or surviving to be able to take over the party?
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
Anything to avoid reality - I know you don't support Corbyn - but you might as well you'll be talking up demos and twitter next.
Oh come on felix. Anything remotely critical of the Tories/unfavourable comments to them you probably don't think is reality. Have you ever disagreed with the Tories on anything, ever?
@MyBurningEars It's a bit hyperbolic yes, but the gist of it I stand by.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Lacking additional padding like American Football, surely an upper limit will be reached, physically, in terms of what can be handled? We may be approaching it, the pitch is full of man mountains, but at some point someone would be too large to be of use, or cause everyone else to be too fragile, I'd have thought.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
I think SeanT may call for the return of Gladitorial arenas - in fairness, it does look cool in the movies.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Lacking additional padding, surely an upper limit will be reached, physically, in terms of what can be handled? We may be approaching it, the pitch is full of man mountains, but at some point someone would be too large to be of use, or cause everyone else to be too fragile, I'd have thought.
Cut down the number of substitutes that can be used. It would lead to lighter fitter players able to run for the 80+ minutes. Maybe just 3 subs?
Meh, ComRes always show massive Tory leads; they've shown Tory leads of around 11 - 14 since May this year after their methodology change. What'll be more interesting is to see the VI of other pollsters.
By which you mean the other pollsters who've not changed their methodology since getting the GE so wrong.
Just because ComRes have changed their methodology doesn't mean their findings are right, either. Nearly all pollsters did some methodology changes post 2010 after getting LD VI wrong, it didn't help them when it came down to 2015 though.
Anything to avoid reality - I know you don't support Corbyn - but you might as well you'll be talking up demos and twitter next.
Oh come on felix. Anything remotely critical of the Tories/unfavourable comments to them you probably don't think is reality. Have you ever disagreed with the Tories on anything, ever?
@MyBurningEars It's a bit hyperbolic yes, but the gist of it I stand by.
I disagreed on the anti-gay bias - but they listened and are now as near perfect as can be
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
New Zealand are a unique force.
e.g. only three teams have ever topped the rugby world rankings - NZ, SA, and England.
NZ have been top for more than 80% of the time. This is unprecedented in any major sport.
England need to rediscover whatever theyhad when Woodward was in charge, when they learned - for a few years - to boss the Southern Hemisphere. Only England and France have the resources to do this. But it should be do-able.
If New Zealand win this World Cup they are the undisputed champions of world rugby union, 3 world cups and 2 back to back
ie ... Effectively that is 3 teams. They look streets ahead of most teams. The final will tell.
Looking at the regional breakdown of tonight's Comres poll the Tories have a huge lead in the South (albeit this includes London), 45% to Labour's 27% and in the Midlands where they lead on 50% to Labour's 24%. In the North the Tories and Labour are tied on 40% each. Tories lead with ABs, C1s and C2s and the over 45s. Labour lead with DEs and 18 to 44 year olds
Do corbynistas care? They wish to take over the labour party. They will be interested getting to 2020 so they can deselect the MPs they hate. Once that is done they then can dictate the candidate to rep!ace Corbyn when he decides to retire as leader. I am pleased if I opened a discussion on the last thread about if they could replace Corbyn before the election. My take on the balance of it is that Corbyn would automatically stand even if someone opposes him. So effectively labour are stuffed. They will be taken over by CND/Stop the War uber lefties. I am pleased because this surely has betting connotations. Just how realistic is it that Corbyn will be replaced? Which is more important to Corbynites, winning in 2020, or surviving to be able to take over the party?
It will take something like Labour coming third in a by-election behind UKIP for any challenge to Corbyn to have a chance of succeeding, much as the Tories coming third in Brent did for IDS.
If your proposition were to come true and Corbynistas lose in 2020 but nonetheless get one of their own to succeed Corbyn a realignment in British politics is inevitable. New Labour types will form a new SDP with the LDs and post EU ref the anti EU Tory right may join up with UKIP so we end up with potentially 4 major parties (5 including the SNP) rather than 3
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
But not an afternoon of great college football games, I note. Significant wording? )
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
New Zealand are a unique force.
e.g. only three teams have ever topped the rugby world rankings - NZ, SA, and England.
NZ have been top for more than 80% of the time. This is unprecedented in any major sport.
England need to rediscover whatever theyhad when Woodward was in charge, when they learned - for a few years - to boss the Southern Hemisphere. Only England and France have the resources to do this. But it should be do-able.
If New Zealand win this World Cup they are the undisputed champions of world rugby union, 3 world cups and 2 back to back
ie ... Effectively that is 3 teams. They look streets ahead of most teams. The final will tell.
At some point their dominance must end. At some point.
There are only 5 teams in 'World rugby' NZ, Australia, South Africa, British Lions and France (on a good day). The rest are just making up numbers. That includes the home unions.
The 'world cup' is an illusion. In respect of American Football I did notice remarkable upper body grappling strength and technique from Canada and USA. Pacific Island backs did show a distinct ability to break the first tackle.
This now is not embarrassing for France , its for the northern hemisphere.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
But not an afternoon of great college football games, I note. Significant wording? )
nope - there are some great games between ranked teams today. 7 Michigan State at 12 Michigan is on now, as is 10 Alabama at 9 Texas A&M. There are more good games which will end about 1.30am tomorrow.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Not trolling, just stating a fact. American Football is embarrassingly dull and foolish in comparison to rugby played this well.
Of course - this is rugby union at its very best. Most rugby is not this fluent, skilfull and compelling.
I remember in the early 80s, after being inspired by a grand slam by Scotland, going to watch the FPs of my former school play.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
No, the difference is that conservative economics work and socialist economics does not. I don't mean to come across as ideological saying that, but the economic records of the Tories and Labour in power ade very clear.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
I think the key point is that Boris isn't THAT far ahead of Osborne.
MPs will go for Osborne (*) as long as they don't think he is a significant negative.
(*) By go for Osborne I mean not let Boris into the final two.
Osborne's numbers look OK given he has four years to mature / grow into the role / do the things that will help him settle into the public's mind as the next PM.
That's how I'd interpret it as well. Osborne's stock is rising and Johnson's is fading, so the gap could be closed further. A 6% lead (if confirmed by other polls), probably isn't even wide enough to be used as a plus point for Boris.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
Yes, it refers to a sport being played ON feet, as opposed to on horseback.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
There is a lot more kicking in Rugby, all throughout the game, however the general point stands.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
No, the difference is that conservative economics work and socialist economics does not. I don't mean to come across as ideological saying that, but the economic records of the Tories and Labour in power ade very clear.
Conservative economics worked when Black Wednesday happened? Or when Callaghan inherited a 800m deficit from the previous Conservative government?
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
Ack, we could have four Southern hemisphere teams in the semis.
Ugh
A surprising lack of confidence in Scotland, there.
I work with a Scottish rugby fan.
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
What worries me is that Australia will be watching this and saying, yeah, we can do that.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
New Zealand are a unique force.
e.g. only three teams have ever topped the rugby world rankings - NZ, SA, and England.
NZ have been top for more than 80% of the time. This is unprecedented in any major sport.
England need to rediscover whatever theyhad when Woodward was in charge, when they learned - for a few years - to boss the Southern Hemisphere. Only England and France have the resources to do this. But it should be do-able.
If New Zealand win this World Cup they are the undisputed champions of world rugby union, 3 world cups and 2 back to back
ie ... Effectively that is 3 teams. They look streets ahead of most teams. The final will tell.
It looks like a New Zealand v Australia final, which New Zealand should win
*wonders if I can do a morning thread which features the words, "Bishops Bash Cameron"*
Cameron embarrassed about Bishop Bashing?
Bishop Bash Cameron leave him feeling like a pig at Piers Gavelston initiation ceremony.
Makes me wonder what sordid happenings occur at a Bishop's Bash.
Have you seen the episode of Blackadder with the Bishop of Bath and Wells?
Never have I encountered such foul, mindless perversity. Have you considered a career in the church?
Have I seen it?
"You see, I am an enormous pervert. Animal, vegetable or mineral, I'll do anything to anything" "Fine words for a Bishop. Nice to see the Church speaking out for a change on social issues"
It's probably the case that most voters would be unable to name the current Chancellor of the Exchequer and have never heard of George Osborne. In such circumstances it is hardly surprising that they prefer Boris Johnson as PM who they are far more likely to have heard of.
*wonders if I can do a morning thread which features the words, "Bishops Bash Cameron"*
Cameron embarrassed about Bishop Bashing?
Bishops Bash Cameron leave him feeling like a pig at Piers Gavelston initiation ceremony.
Even tho I am a regular churchgoer, the fact that Dave has ignored the bishops means he has gone up in my estimation.. Now if the bishops actually did something about looking after their flock so to speak rather than involving themselves in politics, the C of E would be in a much better place.. .
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
No, the difference is that conservative economics work and socialist economics does not. I don't mean to come across as ideological saying that, but the economic records of the Tories and Labour in power ade very clear.
Although in the US the Democrats have tended to produce more surpluses than the Republicans, which reinforced the point that in Europe it is the left which is ideological for more spending, in the US it is the right who are ideological for tax cuts
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
Yes, it refers to a sport being played ON feet, as opposed to on horseback.
Rubbish! What sports are played on horseback, save for Polo?
*wonders if I can do a morning thread which features the words, "Bishops Bash Cameron"*
Cameron embarrassed about Bishop Bashing?
Bishop Bash Cameron leave him feeling like a pig at Piers Gavelston initiation ceremony.
Makes me wonder what sordid happenings occur at a Bishop's Bash.
Have you seen the episode of Blackadder with the Bishop of Bath and Wells?
Never have I encountered such foul, mindless perversity. Have you considered a career in the church?
Have I seen it?
"You see, I am an enormous pervert. Animal, vegetable or mineral, I'll do anything to anything" "Fine words for a Bishop. Nice to see the Church speaking out for a change on social issues"
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
No, the difference is that conservative economics work and socialist economics does not. I don't mean to come across as ideological saying that, but the economic records of the Tories and Labour in power ade very clear.
French have the right idea; Only way to win this is run it, outrageously.
Great game - again! This World Cup has been remarkable. Rugby has hugely improved as a spectacle.
This is a great match and there have been a few such matches but rugby has some serious problems. The number of serious injuries in this WC is unacceptable. The rules were not designed for 18 stone men running at each other at 20mph. Sooner or later someone is going to be killed doing this.
Feck it. Let em die. It's great sport.
Compare this gloriousness to the turgid idiocy of American Football. Pah.
I'm not going to bite this time
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
TRUE FOOTBALL should be played with the FEET
Rugby football is not played with the feet any more than American football.
There is a lot more kicking in Rugby, all throughout the game, however the general point stands.
Punts, kickoffs, extra points - I don't believe the point stands at all. Texas A&M have had many '3 and outs' - punts - as the Tide have held them today. And I say that as a rugby fan.
I don't agree the Left are more ideological than the Right; both sets are pretty ideological. Certainly between 1997-2005, the Conservative party clung to Thatcherism like an umblical cord clings to a womb. Arguably, the Tories in their first few months in government alone have shown how very ideological they are; with this awfully simplistic view that anything related to the private sector is amazing and wonderful, and anything related to the state is awful and needs to be shredded. The difference, the Tories have a electable face to put on their ideology in David Cameron, and the common sense to conceal some of the more undesirable parts of their party. Labour doesn't.
No, the difference is that conservative economics work and socialist economics does not. I don't mean to come across as ideological saying that, but the economic records of the Tories and Labour in power ade very clear.
Although in the US the Democrats have tended to produce more surpluses than the Republicans, which reinforced the point that in Europe it is the left which is ideological for more spending, in the US it is the right who are ideological for tax cuts
I'm not sure I'd agree - the US seems to do best with divided government: i.e 1 party runs Congress and the other occupies the WH.
Comments
6% of 2015 Labour voters would now vote Tory while only 2% of 2015 Tory voters would vote Labour. Labour have picked up 20% of LDs, but the Tories have also picked up 9% of LDs and 9% of UKIP voters
http://comres.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/IoS-SM_Political-Poll_October-2015.pdf
He's always very pessimistic on Scotland's chances, I usually have to perk him up, but I can only see a massive can of whoop ass being opened on Scotland tomorrow.
Scotland just do not have the strength to live with this kind of rugby. TBH, none of the northern hemisphere teams do.
In both being ideological is portrayed either offensively or evaded defensively as doing stupid things, so I wonder why some on the extremes care about ideology at all if that is what being accused of being so inclined is seen as. I guess it gives some loose identity to believe it is more important than it is.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-34553015
MPs will go for Osborne (*) as long as they don't think he is a significant negative.
(*) By go for Osborne I mean not let Boris into the final two.
Osborne's numbers look OK given he has four years to mature / grow into the role / do the things that will help him settle into the public's mind as the next PM.
http://www.libdems.org.uk/liberal-democrats-proposals-for-regulated-cannabis-market
In NZ these athletes play rugby. If they are not strong enough they might be given a cricket bat or sent to run around the track but the big and the strong play rugby.
The size of the English population and their apparent resources is somewhat illusionary.
Better start from France though.
http://d.gu.com/CTCWkH
They wish to take over the labour party. They will be interested getting to 2020 so they can deselect the MPs they hate. Once that is done they then can dictate the candidate to rep!ace Corbyn when he decides to retire as leader.
I am pleased if I opened a discussion on the last thread about if they could replace Corbyn before the election. My take on the balance of it is that Corbyn would automatically stand even if someone opposes him. So effectively labour are stuffed. They will be taken over by CND/Stop the War uber lefties.
I am pleased because this surely has betting connotations. Just how realistic is it that Corbyn will be replaced? Which is more important to Corbynites, winning in 2020, or surviving to be able to take over the party?
@MyBurningEars It's a bit hyperbolic yes, but the gist of it I stand by.
If your proposition were to come true and Corbynistas lose in 2020 but nonetheless get one of their own to succeed Corbyn a realignment in British politics is inevitable. New Labour types will form a new SDP with the LDs and post EU ref the anti EU Tory right may join up with UKIP so we end up with potentially 4 major parties (5 including the SNP) rather than 3
Some so called liberals have the mind bends that reality cannot alter.
- Too busy watching a great afternoon of college football games.
Love rugby (union and league), and cricket. Will watch baseball under protest. Just don't like association football (didn't even call it soccer). Didn't like playing it at school, nor watching it at all.
Cameron embarrassed about Bishop Bashing?
LaaaaaandSliiiiide.
NZ, Australia, South Africa, British Lions and France (on a good day).
The rest are just making up numbers. That includes the home unions.
The 'world cup' is an illusion.
In respect of American Football I did notice remarkable upper body grappling strength and technique from Canada and USA. Pacific Island backs did show a distinct ability to break the first tackle.
This now is not embarrassing for France , its for the northern hemisphere.
What's the difference between politicians and rugby players?
Nothing. They both need hookers to make the game interesting.
Once. In the rain. Abysmal.
Bloody hell. That was ridiculous.
Never have I encountered such foul, mindless perversity. Have you considered a career in the church?
This is just embarrassing for the six nations,even Argentina as improved massively playing in the better tournament.
Only hope is Ireland.
This is an exhibition match now from the ABs
"You see, I am an enormous pervert. Animal, vegetable or mineral, I'll do anything to anything"
"Fine words for a Bishop. Nice to see the Church speaking out for a change on social issues"
Commit to the the Nato 2% of GDP spending on defence and use it to boost our peacekeeping/conventional forces
In such circumstances it is hardly surprising that they prefer Boris Johnson as PM who they are far more likely to have heard of.