Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Oh those Russians, you may have just ended the Labour party as

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited March 18 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Oh those Russians, you may have just ended the Labour party as we know it

I suspect FPTP will stop this from happening. https://t.co/DYqNOdGvsl pic.twitter.com/34N2QPGk9G

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    edited March 18
    Whoever Mr Hoscik is, he hits the nail on the head there.

    Labour are polling either great or ok, and since they improved even when the polling was dire, means anyone who didn't split then ain't splitting now.

    I know that, the grumbling MPs know that, and Corbyn probably knows that too. Presumably the intention behind these 'we really might leave, for realsies this time' briefings is just a shot across the bow to tell Corbyn to rein it in.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,258
    AV's not the ideal system, of course. Better than FPTP, but not a lot.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    forming a new political party called Start Again

    That's a terrible name.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 1,283
    edited March 18
    They should name themselves the SLP. The sore loser party. Soubry was in the SDP wasn't she?

    Why not just join the Lib Dems - why have another party competing against Labour, the Greens, SNP, LDs Etc for pro remain voters?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    edited March 18
    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    OchEye said:

    The biggest single recipient of Russian "dirty" money is of course the British taxpayer.

    They pay SDLT, stamp duty, and capital gains. They keep lawyers and accountants in jobs.

    But for as long as "someone else" benefits from Russian corruption, nothing will be done.

    Russian wealth won off the backs of the dirt poor will be instead paying down Britain's debts.

    There goes the Great British reputation for honesty, legality and truth that we have been so keen to uphold and shine like a beacon to the rest of the planet.. Instead, we are just as much a gangster economy as the Russians. Don't it make you proud!
    'Just as much as'. That we are not whiter than white does not mean we must be exactly the same, that is false equivalence.
    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it follows it is a Duck
    There are dozens to hundreds of types of duck. Not all ducks are the same. Stealing and killing are both sins, but one is clearly worse than the other. Stealing a loaf of bread and stealing the contents of 15 banks are both stealing, but one is clearly worse than the other.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    If this is for real, I have great admiration for those Labour MP standing by their principles. Clearly genuine pro-Western democrats do not have a place in a Momentum dominated Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats have the activist base and organisational structure, while Labour dissidents have the talent. Soubry and other Remain Tories can not back them now for obvious reasons, but I could see defections in time.

    "Start again" would be a terrible name for mockery though. The Progressives is the obvious title for a party believing in reformist, evidence-based social democracy.
    Flag Quote · Off Topic
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,538
    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    OchEye said:

    The biggest single recipient of Russian "dirty" money is of course the British taxpayer.

    They pay SDLT, stamp duty, and capital gains. They keep lawyers and accountants in jobs.

    But for as long as "someone else" benefits from Russian corruption, nothing will be done.

    Russian wealth won off the backs of the dirt poor will be instead paying down Britain's debts.

    There goes the Great British reputation for honesty, legality and truth that we have been so keen to uphold and shine like a beacon to the rest of the planet.. Instead, we are just as much a gangster economy as the Russians. Don't it make you proud!
    'Just as much as'. That we are not whiter than white does not mean we must be exactly the same, that is false equivalence.
    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it follows it is a Duck
    There are dozens to hundreds of types of duck. Not all ducks are the same.
    Still ducks and still shifty ones at that.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 46,173
    Sound like cures for male pattern baldness and impotence
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    brendan16 said:

    They should name themselves the SLP. The sore loser party. Soubry was in the SDP wasn't she?

    Why not just join the Lib Dems - why have another party competing against Labour, the Greens, SNP, LDs Etc for pro remain voters?

    If the LDs had been able to capitalise on what looked like a terrible position for Labour last year, perhaps we would have. The LD manifesto explicitly pitched itself in its foreward not necessarily as for government, but for a better opposition. That they did not and seemingly still cannot capitalise means that loyalty and inertia will surely win out, given the challenges in starting something new.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,566
    I think we should offer out Chris Leslie on a free transfer, wouldn't be against us covering most of the wages if it helped pick up interest from other parties...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,566
    This isn't going to happen. Jez controls the party and there's nothing they can do about it until he loses.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    kle4 said:

    brendan16 said:

    They should name themselves the SLP. The sore loser party. Soubry was in the SDP wasn't she?

    Why not just join the Lib Dems - why have another party competing against Labour, the Greens, SNP, LDs Etc for pro remain voters?

    If the LDs had been able to capitalise on what looked like a terrible position for Labour last year, perhaps we would have. The LD manifesto explicitly pitched itself in its foreward not necessarily as for government, but for a better opposition. That they did not and seemingly still cannot capitalise means that loyalty and inertia will surely win out, given the challenges in starting something new.
    I think the difference this time is that it's not just economic policy and the EU. Now it is our national security at stake. Corbyn as PM has shown he would not react to Russia killing people on our streets. Even the strongest Labour loyalist can have red lines over that.

    In addition, the deselection agenda is clearly gathering steam. Macron has shown new parties are possible in these times, winning power from nowhere.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,285
    I'd be really interested to hear about a new political party ..... but they lost me at the 'pro-European'.

    I take it they mean pro-EU. If they don't mean that, they need a better descriptor.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    AnneJGP said:

    I'd be really interested to hear about a new political party ..... but they lost me at the 'pro-European'.

    I take it they mean pro-EU. If they don't mean that, they need a better descriptor.

    The selling point needs to be evidence-based progressive reform, away from the tribalism and ideology of the other parties.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,890
    FPT, support for shitty regimes. We, meaning the Western governments, support shitty regimes that are well-disposed towards us. Corbyn supports shitty regimes (and insurgencies) that are hostile to us.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,717

    AV's not the ideal system, of course. Better than FPTP, but not a lot.

    Heresy!

    AV is the pineapple on the pizza of electoral deliciousness.

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,941
    edited March 18
    MaxPB said:

    This isn't going to happen. Jez controls the party and there's nothing they can do about it until he loses.

    Jezza falling by the wayside may not result in a swing towards the centre.

    Compared to the days of Foot and Kinnock how successfully have the left and momentum tendency consolidated power and control of the party machine? It gives the impression that JC has focused on that having learnt from the past
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,790
    kle4 said:

    forming a new political party called Start Again

    That's a terrible name.

    Start Again Party.

    The SAPs..... lol!
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,566
    Sean_F said:

    FPT, support for shitty regimes. We, meaning the Western governments, support shitty regimes that are well-disposed towards us. Corbyn supports shitty regimes (and insurgencies) that are hostile to us.

    Corbyn supports hostile regimes in much the same way Major and Blair supported that hostile lot in N. Ireland...

    Funny how things work out when we try a slightly different approach than 'you are the enemy we will kill you'... I wonder if it will ever catch on or if everyone will keep up with the traitor rhetoric and force people to act warlike whilst secretly being in talks about peace but worried about the public's reaction to such weak treachery...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 782
    startagain.org.uk is still available. Therefore this is clearly not happening.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,989

    AV's not the ideal system, of course. Better than FPTP, but not a lot.

    A ‘miserable little compromise’, as I believe someone once said.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,398
    kle4 said:

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
    I hadn't realised that the news media was so much concerned with fun. What do you think was behind their fixation with Eck & RT before a single show had been screened?

  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    Sean_F said:

    FPT, support for shitty regimes. We, meaning the Western governments, support shitty regimes that are well-disposed towards us. Corbyn supports shitty regimes (and insurgencies) that are hostile to us.

    Corbyn supports hostile regimes in much the same way Major and Blair supported that hostile lot in N. Ireland...

    Funny how things work out when we try a slightly different approach than 'you are the enemy we will kill you'... I wonder if it will ever catch on or if everyone will keep up with the traitor rhetoric and force people to act warlike whilst secretly being in talks about peace but worried about the public's reaction to such weak treachery...
    That is simply not true. If Corbyn was just a pacifist looking for peace he would talk to all sides. But he doesn't: just the anti-Western ones. And in places like South Africa, he backed the "one settler, one bullet" nutters, not the ANC.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,989
    edited March 18
    On topic, why now, and not a year or two ago. It’s not like the leopard Corbyn has changed his spots, is it?

    The Corbyn fan club, small though it is in Parliament, should be enough to get the boundary reforms though - and the mandatory reselections that come with them.
  • The Ireland v Scotland world cup qualifier is coming down to a very tight finish.

    Ireland had it in the bag...
  • The Ireland v Scotland world cup qualifier is coming down to a very tight finish.

    Ireland had it in the bag...

    Sorry Scotland, I just DavidL'd you.
  • kle4 said:

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
    I hadn't realised that the news media was so much concerned with fun. What do you think was behind their fixation with Eck & RT before a single show had been screened?

    It is just froth, much like the time the media was obsessed about the last time David Cameron and George Osborne had visited a Greggs.

    Or Dave went shopping in Morrisons.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,717
    philiph said:

    MaxPB said:

    This isn't going to happen. Jez controls the party and there's nothing they can do about it until he loses.

    Jezza falling by the wayside may not result in a swing towards the centre.

    Compared to the days of Foot and Kinnock how successfully have the left and momentum tendency consolidated power and control of the party machine? It gives the impression that JC has focused on that having learnt from the past
    It is more that the Left now are in the majority in membership and now have a leader that matches, and it does seem to be liked by the voters too. Tories are not so keen, but where is the surprise there? If Labour centrists want the leadership, they first need to convince the membership, as New Labour did.

    FWIW the party leaders are neck and neck in "doing well" ratings:

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,890

    Sean_F said:

    FPT, support for shitty regimes. We, meaning the Western governments, support shitty regimes that are well-disposed towards us. Corbyn supports shitty regimes (and insurgencies) that are hostile to us.

    Corbyn supports hostile regimes in much the same way Major and Blair supported that hostile lot in N. Ireland...

    Funny how things work out when we try a slightly different approach than 'you are the enemy we will kill you'... I wonder if it will ever catch on or if everyone will keep up with the traitor rhetoric and force people to act warlike whilst secretly being in talks about peace but worried about the public's reaction to such weak treachery...
    That's silly. Corbyn was not a disinterested seeker after peace in Northern Ireland. He championed the most militant members of one side only.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,566
    edited March 18
    philiph said:

    MaxPB said:

    This isn't going to happen. Jez controls the party and there's nothing they can do about it until he loses.

    Jezza falling by the wayside may not result in a swing towards the centre.

    Compared to the days of Foot and Kinnock how successfully have the left and momentum tendency consolidated power and control of the party machine? It gives the impression that JC has focused on that having learnt from the past
    Generally positions have gone to left candidates though there has been the odd win for the centre. The biggest and most fundamental change is much of the membership now believe they can win with a left wing platform, that makes it incredibly unlikely, even with a change of leadership to see any big or even medium sized reversal in the near future.

    If anything a new leader could come under more pressure from the left of the party and have to respond to that but then on the other hand the more right wing MPs might feel they can push their weight around, my worry is the new leader could have even more pressure from all sides, at least Corbyn has peace from most of them.

    Edit: Many MPs who might have held back also now believe we can win on a left wing platform which is also important and really limits any split potential down to a small number who possibly wouldn't even want to win on such a platform like Tony Blair himself said.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 2,046
    There has never been a time when the leaderships of the two main parties are as inept and unfit to govern as they are now. The desperate need that the country has for a party of pragmatic moderates who will be primarily focused on what is in the country's economic interests and its national security provides the force to overcome the obstacles which have been already enumerated. Let's hope so.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,616
    Yet another story about a new pro-EU centre party that will fail to launch.

    At least the frequency has reduced from one per week to one per month.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,890

    There has never been a time when the leaderships of the two main parties are as inept and unfit to govern as they are now. The desperate need that the country has for a party of pragmatic moderates who will be primarily focused on what is in the country's economic interests and its national security provides the force to overcome the obstacles which have been already enumerated. Let's hope so.

    Baldwin and Lansbury were certainly worse.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,566
    There might be something to that talking to the nutters, which as I mentioned is what Blair and Major did in N. Ireland...

    Talking to the rest is good as well buts its the nutters you need to bring into the process, besides the British government usually had generated enough support for the other side, in say South Africa or N. Ireland. The other side generally weren't the ones we were inflicting pain on. The advantage to Corbyn is he'll have the courage to meet them to look for peace rather than have secret meetings out of worry that the more warlike populace will accuse him of working with the enemy or some kind of trumped up treachery.
  • This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,327
    Elliot said:

    kle4 said:

    brendan16 said:

    They should name themselves the SLP. The sore loser party. Soubry was in the SDP wasn't she?

    Why not just join the Lib Dems - why have another party competing against Labour, the Greens, SNP, LDs Etc for pro remain voters?

    If the LDs had been able to capitalise on what looked like a terrible position for Labour last year, perhaps we would have. The LD manifesto explicitly pitched itself in its foreward not necessarily as for government, but for a better opposition. That they did not and seemingly still cannot capitalise means that loyalty and inertia will surely win out, given the challenges in starting something new.
    I think the difference this time is that it's not just economic policy and the EU. Now it is our national security at stake. Corbyn as PM has shown he would not react to Russia killing people on our streets. Even the strongest Labour loyalist can have red lines over that.

    In addition, the deselection agenda is clearly gathering steam. Macron has shown new parties are possible in these times, winning power from nowhere.
    It's all a question of numbers and personalities.
    If a new centre party could have enough MPs to become the official opposition it really would be a game changer.
    I think that it would also have to be an 'alliance' of groups rather than a completely new party otherwise they would waste too much time deciding the constitution and who should lead and be shadow ministers. No, create a new alliance with Labour MPs, Tory MPs and Lib Dems agreeing a limited set of objectives (including a form of PR, of course).
    But, no I don't think it will happen.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    There might be something to that talking to the nutters, which as I mentioned is what Blair and Major did in N. Ireland...

    Talking to the rest is good as well buts its the nutters you need to bring into the process, besides the British government usually had generated enough support for the other side, in say South Africa or N. Ireland. The other side generally weren't the ones we were inflicting pain on. The advantage to Corbyn is he'll have the courage to meet them to look for peace rather than have secret meetings out of worry that the more warlike populace will accuse him of working with the enemy or some kind of trumped up treachery.

    The nutters were those that opposed the Good Friday Agreements, like the Continuity IRA and, err, John McDonnell? It was the ANC that brought an end to apartheid, not the APLA. And Corbyn won't meet with them all for peace. Just the ones who align with his anti-Western stance. Has he ever met with Israelis or the DUP? No, but Sinn Fein should be invited to parliament after cabinet ministers have been killed. You know this full well.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424

    The Ireland v Scotland world cup qualifier is coming down to a very tight finish.

    Ireland had it in the bag...

    Sorry Scotland, I just DavidL'd you.
    Grrr....
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT, support for shitty regimes. We, meaning the Western governments, support shitty regimes that are well-disposed towards us. Corbyn supports shitty regimes (and insurgencies) that are hostile to us.

    Corbyn supports hostile regimes in much the same way Major and Blair supported that hostile lot in N. Ireland...

    Funny how things work out when we try a slightly different approach than 'you are the enemy we will kill you'... I wonder if it will ever catch on or if everyone will keep up with the traitor rhetoric and force people to act warlike whilst secretly being in talks about peace but worried about the public's reaction to such weak treachery...
    That's silly. Corbyn was not a disinterested seeker after peace in Northern Ireland. He championed the most militant members of one side only.
    The Corbynistas all know this. The "we just want peace and dialogue" is a cover story, not a real argument.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,327

    startagain.org.uk is still available. Therefore this is clearly not happening.

    Go on register it, it'll only cost a fiver or so.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,704
    For a new political party to stand a chance of replacing an existing political party, it would have to instantly become the official Opposition. That brings significant advantages in terms of exposure and funding. It would also explode Labour's claim to be the alternative government.

    For this to happen, a minimum of 132 MPs would have to leave Labour and form a new group or join the Liberal Democrats or Greens, as the only other national parties represented in parliament.

    The chances of this happening seem to me to be about the same as the chances of Seumas Milne having a lucid moment over Stalin.

    For the avoidance of doubt the chances of that happening are precisely fuck all.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    If Labour MPs fear deselection from Momentum, which is a growing possibility as they take over Haringey and Newham councils it could be on the cards. Unless that occurs it is unlikely but to gain traction it would indeed require an alliance with the LDs and Europhile Tories like Soubry.

    On the 7% lead poll for Labour I would be sceptical, it was commissioned by the GMB and prefaced by questions about 'Tory spending cuts' and the previous Survation poll had a much smaller Labour lead. All polls taken since the Russian poisoning and Corbyn's muted position on it have also had the Tories ahead
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 2,046
    Sean_F said:

    There has never been a time when the leaderships of the two main parties are as inept and unfit to govern as they are now. The desperate need that the country has for a party of pragmatic moderates who will be primarily focused on what is in the country's economic interests and its national security provides the force to overcome the obstacles which have been already enumerated. Let's hope so.

    Baldwin and Lansbury were certainly worse.
    It's very telling that you have to go that far back.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,327

    This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.

    You mean quite successful?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,704
    Elliot said:

    There might be something to that talking to the nutters, which as I mentioned is what Blair and Major did in N. Ireland...

    Talking to the rest is good as well buts its the nutters you need to bring into the process, besides the British government usually had generated enough support for the other side, in say South Africa or N. Ireland. The other side generally weren't the ones we were inflicting pain on. The advantage to Corbyn is he'll have the courage to meet them to look for peace rather than have secret meetings out of worry that the more warlike populace will accuse him of working with the enemy or some kind of trumped up treachery.

    The nutters were those that opposed the Good Friday Agreements, like the Continuity IRA and, err, John McDonnell? It was the ANC that brought an end to apartheid, not the APLA. And Corbyn won't meet with them all for peace. Just the ones who align with his anti-Western stance. Has he ever met with Israelis or the DUP? No, but Sinn Fein should be invited to parliament after cabinet ministers have been killed. You know this full well.
    In the interests of accuracy and before someone uses it to undermine your point, Anthony Berry was a whip, not a minister. Tebbit was injured, not killed.

    *Looks round expectantly for the apologia to start on the basis that Berry wasn't politically important*
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 10,383
    Commie Spy/ Russian sympathiser bounce

    "Since the general election my opinion of [X] has become more..."

    Theresa May
    Positive: 24%
    Negative: 38%

    Jeremy Corbyn
    Positive: 29%
    Negative: 25%
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    edited March 18

    Sean_F said:

    There has never been a time when the leaderships of the two main parties are as inept and unfit to govern as they are now. The desperate need that the country has for a party of pragmatic moderates who will be primarily focused on what is in the country's economic interests and its national security provides the force to overcome the obstacles which have been already enumerated. Let's hope so.

    Baldwin and Lansbury were certainly worse.
    It's very telling that you have to go that far back.
    It is more a fact centrists feel bereft they are no longer in command of one of the 2 main parties as they have been for decades, whether in terms of the Cameron and Major Tories or Blair's Labour Party.

    You have to go back to the 1980s when Thatcher led the Tories and Foot and Kinnock led Labour for the last time rightwingers held sway in the leadership of the Tory Party and leftwingers held sway in the leadership of Labour at the same time. At the time it produced the SDP/Liberal Alliance which was formed in 1981 and got 25% at the 1983 general election and 23% at the 1987 general election, the highest share for a third party in a UK general election since 1929 and that is why this thread is pertinent at the present time.

    Amongst prominent Remainers who could form such a party, Cable, Adonis and Soubry were all once in the SDP.
  • This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.

    You mean quite successful?
    Blows up on the launch pad.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,911
    If you're going to split:

    Just F***ing Do it.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424
    This kind of stuff makes me feel old. Back when I was at University the wettest of wet tories (even then) was seriously interested in a new party called the SDP and became a founder member. I subsequently stood as a candidate and was area party secretary for some years. I attended various conferences and helped fight bye elections. It was exciting but ultimately a very frustrating process.

    FPTP is a phenomenal hurdle for a new party to get over as is the essential conservatism of the British people. This applies not only with the electorate but with those that join. In Dundee and Angus we were heavy with disappointed old Labour types who felt that they should still be councillors. It really wasn't a help. It also taught me that being a member of a party involves a lot of compromises and supporting things you don't especially agree with (Europe, even then). In an established party people tend to know and do this but in a new party the tendency to splinter is much greater. Once you have left one party on your principles it is much easier to leave a second. People came and went and money was very tight.

    I don't regret being in the SDP but the odds against a grouping like this having any significant impact are huge. They would be better off trying to persuade Labour (or even the Tories) to adopt the policies they want. Otherwise they risk, at best, splitting the vote.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,911
    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,327

    This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.

    You mean quite successful?
    Blows up on the launch pad.
    You could do with a better comparison then.

    "For the past five years, the rockets have been our only means to resupply the International Space Station. Not bad for a rocket design that was nearly mothballed but has since gone on to make 784 flights, almost all of them successful."
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/29/50_years_soyuz/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    I think that Putin chap is going to do quite well.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,982
    I very very much doubt that Labour MPs have the guts to do any of this. Maybe one or two, if threatened with deselection would resign the whip and sit as indie Labour.

    Half of them are probably just kneeling at the end of the bed each night, praying that Corbyn simply loses the election, and this madness passes.
  • This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.

    You mean quite successful?
    Blows up on the launch pad.
    You could do with a better comparison then.

    "For the past five years, the rockets have been our only means to resupply the International Space Station. Not bad for a rocket design that was nearly mothballed but has since gone on to make 784 flights, almost all of them successful."
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/29/50_years_soyuz/
    If we're playing tit-for-tat

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-space-programme-collapse-soyuz-2-1b-rocket-cosmodrome-launch-failure-latest-news-a8094856.html
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,790
    DavidL said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    I think that Putin chap is going to do quite well.
    If he doesn't, kudos to MI6!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,982
    HYUFD said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
    How many independent electoral observers will make it home?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,327

    This new pro EU left/right party will be like a Russian space rocket.

    You mean quite successful?
    Blows up on the launch pad.
    You could do with a better comparison then.

    "For the past five years, the rockets have been our only means to resupply the International Space Station. Not bad for a rocket design that was nearly mothballed but has since gone on to make 784 flights, almost all of them successful."
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/29/50_years_soyuz/
    If we're playing tit-for-tat

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-space-programme-collapse-soyuz-2-1b-rocket-cosmodrome-launch-failure-latest-news-a8094856.html
    Yes, it's a risky thing launching space rockets as I'm sure Mr Musk would agree, however the Russians don't have a bad reliability record as such things go.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,911
    HYUFD said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
    DavidL said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    I think that Putin chap is going to do quite well.
    OK I walked into that, but Betfair does have a reasonably competitive market on voteshare.
  • DaveWDaveW Posts: 7
    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    edited March 18

    HYUFD said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
    DavidL said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    I think that Putin chap is going to do quite well.
    OK I walked into that, but Betfair does have a reasonably competitive market on voteshare.
    I should think waiting for the Middle Wallop Parish Council by election would be more exciting than the Russian Presidential election result but yes it is just a matter of how much Putin wins by not whether he wins
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    edited March 18

    HYUFD said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
    How many independent electoral observers will make it home?
    Depends how 'independent' they are I imagine, as long as they commend the brilliantly open free and fair exercise of democracy that was the Russian Presidential election and how fully valid was the glorious leader's triumph I expect they can go home without too many concerns
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 802
    edited March 18

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Lemme guess:

    The millionaire communist 15%
    Russian Kim Kardashian 12%
    Zhirinovsky 8%
    Some other joke candidate the Kremlin put up 2%
    His Imperial Majesty Vladimir IV 165%
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,322
    By 2019, the Corbynisation of the Labour machine will be nearing completion. He is likely, therefore, to be replaced (whenever that happens) by a fellow traveller - who certainly won't seek to change the system that got them elected.

    I cannot see a way back for 'Realistic' Labour in the short or medium term. The membership has been skewed by the changes implemented by Miliband and thus control has shifted leftwards. Unless a moderate version of Momentum is established and use those same membership rules to flood the party with new moderate voices, regaining control of the party machine will be very, very difficult. Indeed if such a body were to be established, I can see how the Corbyn inner circle would suddenly demand a purity test for all new members to keep out incoming moderates.

    We need a moderate left of centre opposition party. A party that is loyal to the interests of the Nation. A party that deals with those who use violent language as part of political discourse by kicking them out - no matter how senior they are. A party that refuses to give home to those who indulge in anti-semitism. A party that does not cosy up to extremists round the world.

    Corbyn has demonstrated that he is not willing to do those things.

    They may not succeed but if someone had the gumption to build a new movement on the centre left, then they would earn the respect of those in the political class for doing what is right rather than just sitting muttering in the background.
  • The Salisbury attempted poisonings constitute one of those "events" that Macmillan opined about half a century ago. The story is as yet incomplete and is likely to remain so.

    I really think M Poirot more than anyone else can offer us some guidance. "Means, Motive and Opportunity". The means is essentially understood and not in serious dispute. The opportunity has not been much explored but seems to be based on the happenstance of the daughter visiting her father. An apparent consequence of that is the timing would be dictated by that event rather than co-incident events such as the Russian election.

    But, the one that baffles me is "Motive". Why ?

    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    "Pour decourager les autres". Well, a bullet would have done that.

    To make a stink to make Putin look strong in the run up to the election ? So if the daughter hadn't happened to be visiting at this time then someone else would have been the victim ?

    No doubt John le Carre would tell us, as Corbyn almost seemed to suggest, it was our spooks and not theirs. Sorry, I've never been convinced by his plotting, even if his prose style is excellent.

    So, why ? To make Theresa look stupid ? that is predictably barmy. The one thing about Theresa is that she is much less unimpressive when it comes to giving a response to events such as this.

    To make Corbyn look good ? Whilst his handling of this matter has been much less sure footed than most things it can hardly have been a surprise that an effective response would pose some difficulty for the Cat Herder in Chief.

    To provoke a damp squib of a boycott of the World Cup ? That was hardly difficult to dodge, although Tim Farron failed.

    To bring the Putin vote out ? Most plausible but the timing is a problem.

    To close down the British Council in Russia ? I doubt there will be many tears shed either side of the Iron Curtain for this relic of our Imperialist past.

    It leads me to think the cliche of the Spy Novels of the genius spooks juggling their time between chess and the crossword in the Moldovian Times is just so far out. At best they come over as irredeemably stupid, playing their schoolboy pranks.

    Should I be found dead in extremely improbably circumstances please draw someone's attention to this contribution.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    edited March 18
    DaveW said:

    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.



    Survation also was the only pollster to underestimate the Tory lead and overestimate the Labour voteshare
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,180
    DavidL said:

    This kind of stuff makes me feel old. Back when I was at University the wettest of wet tories (even then) was seriously interested in a new party called the SDP and became a founder member. I subsequently stood as a candidate and was area party secretary for some years. I attended various conferences and helped fight bye elections. It was exciting but ultimately a very frustrating process.

    FPTP is a phenomenal hurdle for a new party to get over as is the essential conservatism of the British people. This applies not only with the electorate but with those that join. In Dundee and Angus we were heavy with disappointed old Labour types who felt that they should still be councillors. It really wasn't a help. It also taught me that being a member of a party involves a lot of compromises and supporting things you don't especially agree with (Europe, even then). In an established party people tend to know and do this but in a new party the tendency to splinter is much greater. Once you have left one party on your principles it is much easier to leave a second. People came and went and money was very tight.

    I don't regret being in the SDP but the odds against a grouping like this having any significant impact are huge. They would be better off trying to persuade Labour (or even the Tories) to adopt the policies they want. Otherwise they risk, at best, splitting the vote.

    They might consider setting up a cross-party campaign for PR. Otherwise, splits usually lead to oblivion. PR makes splits easier to survive electorally, even if a new party is inherently a bit less stable than an old one.

    UKIP seems to demonstrate how unstable a new party can be ...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,982

    The Salisbury attempted poisonings constitute one of those "events" that Macmillan opined about half a century ago. The story is as yet incomplete and is likely to remain so.

    I really think M Poirot more than anyone else can offer us some guidance. "Means, Motive and Opportunity". The means is essentially understood and not in serious dispute. The opportunity has not been much explored but seems to be based on the happenstance of the daughter visiting her father. An apparent consequence of that is the timing would be dictated by that event rather than co-incident events such as the Russian election.

    But, the one that baffles me is "Motive". Why ?

    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    "Pour decourager les autres". Well, a bullet would have done that.

    To make a stink to make Putin look strong in the run up to the election ? So if the daughter hadn't happened to be visiting at this time then someone else would have been the victim ?

    No doubt John le Carre would tell us, as Corbyn almost seemed to suggest, it was our spooks and not theirs. Sorry, I've never been convinced by his plotting, even if his prose style is excellent.

    So, why ? To make Theresa look stupid ? that is predictably barmy. The one thing about Theresa is that she is much less unimpressive when it comes to giving a response to events such as this.

    To make Corbyn look good ? Whilst his handling of this matter has been much less sure footed than most things it can hardly have been a surprise that an effective response would pose some difficulty for the Cat Herder in Chief.

    To provoke a damp squib of a boycott of the World Cup ? That was hardly difficult to dodge, although Tim Farron failed.

    To bring the Putin vote out ? Most plausible but the timing is a problem.

    To close down the British Council in Russia ? I doubt there will be many tears shed either side of the Iron Curtain for this relic of our Imperialist past.

    It leads me to think the cliche of the Spy Novels of the genius spooks juggling their time between chess and the crossword in the Moldovian Times is just so far out. At best they come over as irredeemably stupid, playing their schoolboy pranks.

    Should I be found dead in extremely improbably circumstances please draw someone's attention to this contribution.

    If you really are sending your views from Cumbria, then you are far too far away from Porton Down to fall victim.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,322


    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    You could have said that about Litvinenko or Markov - but they were both taken out in extreme ways.

    Why was an ice axe chosen as the way of dispatching Trotsky? Again a bullet would have far simpler.

    The Soviets and their heirs have always had a penchant for theatrical assassinations. Sometimes they do things quietly, sometimes they do things to really get noticed.

    I can't imagine why - I don't think there is a rational basis for their choices other than to send messages to the wider world not just their intended class of victim.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,982

    DavidL said:

    This kind of stuff makes me feel old. Back when I was at University the wettest of wet tories (even then) was seriously interested in a new party called the SDP and became a founder member. I subsequently stood as a candidate and was area party secretary for some years. I attended various conferences and helped fight bye elections. It was exciting but ultimately a very frustrating process.

    FPTP is a phenomenal hurdle for a new party to get over as is the essential conservatism of the British people. This applies not only with the electorate but with those that join. In Dundee and Angus we were heavy with disappointed old Labour types who felt that they should still be councillors. It really wasn't a help. It also taught me that being a member of a party involves a lot of compromises and supporting things you don't especially agree with (Europe, even then). In an established party people tend to know and do this but in a new party the tendency to splinter is much greater. Once you have left one party on your principles it is much easier to leave a second. People came and went and money was very tight.

    I don't regret being in the SDP but the odds against a grouping like this having any significant impact are huge. They would be better off trying to persuade Labour (or even the Tories) to adopt the policies they want. Otherwise they risk, at best, splitting the vote.

    They might consider setting up a cross-party campaign for PR. Otherwise, splits usually lead to oblivion. PR makes splits easier to survive electorally, even if a new party is inherently a bit less stable than an old one.

    UKIP seems to demonstrate how unstable a new party can be ...
    Any news on their bankruptcy?
  • HYUFD said:

    DaveW said:

    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.



    Survation also was the only pollster to underestimate the Tory lead and overestimate the Labour voteshare
    Wrong. They also underestimated the Labour share by 1%
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,330
    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,982


    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    You could have said that about Litvinenko or Markov - but they were both taken out in extreme ways.

    Why was an ice axe chosen as the way of dispatching Trotsky? Again a bullet would have far simpler.

    The Soviets and their heirs have always had a penchant for theatrical assassinations. Sometimes they do things quietly, sometimes they do things to really get noticed.

    I can't imagine why - I don't think there is a rational basis for their choices other than to send messages to the wider world not just their intended class of victim.
    To kill Rasputin they tried to get him to eat wine and cakes laced with cyanide. He drank all the wine but the poison had evaporated. He refused the cakes.

    So they stabbed him a few times and then shot him. Then dropped him in a river.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,538
    kle4 said:

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
    Losers are like that
  • The Salisbury attempted poisonings constitute one of those "events" that Macmillan opined about half a century ago. The story is as yet incomplete and is likely to remain so.

    I really think M Poirot more than anyone else can offer us some guidance. "Means, Motive and Opportunity". The means is essentially understood and not in serious dispute. The opportunity has not been much explored but seems to be based on the happenstance of the daughter visiting her father. An apparent consequence of that is the timing would be dictated by that event rather than co-incident events such as the Russian election.

    But, the one that baffles me is "Motive". Why ?

    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    "Pour decourager les autres". Well, a bullet would have done that.

    To make a stink to make Putin look strong in the run up to the election ? So if the daughter hadn't happened to be visiting at this time then someone else would have been the victim ?

    No doubt John le Carre would tell us, as Corbyn almost seemed to suggest, it was our spooks and not theirs. Sorry, I've never been convinced by his plotting, even if his prose style is excellent.

    So, why ? To make Theresa look stupid ? that is predictably barmy. The one thing about Theresa is that she is much less unimpressive when it comes to giving a response to events such as this.

    To make Corbyn look good ? Whilst his handling of this matter has been much less sure footed than most things it can hardly have been a surprise that an effective response would pose some difficulty for the Cat Herder in Chief.

    To provoke a damp squib of a boycott of the World Cup ? That was hardly difficult to dodge, although Tim Farron failed.

    To bring the Putin vote out ? Most plausible but the timing is a problem.

    To close down the British Council in Russia ? I doubt there will be many tears shed either side of the Iron Curtain for this relic of our Imperialist past.

    It leads me to think the cliche of the Spy Novels of the genius spooks juggling their time between chess and the crossword in the Moldovian Times is just so far out. At best they come over as irredeemably stupid, playing their schoolboy pranks.

    Should I be found dead in extremely improbably circumstances please draw someone's attention to this contribution.

    If you really are sending your views from Cumbria, then you are far too far away from Porton Down to fall victim.
    Tell that to our sheep and cattle victims of Foot and Mouth in 2001
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424

    DavidL said:

    This kind of stuff makes me feel old. Back when I was at University the wettest of wet tories (even then) was seriously interested in a new party called the SDP and became a founder member. I subsequently stood as a candidate and was area party secretary for some years. I attended various conferences and helped fight bye elections. It was exciting but ultimately a very frustrating process.

    FPTP is a phenomenal hurdle for a new party to get over as is the essential conservatism of the British people. This applies not only with the electorate but with those that join. In Dundee and Angus we were heavy with disappointed old Labour types who felt that they should still be councillors. It really wasn't a help. It also taught me that being a member of a party involves a lot of compromises and supporting things you don't especially agree with (Europe, even then). In an established party people tend to know and do this but in a new party the tendency to splinter is much greater. Once you have left one party on your principles it is much easier to leave a second. People came and went and money was very tight.

    I don't regret being in the SDP but the odds against a grouping like this having any significant impact are huge. They would be better off trying to persuade Labour (or even the Tories) to adopt the policies they want. Otherwise they risk, at best, splitting the vote.

    They might consider setting up a cross-party campaign for PR. Otherwise, splits usually lead to oblivion. PR makes splits easier to survive electorally, even if a new party is inherently a bit less stable than an old one.

    UKIP seems to demonstrate how unstable a new party can be ...
    I think they started off with some unfair advantages in that respect as David Cameron once famously pointed out.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,277
    No PC nonsense at the Motogp.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424

    HYUFD said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    Putin and all decent patriotic Russians 99.99%
    Subversives, weaklings and traitors to the Motherland 0.01%

    There you go!
    DavidL said:

    Are we expecting an exit poll or any quick results out of Russia?

    I think that Putin chap is going to do quite well.
    OK I walked into that, but Betfair does have a reasonably competitive market on voteshare.
    I am not playing but if I was I would bet high. Russians have had a very good reminder of exactly what is good for them.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,180
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Galtieri must have been receiving payment in used £10s for his services. It could also have swung the 1983 election. Thatcher's vote share fell by 1-2 percentage points *despite* the war but her majority rose from about 40 to 140 seats.

  • Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    You could have said that about Litvinenko or Markov - but they were both taken out in extreme ways.

    Why was an ice axe chosen as the way of dispatching Trotsky? Again a bullet would have far simpler.

    The Soviets and their heirs have always had a penchant for theatrical assassinations. Sometimes they do things quietly, sometimes they do things to really get noticed.

    I can't imagine why - I don't think there is a rational basis for their choices other than to send messages to the wider world not just their intended class of victim.
    Very true. It is almost like throwing a stone in a pond for the sheer hell of it.

    I wonder what we would have thought about an assassination attempt on Kim Philby when he was living in Moscow ?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,258
    edited March 18
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Squares with my recollection Mr S. The Conservative vote was very flaky and had it noot been for the Falklands we could still be waiting for another female PM.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280

    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Galtieri must have been receiving payment in used £10s for his services. It could also have swung the 1983 election. Thatcher's vote share fell by 1-2 percentage points *despite* the war but her majority rose from about 40 to 140 seats.
    It was the SDP which helped increase Thatcher's majority so much by splitting the centre left vote, Thatcher got 42% in 1983, the same as May got in 2017 but a landslide majority under FPTP rather than largest party in a hung parliament as the SDP/Alliance took 25% in 1983 and Labour just 3% more on 28%, whereas in 2017 the LDs got just 7% and Labour got 40%.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280

    HYUFD said:

    DaveW said:

    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.



    Survation also was the only pollster to underestimate the Tory lead and overestimate the Labour voteshare
    Wrong. They also underestimated the Labour share by 1%
    Survation had Labour on 40.4% and they got 39.9% (at a UK level), they also had the Tories on 41% and the Tories got 42% UK wide and 43% GB wide
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    It does make a mockery of the idea we have overreacted and threatened relations - the Russians given the appearance of being either pleased or amused at the response.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 782
    Less than 2 hours until preliminary results start coming out of Russia... :smiley:
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,322


    Seriously, to kill the guy a bullet in the back of the head would be much more certain and no less deniable.

    You could have said that about Litvinenko or Markov - but they were both taken out in extreme ways.

    Why was an ice axe chosen as the way of dispatching Trotsky? Again a bullet would have far simpler.

    The Soviets and their heirs have always had a penchant for theatrical assassinations. Sometimes they do things quietly, sometimes they do things to really get noticed.

    I can't imagine why - I don't think there is a rational basis for their choices other than to send messages to the wider world not just their intended class of victim.
    Very true. It is almost like throwing a stone in a pond for the sheer hell of it.

    I wonder what we would have thought about an assassination attempt on Kim Philby when he was living in Moscow ?
    In a way, I suspect we were happier to know he was living a miserable, disappointed life in Moscow than if we had have bumped him off. His suffering was prolonged.
  • stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Squares with my recollection Mr S. The Conservative vote was very flaky and had it noot been for the Falklands we could still be waiting for another female PM.
    It is all this turnout thing in local elections. Mrs T was never going to lose the 1983 GE, with or without Galtieri. Yes, the motivated voters who turn out in local elections were flaky and Tories more likely to stay at home, they always are, but in a GE the Tory vote would always have come out. Yes, it would have been down more than it was, but an increased majoirty was always likely.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    edited March 18

    kle4 said:

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
    I hadn't realised that the news media was so much concerned with fun. What do you think was behind their fixation with Eck & RT before a single show had been screened?

    Personalities in the news media obviously are concerned with fun, in mocking the influential and once influential, and of celebrating negative changes for people and parties they don't like. Whether they should be is another matter. As for their fixation with Salmond and RT beforehand, the same reason - they don't like Salmond and RT, reportedly, is a propaganda station (though I've never seen it to judge). I cannot figure out what you might be implying as if there's more to their interest than that.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,424

    Less than 2 hours until preliminary results start coming out of Russia... :smiley:

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,704

    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Squares with my recollection Mr S. The Conservative vote was very flaky and had it noot been for the Falklands we could still be waiting for another female PM.
    Mine too.
    It's quite difficult, even for those who lived through it, to remember and contextualise public attitudes to Thatcher prior to Galtieri's Falklands escapade. Without the emotional solidarity of the war, the appeal of the SDP to wetter Tories would have been considerably stronger, as there was a significant portion of the party and its supporters which heartily despised her.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,460

    Less than 2 hours until preliminary results start coming out of Russia... :smiley:

    The suspense is killing us .... and I don't even live in Salisbury ....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,738
    Elliot said:

    AnneJGP said:

    I'd be really interested to hear about a new political party ..... but they lost me at the 'pro-European'.

    I take it they mean pro-EU. If they don't mean that, they need a better descriptor.

    The selling point needs to be evidence-based progressive reform, away from the tribalism and ideology of the other parties.
    Tribalism would soon emerge even among such an idealised scenario, I have no doubt, it's inevitable for organisations.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 69,019
    edited March 18
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    DaveW said:

    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.



    Survation also was the only pollster to underestimate the Tory lead and overestimate the Labour voteshare
    Wrong. They also underestimated the Labour share by 1%
    Survation had Labour on 40.4% and they got 39.9% (at a UK level), they also had the Tories on 41% and the Tories got 42% UK wide and 43% GB wide
    Wrong, wrong, and more wrong.

    The final Survation poll was GB wide not UK wide, it had Labour on 40.4%, and Labour in Great Britain polled 41%.

    There's no harm in admitting you were wrong when you said Survation overestimated the Labour vote share which is factually incorrect.

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Survation-GE2017-Final-Poll-2d7l9l8.pdf
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280

    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Back from an excellent brunch and a bracing walk which just goes to show you don't need ti live in provincial England to have a pleasant Sunday.

    A new party ? Well, yes. Let's not forget the SDP came very close to achieving that breakthrough and I well remember being out canvassing thirty-six years ago in a similarly cold late winter/early spring in a solid Conservative Ward and hearing that solid vote disintegrate in front of me.

    One week or so later, Galtieri decided on his insane foreign venture and both the Conservative AND Labour parties were saved. Had the May 1982 local elections happened without the Falklands, I wonder how London would have voted.

    As it was, the Conservatives lost 7% and Labour 9% with the Alliance quadrupling the former Liberal share to 24%.

    Anyway, that's history which doesn't often repeat itself exactly.

    Squares with my recollection Mr S. The Conservative vote was very flaky and had it noot been for the Falklands we could still be waiting for another female PM.
    The final pre Falklands invasion and Falklands War Gallup poll in March 1982 had it Tories 39.5% Labour 28.5% SDP Alliance 29%, so the main result of the War was to shift some SDP voters to the Tories and ensure Labour held second place ahead of the SDP Alliance
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1979-1983
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,280
    edited March 18

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    DaveW said:

    See TSE is making the same school boy error that Momentum have been making. Survation may have been the most accurate polling company at the election. That does not mean given methodology changes that they are the most accurate now.



    Survation also was the only pollster to underestimate the Tory lead and overestimate the Labour voteshare
    Wrong. They also underestimated the Labour share by 1%
    Survation had Labour on 40.4% and they got 39.9% (at a UK level), they also had the Tories on 41% and the Tories got 42% UK wide and 43% GB wide
    Wrong, wrong, and more wrong.

    The final Survation poll was GB wide not UK wide, it had Labour on 40.4%, and Labour in Great Britain polled 41%.

    There's no harm in admitting you were wrong when you said Survation overestimated the Labour vote share which is factually incorrect.

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Survation-GE2017-Final-Poll-2d7l9l8.pdf
    I said Survation overestimated the Labour voteshare which was correct on a UK wide basis (we have a UK not GB Parliament) and of course as it underestimated the Tory voteshare on a UK wide basis too even when a GB wide poll that just reinforces the point
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,398
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    And yet the media (including it seems Brillo) are obsessed by Eck & his show. I wonder why?
    I don't think it is exactly rocket science. They don't like him, plus he's a once powerful figure no longer as central to things as he used to be, so that his show apparently gets few viewers is fun for them to focus on
    I hadn't realised that the news media was so much concerned with fun. What do you think was behind their fixation with Eck & RT before a single show had been screened?

    Personalities in the news media obviously are concerned with fun, in mocking the influential and once influential, and of celebrating negative changes for people and parties they don't like. Whether they should be is another matter. As for their fixation with Salmond and RT beforehand, the same reason - they don't like Salmond and RT, reportedly, is a propaganda station (though I've never seen it to judge). I cannot figure out what you might be implying as if there's more to their interest than that.
    I think Yoons and their enthusiastic media mouthpieces have to decide whether Salmond is an irrelevant has-been with little or no influence that nopbody watches on RT, or a dangerous Putinist propagandist giving credibilty to totalitarianism. Currently they seem to think that he's performing the impressive trick of being both.
This discussion has been closed.