Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The PB / Polling Matters podcast returns!

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited March 28 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The PB / Polling Matters podcast returns!

As a new YouGov poll shows the Tories 4 points ahead, Keiran Pedley and Leo Barasi discuss the untold story of the recent Conservative resurgence in the polls and ask what is behind it and does it matter?

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 621
    edited March 28
    First, like Woodcock?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,974
    edited March 28
    Second....like class citizens Jews in the Labour Party.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,988
    Third...rate like Corbyn.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,885
    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 5,698

    Second....like class citizens Jews in the Labour Party.

    At a time when Jews are being killed in Europe just for being Jewish.

    Labour are just an utter bucket of filth right now.

    If I was Jewish I would be very anxious about the way things are moving right now.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Danny565 said:

    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
    A sound analysis!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,885

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,153
    edited March 28
    FPT

    MikeL said:
    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.


    The exponentially smoothed moving average smooths out the MOE froth but is sensitive to underlying trends.

    The big picture is that, over the last three months, the Tories have moved from 40% to 41%. Labour has stayed constant on 41%. UKIP has dropped a point from 4% to 3%. It looks as if there has been a small transfer from UKIP to Conservative.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,281
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    I think your analysis here is also spot on as well.
  • Scott_P said:
    For context, Ronny Jackson is an Admiral in the US Navy, Harriet Miers for Justice on the Supreme Court this is not
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,117
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    One of Corbyn's USPs however, in a way that Zac's wasn't, is that he is an honest, decent, principled man. His evasion around his institutional anti-Semitism if not actual anti-Semitism will do some damage to that assessment of his character.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,956
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    I think that the rows over antisemitism are unhelpful to Labour, and will be a net vote loser, but not a big net vote loser.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,977

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Danny565 said:

    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
    But, Corbyn shot himself in the foot.

    May was equally “in control” of events during the Manchester and London terror attacks last year, where Corbyn - cynically, but effectively - played the politics rather well.

    He succumbed to hubris this year, tried it again and just made himself look like Putin’s sockpuppet.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,974
    Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

    The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

    Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 2,338
    Scott_P said:
    Difficult to tell what is real and what is a spoof re White House these days.
    Perhaps that is the point?
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,640
    There is zero chance of Parliament coming up with anything like a coherent position that could form the basis of a negotiation. That is not how Parliament is supposed to work. The EU is not going to talk to Parliament to agree anything. That is why we have governments.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,281
    edited March 28

    Danny565 said:

    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
    But, Corbyn shot himself in the foot.

    May was equally “in control” of events during the Manchester and London terror attacks last year, where Corbyn - cynically, but effectively - played the politics rather well.

    He succumbed to hubris this year, tried it again and just made himself look like Putin’s sockpuppet.
    I don’t think it’s hubris so much as stubbornness. Corbyn has had a certain kind of world view for decades and he’s not letting it go, no matter what sadly.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,974

    Danny565 said:

    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
    But, Corbyn shot himself in the foot.

    May was equally “in control” of events during the Manchester and London terror attacks last year, where Corbyn - cynically, but effectively - played the politics rather well.

    He succumbed to hubris this year, tried it again and just made himself look like Putin’s sockpuppet.
    I don’t think it’s hubris so much as stubbornness. Corbyn’s has a certain kind of world view for decades and he’s not letting it go, no matter what sadly.
    Remember during the GE, even his supposed shift on trident renewal, he was caught out on the phone to Seamus basically say they bought all the bollocks and nothing had really changed.

    But Jezza never lies...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532

    Danny565 said:

    FPT:-



    May wouldn't have looked as 'above party politics' over Salisbury if Corbyn hadn't stuck to his anti-West lines.

    Yes she would - no matter how much the Opposition leader agrees with the PM on matters like this, it's only the PM who actually has the power to do stuff about it, and to be seen to be "in control" of events. The Conservatives and Democrats were fully behind Blair and Bush's responses to 9/11 (at first atleast), but it was still only Blair and Bush who reaped the benefits in the polls.
    But, Corbyn shot himself in the foot.

    May was equally “in control” of events during the Manchester and London terror attacks last year, where Corbyn - cynically, but effectively - played the politics rather well.

    He succumbed to hubris this year, tried it again and just made himself look like Putin’s sockpuppet.
    I don’t think it’s hubris so much as stubbornness. Corbyn’s has had a certain kind of world view for decades and he’s not letting it go, no matter what sadly.
    Yes, and he will either live or die by it, politically.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,836
    Re: ShawCroft

    Wasn’t there a fight over her appointment? Was she the one that Momentum wanted ir the one they opposed?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,977
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    Do they have a majority for it? That is the question.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    JonathanD said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    One of Corbyn's USPs however, in a way that Zac's wasn't, is that he is an honest, decent, principled man. His evasion around his institutional anti-Semitism if not actual anti-Semitism will do some damage to that assessment of his character.
    Agreed. Make no mistake, Corbyn is not antisemitic.

    But his inability to condemn his supporters who are is damaging to his reputation.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,846
    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    Because it isn’t within the gift of Parliament and/or the Government to reject any agreed deal in favour of further negotiation whilst not crashing out of the EU in the meantime. If you oppose the outcome of any deal it makes far more coherent sense to accept the outcome and then seek a mandate in an election for further negotiation from without the EU.

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,885

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    Do they have a majority for it? That is the question.
    They have had for every vote apart from one procedural (non substantive) amendment, so far.

    For rational followers of politics, that answers the question.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,988
    edited March 28
    Anazina said:

    JonathanD said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    One of Corbyn's USPs however, in a way that Zac's wasn't, is that he is an honest, decent, principled man. His evasion around his institutional anti-Semitism if not actual anti-Semitism will do some damage to that assessment of his character.
    Agreed. Make no mistake, Corbyn is not antisemitic.

    But his inability to condemn his supporters who are is damaging to his reputation.
    His unwillingness to speak directly to the media to remove all doubt about his sincerity doesn't help his case that he is not antisemtic. At some point Corbyn is going to have to stop hiding behind Milne and the spinners and take questions.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    You seem remarkably confident that they have a majority for it, despite not actually knowing what the deal will be. Must be great to be so sanguine.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,846
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    Well it’s possible that a rerun of 2017 could be quite successful in the context of a Labour Party coming off the fence over Brexit and not being able to simultaneously draw votes from both sides.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,817

    Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

    The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

    Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

    ,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

    Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,275
    Charles said:

    Re: ShawCroft

    Wasn’t there a fight over her appointment? Was she the one that Momentum wanted ir the one they opposed?

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,185
    edited March 28

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    No it won't. The only thing that will move votes is giving people a positive reason to vote for us, we've already got the votes of people who don't like Corbyn, there's nothing left in the tank there.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    I
    Floater said:

    Interesting back story on her - a big fan of Lutfur - which previously earned her a suspension.
    I was going to say that should have been a big red flag, but obviously that would be a good thing.

    I look forward to seeing in the podcast how the antisemitism row could matter in a way I wouldn't expect.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    You seem remarkably confident that they have a majority for it, despite not actually knowing what the deal will be. Must be great to be so sanguine.
    It is very rare that the government lose a vote about anything. When there has been a referendum and by then hundreds of related votes in favour of Brexit, it isn't exactly difficult to have a strong degree of confidence that the final substantive vote will go the same way.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Anazina said:

    JonathanD said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    One of Corbyn's USPs however, in a way that Zac's wasn't, is that he is an honest, decent, principled man. His evasion around his institutional anti-Semitism if not actual anti-Semitism will do some damage to that assessment of his character.
    Agreed. Make no mistake, Corbyn is not antisemitic.

    But his inability to condemn his supporters who are is damaging to his reputation.
    How do you know?

    I know you want to believe he’s whiter than white, and it’s just his supporters that are the problem, but the evidence for that isn’t conclusive.

    A fish rots from the head. I can’t think of a political party leader in my lifetime who wouldn’t have steered clear of commenting on a mural like that in a million years, except Nick Griffin.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    I think HMG will end up making a small number of concessions to the Lords.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    Floater said:

    Interesting back story on her - a big fan of Lutfur - which previously earned her a suspension.

    Floater said:

    twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/979100827095916551

    No problem with antisemitism in the Labour Party....they did an investigation and everything.
    Its almost like ... they have no problem with it because they are ok with it.


    Witness the e mail released today
    What I find the most incredible is just how right on, easily offended on others behalf, non-platformy, everybody else is a bigot, so many of Jezza's most vocal supporters are.

    If there was even a whiff of this kind of bigoted behaviour towards say the LGBT community, they would be protesting like mad and trying to shut down anybody involved from going about their daily commitments.

    But instead they find all sorts of excuses why Jezza hanging out in 5 different Facebook groups dominated by antisemitic conspiracy nutters is nothing to do with Jezza.
    That, I think, is a fair point. It's an extension to the old idea of 'would I be ok with an opponent doing this?' , being 'would i be offended if it was another group?'
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,988

    Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

    The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

    Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

    ,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

    Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.
    The speadsheet tax error spin does seem rather implausible.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    MaxPB said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    No it won't. The only thing that will move votes is giving people a positive reason to vote for us, we've already got the votes of people who don't like Corbyn, there's nothing left in the tank there.
    I think a small peel off of some Labour votes to Green/LD and NOTA could occur from it.

    I agree the Tories need to move the story on from austerity and Brexit only.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,227
    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    What I don't understand is how turning down the deal (whatever it is) is going to change anything. Will the EU stop the A50 clock & open up with more concessions because of a vote in the UK parliament?

    Sounds a bit like ordering the tide not to come in, to me.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    Do they have a majority for it? That is the question.
    They have had for every vote apart from one procedural (non substantive) amendment, so far.

    For rational followers of politics, that answers the question.
    In other words, they have always commanded a majority except when they haven’t.

    For rational followers of logic, that answers William’s question.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    Floater said:

    Interesting back story on her - a big fan of Lutfur - which previously earned her a suspension.

    Floater said:

    twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/979100827095916551

    No problem with antisemitism in the Labour Party....they did an investigation and everything.
    Its almost like ... they have no problem with it because they are ok with it.


    Witness the e mail released today
    What I find the most incredible is just how right on, easily offended on others behalf, non-platformy, everybody else is a bigot, so many of Jezza's most vocal supporters are.

    If there was even a whiff of this kind of bigoted behaviour towards say the LGBT community, they would be protesting like mad and trying to shut down anybody involved from going about their daily commitments.

    But instead they find all sorts of excuses why Jezza hanging out in 5 different Facebook groups dominated by antisemitic conspiracy nutters is nothing to do with Jezza.
    That, I think, is a fair point. It's an extension to the old idea of 'would I be ok with an opponent doing this?' , being 'would i be offended if it was another group?'

    So all this stuff about anti-Semitism hasn't harmed Labour.

    It's not as though it has been taken as gospel that it would. A lot have said it should, or could, but I don't think there's been any sort of consensus it would.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,836
    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Re: ShawCroft

    Wasn’t there a fight over her appointment? Was she the one that Momentum wanted ir the one they opposed?

    I know that. It’s more likely this has been used to settle old scores
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,114
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,185

    MaxPB said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    No it won't. The only thing that will move votes is giving people a positive reason to vote for us, we've already got the votes of people who don't like Corbyn, there's nothing left in the tank there.
    I think a small peel off of some Labour votes to Green/LD and NOTA could occur from it.

    I agree the Tories need to move the story on from austerity and Brexit only.
    It's not going to be substantial enough to get us a majority.

    It's not just austerity and Brexit. It's being something other than "not Corbyn". It didn't work last time, just as being "not Trump" didn't work very well for Hilary.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    edited March 28
    I'm not opposed to anything to avoid a no deal, but if the deal is voted down what our parliament wants might be too late to matter, surely?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    edited March 28

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    I think HMG will end up making a small number of concessions to the Lords.
    To be fair to the Lords (well, sort of), past behaviour indicates that they know that if the unelected upper chamber try to outmanoeuvre not only the elected chamber but also go against the referendum, then the PM will have every justification to flood the chamber AND introduce legislation to fundamentally reform the house.

    I suspect there will be no concessions at all to the Upper House.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 2,338
    alex. said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    Well it’s possible that a rerun of 2017 could be quite successful in the context of a Labour Party coming off the fence over Brexit and not being able to simultaneously draw votes from both sides.
    This is true. But equally it could see a Conservative Party having to fess up that Brexit will have winners AND losers. And having to explain that some of the losers will be their own supporters.
    We really don't know. Either way it may be sensible to have a fall back plan.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    You seem remarkably confident that they have a majority for it, despite not actually knowing what the deal will be. Must be great to be so sanguine.
    It is very rare that the government lose a vote about anything. When there has been a referendum and by then hundreds of related votes in favour of Brexit, it isn't exactly difficult to have a strong degree of confidence that the final substantive vote will go the same way.
    If it’s sensible and soft, yes. Perhaps it will be. We can only hope that Brexit is very much like Not Brexit, I’m sure enlightened businessmen like you will agree.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    Do they have a majority for it? That is the question.
    They have had for every vote apart from one procedural (non substantive) amendment, so far.

    For rational followers of politics, that answers the question.
    In other words, they have always commanded a majority except when they haven’t.

    For rational followers of logic, that answers William’s question.
    Of the 13 Tories who voted for the one amendment on which the Govt narrowly lost, I'd be surprised if more than 1 voted against a final deal.

    Thats the rub, however much Remainers wish it weren't so.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    No it won't. The only thing that will move votes is giving people a positive reason to vote for us, we've already got the votes of people who don't like Corbyn, there's nothing left in the tank there.
    I think a small peel off of some Labour votes to Green/LD and NOTA could occur from it.

    I agree the Tories need to move the story on from austerity and Brexit only.
    It's not going to be substantial enough to get us a majority.

    It's not just austerity and Brexit. It's being something other than "not Corbyn". It didn't work last time, just as being "not Trump" didn't work very well for Hilary.
    Yes, and I agree with you, but that wasn’t the point I was trying to make.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    You seem remarkably confident that they have a majority for it, despite not actually knowing what the deal will be. Must be great to be so sanguine.
    It is very rare that the government lose a vote about anything. When there has been a referendum and by then hundreds of related votes in favour of Brexit, it isn't exactly difficult to have a strong degree of confidence that the final substantive vote will go the same way.
    If it’s sensible and soft, yes. Perhaps it will be. We can only hope that Brexit is very much like Not Brexit, I’m sure enlightened businessmen like you will agree.
    Not sure how enlightened I am, TBH, I sell old paper bound in leather....
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    Do they have a majority for it? That is the question.
    They have had for every vote apart from one procedural (non substantive) amendment, so far.

    For rational followers of politics, that answers the question.
    In other words, they have always commanded a majority except when they haven’t.

    For rational followers of logic, that answers William’s question.
    Of the 13 Tories who voted for the one amendment on which the Govt narrowly lost, I'd be surprised if more than 1 voted against a final deal.

    Thats the rub, however much Remainers wish it weren't so.
    That assumes a sensible soft Brexit, I hope (and now think) that’s likely. But who knows? Deranged Moggite, anti-business, anti EU talent solutions remain a considerable minority risk.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    edited March 28

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Many of our opponents want to think that we hate public spending; what most of us actually hate is a growing debt pile. Conservatism is about not abandoning future generations on the altar of current spending, for which there will always be competing demands.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    AnneJGP said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    What I don't understand is how turning down the deal (whatever it is) is going to change anything. Will the EU stop the A50 clock & open up with more concessions because of a vote in the UK parliament?

    Sounds a bit like ordering the tide not to come in, to me.
    I suppose anything is possible, but presumably they would have a hefty price for doing so (if they even care to). At first glance the idea looks like trying to extract a promise we won't crash out if we vote against the deal, allowing Labour to vote against it without too much worry, but it doesn't seem like parliament instructing the government to go back to the EU and renegotiate has much of a guarantee no matter how much we want it to.

    In fact, that would seem to only work if the more hardline Brexiter stance of the EU needing us more than them were in fact true - as they would give us more time because they feared no deal more than us. And I don't think that is true.

    But Starmer usually seems plausible, so I'd need to look into it more.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,988


    How to win friends and influence people, a reminder be courteous in your dealings. Don't be like Christine.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 22,462
    YouGov must be Tory stooges for putting them ahead in the polls. Well, according to Corbyn supporters on Twitter
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Blah. Increasing the deficit or reducing it? Focusing on growth or restricting immigration? You sound like a PPB.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014
    AndyJS said:

    YouGov must be Tory stooges for putting them ahead in the polls. Well, according to Corbyn supporters on Twitter

    The best tweet I saw was a tongue in cheek one along the lines of 'Yougov should respect Corbyn's mandate'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    I think HMG will end up making a small number of concessions to the Lords.
    Given the amount of debating and voting the Lords will be doing, it would be doing a poor job if at least some of them were not things that the Commons felt should be conceded on. Absent a perfect world even the finest legislation probably needs tweaking from the Lords on occasion.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Blah. Increasing the deficit or reducing it? Focusing on growth or restricting immigration? You sound like a PPB.
    Yup. Thought you’d struggle to find a response to that.

    Corbyn can’t answer any of them.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    It would amount to a no-confidence vote. But, then again, so would voting down the A50 deal in practice.
    Politically it makes sense to preempt the A50 vote by proposing that it be decided by referendum: Accept or Revoke.
    It's all guff.

    The Govt have a majority in the house for Brexit.

    Therefore, we Brexit on the Govt's terms.

    Triggering Article 50 was the only vote that mattered. And many MPs still don't seem
    to have realised it.
    You seem remarkably confident that they have a majority for it, despite not actually knowing what the deal will be. Must be great to be so sanguine.
    It is very rare that the government lose a vote about anything. When there has been a referendum and by then hundreds of related votes in favour of Brexit, it isn't exactly difficult to have a strong degree of confidence that the final substantive vote will go the same way.
    If it’s sensible and soft, yes. Perhaps it will be. We can only hope that Brexit is very much like Not Brexit, I’m sure enlightened businessmen like you will agree.
    Not sure how enlightened I am, TBH, I sell old paper bound in leather....
    That will never catch on.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    AndyJS said:

    YouGov must be Tory stooges for putting them ahead in the polls. Well, according to Corbyn supporters on Twitter

    No one even vaguely acquainted with a brain takes any notice of midterm polls anymore anyway - which kind of proves your point.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Many of our opponents want to think that we hate public spending; what most of us actually hate is a growing debt pile. Conservatism is about not abandoning future generations on the altar of current spending, for which there will always be competing demands.
    Another PPB wallah.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,817
    dr_spyn said:

    Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

    The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

    Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

    ,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

    Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.
    The speadsheet tax error spin does seem rather implausible.
    Indeed.

    Worth noting that whole the media is concentrating on Bargain Booze which is a household retail name, I do believe that Matthew Clark is actually the bigger business.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A
    Many of our opponents want to think that we hate public spending; what most of us actually hate is a growing debt pile. Conservatism is about not abandoning future generations on the altar of current spending, for which there will always be competing demands.
    Another PPB wallah.
    What is wrong with people believing things which could find a place in a PPB? Anybody trying to justify their political tribe in generic terms sounds, well, generic, particularly when the left-right axis is largely bullcrap anyway.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 3,020
    kle4 said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    What I don't understand is how turning down the deal (whatever it is) is going to change anything. Will the EU stop the A50 clock & open up with more concessions because of a vote in the UK parliament?

    Sounds a bit like ordering the tide not to come in, to me.
    I suppose anything is possible, but presumably they would have a hefty price for doing so (if they even care to). At first glance the idea looks like trying to extract a promise we won't crash out if we vote against the deal, allowing Labour to vote against it without too much worry, but it doesn't seem like parliament instructing the government to go back to the EU and renegotiate has much of a guarantee no matter how much we want it to.

    In fact, that would seem to only work if the more hardline Brexiter stance of the EU needing us more than them were in fact true - as they would give us more time because they feared no deal more than us. And I don't think that is true.

    But Starmer usually seems plausible, so I'd need to look into it more.
    I don't think anyone seriously expects the deal to be voted down, all these manoeuvres are about changing the nature of the deal in the first place, via parliamentary pressure.

    There are twists and turns in this yet.

    The Bargain Booze administration news may well be a further straw in the wind. There are lots of companies overexpanded on cheap debt. When that cheap debt ends, so do they.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    edited March 28
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Anazina said:

    Seems a wise move. I’m sure we’ll soon hear on here why it isn’t.
    What I don't understand is how turning down the deal (whatever it is) is going to change anything. Will the EU stop the A50 clock & open up with more concessions because of a vote in the UK parliament?

    Sounds a bit like ordering the tide not to come in, to me.
    I suppose anything is possible, but presumably they would have a hefty price for doing so (if they even care to). At first glance the idea looks like trying to extract a promise we won't crash out if we vote against the deal, allowing Labour to vote against it without too much worry, but it doesn't seem like parliament instructing the government to go back to the EU and renegotiate has much of a guarantee no matter how much we want it to.

    In fact, that would seem to only work if the more hardline Brexiter stance of the EU needing us more than them were in fact true - as they would give us more time because they feared no deal more than us. And I don't think that is true.

    But Starmer usually seems plausible, so I'd need to look into it more.
    I don't think anyone seriously expects the deal to be voted down, all these manoeuvres are about changing the nature of the deal in the first place, via parliamentary pressure.

    There are twists and turns in this yet.
    Quite probably - particularly if such a plan is indeed merely a bluff, because that bluff might get called.

    Good night everybody. I wonder what fresh anti-semitic scandal will hit tomorrow.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,824
    edited March 28
    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,956
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    Only a handful of voters need to shift to deliver a Conservative majority. A result of 43/39 would give a dozen Conservative gains.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455

    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    It’s true, that is a risk for the Tories.

    They need to have a platform to get those same voters to stick with them once Brexit is complete.
    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.
    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Blah. Increasing the deficit or reducing it? Focusing on growth or restricting immigration? You sound like a PPB.
    Yup. Thought you’d struggle to find a response to that.

    Corbyn can’t answer any of them.
    Corbyn is an old fool - you risk becoming his kindred spirit if you continue to punt platitudes on an Internet forum! As you clearly have good taste in James Bond films I will let you off.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    edited March 28
    Labour takes all complaints of anti-Semitism extremely seriously,

    When the MSM take notice (tbf, I am sure parts of the party take them very seriously)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,974
    dr_spyn said:

    Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

    The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

    Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

    ,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

    Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.
    The speadsheet tax error spin does seem rather implausible.
    It is a bit like football clubs who incorrectly calculate their NI commitments then go bust. Its like a massive shock that multi-million pound footballers end up costing a lot in NI contributions.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 5,223
    Mortimer said:

    Many of our opponents want to think that we hate public spending; what most of us actually hate is a growing debt pile.

    It would be nice if you stopped adding to it then.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,281
    edited March 28
    kle4 said:

    Labour takes all complaints of anti-Semitism extremely seriously,

    When the MSM take notice (tbf, I am sure parts of the party take them very seriously)
    Just happens that those parts clearly aren’t at the top of the Labour Party, sadly.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,969
    Sean_F said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Good poll for Con.

    YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

    Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

    LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.
    Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.
    That probably isn't that many people.

    And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.
    The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

    Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.
    Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

    I think that’s what could move votes.
    If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.
    Only a handful of voters need to shift to deliver a Conservative majority. A result of 43/39 would give a dozen Conservative gains.
    If the Cons make net gains Labour will cling to gains in London.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    viewcode said:

    Mortimer said:

    Many of our opponents want to think that we hate public spending; what most of us actually hate is a growing debt pile.

    It would be nice if you stopped adding to it then.
    :)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 5,223

    Anazina said:

    Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.

    A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.
    Be honest. That's a Callaghan manifesto.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,337
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    I think a lot of the apparent shift to Labour in London is driven by the eastern inner boroughs, where it will make almost no difference to seat counts. In my leafy suburb, the Tory vote is rock solid; nobody mentions Brexit on the doorstep.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,824
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    London will likely still see a swing to Labour but it may not be enough to take Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster, the key Labour targets, especially after the anti Semitism row and rumours of Momentum trying to oust moderate Labour group leaders. In which case the Tories could do a 1990 and claim they held their flagship councils in London despite the Labour onslaught
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 5,698
    RoyalBlue said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    I think a lot of the apparent shift to Labour in London is driven by the eastern inner boroughs, where it will make almost no difference to seat counts. In my leafy suburb, the Tory vote is rock solid; nobody mentions Brexit on the doorstep.
    Don't tell Meeks
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,765
    edited March 28
    Floater said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    I think a lot of the apparent shift to Labour in London is driven by the eastern inner boroughs, where it will make almost no difference to seat counts. In my leafy suburb, the Tory vote is rock solid; nobody mentions Brexit on the doorstep.
    Don't tell Meeks
    He once made clear the bits of London that did vote more heavily for Brexit than others were not real London anyway. Presumably any bits not crying with bitterness over it also don't count as real London.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 26,699
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    I think a lot of the apparent shift to Labour in London is driven by the eastern inner boroughs, where it will make almost no difference to seat counts. In my leafy suburb, the Tory vote is rock solid; nobody mentions Brexit on the doorstep.
    Don't tell Meeks
    He once made clear the bits of London that did vote more heavily for Brexit than others were not real London anyway.
    Greater London has been a reality since 1965.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 11,505
    edited March 28
    It does appear that Theresa has turned the corner on her election disaster.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,977
    GIN1138 said:

    It does appear that Theresa has turned the corner on election disaster.

    She's planning another walking holiday in Wales this Easter.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,337
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tonight's Yougov if repeated in May's local elections would see a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since May 2014, a 9.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories and a 14% swing from UKIP to the Tories.

    It is now certainly a possibility the Tories will make a net gain in terms of both councillors and councils

    Can they stem the tide in London? That would be a remarkable showing. Can't see it myself.
    I think a lot of the apparent shift to Labour in London is driven by the eastern inner boroughs, where it will make almost no difference to seat counts. In my leafy suburb, the Tory vote is rock solid; nobody mentions Brexit on the doorstep.
    Don't tell Meeks
    He once made clear the bits of London that did vote more heavily for Brexit than others were not real London anyway.
    That kind of attitude is normally displayed by people who grew up very far from the capital, but display their satisfaction with their achieved metropolitan identity by turning withering fire on the place and people that made them.

    Mr Meeks is the platonic ideal.
This discussion has been closed.