Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It is a big mistake to assume that the decline of UKIP means i

24

Comments

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Doethur, don't blame me, I didn't say it!

    I (thankfully) missed that IDS comment earlier.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    Where the tories are failing is letting corbyn 70s reheated socialist outlook pass without successfully countering my how flawed it is. When miliband started banging on about good vs bad companies, the tories killed him. Corbyn suggests killing the city to help the “genuine” economy and nothing.

    It was more fear of Ed Miliband combining with the SNP and his weakness which won the Tories a majority in 2015 than banging on about capitalism. Tory spokesmen are correctly challenging Corbyn on that but at the moment the average voter is pro Brexit and pro reducing immigration but also pro nationalising the railways and key utilities, spending more on the NHS and taxing the rich and City more (while keeping their own taxes low)
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    What happens with May is a big part of where the Conservative vote goes.

    Despite the terrible campaign she did set herself up well early on as being about the JAMs and trying to appear as a different kind of Conservative to win votes. I think it worked to an extent, the campaign itself didn't go well and the manifesto didn't go well either but the basic set up and strategy leading up the campaign was brilliant. From the JAM speech, the coalitions of chaos warnings with the SNP and the ability to point to a divided Labour party whose MPs didn't want their leader as being the wrong person to negotiate Brexit.

    Considering the deal with the DUP is just as toxic (if not more) than one with the SNP, the fact that a new leader doing the JAM speech in different words won't have the same effect and being able to point to divided party having to negotiate Brexit won't work means these tactical advantages have been almost wiped out.

    Well on the assumption May goes anyway.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Jezziah, I'm not so sure about that. The DUP don't want to break up the UK, for a start. And I think an Anglo-Scottish divide is seen as a real risk (with some cross-border antagonism occurring when Davidson secured Scottish exemption from the proposed Winter Fuel Allowance cut).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,755

    Mr. Doethur, don't blame me, I didn't say it!

    I (thankfully) missed that IDS comment earlier.

    I wasn't blaming you, don't worry.

    It does however seem that Labour have some pretty vile people in their ranks and in many ways what is more worrying a total lack of awareness of just how nasty a party (to coin a phrase) they can come across as.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    Of course, any trade war ‘win’ would be only in the short term, in the medium term that phyrric victory would reduce overall trade and consumer choice. As was pointed out earlier today on the previous thread, see the early 1930s for more details.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Bridge, not sure whether to give this weight or not, but I was speaking to my mother the other day about something or other, and she raised Corbyn's love of the customs union as going down like a lead balloon in some parts of the North (one comment she mentioned was that a northern lefty had said Corbyn should be put up against the wall).

    Charming. But then we had a lefty poster on this forum today wishing Iain Duncan Smith had been murdered (and tbf was heavily criticised by another lefty poster) we have John McDonnell endorsing the lynching of Esther McVey and a Leader of the Opposition joking about four murdered rivals being 'a very good start.'

    It almost makes me nostalgic for the days when Tony Banks said William Hague was a foetus who should be aborted.
    Be interesting in a link for that lynching endorsement. I did ask on here a while back if the version where he clearly says 'they said' that I found was wrong, but nobody provided me with a different version.

  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    With regard to the business class debate - you can fly around Europe in business class very cheaply on widebodied jets with flat beds on certain routes. For instance, BA and Iberia both use planes with flat beds on the Heathrow to Madrid route, and I think you can buy tickets for about £300 return. There are other routes, like Heathrow to Istanbul on Turkish airlines, and Heathrow to Helsinki on Finnair. Its obviously not the same as flying intercontinental business class, but it does make flying a lot more enjoyable.

    Another thing is that you can buy airline points, and then use them to upgrade for a fraction of the cost of buying a business class ticket. The Finnair plus frequent flyer programme is, in my experience, particularly good for this. Airlines also sell upgrades in to business class, often very cheaply. If I was flying intercontinental, ie on holiday, I would consider buying an upgrade for any leg of the journey that was overnight, as this is objectively where the value is.

  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    What happens with May is a big part of where the Conservative vote goes.

    Despite the terrible campaign she did set herself up well early on as being about the JAMs and trying to appear as a different kind of Conservative to win votes. I think it worked to an extent, the campaign itself didn't go well and the manifesto didn't go well either but the basic set up and strategy leading up the campaign was brilliant. From the JAM speech, the coalitions of chaos warnings with the SNP and the ability to point to a divided Labour party whose MPs didn't want their leader as being the wrong person to negotiate Brexit.

    Considering the deal with the DUP is just as toxic (if not more) than one with the SNP, the fact that a new leader doing the JAM speech in different words won't have the same effect and being able to point to divided party having to negotiate Brexit won't work means these tactical advantages have been almost wiped out.

    Well on the assumption May goes anyway.

    Why should she act as a patsy ?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 1,019
    Anyone think Lansman might be looking for a favourable seat at some point?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    I hate these poll sets with a simple 'stayed the same' question. It negates the whole set because it is impossible to differentiate between those for whom 'stay the same' means still hate and those for whom it means still like.
    Indeed. It says that 37% have a worse opinion of Blair after this week. For most of those, his reputation probably couldn’t have got much worse than it was already.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Sandpit, quite. There comes a point where it doesn't matter. I imagine most of the Bulgars hated Basil II before Kleidion.

    Mr. Garner, it wouldn't be surprising, alas.

    Anyway, my eyes are going fuzzy, which isn't terribly helpful for proofreading. Play nicely, children.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,755

    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Bridge, not sure whether to give this weight or not, but I was speaking to my mother the other day about something or other, and she raised Corbyn's love of the customs union as going down like a lead balloon in some parts of the North (one comment she mentioned was that a northern lefty had said Corbyn should be put up against the wall).

    Charming. But then we had a lefty poster on this forum today wishing Iain Duncan Smith had been murdered (and tbf was heavily criticised by another lefty poster) we have John McDonnell endorsing the lynching of Esther McVey and a Leader of the Opposition joking about four murdered rivals being 'a very good start.'

    It almost makes me nostalgic for the days when Tony Banks said William Hague was a foetus who should be aborted.
    Be interesting in a link for that lynching endorsement. I did ask on here a while back if the version where he clearly says 'they said' that I found was wrong, but nobody provided me with a different version.

    That frankly came across as an endorsement.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited March 2018
    Yorkcity said:



    Why should she act as a patsy ?

    Good of the party/country, duty, pay cheque, the prestige, the power...

    Wouldn't be a 0% chance of winning. A number of reasons, the temptation to stand down would be pretty good though, also I understand she doesn't really need the money.
    viewcode said:

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    I think I saw polling that suggested around 5% of Labour votes were personal votes for the MP as the top reason. The amount of those who did vote Labour but only because they were sure Labour would lose and now would not vote Labour is probably pretty minimal...

    Most things I've seen and read seem to suggest that parties that look like they are going to win do better rather than worse, as much as there probably are voters who didn't like either party and reluctantly voted for one or the other would make you think otherwise.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    edited March 2018
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    viewcode said:

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    Charles said:

    TOPPING said:

    In the minds of many Remainers the simple act of advocating Brexit, with all the associated ills (some justified - alien registration, etc), means that the Cons have moved firmly to the right. Add to that the unwelcome presence of Redwood, Cash, JRM, etc and I don't think the Cons are going to pick up any centrist votes any time soon.

    So who to go to for NOTA? Can only be the LDs because (no offence) they are not seen as representing anything in particular and are in no chance of gaining power, even in coalition. Their Brexit stance is no more politically astute than their previous hypothecation advocacy.

    Hence I foresee a resurgence.

    At 42% they are most definitely picking up centrist votes.

    Or the centre is a lot smaller than you think
    The Conservative Party is fortunate that Corbyn scares off a lot of prosperous, centrist voters.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    I hate these poll sets with a simple 'stayed the same' question. It negates the whole set because it is impossible to differentiate between those for whom 'stay the same' means still hate and those for whom it means still like.
    I hate them too, but for a slightly different reason. A speech is an attempt to create a narrative. As it happens I don't think any of the four had what it takes to have succeeded in doing so, though John Major's was the closest. But it is too early to tell. Brexit isn't going to be a smooth process. It will be a chaotic mash of events. There will be crises. Deadlines will be set. Totally unrelated things will happen like a negotiator turning out to be a cross dressing dominatrix or a former mafia hitman. The winner from Brexit will the one who creates the story that people buy into. These polling figures tell us nothing about it. I don't think the opinion polls of any kind tell us much at this stage - though they are part of the back story.

    I actually wouldn't bet against Mrs May emerging quite well. Particularly if she decides she's lost her deposit anyway so may as well wreck the place, and sacks a few big names.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Isn’t that why Airbus built their A320 factory in China to supply the domestic market there? If they hadn’t, the Chinese would have just torn down one plane and reverse-engineered it anyway!
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)
    The bald truth is that there is more chance of Scotland winning the Calcutta Cup this year by a couple of tries .... :smiley:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,755
    edited March 2018

    Totally unrelated things will happen like a negotiator turning out to be a cross dressing dominatrix or a former mafia hitman.

    We already know that Barnier is a former Minister of Agriculture in the Fifth Republic of France. There couldn't possibly be anything worse to come out.

    (BTW on a more serious note I agree with the rest of your post.)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    Interesting to know, thank you.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    nielh said:

    BA and Iberia both use planes with flat beds on the Heathrow to Madrid route

    Are you sure?

    The BA flights from Heathrow to Madrid are BA362, 518 and 464. According to Flight Radar, all are narrowbody jets (A320, A319) - none of which have flat beds.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited March 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.
    I think this will be a good test of whether our current doctrine of free trade above all is actually true, at least in a market where a few major players don't stick to the rules.

    US trade with China has benefits in a sense of low inflation, but it probably has as many drawbacks as higher and higher value jobs continue to be lost to Chinese industry.

    I'm genuinely interested to see what happens.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Bridge, not sure whether to give this weight or not, but I was speaking to my mother the other day about something or other, and she raised Corbyn's love of the customs union as going down like a lead balloon in some parts of the North (one comment she mentioned was that a northern lefty had said Corbyn should be put up against the wall).

    Charming. But then we had a lefty poster on this forum today wishing Iain Duncan Smith had been murdered (and tbf was heavily criticised by another lefty poster) we have John McDonnell endorsing the lynching of Esther McVey and a Leader of the Opposition joking about four murdered rivals being 'a very good start.'

    It almost makes me nostalgic for the days when Tony Banks said William Hague was a foetus who should be aborted.
    I'm sure he can speak for himself, but as I recall DA is usually inclined to the Conservative but considers Brexit and the Tories' current incarnation as shit. Of course that's probably currently defined as 'lefty' in Brexitania.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)
    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen

    Interestingly, he did sort of receive a high level endorsement last time around:

    https://consequenceofsound.net/2016/03/joe-biden-endorses-bruce-springsteen-for-president/
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Well it would, if US companies are forced to pull out then China wouldn't be able to rip off the IP address easily as they do at the moment. Reverse engineering from a finished product isn't as easy as simply stealing the IP from source.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    JackW said:

    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)
    The bald truth is that there is more chance of Scotland winning the Calcutta Cup this year by a couple of tries .... :smiley:
    LOL wishful thinking. More chance of a 100/1 outsider in a four horse race winning a major party leadership bid.

    If I wasn’t in a Muslim country there would probably be pigs flying past my window. :)
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    ydoethur said:


    That frankly came across as an endorsement.

    I wouldn't say I was delighted when I heard it, it is definitely something I was rather he didn't say but without assuming negative intent it is difficult to condemn him too harshly, albeit without assuming positive intent (or no negative intent) you can't clear him. Without assuming intent it doesn't sound good but it is a repetition of something that he did presumably hear and see.

    In my defence I do try to apply this kind of thinking to politicians of all stripes, Trump, May, Farage, Corbyn. I feel the problem is if you don't like a politician it is all to easy to go looking for the worst in every statement or action.

    Obviously there are limits to this but I feel I manage to judge things more fairly and get caught up less in a good vs evil struggle If I at least try to remove my negative view of their intent.

    If we take for example May's citizens of nowhere speech, I'm sure she was trying to signal to potential supporters and left behind Brexiteers and there was something of a mild negative element (I felt anyway) in the thinking of it towards a more affluent city type resident but I feel people reacted that way to it because they wanted to see the negative intent in it and I highly doubt May meant it as an insult to millions of people in Britain living in City's.

    Maybe not quite to those levels but if you really went looking for it you would probably manage to find offence in the majority of MPs in the commons from at least a few statements.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Isn’t that why Airbus built their A320 factory in China to supply the domestic market there? If they hadn’t, the Chinese would have just torn down one plane and reverse-engineered it anyway!
    They've done that already! Bought a batch of A320s and one of them disappeared.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    Sandpit said:

    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)

    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen
    Well, he was born to run...

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    rcs1000 said:

    nielh said:

    BA and Iberia both use planes with flat beds on the Heathrow to Madrid route

    Are you sure?

    The BA flights from Heathrow to Madrid are BA362, 518 and 464. According to Flight Radar, all are narrowbody jets (A320, A319) - none of which have flat beds.
    Iberia use widebodies primarily to shift belly cargo.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    viewcode said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)

    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen
    Well, he was born to run...
    Damn it, that was far too obvious! :+1:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Isn’t that why Airbus built their A320 factory in China to supply the domestic market there? If they hadn’t, the Chinese would have just torn down one plane and reverse-engineered it anyway!
    They've done that already! Bought a batch of A320s and one of them disappeared.
    Ooh, didn’t know that. The Chinese factory has a local partner (as they all do), so it’s more likely they just pranged one and don’t want to tell anyone about it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,755

    ydoethur said:


    That frankly came across as an endorsement.

    I wouldn't say I was delighted when I heard it, it is definitely something I was rather he didn't say but without assuming negative intent it is difficult to condemn him too harshly, albeit without assuming positive intent (or no negative intent) you can't clear him. Without assuming intent it doesn't sound good but it is a repetition of something that he did presumably hear and see.
    How can I put this? If I hear a politician talking about nationalisation and not ruling it out, I assume it's an option they're considering. If I hear a politician talking about tax cuts and not ruling them out, I assume they're considering that too. If I hear a politician talking about his supporters wanting to lynch another politician without condemning them, I assume he is at least tacitly endorsing their views.

    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Bridge, not sure whether to give this weight or not, but I was speaking to my mother the other day about something or other, and she raised Corbyn's love of the customs union as going down like a lead balloon in some parts of the North (one comment she mentioned was that a northern lefty had said Corbyn should be put up against the wall).

    Charming. But then we had a lefty poster on this forum today wishing Iain Duncan Smith had been murdered (and tbf was heavily criticised by another lefty poster) we have John McDonnell endorsing the lynching of Esther McVey and a Leader of the Opposition joking about four murdered rivals being 'a very good start.'

    It almost makes me nostalgic for the days when Tony Banks said William Hague was a foetus who should be aborted.
    I'm sure he can speak for himself, but as I recall DA is usually inclined to the Conservative but considers Brexit and the Tories' current incarnation as shit. Of course that's probably currently defined as 'lefty' in Brexitania.
    I wouldn't know, as a Remainer (if I were feeling mischievous I would however point out every 'Yes' vote in the Scottish referendum was technically a 'Leave' vote in EU matters, so that would make you a Leaver... :smile: )
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,755
    viewcode said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)

    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen
    Well, he was born to run...
    So was Donald Trump. Well, he spouts shit 24/7.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263



    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    Not really. Labour did very well in lots of seats where the candidate was new and can't realistically have had much personal vote.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    edited March 2018

    Just a reminder of how good politicians used to be at making off the cuff speeches.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCXcF8L0KTA

    Brilliant speech and so prescient. Thanks for posting it. Frank Maguire had a lot to answer for, but so do the SNP. Had they abstained, devolution would have come sooner and life would ave been a lot better in a lot of ways.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    It wasn't just Rosindell though - there were big swings to the Tories throughout Havering in 2001 when they also gained Upminster. Demographic change has been significant in these seats.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    edited March 2018
    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    How can I put this? If I hear a politician talking about nationalisation and not ruling it out, I assume it's an option they're considering. If I hear a politician talking about tax cuts and not ruling them out, I assume they're considering that too. If I hear a politician talking about his supporters wanting to lynch another politician without condemning them, I assume he is at least tacitly endorsing their views.
    ..................................................

    So, for example, the politicians and posters here that have talked of a potential violent reaction if the will of the people in regards to Brexit being overturned by MPs are actually endorsing it?

    Although in this case surely it is even worse as these people aren't usually even repeating what they have heard someone or a another group say but actually saying it themselves and in the case of MPs making it public whereas McDonnell kept his endorsement (if we assume that is what it is) quiet. Also whilst their both pretty bad if we assume the worst of both then endorsing the lynching woman, whilst horrific does actually pale in comparison to *endorsing civil insurrection from millions of people....

    It is your view and I respect that but if we assume everything a politician says without specific condemnation is an endorsement then it must be hell finding politicians you can vote for happily.

    *Also just to note I am not actually claiming I believe this to be the case.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    What a wonderful trip. I wish I'd been able to do it. Really envy you.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    edited March 2018
    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:



    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    Interesting to know, thank you.
    I think you can make a reasonable case that I built up a personal vote over time:
    1992: Conservaives led nationallly by 7.5 %, in Broxtowe by 16.2%
    2010: Conservatives led nationally by 7.1 %, in Broxtowe by 0.7%.

    I improved on the national swing in 3 of the 4 elections to 2010. In 2015, I stood again but by that time a quarter of the electorate had changed and I'd been working in London for 5 years, so the personal vote largely dissipated and there was an above-average swing to the Tories, who won by 8% vs 6.5% nationally. I got the message and didn't stand again in 2017.

    There was no obvious demographic change to account for any of this - the seat is a classic East Midlands seat with no dominant demographic group.
  • How can I put this? If I hear a politician talking about nationalisation and not ruling it out, I assume it's an option they're considering. If I hear a politician talking about tax cuts and not ruling them out, I assume they're considering that too. If I hear a politician talking about his supporters wanting to lynch another politician without condemning them, I assume he is at least tacitly endorsing their views.
    ..................................................

    So, for example, the politicians and posters here that have talked of a potential violent reaction if the will of the people in regards to Brexit being overturned by MPs are actually endorsing it?

    Although in this case surely it is even worse as these people aren't usually even repeating what they have heard someone or a another group say but actually saying it themselves and in the case of MPs making it public whereas McDonnell kept his endorsement (if we assume that is what it is) quiet. Also whilst their both pretty bad if we assume the worst of both then endorsing the lynching woman, whilst horrific does actually pale in comparison to *endorsing civil insurrection from millions of people....

    It is your view and I respect that but if we assume everything a politician says without specific condemnation is an endorsement then it must be hell finding politicians you can vote for happily.

    *Also just to note I am not actually claiming I believe this to be the case.

    I am surprised you are trying to make a distinction between two equally abhorrent views
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8
  • viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    What a wonderful trip. I wish I'd been able to do it. Really envy you.
    It does make you stand and stare and feel very humble
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited March 2018
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Isn’t that why Airbus built their A320 factory in China to supply the domestic market there? If they hadn’t, the Chinese would have just torn down one plane and reverse-engineered it anyway!
    While the Russian's are busy aggressively hacking to try and influence elections* and cast doubt on Olympic champions, the Chinese are quietly very busy hacking to steal all the IP they can (especially from companies with no Chinese presence).

    * Yes I know they also hack for IP, but they are making such a racket that everybody is instantly worried about anything Russian. The Chinese just go about their business quietly, just like the military build up in the South China sea and taking over Africa.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    edited March 2018
    ydoethur said:


    I wouldn't know, as a Remainer (if I were feeling mischievous I would however point out every 'Yes' vote in the Scottish referendum was technically a 'Leave' vote in EU matters, so that would make you a Leaver... :smile: )

    You wouldn't know but were happy to assert that 'But then we had a lefty poster on this forum today wishing Iain Duncan Smith had been murdered'?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:



    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    Interesting to know, thank you.
    I think you can make a reasonable case that I built up a personal vote over time:
    1992: Conservaives led nationallly by 7.5 %, in Broxtowe by 16.2%
    2010: Conservatives led nationally by 7.1 %, in Broxtowe by 0.7%.

    I improved on the national swing in 3 of the 4 elections to 2010. In 2015, I stood again but by that time a quarter of the electorate had changed and I'd been working in London for 5 years, so the personal vote largely dissipated and there was an above-average swing to the Tories, who won by 8% vs 6.5% nationally. I got the message and didn't stand again in 2017.

    There was no obvious demographic change to account for any of this - the seat is a classic East Midlands seat with no dominant demographic group.
    Your failure to lure the substantial Jacobite vote was clearly crucial in your defeats.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Well it would, if US companies are forced to pull out then China wouldn't be able to rip off the IP address easily as they do at the moment. Reverse engineering from a finished product isn't as easy as simply stealing the IP from source.
    I wouldn't underestimate the quality of Chinese R&D. Like Japan in the 1960s and 70s (or Korea in the 90s and 2000s), they've quickly moved on from copying our stuff to generating their own.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840



    I am surprised you are trying to make a distinction between two equally abhorrent views

    Well civil insurrection would probably involve many women and men dying so in a purely numbers based scenario it would be obvious but my main point was they are not endorsing that situation. They may be playing up the idea for less than pure motives, but they are not endorsing the idea.


  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    What a wonderful trip. I wish I'd been able to do it. Really envy you.
    I have been on big trips with people well into their eighties. I remember a very spritely lady of nearly 90, who was racing up a mountain in Arizona to see the Spotted Owls... And that was at over 9,000 feet.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh shit, he’s actually trying to start a bloody trade war. :open_mouth:
    The US might "win" a trade war - in that the EU and China are hurt more than the US - but that won't make up for the increased unemployment and inevitable recession.

    (I'd also note that while Germany exports $22bn of cars to the US, that's not actually that much in the general scheme of things.)
    If you think that China is an existential threat to the US (which Trump probably does) you may calculate that it's worth damaging their economy, even if it harms the US too.
    Also... here's the thing, though. China is getting richer because it is learning our secrets. A US-China trade war would not stop the Chinese getting smarter.
    Isn’t that why Airbus built their A320 factory in China to supply the domestic market there? If they hadn’t, the Chinese would have just torn down one plane and reverse-engineered it anyway!
    Airbus gave China a final assembly line, which is relatively low risk in terms of knowledge transfer. Kawasaki had a brief JV for one of China's several high speed train manufacturers and has more to complain about. Kawasaki was thrown out of the JV and the Chinese partner produced the trains on its own. Kawasaki estimated it wasn't worth suing for patent infringement although it reckons it has a watertight case. The really galling thing was the Chinese company selling what Kawasaki sees as derivatives of its own trains on the world market, undercutting Kawasaki on price.

    Having said that, domestic manufacturers are losing out to foreign ones in the Chinese car market. As consumers get wealthier they are rejecting Cherys in favour of Audis.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    What a wonderful trip. I wish I'd been able to do it. Really envy you.
    I have been on big trips with people well into their eighties. I remember a very spritely lady of nearly 90, who was racing up a mountain in Arizona to see the Spotted Owls... And that was at over 9,000 feet.
    Sounds very Mrs JackW .... :sunglasses:
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    One shouldn’t be complacent as a Tory, certainly. But nor should one buy into this “Corbyn inexorability” narrative.

    Corbyn remains very unpopular in large parts of the country that Labour needs to make inroads into. And next time large numbers of people will be highly motivated to turn out and vote against Labour...

    I agree, and I'm not saying Corbyn will become PM, inexorably or otherwise. ;)

    But in some ways the Conservatives need to forget about Corbyn, and sort out their own offer to the country. A positive vision.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I am going sailing in Svalbard this summer, to see how I get on with high latitudes. It sounds great - probably the only place in the world where it can be illegal *not* to have a loaded rifle with you.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    GIN1138 said:

    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8

    Those were the days! Even an innocuous Fairy Liquid ad shows the girl in bra and pants
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    Roger said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8

    Those were the days! Even an innocuous Fairy Liquid ad shows the girl in bra and pants
    In Los Angeles you can actually hire "topless maids" to do your cleaning for you.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    edited March 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I am going sailing in Svalbard this summer, to see how I get on with high latitudes. It sounds great - probably the only place in the world where it can be illegal *not* to have a loaded rifle with you.
    My wife and I have also visited Svalbard and you will love it. We saw polar bears from the ship, sea life and fantastic scenery but it does take time to get accustomed to 24/7 daylight in the summer
  • rcs1000 said:

    Roger said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8

    Those were the days! Even an innocuous Fairy Liquid ad shows the girl in bra and pants
    In Los Angeles you can actually hire "topless maids" to do your cleaning for you.
    You can hire them in the UK as well.

    I only know this when I googled cleaners in Manchester.


    https://www.naturistcleaners.co.uk/services/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    A
    rcs1000 said:

    Roger said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8

    Those were the days! Even an innocuous Fairy Liquid ad shows the girl in bra and pants
    In Los Angeles you can actually hire "topless maids" to do your cleaning for you.
    A hand wash?
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    edited March 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    nielh said:

    BA and Iberia both use planes with flat beds on the Heathrow to Madrid route

    Are you sure?

    The BA flights from Heathrow to Madrid are BA362, 518 and 464. According to Flight Radar, all are narrowbody jets (A320, A319) - none of which have flat beds.
    I can't tell you the flight numbers, but they definetly do. I looked a couple of weeks ago on the BA website, and they were running a 787 on the route on one of the afternoon slots.

    You can see that one of the points geeks has written an article about it here, google will reveal many others.

    https://www.headforpoints.com/2016/12/19/british-airways-to-run-a-777-to-madrid-in-2017-offering-club-world-and-first/

    edit - obviously its not all of the flights on the route, just certain times of the day.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I am going sailing in Svalbard this summer, to see how I get on with high latitudes. It sounds great - probably the only place in the world where it can be illegal *not* to have a loaded rifle with you.
    My wife and I have also visited Svalbard and you will love it. We saw polar bears from the ship, sea life and fantastic scenery but it does take time to get accustomed to 24/7 daylight in the summer
    The kit list says to bring a head torch, which worried me a bit. Handy in a Jonah and the whale situation, perhaps.
  • Ishmael_Z said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I am going sailing in Svalbard this summer, to see how I get on with high latitudes. It sounds great - probably the only place in the world where it can be illegal *not* to have a loaded rifle with you.
    My wife and I have also visited Svalbard and you will love it. We saw polar bears from the ship, sea life and fantastic scenery but it does take time to get accustomed to 24/7 daylight in the summer
    The kit list says to bring a head torch, which worried me a bit. Handy in a Jonah and the whale situation, perhaps.
    That's funny but it does stay light in the summer throughout the night
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    JackW said:

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    What a wonderful trip. I wish I'd been able to do it. Really envy you.
    I have been on big trips with people well into their eighties. I remember a very spritely lady of nearly 90, who was racing up a mountain in Arizona to see the Spotted Owls... And that was at over 9,000 feet.
    Sounds very Mrs JackW .... :sunglasses:
    Did naughty old Jack tell her there was a shoe shop at 10,000 feet?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    Labour candidates didn't think Corbyn could win either. They asked for personal votes instead. Has anyone considered that these peronal votes happened, support for Corbyn didn't?

    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    It wasn't just Rosindell though - there were big swings to the Tories throughout Havering in 2001 when they also gained Upminster. Demographic change has been significant in these seats.
    To an extent but the swing in Upminster was 5% in 2001 compared to 9% in Romford
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:



    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    Interesting to know, thank you.
    I think you can make a reasonable case that I built up a personal vote over time:
    1992: Conservaives led nationallly by 7.5 %, in Broxtowe by 16.2%
    2010: Conservatives led nationally by 7.1 %, in Broxtowe by 0.7%.

    I improved on the national swing in 3 of the 4 elections to 2010. In 2015, I stood again but by that time a quarter of the electorate had changed and I'd been working in London for 5 years, so the personal vote largely dissipated and there was an above-average swing to the Tories, who won by 8% vs 6.5% nationally. I got the message and didn't stand again in 2017.

    There was no obvious demographic change to account for any of this - the seat is a classic East Midlands seat with no dominant demographic group.
    Shows you made a difference by working the seat
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    I have always believed that Corbyn owed much of his success in 2017 to his having been able to change the focus of the campaign . Few people were particularly interested in the technicalities of Brexit per se - and he managed to change the subject by addressing concerns felt much more acutely by the wider electorate rather than political anoraks such as ourselves. Had it been a Brexit election , May would have won handsomely last June. It wasn't - and is very unlikely to be so next time either.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited March 2018
    I did tip Boris as next out of the cabinet at 5/1 the other day.

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/970044539338706950
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,744
    justin124 said:

    I have always believed that Corbyn owed much of his success in 2017 to his having been able to change the focus of the campaign . Few people were particularly interested in the technicalities of Brexit per se - and he managed to change the subject by addressing concerns felt much more acutely by the wider electorate rather than political anoraks such as ourselves. Had it been a Brexit election , May would have won handsomely last June. It wasn't - and is very unlikely to be so next time either.

    Indeed and to show there's a world beyond leaving the EU and A50 negotiations:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43273843

    Interesting to see John McDonnell borrow David Hodge's comments to have a pop at Hammond , a Surrey MP.

  • I did tip Boris as next out of the cabinet at 5/1 the other day.

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/970044539338706950

    The pro remain sunday mail trying to cause mischief with Boris - nothing new then
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If you become unemployed as a result of Trump's trade policies, then you won't be voting for him in 2020.

    We really need an insightful PB tipster who might read the tea leaves and spot an outrageous 50/1 shot for 2020 POTUS. Any clues ?
    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)
    Well I didn't get 200/1 Trump
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    justin124 said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    I have always believed that Corbyn owed much of his success in 2017 to his having been able to change the focus of the campaign . Few people were particularly interested in the technicalities of Brexit per se - and he managed to change the subject by addressing concerns felt much more acutely by the wider electorate rather than political anoraks such as ourselves. Had it been a Brexit election , May would have won handsomely last June. It wasn't - and is very unlikely to be so next time either.
    Plus Corbyn's Brexit policy at the time was virtually indistinguishable from May's anyway
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.
    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.
    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
    Labour Leave campaigned to 'Wipe the smile off their faces'. Must have pushed a fair few Labour waverers into the Leave camp.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:



    In 2015/5 a lot of LD's pinned their hopes no personal votes and were sustained in that belief by name-specific polling. In the election itself the putative "personal vote" vanished and they lost heavily. I'm not sure personal votes exist in big enough numbers to overcome a swing, except for people at (say) Cabinet level.

    It is rare but a few MPs and parliamentary candidates have it eg Andrew Rosindell got a 9% swing from Labour in Romford in 2001 against a national swing to the Tories of just 1.75%.

    In Ilford South Mike Gapes got a swing to Labour of 0.2% in Ilford South in 2010 against a national swing to the Tories of 5%
    Interesting to know, thank you.
    I think you can make a reasonable case that I built up a personal vote over time:
    1992: Conservaives led nationallly by 7.5 %, in Broxtowe by 16.2%
    2010: Conservatives led nationally by 7.1 %, in Broxtowe by 0.7%.

    I improved on the national swing in 3 of the 4 elections to 2010. In 2015, I stood again but by that time a quarter of the electorate had changed and I'd been working in London for 5 years, so the personal vote largely dissipated and there was an above-average swing to the Tories, who won by 8% vs 6.5% nationally. I got the message and didn't stand again in 2017.

    There was no obvious demographic change to account for any of this - the seat is a classic East Midlands seat with no dominant demographic group.
    Seems plausible.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I don't think I would like the cold, but thank you for the suggestion
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    ydoethur said:

    viewcode said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)

    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen
    Well, he was born to run...
    So was Donald Trump. Well, he spouts shit 24/7.
    Boom, boom.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    Sandpit said:

    viewcode said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ha ha, as if there was any chance of a 50/1 shot coming in for POTUS.

    ;)

    My tip (OK, wishcast) for 2020: Bruce Springsteen
    Well, he was born to run...
    Damn it, that was far too obvious! :+1:
    Thank you.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.
    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
    Labour Leave campaigned to 'Wipe the smile off their faces'. Must have pushed a fair few Labour waverers into the Leave camp.
    Perhaps but they were not the reason Leave won, otherwise Labour would have won in 2015, the reason Leave won was immigration concerns and regaining sovereignty
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    US President Donald Trump has stepped up his war of words over trade tariffs, threatening to "apply a tax" on imports of cars from the European Union.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    edited March 2018
    For those of you who are interested about the logistics of polling, you might like to read this article from Kantar (formerly TNS-BRMB)

    https://uk.kantar.com/home/public-opinion/politics/2018/how-does-kantar-public-weight-its-voting-intention-data/
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.

    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
    Ah yes, 2015 was the election where the Conservatives cheated, wasn`t it?

    The issues that you name as key factors in influencing the Referendum result, were just part of the rhetoric. Sovereignty.... taking back power..... Yes, taking back power on the part of the excessively wealthy top Tory elite, maybe. Nobody much voted for that.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    I have always believed that Corbyn owed much of his success in 2017 to his having been able to change the focus of the campaign . Few people were particularly interested in the technicalities of Brexit per se - and he managed to change the subject by addressing concerns felt much more acutely by the wider electorate rather than political anoraks such as ourselves. Had it been a Brexit election , May would have won handsomely last June. It wasn't - and is very unlikely to be so next time either.
    Plus Corbyn's Brexit policy at the time was virtually indistinguishable from May's anyway
    Maybe so , but I really don't believe that Brexit was uppermost in the minds of most voters. Attitudes to Corbyn himself were much more important - he was very much a Marmite influence. Whilst many were drawn to Labour and inspired by him , I know from my own experience that a significant number of lifelong Labour voters were alienated and voted Tory for the first time. Whether those people would vote Tory again is another matter - and perhaps holds the key to Corbyn's prospects of a majority next time.
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Good news - we've found one and half million penguins nobody knew about - in the gloriously named Danger Islands.

    http://time.com/5182795/adelie-penguins-danger-islands-antarctica/

    They were hiding?

    "...nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine, one million...ready or not, I'm coo-mming!"
    My wife and I went to Antarctica for our retirement celebration and it was quite the most amazing, awe inspiring trip of a lifetime with images of unimaginable beauty, teaming wildlife, icebergs, and yes hurricane seas. But the magic of landing on the ice from a zodiac with full survival equipment, if needed, was a privilege and the photographic opportunities were indescribable.

    As for the delightful penguins you could usual smell them long before you reached their colonies.

    If anyone gets the chance , do not hesitate and go and wonder at the beauty of our ever so precious World and the magic that is Antarctica
    I don't think I would like the cold, but thank you for the suggestion
    You are required to take suitable base layers and kit and , while it is cold, proper clothing dissipates the cold
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    Regardless 52% were still prepared to vote for Brexit even if some of the 48% did indeed try and get some revenge by voting Labour in 2017
    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.
    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
    Labour Leave campaigned to 'Wipe the smile off their faces'. Must have pushed a fair few Labour waverers into the Leave camp.
    Perhaps but they were not the reason Leave won, otherwise Labour would have won in 2015, the reason Leave won was immigration concerns and regaining sovereignty
    If it only moved 3% of voters it made all the difference.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    US President Donald Trump has stepped up his war of words over trade tariffs, threatening to "apply a tax" on imports of cars from the European Union.

    Good job we are leaving ;-)

    seriously, dear god, Trump is going to start a trade war isn't he

    Because they always end well.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Roger said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Thread header reminds me of this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LaVvSIT_8

    Those were the days! Even an innocuous Fairy Liquid ad shows the girl in bra and pants
    What's happened to your pre-Oscars thread header Rog? :(
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited March 2018
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    Not there yet, Mr HYUFD. I don`t think they were voting FOR Brexit. They were voting against Cameron`s Conservative government. And they did so again in the general election - not FOR a Socialist programme.

    Cameron of course won a majority in 2015. It was immigration concerns and sovereignty which won Leave a majority not an anti Cameron protest vote as such
    Ah yes, 2015 was the election where the Conservatives cheated, wasn`t it?

    The issues that you name as key factors in influencing the Referendum result, were just part of the rhetoric. Sovereignty.... taking back power..... Yes, taking back power on the part of the excessively wealthy top Tory elite, maybe. Nobody much voted for that.
    At least they could get rid of that Tory elite at a general election if they so chose, they could not get rid of Juncker and the EU Commission even if they wanted to
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    PClipp said:


    Ah yes, 2015 was the election where the Conservatives cheated, wasn`t it?

    The one where they were fined £20,000 by the Electoral Commission for 307 undeclared election payments totalling £184,676.

    Oh, my bad, that was the LibDems cheats.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    The 'centre' is by definition voters who are dead centre in the median of public opinion. For many years the 'centre' at least on Brexit has been assumed to be pro EU, the referendum vote means the 'centre' is now by definition represented by someone who voted against the EU.

    Has it been established anywhere just how many people voted Leave because they were voting against Cameron and the Tories?

    For that matter, just how many people voted Labour in the General Election, because they thought Labour under Corbyn were in favour of remaining in the EU?
    I have always believed that Corbyn owed much of his success in 2017 to his having been able to change the focus of the campaign . Few people were particularly interested in the technicalities of Brexit per se - and he managed to change the subject by addressing concerns felt much more acutely by the wider electorate rather than political anoraks such as ourselves. Had it been a Brexit election , May would have won handsomely last June. It wasn't - and is very unlikely to be so next time either.
    Plus Corbyn's Brexit policy at the time was virtually indistinguishable from May's anyway
    Maybe so , but I really don't believe that Brexit was uppermost in the minds of most voters. Attitudes to Corbyn himself were much more important - he was very much a Marmite influence. Whilst many were drawn to Labour and inspired by him , I know from my own experience that a significant number of lifelong Labour voters were alienated and voted Tory for the first time. Whether those people would vote Tory again is another matter - and perhaps holds the key to Corbyn's prospects of a majority next time.
    Corbyn was a factor but the fact he neutralised Brexit as a campaigning tool for May stopped dead her plans for a landslide win to endorse her Brexit plans and then she managed to lose her majority by shooting her base in the foot with the disastrous dementia tax plan
This discussion has been closed.