Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Be wary of YouGov’s finding that Britain’s voting intentions i

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited May 12 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Be wary of YouGov’s finding that Britain’s voting intentions is classless

Queues like I've never seen out the polling station in hackney pic.twitter.com/oDUBM7wBVj

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    First.

    It'd be interesting to see a plot of the class subsamples over time. Hard to tell if the recent poll was an outlier or not.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    And thanks David!
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,740
    If the electorate didn't include large numbers of hallucinating insane people, then 100% would vote Conservative, and unweighted sub-samples wouldn't be a problem
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Good morning, everyone.

    Indeed, Mr. Herdson.

    Mr. Loony, sensible as ever :)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384
    Isn't an important underlying factor Leave vs Remain, with the former (typically C2DE) tending to the Tories while the latter (typically ABC1) tending Labour?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    edited May 12
    Scott_P said:
    Ultimately, it's for the ECJ to decide whether or not it's revocable. Neither side seem to be clamouring for a judgement on the issue however.

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Edit: as a commenter pointed out, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 provides a firm foundation for the A50 notification.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076
    edited May 12
    JohnLoony said:

    If the electorate didn't include large numbers of hallucinating insane people, then 100% would vote Conservative Labour , and unweighted sub-samples wouldn't be a problem

    Corrected that for you.


  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272

    JohnLoony said:

    If the electorate didn't include large numbers of hallucinating insane people, then 100% would vote Conservative Labour , and unweighted sub-samples wouldn't be a problem

    Corrected that for you.
    Conservative Labour? Weren't those lot thrown out in 2010?

    I'll get my coat....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    edited May 12
    The big story here isn't that the latest poll might be an MoE out in its sub-sample findings, but that this trend is real, started well before Brexit was on the horizon, and is slowly changing the shape of British politics. I suspect it is also the driver for the loss of voter loyalty and greater volatility of election results that we have seen over recent years (cf. the rise and fall of the LibDems, UKIP, and the SNP) - voting behaviour is no longer so rooted in immutable family traditions going back generations.

    The big questions therefore are whether it is (long term) temporary, or permanent re-alignment, and whether Brexit reflects its culmination or will bring about an acceleration. If the latter in both cases then we will see a shift in politics as dramatic as the one in the US that switched the geography of Republican and Democratic support in the 20th century, with rich and poor states switching places..
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,802
    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384
    Scott_P said:
    From the comments:

    The referendum informed the decision to trigger Article 50, but it was the Parliamentary vote based on it that formally did the deed with the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
    Sympathetic as I am to the writer, it has to be accepted that the UK’s actions do satisfy the need to arrive at the decision by the UK’s constitutional requirements. Ironically, if Gina Miller hadn’t intervened, the UK’s government’s fatal error would have stood and, the fraud exposed, the EU would not have accepted that the UK had legitimately served Article 50
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    edited May 12
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    There isn't a constitutional requirement to have a referendum. The executive's power to trigger article 50 was confirmed by the 2017 Act. Let's not forget, the referendum wasn't legally binding.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    JohnLoony said:

    If the electorate didn't include large numbers of hallucinating insane people, then 100% would vote Conservative, and unweighted sub-samples wouldn't be a problem

    There must be a better way to resolve hallucinations than blinkers?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    edited May 12
    RobD said:

    First.

    It'd be interesting to see a plot of the class subsamples over time. Hard to tell if the recent poll was an outlier or not.

    There was a tweet with this data that was shared on PB very recently. In the 1970s poltiics was firmly class based, but the pattern gradually unwinds with Thatcher's pursuit of the Cs, Blair's of the ABs, and now Brexit.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,802

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    Let's just have a quick reminder on how much was spent during the referendum:

    https://i.redd.it/cc19pq4y0xn01.jpg

    Not to mention the £9mn for HMG's Remain pamphlet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,272
    IanB2 said:

    RobD said:

    First.

    It'd be interesting to see a plot of the class subsamples over time. Hard to tell if the recent poll was an outlier or not.

    There was a tweet with this data that was shared on PB very recently. In the 1970s poltiics was firmly class based, but the pattern gradually unwinds with Thatcher's pursuit of the Cs, Blair's of the ABs, and now Brexit.
    Thanks! I must have missed that. Although I was thinking specifically of the yougov subsamples, it'd be interesting to look at a more historic series.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Mr. P, suppose that, for the sake of argument, a court does declare the referendum result void for whatever reason, and said judgement is not overturned.

    What then? Referendum II: Refer Harder?

    It's an interesting possibility but I think it's unlikely to occur.

    Also, this tweet entertained me. Perhaps Corbyn would look less like a Leninist if he didn't dress like one.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    Scott_P said:

    "“If we don’t get the negotiation right, your economic security and prosperity will be put at risk”" [Mrs M last year]

    "The government is not yet in freefall only because it has not finished building its own scaffold"

    "Bystanders in the EU are slowly accepting that there is no clever subplot behind the superficial chaos and no method in the madness"

    "One year after May threatened us with the consequences of a botched negotiation, she has not even begun to discuss a final deal, and does not know what to ask for when she does. She is right that our children and grandchildren’s jobs are at risk. And it is more important to save their jobs than hers."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    Let's just have a quick reminder on how much was spent during the referendum:

    https://i.redd.it/cc19pq4y0xn01.jpg

    Not to mention the £9mn for HMG's Remain pamphlet.
    So Remain outspent Leave by £5.5 million (or £15 million if you include the government leaflet), but because a side Leave campaign overspent by £70,000, the referendum is now invalid? Clutching at straws, much?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,688
    The problem is not the polls, it’s the ABC1 model is out of date. In each single letter class there are tribes/ classes that are the antithesis of each other.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,575
    IanB2 said:

    RobD said:

    First.

    It'd be interesting to see a plot of the class subsamples over time. Hard to tell if the recent poll was an outlier or not.

    There was a tweet with this data that was shared on PB very recently. In the 1970s poltiics was firmly class based, but the pattern gradually unwinds with Thatcher's pursuit of the Cs, Blair's of the ABs, and now Brexit.
    There always was, unless my memory fails, a reasonably substantial working class Tory vote, as a consequence of a deliberate policy by, again IIRC, Disraeli and the reason why there are Conservative or Constitutional drinking clubs in apparently primarily working class areas.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    Jonathan said:

    The problem is not the polls, it’s the ABC1 model is out of date. In each single letter class there are tribes/ classes that are the antithesis of each other.

    A fair point - nevertheless the shifting electoral geography we are seeing does demonstrate that something is going on.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,802

    Mr. P, suppose that, for the sake of argument, a court does declare the referendum result void for whatever reason, and said judgement is not overturned.

    What then? Referendum II: Refer Harder?

    It's an interesting possibility but I think it's unlikely to occur.

    I agree it's unlikely. It would be fun though.

    I expect it would be very different from last time.

    Social media companies have already announced they are not accepting advertising during the Ireland referendum, so that whole dynamic would change. No Cambridge Analytica.

    The prominent players would also be different.

    BoZo would be compelled to campaign for Leave again, but his £350m has already been annulled by him, so he would need a new gimmick. Dan Hannan has admitted Brexit isn't working out like he thought, so not clear what pitch he can make next time.

    Of course if Tezza leads Remain then we are out with an increased majority
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,889
    Scott_P said:
    DD's been quiet lately. What has the stupid old sot been up to?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 11,447
    edited May 12

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    Let's just have a quick reminder on how much was spent during the referendum:

    https://i.redd.it/cc19pq4y0xn01.jpg

    Not to mention the £9mn for HMG's Remain pamphlet.
    So Remain outspent Leave by £5.5 million (or £15 million if you include the government leaflet), but because a side Leave campaign overspent by £70,000, the referendum is now invalid? Clutching at straws, much?
    It's worth remembering the Remain side also had a fringe group fined for false accountancy.

    What's different and mildly entertaining about this case is that it appears some of the nastier elements in our political system have been caught committing actual fraud, for which with luck they will be given jail terms so we can all point and laugh at them.

    What's worrying about the blogpost is that a law lecturer at one of our leading universities doesn't appear to have a grasp of basic law (somebody who is unaware that the role of our courts is to enforce the law, not interpret our unwritten constitution is not somebody who can be considered to be cluefull). King's College can't be too fussy in its hiring procedures. That said QMUL employed Tristram Hunt...

    Edit - he also appears to be unaware of the law of libel. Hasn't the Electoral Commission ruled out Leave using CA?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    IanB2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    The problem is not the polls, it’s the ABC1 model is out of date. In each single letter class there are tribes/ classes that are the antithesis of each other.

    A fair point - nevertheless the shifting electoral geography we are seeing does demonstrate that something is going on.
    Further, the decline in class allegiance *should* have, but hasn't, led to a progressive increase in the number of marginal rather than safe parliamentary seats - because both Labour and Tory have got better at gaming the boundary review process, both arguing for geography that maximises the number that are safe for their own side.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,968
    Jonathan said:

    The problem is not the polls, it’s the ABC1 model is out of date. In each single letter class there are tribes/ classes that are the antithesis of each other.

    As part of that there has been internal change in the classifications

    For instance the AB class includes many more public sector employees than it did in the early 1980s

    I’m not sure it’s a useful analysis
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,575
    Dura_Ace said:

    Scott_P said:
    DD's been quiet lately. What has the stupid old sot been up to?
    Hasn’t he got something complicated that he MUST read and report to the PM on?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076

    Mr. P, suppose that, for the sake of argument, a court does declare the referendum result void for whatever reason, and said judgement is not overturned.

    What then? Referendum II: Refer Harder?

    It's an interesting possibility but I think it's unlikely to occur.

    Also, this tweet entertained me. Perhaps Corbyn would look less like a Leninist if he didn't dress like one.

    You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,478
    edited May 12
    The working class and the left haven't always been in step.. The dockers marched in their tens of thousands behind Powell after his Rivers of Blood speech.

    The new divide now seems to be xenophobes/Powellite/Leavers versus cosmopolitan/Remainers.

    Though it's never been clearer to know which group you fit into it's never been more difficult to know which party comes closest to representing you.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,956
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,802
    tlg86 said:

    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o

    If they were voting to "enact the fraudulent will of the people", then no... :open_mouth:
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:


    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,956
    Scott_P said:

    tlg86 said:

    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o

    If they were voting to "enact the fraudulent will of the people", then no... :open_mouth:
    Yeah, I totally voted Leave because a group supporting Leave spent more than they should have.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,968

    Mr. P, suppose that, for the sake of argument, a court does declare the referendum result void for whatever reason, and said judgement is not overturned.

    What then? Referendum II: Refer Harder?

    It's an interesting possibility but I think it's unlikely to occur.

    Also, this tweet entertained me. Perhaps Corbyn would look less like a Leninist if he didn't dress like one.

    You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?
    I don’t believe it was

    AIUI it was an existing hat but through the filtering it lost some of the definition so looked more like a Russian hat. Or something.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384
    edited May 12
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    tlg86 said:

    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o

    If they were voting to "enact the fraudulent will of the people", then no... :open_mouth:
    Yeah, I totally voted Leave because a group supporting Leave spent more than they should have.
    0.5% of the extra the Remain side spent in the authorised spending on the campaign....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,384

    Mr. P, suppose that, for the sake of argument, a court does declare the referendum result void for whatever reason, and said judgement is not overturned.

    What then? Referendum II: Refer Harder?

    It's an interesting possibility but I think it's unlikely to occur.

    Also, this tweet entertained me. Perhaps Corbyn would look less like a Leninist if he didn't dress like one.

    You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?
    It wasn’t. I suggest you read the article.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    And so it was. No one who was entitled to vote was barred from voting; neither side was prevented from putting its message across, and the count was honest.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    Let's just have a quick reminder on how much was spent during the referendum:

    https://i.redd.it/cc19pq4y0xn01.jpg

    Not to mention the £9mn for HMG's Remain pamphlet.
    So Remain outspent Leave by £5.5 million (or £15 million if you include the government leaflet), but because a side Leave campaign overspent by £70,000, the referendum is now invalid? Clutching at straws, much?
    It's worth remembering the Remain side also had a fringe group fined for false accountancy.

    What's different and mildly entertaining about this case is that it appears some of the nastier elements in our political system have been caught committing actual fraud, for which with luck they will be given jail terms so we can all point and laugh at them.

    What's worrying about the blogpost is that a law lecturer at one of our leading universities doesn't appear to have a grasp of basic law (somebody who is unaware that the role of our courts is to enforce the law, not interpret our unwritten constitution is not somebody who can be considered to be cluefull). King's College can't be too fussy in its hiring procedures. That said QMUL employed Tristram Hunt...

    Edit - he also appears to be unaware of the law of libel. Hasn't the Electoral Commission ruled out Leave using CA?
    i'm glad he didn't teach me law.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,667

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    Hatgate II, the return of the mad hatter.
    A sequels are so depressing.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,887
    edited May 12


    You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?

    Nope. Here's Corbyn wearing his 'Leninist' hat:

    image

    What we have here is a politician with a history of social media faceplants - Joanne Cherry - attempting to use a perfectly simple rejection of a trollish complaint about Corbyn as mud to sling at the BBC, and making herself look silly (again).

    All simply and straightforwardly explain in the article Cherry seems not to have bothered to read properly.


  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,887
    Hah. I didn't realise that the source of the original story (as quoted by The Canary) was the preternaturally gormless Dr Eoin Clarke:


  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 699
    edited May 12
    I’m enjoying reading Jeremy Corbyn supporters arguing amongst themseves about the EU on Reddit this morning.

    For the millionth time: The manifesto cannot be implemented while a member of the EU or the single market.
    You were never left wing, you're a liberal who has run out of space for posturing and is reverting to form.

    Stop posting on a politics forum as a party member and go read the relevant material before posting again.

    :smiley:
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,630
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    The problem is not the polls, it’s the ABC1 model is out of date. In each single letter class there are tribes/ classes that are the antithesis of each other.

    As part of that there has been internal change in the classifications

    For instance the AB class includes many more public sector employees than it did in the early 1980s

    I’m not sure it’s a useful analysis

    All the polls are wrong IMHO . None can be trusted
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 739

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter.
    I think you should pay more attention to current affairs, and less to the Canary or Owen Jones. The hat was not photoshopped, and the only thing that could be classed as photoshopping was the red tint, however this was done to a conservative minister a few weeks before. Guess what - no-one said that was a conspiracy!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,887
    edited May 12

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter.
    Trying a bit too hard, here :-).

    "The hat was photoshopped on" is not 'using the term photoshopping generically'. It is repeating a specific - entirely untrue - claim.

    The image was distorted (a little too tall) because the people who complained took their photos on a curved screen (says the article).

    Corbyn presumably wears a Lenin hat because he likes it, and the associations that goes with it. If the hat fits - wear it.

    Anyway - I'm off to a RYA Push the Boat Out event for a free trial of some sailing boats.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,866
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o
    That depends on your view of the use of whips to pressurise MPs to vote in a particular way.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,667

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter.
    Ah. That explains why you seem unfamiliar with Newsnight’s longstanding habit of using quick and cheap graphics in ways which are often disobliging to politicians of all stripes.

    It is one of the programme’s charms, and is in no way an indication of political bias - other than the habit of not taking politicians quite as seriously as they take themselves.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,889
    I can't believe we are still discussing the fucking hat. Before it was sported by the Lenin and other commies the 'kasket' was popularised by the Jewish middle classes in Russia when the Tsar banned traditional Jewish headwear. If JC finds out his fucker will be getting flung in the fire.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076
    I am only aware of the Canary's existence because of references to it on here. I never read Owen Jones writing. Partisan sources are a waste of time in my opinion. What I like about Corbyn is he has extended the range of political options. I appreciate the extra choice, though I may not actually choose it. Distorting his hat in that clip is one of many examples of attempts to render his views unacceptable without going to the hard work of actually arguing with him.

    If you enjoy such parlour games that is your prerogative. But don't imagine you are part of a proper political debate. In fact you are helping close it down.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,991
    MattW said:


    You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?

    Nope. Here's Corbyn wearing his 'Leninist' hat:

    image

    What we have here is a politician with a history of social media faceplants - Joanne Cherry - attempting to use a perfectly simple rejection of a trollish complaint about Corbyn as mud to sling at the BBC, and making herself look silly (again).

    All simply and straightforwardly explain in the article Cherry seems not to have bothered to read properly.


    I fear you may get over excited at the concatenation of Red Jez and the EssEnPee so early in the morning. Pace yersel'.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,089
    Morning all :)

    Thank you, as always, David, for the Saturday piece. TBH, when I see the word "class" in any political analysis or commentary, I switch off or remember fondly John Law's classic sketch on the Frost Report.

    I would also suppose that the shifting tectonic plates of "class" mean Stephen Timms must consider his hyper-marginal 43,000 majority under threat.

    Seats change because areas and regions change as people, business and industry move in and out. East Ham South was once a Conservative area - I suspect even the staunchest Conservative supporter would concede that's unlikely now. Seats change as parties change and we can all map how seats have become more one-sided or less so with time.

    It may be mobility is far greater than we imagine but it's a different kind of mobility - perhaps less social and more cultural. People like people like themselves - people like to be with the people they want to be.

    The successful politician identifies with that cultural theme - they become either the spokesperson or the role model for that which a large section of the population aspires to be. Margaret Thatcher was the epitome of middle class suburban culture in the post war period - Blair was the evolution of that to the 1990s and Cameron to the next generation.

    Neither May nor Corbyn are where Britain is now or where it is going and it is only the mutual fear (or antipathy) that preserves both like anachronistic flies in amber.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    Thank you, as always, David, for the Saturday piece. TBH, when I see the word "class" in any political analysis or commentary, I switch off or remember fondly John Law's classic sketch on the Frost Report.

    I would also suppose that the shifting tectonic plates of "class" mean Stephen Timms must consider his hyper-marginal 43,000 majority under threat.

    Seats change because areas and regions change as people, business and industry move in and out. East Ham South was once a Conservative area - I suspect even the staunchest Conservative supporter would concede that's unlikely now. Seats change as parties change and we can all map how seats have become more one-sided or less so with time.

    It may be mobility is far greater than we imagine but it's a different kind of mobility - perhaps less social and more cultural. People like people like themselves - people like to be with the people they want to be.

    The successful politician identifies with that cultural theme - they become either the spokesperson or the role model for that which a large section of the population aspires to be. Margaret Thatcher was the epitome of middle class suburban culture in the post war period - Blair was the evolution of that to the 1990s and Cameron to the next generation.

    Neither May nor Corbyn are where Britain is now or where it is going and it is only the mutual fear (or antipathy) that preserves both like anachronistic flies in amber.

    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212
    edited May 12
    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    Except the vote was not corrupt and Parliament was not misled.

    Next.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,824
    edited May 12
    Russian meddling in America is based on inflaming racial divisions, according to an analysis of Russian Facebook adverts carried out by USA Today.

    We read every one of the 3,517 Facebook ads bought by Russians. Their dominant strategy: Sowing racial discord
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/05/11/what-we-found-facebook-ads-russians-accused-election-meddling/602319002/

    Has there been a similar study of how Russia duped Britons into voting for or against Brexit or that man in the funny hat?

    (hat-tip: reddit)
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 816
    Dura_Ace said:

    Scott_P said:
    DD's been quiet lately. What has the stupid old sot been up to?
    Trying to stop May completely bollocking up Brexit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474

    Dura_Ace said:

    Scott_P said:
    DD's been quiet lately. What has the stupid old sot been up to?
    Trying to stop May completely bollocking up Brexit.
    More likely the other way around.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Mr. Recidivist, that's just wrong.

    Earlier, you wrote: "You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?"

    Then you wrote: "I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter."

    Given that, and the second sentence in the second post, I'm afraid it does rather make you look like an astroturfer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    Position 1670 in the Proms booking site waiting room. I wonder how long this is going to take....
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,089
    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    Thank you, as always, David, for the Saturday piece. TBH, when I see the word "class" in any political analysis or commentary, I switch off or remember fondly John Law's classic sketch on the Frost Report.

    I would also suppose that the shifting tectonic plates of "class" mean Stephen Timms must consider his hyper-marginal 43,000 majority under threat.

    Seats change because areas and regions change as people, business and industry move in and out. East Ham South was once a Conservative area - I suspect even the staunchest Conservative supporter would concede that's unlikely now. Seats change as parties change and we can all map how seats have become more one-sided or less so with time.

    It may be mobility is far greater than we imagine but it's a different kind of mobility - perhaps less social and more cultural. People like people like themselves - people like to be with the people they want to be.

    The successful politician identifies with that cultural theme - they become either the spokesperson or the role model for that which a large section of the population aspires to be. Margaret Thatcher was the epitome of middle class suburban culture in the post war period - Blair was the evolution of that to the 1990s and Cameron to the next generation.

    Neither May nor Corbyn are where Britain is now or where it is going and it is only the mutual fear (or antipathy) that preserves both like anachronistic flies in amber.

    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.
    Nevertheless stodgy is right that we await a leader who will either embody or shape the mood of the times.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,246

    Scott_P said:
    From the comments:

    The referendum informed the decision to trigger Article 50, but it was the Parliamentary vote based on it that formally did the deed with the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
    Sympathetic as I am to the writer, it has to be accepted that the UK’s actions do satisfy the need to arrive at the decision by the UK’s constitutional requirements. Ironically, if Gina Miller hadn’t intervened, the UK’s government’s fatal error would have stood and, the fraud exposed, the EU would not have accepted that the UK had legitimately served Article 50
    Heart of stone etc.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    IanB2 said:

    Position 1670 in the Proms booking site waiting room. I wonder how long this is going to take....

    Already nearly up to 1000th in the queue, so maybe not so long...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    On trend I should get to the front at 0931....
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:
    From the comments:

    The referendum informed the decision to trigger Article 50, but it was the Parliamentary vote based on it that formally did the deed with the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
    Sympathetic as I am to the writer, it has to be accepted that the UK’s actions do satisfy the need to arrive at the decision by the UK’s constitutional requirements. Ironically, if Gina Miller hadn’t intervened, the UK’s government’s fatal error would have stood and, the fraud exposed, the EU would not have accepted that the UK had legitimately served Article 50
    Heart of stone etc.
    It is strange that a lecturer in law should be unaware that no Court can overrule primary legislation. That's pretty basic stuff.

    But, suppose for the sake of argument, that Gina Miller had never brought her case? The EU would surely have treated an A.50 Notification by the Government as valid. They have no interest in arguing over our constitutional law.



  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Mr. F, the EU has many allies in the Commons and Lords. If Parliament had subsequently voted that the referendum campaigns could not be considered legitimate, and the result likewise, the EU would've nodded agreement.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,077
    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    One of the side effects of twitter etc is it has made bad losers much more able to get in touch with other sore, bad and crybaby losers.

    Previously they would sit in the corner of the pub wailing into their pint of mild. Now they can sit in their mums basement and crywank with like-simple-minded people 24/7.

    Hopefully just a fad.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363
    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    I think May is very much in the mould of the politicians who led the Conservatives from 1945-1979.

    Corbyn is certainly a good fit for Radical Left Britain, but not so much for either more centrist Labour voters, or for people who switched to Labour over Brexit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,474
    Well that went much more smoothly than the last time I tried to buy in-demand tickets as the box office opens. Four minutes to get into the queue and a half hour wait; the AH has clearly invested in some good IT and I see Amazon is doing the hosting. Looks like they handled a couple of thousand proms bookings in the first half hour.

    Now the dog needs his delayed morning walk....
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363

    Mr. F, the EU has many allies in the Commons and Lords. If Parliament had subsequently voted that the referendum campaigns could not be considered legitimate, and the result likewise, the EU would've nodded agreement.

    Legally, there was nothing to prevent Parliament from voting against the EU (Notification of Withdrawal Bill) or from passing a motion of No Confidence in a government which gave Notice of Withdrawal.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076

    Mr. Recidivist, that's just wrong.

    Earlier, you wrote: "You do realise the hat was photoshopped on?"

    Then you wrote: "I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter."

    Given that, and the second sentence in the second post, I'm afraid it does rather make you look like an astroturfer.

    The hat Corbyn actually wore looks different to the one that appears in the image on Newsnight - I don't know what brand of software they used but everyone obviously knows what is meant when you say photoshop. This is of a piece with the general disrespect shown to Corbyn and his views, and by extension to those who hold them. Your post which triggered off the discussion was using that image in exactly that way, to abuse someone whose politics you disagree with. We only get one life. Is that what you want to spend yours on?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,824
    Nigelb said:
    So the multi-cultural George Osborne has Jewish, Muslim and Christian brothers, is that right? If he needs a new hat, we know a man who ...

    Wasn't one of his relations peripherally involved with Lord Lucan?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,824
    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,076

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Good points. Also quite good to remember that joining Europe was a Tory idea and setting up grammar schools a Labour one.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,281
    Mr. Flashman (deceased), indeed. Previously a noisy fool would be the only one in a pub, and derided/ignored by the rest of the patrons. Now they can club together easily. As big a problem are the fools who indulge such tomfoolery.

    Mr. F, indeed. I do wonder if they'd do that now, given the chance.

    Mr. Recidivist, you are a silly sausage. You said the hat was photoshopped on. Then you said how well-informed you are, after admitting you didn't know it was not. Then you claimed 'photoshopped on' doesn't mean it was put on in photoshop.

    Astroturf indeed.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,731
    edited May 12

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Good points. Also quite good to remember that joining Europe was a Tory idea and setting up grammar schools a Labour one.
    Heath suffers from the fact that left wing academics are not likely to rate him, while right wing journalists are unlikely to rehabilitate him post-Thatcher.

    The U.K. has only had three great post-war PMs - all Tories - McMillan, Thatcher, and Blair!

    Heath is mid-table.
    Edit: Probably one above Cameron.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,597

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Heath is also the only post-war party leader to win an overall working majority from a party that also had an overall working majority. That was GE1970. No one else has achieved that.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,571
    The private sector working class has been trending rightwards.

    The public sector middle class has been trending leftwards.

    There are variations to these general trends - the collapse in the LibDems in SW England will have seen Labour gain working class votes while in Scotland the Conservatives would have gained unionist middle class votes.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,731

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Heath is also the only post-war party leader to win an overall working majority from a party that also had an overall working majority. That was GE1970. No one else has achieved that.
    That’s very interesting, and shows how finely balanced the electorate has been post-war.

    In that sense, the last ten years of non-majorities (2015 aside) can be seen as a return to the norm after the outstanding achievements of Thatcher, then Blair.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,071

    Nigelb said:
    So the multi-cultural George Osborne has Jewish, Muslim and Christian brothers, is that right? If he needs a new hat, we know a man who ...

    Wasn't one of his relations peripherally involved with Lord Lucan?
    Apparently, he only discovered his Jewish ancestry recently. But here is a link from 2010:

    http://bloghd.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/george-osbornes-alleged-jewish.html
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,991
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    But it was advisory not binding (as Remainers never tired of reminding us). Gina Miller forced Parliament to have a vote on the matter and overwhelmingly passed the bill. That was the constitutional process. And you’ll need a vote to overturn it. Ms Miller as a heroine of Brexit! Whodathunkit?

    Fruit of the poisoned tree

    Parliament voted to enact the corruptly expressed 'will of the people'

    If the vote was corrupt, the 'will' was corrupt and Parliament was misled (constitutionally a bad thing...)
    One of the side effects of twitter etc is it has made bad losers much more able to get in touch with other sore, bad and crybaby losers.

    Previously they would sit in the corner of the pub wailing into their pint of mild. Now they can sit in their mums basement and crywank with like-simple-minded people 24/7.

    Hopefully just a fad.
    A The Rangers supporter exhorts others not to be sore, bad & crybaby losers, and avoid crywanking with like-simple-minded people 24/7 on social media.

    I hesitate to use the word unspoofable, but...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 32,522
    edited May 12

    Mr. Recidivist, you do realise it wasn't?

    52 seconds into this video:

    Or:



    I'm quite surprised, given the interests of this site, that you appear unaware of that.

    I don't follow the news. That is why I am better informed about current affairs than most people on here. I was using the term photoshopping generically. The details of how the image was distorted to misrepresent Mr Corbyn don't matter.
    You what? The fact it was notphotoshopped and that you've arrived at your own definition of photoshop (and didn't define that so nobody could tell) to assert that it was doesn't matter?

    I note you specifically claimed it was 'photoshopped on', not distorted in some fashion. Even if you used photoshopped generically to refer to some kind of digital manipulation, you were clear on the manner that manipulation took - putting it on.

    The hat story is one of the silliest stories on a long time, I cannot believe it is back. The government is in enough a shambles, it might even collapse, and some are still upset about how Corbyn's hat looked.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 43,711
    edited May 12
    Class politics is certainly far less of a dividing line than it was in say the 1950s. While the Tories still win ABs and Labour still win DEs, the divide is less strong with the LDs doing particularly well with ABs post Brexit where the Remain vote was strongest.

    The gains Thatcher made with C2s after council house sales have been accelerated by the Tories post Brexit and the Tories won the strongly pro Brexit skilled working class at the last general election helped by defections from UKIP which did particularly well with that group in 2015. C1s however were almost tied between Labour and the Tories as this is the group which has seen the biggest decline in home ownership due to rising house prices, the group hit hardest by university tuition fees rises and also the group which was most divided in the EU referendum.

    Indeed there is now a far bigger dividing line based on the age of voters and particularly between pensioners and the young than there is over social class.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 32,522
    philiph said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.

    Does it really? The executive doesn't need the approval of a referendum to conduct diplomacy.

    Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    Our constitutional requirement is that any vote must be free and fair
    The votes in Parliament weren't free and fair? :o
    That depends on your view of the use of whips to pressurise MPs to vote in a particular way.
    They're all adults whose duty is to represent the interests of their constituents and the nation, making a personal judgement as to the best way to do that. While they would find it hard to do so and they usually would not, they have to considered able to withstand the pressure of whips even at the risks of their careers. At least some did.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,363

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Heath is also the only post-war party leader to win an overall working majority from a party that also had an overall working majority. That was GE1970. No one else has achieved that.
    That’s very interesting, and shows how finely balanced the electorate has been post-war.

    In that sense, the last ten years of non-majorities (2015 aside) can be seen as a return to the norm after the outstanding achievements of Thatcher, then Blair.
    Small leads were the norm, up till 1983 (even in 1945, Labour only led by 8%). But, with few seats going to the SNP or Liberals, and the Unionists taking the Conservative whip, a lead of just 2% was enough for a working majority.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 43,711

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour ed so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Good points. Also quite good to remember that joining Europe was a Tory idea and setting up grammar schools a Labour one.
    Heath suffers from the fact that left wing academics are not likely to rate him, while right wing journalists are unlikely to rehabilitate him post-Thatcher.

    The U.K. has only had three great post-war PMs - all Tories - McMillan, Thatcher, and Blair!

    Heath is mid-table.
    Edit: Probably one above Cameron.
    Attlee was a great post-war PM too and Labour, he undoubtedly shifted the UK left just as Thatcher shifted it right and founded the NHS and welfare state. Blair was not a Tory either with his fox hunting ban, liberal left legislation etc even if he was not a socialist either.

    He and Thatcher are the most consequential post war PMs with Churchill having been a great war PM but less great post war.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 43,711

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I think "traditional working class" Labour is not what some nostalgically remember. It is changing and becoming less deferential to and less respectful of the economic order (one of the consequences of 2008 perhaps). As the moderate centre left economics seemed to fail so disastrously, more radical solutions have gained credence and are represented by Corbyn/McDonnell.

    As for May, you are a conservative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Heath is also the only post-war party leader to win an overall working majority from a party that also had an overall working majority. That was GE1970. No one else has achieved that.
    When Heath lost in February and October 1974 to Wilson it was also on topic the last time a majority of working class voters beat a majority of middle class voters until Brexit
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 32,522
    An even sillier aspect of hat gate is far more people have seen this supposedly horrific image now because people whined about it, and also their insistence it was an outrageous attempt to make him look bad...makes him look bad. I saw the image and I thought it was a pic of Corbyn with a silly hat (no judgement on silly hats here, I usually wear a safari style hat) with a Russian backdrop because the story was about Russia. Now anybody following the story will remember that Corbyn's supporters are terrified of the image because they think Corbyn plus Russia will lose him votes somehow.

    Which it won't, we've seen over and over stories on any true or fake associations don't harm him.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 32,522
    Wow, introduction of the euro really hit our average.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 43,711

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:


    In broad terms, the Conservatives represent provincial England, and to a lesser extent, provincial Wales and Scotland. They do well in rural areas (apart from the Celtic fringe) Market towns, suburbs, and are competitive in large towns and small cities. Labour dominate London, big cities, university constituencies, and some industrial areas where they were historically strong. May is probably a better fit for Conservative Britain than Corbyn is for Labour Britain.

    Thanks, Sean.

    I'd agree on Corbyn up to a point though I ervative and I'll take your word on that. I have my doubts - I begin to suspect her and Corbyn's relationship is entirely symbiotic. When one goes the other will swiftly follow.

    Conversely, May probably plays better to the nostalgic notion of what conservatism was as distinct from what it is or could be. I consider her interventionist on a scale Heath and Heseltine would appreciate and her willingness to use the mechanisms of the State to force through policy seems a world away from Thatcherite notions of self-reliance and self-responsibility and a small State.

    She is far too authoritarian for me and I'm surprised so many so-called "liberal" Conservatives are comfortable with her use of State power but all you have to say is "Corbyn" and everyone falls into line.
    May feels like a stopgap leader, like Callaghan, Brown, and arguably Heath. We await what will follow.
    Was Heath the most influential Prime Minister since Atlee? Not only did he close more grammar schools than anyone else through his Ed Sec Margaret Thatcher (two threads yesterday iirc), he also took us into Europe (without a referendum btw).

    If judged by the number and volume of pb threads dominated by his legacies, Edward Heath is surely the greatest Prime Minister of all time.

    Good points. Also quite good to remember that joining Europe was a Tory idea and setting up grammar schools a Labour one.
    It was Rab Butler, a Tory, who really established the idea of grammar schools and technical schools etc and Harold Wilson, Shirley Williams and Tony Crosland, all Labour who began the process of closing them.

    There were also plenty of Labour figures like Roy Jenkins who were pro EEC and plenty of Tories like Enoch Powell who were anti EEC, it was and still is the Liberals who were most pro a European Union from Jeremy Thorpe to Nick Clegg and indeed Jenkins would eventually join the SDP in part because of that
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,838
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:
    From the comments:

    The referendum informed the decision to trigger Article 50, but it was the Parliamentary vote based on it that formally did the deed with the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
    Sympathetic as I am to the writer, it has to be accepted that the UK’s actions do satisfy the need to arrive at the decision by the UK’s constitutional requirements. Ironically, if Gina Miller hadn’t intervened, the UK’s government’s fatal error would have stood and, the fraud exposed, the EU would not have accepted that the UK had legitimately served Article 50
    Heart of stone etc.
    As I said at the time, and to the derision of many on here, Gina Miller has been the Leavers' best friend.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,838
    edited May 12
    Nigelb said:
    [Tim Mode On]
    Was it when he realised his middle name was Gideon?
    [/Tim Mode Off]
This discussion has been closed.