Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New academic research shows the wide differences between CON m

2

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    The thing in The Sun today about postage stamps was a bit creepy. It's like living under occupation where the occupiers insist on ramming symbols of their Supreme Victory down the population's throats. What next: a monument to Brexit on every street corner? Thankfully the Royal Mail refused to get involved in divisive politics and told them where to stick it.

    I assume the Sun will not want commemorative stamps of Corbyn if he ever becomes PM?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind).

    When we voted in June 2016 we did not know what Brexit meant in reality. Soon we will. It is perfectly democratic to ask people whether they continue to want to leave the EU and move to this new arrangement.

    Now I realise that there are lots of assumptions and ifs in this and that getting from where we are to this point is not easy etc. But there is nothing inherently wrong in wanting a vote on the new arrangement.

    Indeed, isn’t it the mirror image of the vote which many say they wanted on Maastricht and Lisbon etc? Moving to a version of Brexit without clear support only risks storing up the same sort of resentments as agreeing to the various treaties did.

    Whether Blair / Clegg et al are the right people to do this is another matter as Jones argues. Still, I thought Humphries was too quick to interrupt Blair this morning. There is a dilemma at the heart of what May is trying to do and fudging or ignoring it won’t work, not for long anyway. Blair is right to point it out.

    No chance of selling that to leavers.
    It will be the great Brexit betrayal.
    But I think you’ve argued it well and I find myself unexpectedly agreeing with you.
    Maybe we should rejoin the EU if we had a 'cast iron' guarantee that there would be no further change in our status or rules/powers which the EU operated under.

    You see that thats issue, it's never can be a fixed position. the EU has morphed time and time again from the 1970s onwards, changing it's status and it's powers. Whilst governments may have signed up to each change, the people haven't.

    Now, the first time people have had a chance to say, 'hang on, we don't like this' we want out, you're planning on putting roadblock after roadblock in the way.

    the referendum wasn't lost in 2016, it was lost time and time again over the last 30 years when politicans haven't listened to people.
    Such a guarantee would be ridiculous - it’s perfectly fine for the EU to evolve and there would be certain reforms the UK would want. What might address your concern is a commitment to have a regular referendum every xx years - but to be honest that sounds a big hassle.
    Bingo... so why is it ok for us to sign up to the EU when we don't fully know what that means, but wrong for us to leave when we don't fully know what that means.

    Sauce for the goose clearly isn't sauce for the gander to Remainers
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    I'm against the death penalty, but there should be an option for murderers and the like to end their own life if they so choose.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,098
    Despite Labour's youthquake, the LibDems still have a proportionately younger membership.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    It would be interesting to find out what Tory members consider to be traditional British values. Is obeying authority one of them?

    They asked me whether obeying authority was a traditional British value, but I refused to answer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,098
    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881

    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind).

    of Brexit without clear support only risks storing up the same sort of resentments as agreeing to the various treaties did.

    Whether Blair / Clegg et al are the right people to do this is another matter as Jones argues. Still, I thought Humphries was too quick to interrupt Blair this morning. There is a dilemma at the heart of what May is trying to do and fudging or ignoring it won’t work, not for long anyway. Blair is right to point it out.

    No chance of selling that to leavers.
    It will be the great Brexit betrayal.
    But I think you’ve argued it well and I find myself unexpectedly agreeing with you.
    Maybe we should rejoin the EU if we had a 'cast iron' guarantee that there would be no further change in our status or rules/powers which the EU operated under.

    You see that thats issue, it's never can be a fixed position. the EU has morphed time and time again from the 1970s onwards, changing it's status and it's powers. Whilst governments may have signed up to each change, the people haven't.

    Now, the first time people have had a chance to say, 'hang on, we don't like this' we want out, you're planning on putting roadblock after roadblock in the way.

    the referendum wasn't lost in 2016, it was lost time and time again over the last 30 years when politicans haven't listened to people.
    Such a guarantee would be ridiculous - it’s perfectly fine for the EU to evolve and there would be certain reforms the UK would want. What might address your concern is a commitment to have a regular referendum every xx years - but to be honest that sounds a big hassle.
    Bingo... so why is it ok for us to sign up to the EU when we don't fully know what that means, but wrong for us to leave when we don't fully know what that means.

    Sauce for the goose clearly isn't sauce for the gander to Remainers
    I don’t particularly like using referendums to solve anything - except perhaps voting system changes.

    But I think the point is it is fine for us to have a referendum when we know what leaving means, just as it was fine to have a referendum once we knew what joining meant as well.

    It’s not that the 2016 referendum was wrong - it’s that having another one would not be wrong.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    I'm against the death penalty, but there should be an option for murderers and the like to end their own life if they so choose.
    Either you have a punishment or you don't in my view, though that could be an option if a life term really is a life term
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,039
    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind).

    When we voted in June 2016 we did not know what Brexit meant in reality. Soon we will. It is perfectly democratic to ask people whether they continue to want to leave the EU and move to this new arrangement.

    Now I realise that there are lots of assumptions and ifs in this and that getting from where we are to this point is not easy etc. But there is nothing inherently wrong in wanting a vote on the new arrangement.

    Indeed, isn’t it the mirror image of the vote which many say they wanted on Maastricht and Lisbon etc? Moving to a version of Brexit without clear support only risks storing up the same sort of resentments as agreeing to the various treaties did.

    Whether Blair / Clegg et al are the right people to do this is another matter as Jones argues. Still, I thought Humphries was too quick to interrupt Blair this morning. There is a dilemma at the heart of what May is trying to do and fudging or ignoring it won’t work, not for long anyway. Blair is right to point it out.

    The problem is in your opening paragraph. If the EU would only revisit the question of us Remaining, and state its terms, if the UK changed its mind then on what basis would it assess that other than on another referendum itself?

    I think there are large gaps in current polling between those who think it was wrong to vote to Leave in hindsight, very slender lead with all the usual caveats on MoE, with those who think Brexit must be implemented at this stage, c.10% lead.

    Quite aside from the mechanism through which this would ever be realised, I think Remainers are using the evidence of the former to argue for a vote which is far more likely to result in the latter.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,407

    It would be interesting to find out what Tory members consider to be traditional British values. Is obeying authority one of them?

    They asked me whether obeying authority was a traditional British value, but I refused to answer.
    Despite the media narrative, a lot of Labour's membership growth has come from crusty old lefties - in many cases rejoining after quitting due to Iraq.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,098
    FF43 said:

    I am surprised to see Lib Dem members as the youngest of the selected parties - albeit not very young. I had the LDs down as an old person's party. Maybe the difference between members and supporters? The SNP can call on a youngish activist base when required.

    Why? Up until Clegg's tuition fees fiasco, young people (and particularly the more educated ones) were the key LibDem demographic. LibDems have championed most of the social changes of the past fifty years and young people are considerably more liberal and open-minded than the older generations. The surge in LD membership since the referendum is mostly young people motivated by its clear anti-Brexit stance.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,039
    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind).

    When we voted in June 2016 we did not know what Brexit meant in reality. Soon we will. It is perfectly democratic to ask people whether they continue to want to leave the EU and move to this new arrangement.

    Now I realise that there are lots of assumptions and ifs in this and that getting from where we are to this point is not easy etc. But there is nothing inherently wrong in wanting a vote on the new arrangement.

    Indeed, isn’t it the mirror image of the vote which many say they wanted on Maastricht and Lisbon etc? Moving to a version of Brexit without clear support only risks storing up the same sort of resentments as agreeing to the various treaties did.

    Whether Blair / Clegg et al are the right people to do this is another matter as Jones argues. Still, I thought Humphries was too quick to interrupt Blair this morning. There is a dilemma at the heart of what May is trying to do and fudging or ignoring it won’t work, not for long anyway. Blair is right to point it out.

    It was a stupid referendum and atrociously bad decision making when you reject an existing arrangement without seriously considering the alternatives. I would be happy never to have another referendum, But, given the absolute requirement to pursue a course of action however dumb, only another referendum can arguably countermand the first. The only circumstances in which that is viable in my opinion are where the electorate has collectively changed its mind and is looking for an out. In other words, a sizeable chunk of those that voted Leave now regret their decision. That hasn't happened yet in anything like sufficient numbers and it is unlikely to do so in the next year before the EU treaties lapse.

    We are where we are. Brexit needs a hard headed effort at damage limitation. Remainers can do that intellectually because they never signed up to the agenda in the first place. Leavers can't. Damage limitation implies things will be worse than they were and they should be and it implies Leavers were wrong to suggest otherwise. Leavers cannot limit the damage nor can they deliver a successful Brexit. It's a mess.

    But, why not take the mirror view of that, and look at how to maximise the opportunities for Brexit?

    Even the hardest of hard Remainers should be able to recognise there are some.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,591
    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind)...

    In principle, sure.

    But absent a substantial majority of the electorate in favour of a second referendum, which seems unlikely, it isn't going to (and shouldn't) happen.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,039
    rkrkrk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I don’t see why, in principle, you could not have a vote on the choice between whatever deal is negotiated and remaining in the EU (on our current terms? /new terms?), assuming the EU would agree to this (and @NickPalmer and others have suggested that the EU would be likely to agree if the UK changed its mind).

    When we voted in June 2016 we did not know what Brexit meant in reality. Soon we will. It is perfectly democratic to ask people whether they continue to want to leave the EU and move to this new arrangement.

    Now I realise that there are lots of assumptions and ifs in this and that getting from where we are to this point is not easy etc. But there is nothing inherently wrong in wanting a vote on the new arrangement.

    Indeed, isn’t it the mirror image of the vote which many say they wanted on Maastricht and Lisbon etc? Moving to a version of Brexit without clear support only risks storing up the same sort of resentments as agreeing to the various treaties did.

    Whether Blair / Clegg et al are the right people to do this is another matter as Jones argues. Still, I thought Humphries was too quick to interrupt Blair this morning. There is a dilemma at the heart of what May is trying to do and fudging or ignoring it won’t work, not for long anyway. Blair is right to point it out.

    No chance of selling that to leavers.
    It will be the great Brexit betrayal.
    But I think you’ve argued it well and I find myself unexpectedly agreeing with you.
    Leavers would, rightly in my view, point out that Brexit was voted for in a referendum, confirmed in a General Election where parties supporting Brexit won an overall majority, and a majority for the Government's programme, and current opinion polling shows that the public agree it must be implemented.

    The trouble here is the hair-trigger reaction of Remainers, where they call out even the slightest evidence of doubt or wavering, even one-offs, as a reason to call off the whole thing.

    Brexit is bound to have ups and downs.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,098
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    Dismissing the housing crisis in a single sentence isn't going to get the Tories anywhere.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,039
    HYUFD said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    An interesting choice - May's half-baked deal or full-fat EU: Euro, Schengen, the lot.

    Actually, I would be happier with the latter than our current fudged membership position.
    In which case Leave would go from 52% to close to 70% and the issue would be settled for good
    In the current climate, anything from 60%-75%. More probably 62-38%.

    "Full membership" would have a voting spike, in my view, as the battlelines over values have been so starkly drawn.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    Dismissing the housing crisis in a single sentence isn't going to get the Tories anywhere.
    Where did I dismiss it? The Tories are building more homes for the young but it was the dementia tax which cost them with the middle aged more than housing
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,039
    Sean_F said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    The problem would be that it would confirm that on EU-related matters, the only vote that's treated as being binding is one in favour of More Europe.
    Opinion isn't going to shift decisively in favour of the EU, because so much of the split is down to entrenched values. Therefore, a 2nd EU referendum could only sneak a win on 53-54% of the vote, at best.

    That really would poison both EU and British politics for decades. The only way to settle this (either way) is a Remain that takes on concerns of those who voted Leave, or a Leave that takes on concerns of the Remainers.

    I expect the latter, but do agree some of Nick Timothy's mood music last year (and before) wasn't helpful.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    HYUFD said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    An interesting choice - May's half-baked deal or full-fat EU: Euro, Schengen, the lot.

    Actually, I would be happier with the latter than our current fudged membership position.
    In which case Leave would go from 52% to close to 70% and the issue would be settled for good
    In the current climate, anything from 60%-75%. More probably 62-38%.

    "Full membership" would have a voting spike, in my view, as the battlelines over values have been so starkly drawn.
    So either way a Leave landslide
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Floater said:
    Regis Debray: “Too Christian for the Left, too foreign for the Right.”
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,572

    stevef said:

    I think what the last few elections have shown is that the public no longer want a centrist Blairite Labour Party. They want a Labour Party a bit like it was under Harold Wilson or John Smith which offers a more radical alternative to the Tories. What Labour members did in 2015 however under the new method of choosing a leader which gave too much power to members, was to take Labour too far in the leftwards direction that it wants Labour to go. I dont think the public wants a Marxist chancellor, unilateral nuclear disarmament or too much tax and spend. I think this is the mistake that Labour is making and why it will lose again in 2022.

    The old "spending / investment is communism" attack from the Tories doesn't wash any more. People can touch and feel the need for spending in a large number of areas they interact with. Which is why the "spending has gone up" argument is so funny - government is haemorrhaging money yet front line spending in schools, NHS, social care, Police etc etc is cut to the bone.
    Fair enough, but that shift doesn't mean though that a majority of the general public are willing to sign up to all of the most extreme positions taken by the far left, which is what the Corbynites would have you believe. I agree entirely with stevef, in that the public mood has shifted such that people are now open to a more traditional Labour approach aka Wilson or Smith, but that Corbyn is incapable of limiting his ambition to that and will more than likely lose in 2022 as a consequence.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    edited January 2018

    FF43 said:


    It was a stupid referendum and atrociously bad decision making when you reject an existing arrangement without seriously considering the alternatives. I would be happy never to have another referendum, But, given the absolute requirement to pursue a course of action however dumb, only another referendum can arguably countermand the first. The only circumstances in which that is viable in my opinion are where the electorate has collectively changed its mind and is looking for an out. In other words, a sizeable chunk of those that voted Leave now regret their decision. That hasn't happened yet in anything like sufficient numbers and it is unlikely to do so in the next year before the EU treaties lapse.

    We are where we are. Brexit needs a hard headed effort at damage limitation. Remainers can do that intellectually because they never signed up to the agenda in the first place. Leavers can't. Damage limitation implies things will be worse than they were and they should be and it implies Leavers were wrong to suggest otherwise. Leavers cannot limit the damage nor can they deliver a successful Brexit. It's a mess.

    But, why not take the mirror view of that, and look at how to maximise the opportunities for Brexit?

    Even the hardest of hard Remainers should be able to recognise there are some.
    I am OK with that in principle. In practice there are very few new opportunities consistent with the damage limitation that I talked about, and which by definition leaves us worse off. I am open to suggestions, do read widely on the subject and haven't seen anything workable yet. If there are any, you would be the one to suggest them. That's a sincere compliment, by the way.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    An interesting choice - May's half-baked deal or full-fat EU: Euro, Schengen, the lot.

    Actually, I would be happier with the latter than our current fudged membership position.
    In which case Leave would go from 52% to close to 70% and the issue would be settled for good
    In the current climate, anything from 60%-75%. More probably 62-38%.

    "Full membership" would have a voting spike, in my view, as the battlelines over values have been so starkly drawn.
    So either way a Leave landslide
    Where are the extra leave votes going to come from?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    A re-run referendum is fine by me.

    But, I don't think Remain have yet understood why they lost in the first place (at least judging from comments by prominent Remainer politicians and Remainer advocates here). So, I think Remain would lose again.

    Some people and some places did very well out of the EU (primarily middle-class or metropolitan or University seats). However, they collectively paid scant regard to people and places who did badly out of the EU (primarily working-class or rural or Northern seats).

    The Remainers should tell us how and why it would be any different in the future?

    If they could re-run the referendum, what would they do differently?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    An interesting choice - May's half-baked deal or full-fat EU: Euro, Schengen, the lot.

    Actually, I would be happier with the latter than our current fudged membership position.
    In which case Leave would go from 52% to close to 70% and the issue would be settled for good
    In the current climate, anything from 60%-75%. More probably 62-38%.

    "Full membership" would have a voting spike, in my view, as the battlelines over values have been so starkly drawn.
    So either way a Leave landslide
    Where are the extra leave votes going to come from?
    If the proposition were to join the Euro, end the rebate etc as suggested in that scenario a number of soft Remainers would switch
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821



    Maybe we should rejoin the EU if we had a 'cast iron' guarantee that there would be no further change in our status or rules/powers which the EU operated under.

    You see that thats issue, it's never can be a fixed position. the EU has morphed time and time again from the 1970s onwards, changing it's status and it's powers. Whilst governments may have signed up to each change, the people haven't.

    Now, the first time people have had a chance to say, 'hang on, we don't like this' we want out, you're planning on putting roadblock after roadblock in the way.

    the referendum wasn't lost in 2016, it was lost time and time again over the last 30 years when politicans haven't listened to people.

    The EU hasn't changed its vision, it's just progressed further on the road to ever closer union, and will continue to do so. The politicians that lost the referendum were those like Cameron who kept slagging off the EU while posing as supporting it.

    However, the decision has been made, and there's no turning back. Having antagonised the EU, it is important for the UK to develop better working relationships with other countries, in particular those relatively close by, such as Turkey and Russia. There also needs to be a plan to hive off the 6 counties to Eire, possibly via a transitional arrangement, as a proper Brexit can't be delivered without a proper border between Eire and GB.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,407
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    0-30 young, 30-60 middle, 60+ old. However, try telling a 31 year old that they have entered Middle Age!

    OK, try again:

    0-18 youth, 18-40 young adulthood, 40-65 middle, 65+ old. That sounds better.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited January 2018
    "Donald Trump could annihilate North Korea with nuclear weapons in a little over half-an-hour, experts have told The Telegraph. According to US nuclear protocols designed to streamline the decision-making process the president has sole authority to launch, no-one has to second his decision, and there may be no way to stop him "going off the deep end"."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/04/donald-trump-nuclear-monarch-could-destroy-north-korea-35-minutes/
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
    If it can lock you up in prison for the rest of your life, I don't see going from that to capital punishment as a major step up.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,785
    edited January 2018

    HYUFD said:

    Miss Cyclefree, not sure where (which is very helpful, I know) but I think I heard Laura Kuennsberg[sp] some time ago assert that if we changed our minds we'd lose all negotiated opt-outs, plus the rebate.

    An interesting choice - May's half-baked deal or full-fat EU: Euro, Schengen, the lot.

    Actually, I would be happier with the latter than our current fudged membership position.
    In which case Leave would go from 52% to close to 70% and the issue would be settled for good
    In the current climate, anything from 60%-75%. More probably 62-38%.

    "Full membership" would have a voting spike, in my view, as the battlelines over values have been so starkly drawn.
    It is in the leavers hands now. Public opinion shows little sign off moving with May's approach and as long as she is allowed to continue her journey towards the damage limitation options, Brexit should, and will, happen.

    If, however, the hardcore Leavers do succeed in a coup that drives us towards WTO exit, be certain that few remainers will remotely tolerate that, and the counter coup will not respect any niceties whatsoever in attempting to stop that.

    Be in no doubt, WTO crash Brexit will never, never, never be allowed to happen.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,407
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Increasingly, the same address.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
  • Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
    If it can lock you up in prison for the rest of your life, I don't see going from that to capital punishment as a major step up.
    It is a massive step. A mistake can be rectified if the person is still alive. It cannot be rectified if a person is dead. Moreover if a person is still alive they still have the ability to fight to clear their name, something that cannot be easily done when one is dead.

    I can see no justification whatsoever for the return of the death penalty.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    edited January 2018
    As far as Figure 4 is concerned all I can say is Bugger!

    The Tory party is definitely not for me if those are the prevalent attitudes of the majority of its members.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Both are working, both no longer in education, both may well have children at home
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
    If it can lock you up in prison for the rest of your life, I don't see going from that to capital punishment as a major step up.
    Not much point wasting any time on this debate. The chances of the UK reintroducing capital punishment in the foreseeable future are zero. For one thing it is legally impossible to do so whilst we remain subject to the ECHR and there is little chance of the government pulling us out of this despite its regular bluster about doing so at election time. Even if this hurdle could be overcome it would make us a total pariah amongst our European neighbours and other liberal Western states.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
    If it can lock you up in prison for the rest of your life, I don't see going from that to capital punishment as a major step up.
    It is a massive step. A mistake can be rectified if the person is still alive. It cannot be rectified if a person is dead. Moreover if a person is still alive they still have the ability to fight to clear their name, something that cannot be easily done when one is dead.

    I can see no justification whatsoever for the return of the death penalty.
    I can for serial killers as does 69% of the population according to Mori
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    The State shouldn’t have the right to determine life or death. Too much power over the citizen
    If it can lock you up in prison for the rest of your life, I don't see going from that to capital punishment as a major step up.
    The state can withhold the benefits of citizenship (through exile or imprisonment) but it’s another order of magnitude to terminate life as it makes a citizen fundamental subordinate to the state

    (And whole of life sentences are no longer permitted)
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Isn't the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Increasingly, the same address.
    36 and 66 for a while :)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
    They struggle to get product, resulting in dodgy combinations are regular fuckups
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    stevef said:

    The truest thing in politics as far as I am concerned is that any party's activists or members are always out of touch with the mainstream of public opinion. No party therefore should ever give too much power to its own members because if they do their party will be out of step with public opinion and will struggle to get elected. This is why the Tories do not promise at election times to bring back hanging -even though their own members want it.

    The problem with Labour at the moment is that its given too much power to its own members (as against MPs). These members have elected a leader that most voters do not want as PM, and driven the party far more leftwards than the voters want to go. This is why Labour will struggle to come to power again anytime soon.

    On the evidence of the last few elections I think the Labour members rather than the majority of Labour MPs have been shown to be a better judge of what the public want. Not that they or Corbyn who they support are the greatest judge but I would argue the evidence seems to indicate they are a bit closer to what the electorate want than the last couple of Labour offerings.
    I agree. All the evidence we have over the last 15 years is that Corbynism is more electorally popular with the wider electorate than most of us thought, including New Labour. Indeed the fact that Jezz has maintained his polling numbers shows that June was no flash in the pan. A lot of the country wants change, and likes the Corbyn plan.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Isn't the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment?
    It may also make juries less willing to convict.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Both are working, both no longer in education, both may well have children at home
    You could say all that about people of almost any age these days. Doesn't mean they have anything in common. All you are doing is lumping chunks of the oldie vote into the age range in your increasingly desperate attempts to argue that the Tories are supported by the real middle aged (ie 30s/40s many with young kids). Increasingly they are not, and as the baby boomers die off through the 2020s and 2030s the Tories will pay a high electoral price.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Foxy said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Isn't the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment?
    It may also make juries less willing to convict.
    To be fair, that might be less of an issue in Ishmael's universal bodycam scenario.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited January 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    The 35 year-old is likely to be more puritanical and intolerant than the 65 year-old.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
    They struggle to get product, resulting in dodgy combinations are regular fuckups
    They increasingly get them from abroad, showing the US drugs industry approach is counterproductive
  • Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Isn't the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment?
    Not for the legal profession, all those appellate court hearings will be great for the legal profession.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    edited January 2018
    FF43 said:


    But, why not take the mirror view of that, and look at how to maximise the opportunities for Brexit?

    Even the hardest of hard Remainers should be able to recognise there are some.

    I am OK with that in principle. In practice there are very few new opportunities consistent with the damage limitation that I talked about, and which by definition leaves us worse off. I am open to suggestions [for how to maximise the opportunities for Brexit], do read widely on the subject and haven't seen anything workable yet. If there are any, you would be the one to suggest them. That's a sincere compliment, by the way.
    More on this. Brexit allows us to make particular policy changes. For example, Michael Gove is talking about a new subsidy regime for wildflower meadows, presumably at the expense of food production. The government has at the same time implied it would weaken certain environmental protections guaranteed by the EU. The main takeaway is that Michael Gove aims to spend just as much money on agricultural subsidies as the EU does. My impression from visits to Germany is that there are a lot more wildflower meadows in that country than here. So we are talking narrowly about a policy to promote wildflower meadows through subsidy rather than promoting wildflower meadows generally, which probably can be done as members of the EU.

    You may or may not think those government proposals are good ones, but in the round it seems like change because we can do it, rather than a new direction that Brexit enables for the first time.

    Meanwhile the direct effects of Brexit are almost entirely negative. They will impact financial services, pharmaceuticals, car manufacturing and possibly agriculture. Important industries for the UK. The best we can do is mitigate those effects by compromising on how we Brexit. We can only do that if we accept that the damage of Brexit needs to be limited.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Foxy said:

    stevef said:

    The truest thing in politics as far as I am concerned is that any party's activists or members are always out of touch with the mainstream of public opinion. No party therefore should ever give too much power to its own members because if they do their party will be out of step with public opinion and will struggle to get elected. This is why the Tories do not promise at election times to bring back hanging -even though their own members want it.

    The problem with Labour at the moment is that its given too much power to its own members (as against MPs). These members have elected a leader that most voters do not want as PM, and driven the party far more leftwards than the voters want to go. This is why Labour will struggle to come to power again anytime soon.

    On the evidence of the last few elections I think the Labour members rather than the majority of Labour MPs have been shown to be a better judge of what the public want. Not that they or Corbyn who they support are the greatest judge but I would argue the evidence seems to indicate they are a bit closer to what the electorate want than the last couple of Labour offerings.
    I agree. All the evidence we have over the last 15 years is that Corbynism is more electorally popular with the wider electorate than most of us thought, including New Labour. Indeed the fact that Jezz has maintained his polling numbers shows that June was no flash in the pan. A lot of the country wants change, and likes the Corbyn plan.
    They like some things e.g. renationalisation of utilities and the railways and higher taxes for the rich and more money for the NHS and free tuition fees, they dislike other things like reversing Osborne's IHT cut, more powers for the unions to strike and Corbyn's weak approach to national security
  • Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Isn't the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment?
    Not for the legal profession, all those appellate court hearings will be great for the legal profession.
    I cannot think of anything worse to put lawyers through.

    The junior criminal bar would have a new lease of life I suppose.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548

    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
    That's interesting, as for me in that part of the Midlands, the north starts at the Weaver Hills, the southernmost outcrop of the Pennines (though I've heard some claim Cannock Chase as such). The landscape north of the Weavers is very different to that to the south, and to a certain extent landscape makes the people.

    Further east, I'd say the Humber marks 'the north', and further west I might even say the Mersey.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
    Good afternoon all.

    Some interesting reading here today. My rule of thumb is the North is anything further north than the river Trent.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited January 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Both are working, both no longer in education, both may well have children at home
    You could say all that about people of almost any age these days. Doesn't mean they have anything in common. All you are doing is lumping chunks of the oldie vote into the age range in your increasingly desperate attempts to argue that the Tories are supported by the real middle aged (ie 30s/40s many with young kids). Increasingly they are not, and as the baby boomers die off through the 2020s and 2030s the Tories will pay a high electoral price.
    No. As I said the median voter is about 55, as under 18s can't vote including them is irrelevant. In theory the Tories could lose 30 and 40 year olds to Labour and win a small majority provided they won the over 50s by a big enough margin.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,842
    The sign at the end of my road says "Darlington and The South". Therefore Darlington is the border...it is on an official Government sign.
  • Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    Historically the boundary between north and south in England has been the River Trent.

    In Roman times it was the boundary between the military and civilian zones.

    At the time of Edward III it was used as the boundary between those counties which needed to pay additional taxes to support the war in France and those who were exempt as they were considered 'bandit country' and needed to raise revenue and men to protect against the Scots.

    At the time of Henry VIII it was used as the defensive boundary during the Pilgrimage of Grace rebellion.

    Basically North of the Trent is North and South of the Trent is South.
  • John_M said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
    Good afternoon all.

    Some interesting reading here today. My rule of thumb is the North is anything further north than the river Trent.
    Surely it must start at the end of the Northern Line?
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,884
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    stevef said:

    The truest thing in politics as far as I am concerned is that any party's activists or members are always out of touch with the mainstream of public opinion. No party therefore should ever give too much power to its own members because if they do their party will be out of step with public opinion and will struggle to get elected. This is why the Tories do not promise at election times to bring back hanging -even though their own members want it.

    The problem with Labour at the moment is that its given too much power to its own members (as against MPs). These members have elected a leader that most voters do not want as PM, and driven the party far more leftwards than the voters want to go. This is why Labour will struggle to come to power again anytime soon.

    On the evidence of the last few elections I think the Labour members rather than the majority of Labour MPs have been shown to be a better judge of what the public want. Not that they or Corbyn who they support are the greatest judge but I would argue the evidence seems to indicate they are a bit closer to what the electorate want than the last couple of Labour offerings.
    I agree. All the evidence we have over the last 15 years is that Corbynism is more electorally popular with the wider electorate than most of us thought, including New Labour. Indeed the fact that Jezz has maintained his polling numbers shows that June was no flash in the pan. A lot of the country wants change, and likes the Corbyn plan.
    They like some things e.g. renationalisation of utilities and the railways and higher taxes for the rich and more money for the NHS and free tuition fees, they dislike other things like reversing Osborne's IHT cut, more powers for the unions to strike and Corbyn's weak approach to national security
    I think Corbz will tack even further to port in his next GE manifesto. He'll offer nationalisation of water and electricity. The punters will love it and won't give a fuck how it's going to be paid for.
  • John_M said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
    Good afternoon all.

    Some interesting reading here today. My rule of thumb is the North is anything further north than the river Trent.
    Spot on.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote for each party, or indeed in many cases the official party line. That's the case in several of the points highlighted, for example the death penalty for the Conservatives, Brexit for Labour.

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822

    That's encouraging. But I'd argue that of the 48% a disproportionate number would be older and right-leaning.
    That is a confusing sentence, taken out of context.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    dixiedean said:

    The sign at the end of my road says "Darlington and The South". Therefore Darlington is the border...it is on an official Government sign.

    At one time there was a road sign near Paddington Station that indicated "Hatfield and the North". I remember as a boy applying exactly the same logic and designating everywhere with a latitude greater than that of Hatfield as northern.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    .
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Both are working, both no longer in education, both may well have children at home
    You could say all that about people of almost any age these days. Doesn't mean they have anything in common. All you are doing is lumping chunks of the oldie vote into the age range in your increasingly desperate attempts to argue that the Tories are supported by the real middle aged (ie 30s/40s many with young kids). Increasingly they are not, and as the baby boomers die off through the 2020s and 2030s the Tories will pay a high electoral price.
    No. As I said the median voter is about 55, as under 18s can't vote including them is irrelevant. In theory the Tories could lose 30 and 40 year olds to Labour and win a small majority provided they won the over 50s by a big enough margin.
    Depends whether the 40 year olds continue to dislike the Tories when they become 50 year olds. I think you are being hugely complacent.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    I feel like at the moment, elections are being won and lost more on turnout than people switching their votes. Intuitively this goes together with political polarisation. Though I'd be interested to see if the data backs me up.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    If driving up A1, then the Bawtry/Blyth old roundabout is the start of the North (its bypassed now).
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the inevitable error rate under current evidential rules ("beyond reasonable doubt" is a long way from absolute certainty). If everyone wore personal bodycams, uploading in real time so there's no point in the murderer destroying or removing them, I'd be fairly relaxed about a string-em-up policy. Nothing more costly and pointless than prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
    They struggle to get product, resulting in dodgy combinations are regular fuckups
    They increasingly get them from abroad, showing the US drugs industry approach is counterproductive
    Do you actual know fuck all about what you post on?

    The constraints started with the European companies and spread to the US and India. They still get grey market Chinese sedatives - which is what causes the issues (and arguably breaks the law as they are being purchased without prescription for an non approved purpose)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044

    dixiedean said:

    The sign at the end of my road says "Darlington and The South". Therefore Darlington is the border...it is on an official Government sign.

    At one time there was a road sign near Paddington Station that indicated "Hatfield and the North". I remember as a boy applying exactly the same logic and designating everywhere with a latitude greater than that of Hatfield as northern.
    Name of a band as well iirc.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548
    How about: "the north is anywhere to the north of London where it is not possible to commute to London in two hours."

    This could be expanded to: "civilisation is anywhere where it is possible to commute to london in two hours." ;)
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044

    John_M said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'd say where I live in the East Midlands is definitely in the north.
    I'm from the south coast so I don't think my opinion matters very much on this subject. But I regard the north as starting just to the north of Leicester where there is a ridge of sandstone that makes the countryside look more rugged than I am used to. It just feels like you have passed into a different region there. I think there must be some underlying geological difference behind it.
    Good afternoon all.

    Some interesting reading here today. My rule of thumb is the North is anything further north than the river Trent.
    Spot on.
    This puts Nottingham in the North. Just.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote

    Worth remembering that it is 12% of 600,000 for Labour and 12% of maybe 130,000 for the Tories.

    I would be surprised if most Tory voters do not back the return of the death penalty given that a majority in the country does. Likewise, all the polling indicates that most Labour voters also voted Remain.

    It s NOT the case the the majority of voters back capital punishment. No down to below 50%

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the han prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
    They struggle to get product, resulting in dodgy combinations are regular fuckups
    They increasingly get them from abroad, showing the US drugs industry approach is counterproductive
    Do you actual know fuck all about what you post on?

    The constraints started with the European companies and spread to the US and India. They still get grey market Chinese sedatives - which is what causes the issues (and arguably breaks the law as they are being purchased without prescription for an non approved purpose)
    So as I said the reluctance of US drugs companies to get involved just creates more problematic issues
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044

    How about: "the north is anywhere to the north of London where it is not possible to commute to London in two hours."

    This could be expanded to: "civilisation is anywhere where it is possible to commute to london in two hours." ;)

    HS2 could ruin your scheme.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    stevef said:

    The truest thing in politics as far as I am concerned is that any party's activists or members are always out of touch with the mainstream of public opinion. No party therefore should ever give too much power to its own members because if they do their party will be out of step with public opinion and will struggle to get elected. This is why the Tories do not promise at election times to bring back hanging -even though their own members want it.

    The problem with Labour at the moment is that its given too much power to its own members (as against MPs). These members have elected a leader that most voters do not want as PM, and driven the party far more leftwards than the voters want to go. This is why Labour will struggle to come to power again anytime soon.

    On the evidence of the last few elections I think the Labour members rather than the majority of Labour MPs have been shown to be a better judge of what the public want. Not that they or Corbyn who they support are the greatest judge but I would argue the evidence seems to indicate they are a bit closer to what the electorate want than the last couple of Labour offerings.
    I agree. All the evidence we have over the last 15 years is that Corbynism is more electorally popular with the wider electorate than most of us thought, including New Labour. Indeed the fact that Jezz has maintained his polling numbers shows that June was no flash in the pan. A lot of the country wants change, and likes the Corbyn plan.
    They like some things e.g. renationalisation of utilities and the railways and higher taxes for the rich and more money for the NHS and free tuition fees, they dislike other things like reversing Osborne's IHT cut, more powers for the unions to strike and Corbyn's weak approach to national security
    I think Corbz will tack even further to port in his next GE manifesto. He'll offer nationalisation of water and electricity. The punters will love it and won't give a fuck how it's going to be paid for.
    I think he already is offering that now anyway
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548
    HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
    Yet walk the Viking Way from Rutland to the Humber, and you do not see much difference in landscape or peoples - in many parts you could be in Surrey or Suffolk. Cross that two kilometres of water and it feels very different. To me, the Humber feels much more of a delineation than the Trent.
  • dixiedean said:

    The sign at the end of my road says "Darlington and The South". Therefore Darlington is the border...it is on an official Government sign.

    Didn't Ian Drury once have a band called Hatfield And The North?

    This would imply the land between Hatfield and Darlington is tundra. Seems about right to me.

    Btw, as regards the death penalty I am sure most on here would agree with my view that it should be reintroduced but only for those incorrigible offenders who persistently cycle on the pavement.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    .
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    And every year another age-slice of them are mostly priced out of the housing market. If the Tories don't sort housing, they are doomed.
    Even now the average age of first time buyers is 37 so still the vast majority of the middle aged over 35 to 65s are owner occupiers and of course most first time buyers also get parental assistance with a deposit while the Tories are building more affordable housing anyway
    People aged 65 are not "middle aged", they are old. On today's life expectancies, the middle year of your life is roughly 40.
    In terms of voters they are middle aged, considering you do not vote until you are 18 and you retire aged 65. Indeed the median voter is about 55
    What has a 35 year old got in common with a 65 year old? Pretty much nothing nowadays.
    Both are working, both no longer in education, both may well have children at home
    You could say all that about people of almost any age these days. Doesn't mean they pay a high electoral price.
    No. As I said the median voter is about 55, as under 18s can't vote including them is irrelevant. In theory the Tories could lose 30 and 40 year olds to Labour and win a small majority provided they won the over 50s by a big enough margin.
    Depends whether the 40 year olds continue to dislike the Tories when they become 50 year olds. I think you are being hugely complacent.
    They disliked the Tories mainly because of the dementia tax last time, they seriously dislike inheritance tax which Corbyn wants to raise
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548
    edited January 2018

    How about: "the north is anywhere to the north of London where it is not possible to commute to London in two hours."

    This could be expanded to: "civilisation is anywhere where it is possible to commute to london in two hours." ;)

    HS2 could ruin your scheme.
    Another reason to be in favour of it as a great civilising influence. ;)

    I think there's a map somewhere in the HS documentation showing how travel times will decrease with HS2...
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617

    How about: "the north is anywhere to the north of London where it is not possible to commute to London in two hours."

    This could be expanded to: "civilisation is anywhere where it is possible to commute to london in two hours." ;)

    HS2 could ruin your scheme.
    Even now, I think you can get from London to Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and York in 2 hours or so.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    dixiedean said:

    The sign at the end of my road says "Darlington and The South". Therefore Darlington is the border...it is on an official Government sign.

    Didn't Ian Drury once have a band called Hatfield And The North?

    This would imply the land between Hatfield and Darlington is tundra. Seems about right to me.

    Btw, as regards the death penalty I am sure most on here would agree with my view that it should be reintroduced but only for those incorrigible offenders who persistently cycle on the pavement.
    I would not take it as far as pineapple on pizza, but irresponsible cyclists seems a fair call.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Tory party faces a choice. Does it continue to modernise in pursuit if a broad, one nation pragmatic version of itself. Or does it prefer to become a more focused right wing ideological group.

    Can't do both.

    The Tory party since Brexit is more traditionally one nation and less ideologically right wing than under Cameron/Osborne.

    It just happens to disagree with you about being in Europe.
    Wrong, wrong, wrong! Look at the demographics my young Tory friend!

    It's all heading in the wrong direction for the Tories...
    It is the middle aged 35 to 65 year olds the Tories need for a majority, the old always vote Tory and the young always vote Labour unless one wins a landslide
    I feel like at the moment, elections are being won and lost more on turnout than people switching their votes. Intuitively this goes together with political polarisation. Though I'd be interested to see if the data backs me up.
    Even in 2017 the old still voted in far higher numbers than the young
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    These maps put the odd poll finding 1% of Kippers wanting to Remain in context:
    image
  • Anything south of Dronfield/Chesterfield is the South to me.
  • HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
    Yet walk the Viking Way from Rutland to the Humber, and you do not see much difference in landscape or peoples - in many parts you could be in Surrey or Suffolk. Cross that two kilometres of water and it feels very different. To me, the Humber feels much more of a delineation than the Trent.
    Since the Trent runs up into the Humber then that is the natural extension of the boundary. Historically Lincolnshire was considered the South.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    For me the most surprising point in these tables is that Labour doesn't draw more of its members from London - the same percentage (12%) as the Conservatives.

    More generally, what the survey shows is that party members don't reflect the views of those who vote

    .

    A majority still support it for specific things:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3802
    Yes, while support hovers around 50% for the death penalty for murder that rises to 69% supporting the death penalty for serial killers
    The only knockdown argument against the death penalty that I can see is the han prisons.
    Personally I would only consider it for serial killers which also reduces the error rate and focuses on the most calculating killers and then only lethal injection
    The drugs industry works hard to prevent its products being used in lethal injections
    Most US states still execute by lethal injection though firing squad would be equally acceptable as in Utah where it is an option for death row prisoners
    They struggle to get product, resulting in dodgy combinations are regular fuckups
    They increasingly get them from abroad, showing the US drugs industry approach is counterproductive
    Do you actual know fuck all about what you post on?

    The constraints started with the European companies and spread to the US and India. They still get grey market Chinese sedatives - which is what causes the issues (and arguably breaks the law as they are being purchased without prescription for an non approved purpose)
    So as I said the reluctance of US drugs companies to get involved just creates more problematic issues
    That isn't what you said though is it. You said that US companies started the boycott causing the drugs to be imported. In fact it was the bona fide exporters who started the boycott which pressured the US suppliers to follow suit.
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    HYUFD said:

    The thing in The Sun today about postage stamps was a bit creepy. It's like living under occupation where the occupiers insist on ramming symbols of their Supreme Victory down the population's throats. What next: a monument to Brexit on every street corner? Thankfully the Royal Mail refused to get involved in divisive politics and told them where to stick it.

    I assume the Sun will not want commemorative stamps of Corbyn if he ever becomes PM?
    The Sun will want commemorative stamps on Rupert's passing, while over at the Mail, the celebration of Dacre's retirement....
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617

    HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
    Yet walk the Viking Way from Rutland to the Humber, and you do not see much difference in landscape or peoples - in many parts you could be in Surrey or Suffolk. Cross that two kilometres of water and it feels very different. To me, the Humber feels much more of a delineation than the Trent.
    That's perhaps true of north east Notts around Newark, and rural Lincolnshire. But I struggle to see how eg Doncaster and Scunthorpe resemble Surrey.
  • HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
    Yet walk the Viking Way from Rutland to the Humber, and you do not see much difference in landscape or peoples - in many parts you could be in Surrey or Suffolk. Cross that two kilometres of water and it feels very different. To me, the Humber feels much more of a delineation than the Trent.
    That's perhaps true of north east Notts around Newark, and rural Lincolnshire. But I struggle to see how eg Doncaster and Scunthorpe resemble Surrey.
    Ever been to Croydon?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548

    HHemmelig said:

    HHemmelig said:

    AndyJS said:

    Have you read the tweet correctly? It implies around 80% don't want to be northerners.
    The regions are so big that the results are pretty meaningless IMO. The East Midlands stretches from the coalfield of north Derbyshire right down to Northampton. That Chesterfield and Bolsover most likely identify as northern is hardly a surprise, whilst Northants is borderline home counties.
    My rule of thumb has always been that Doncaster is in the North, Nottingham is in the Midlands.
    Nottingham is midlands but the coalfield in the north of the county (Mansfield etc) is definitely north in a cultural sense. Richard is right I think that the boundary is approximately the Trent, though most of the city of Nottingham is north of it.
    Yet walk the Viking Way from Rutland to the Humber, and you do not see much difference in landscape or peoples - in many parts you could be in Surrey or Suffolk. Cross that two kilometres of water and it feels very different. To me, the Humber feels much more of a delineation than the Trent.
    Since the Trent runs up into the Humber then that is the natural extension of the boundary. Historically Lincolnshire was considered the South.
    Indeed. However that part of the Trent runs essentially south to north, making it more of a west-east boundary than a north-south one. And on the other side of the country, what about Cheshire? Southern or northern?
This discussion has been closed.