Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
I voted for May's Tories in 2019 in the European Parliament elections when 30% voted for Farage's party. So on that basis arguably 30% of voters are rightwards of me
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
Given
- the collapsing living standards and public services, - sky high taxes, - soaring mortgage rates, - a PM with a charisma bypass - the lack of any positive narrative from the Government - after 13 years they don't have anyone else to blame,
the miracle is that a quarter of the country are willing to back the Conservatives in opinion polls, and indeed in real elections a couple of months ago Labour were only 7-9% ahead in the national share of the vote.
Rob Ford @robfordmancs · 4h Replying to @robfordmancs Just as 2010-15 saw UKIP mobilise support among voters who wanted a more radical approach on the core issue which exercised them most, could 2024-29 see Greens achieve the same kind of breakthrough among young grads exercised by the climate emergency?
No. The Greens just don't have the coherent messaging or leadership to achieve that. They have co-leaders for a start.
UKIP were led by the (hateful but charismatic) Farage. The Greens would need something similar. Unlike the Lib Dems they don't have the local power base or second places in constituencies to build up from the base either.
I also think, more then that, the Green just have a message that no one with a microphone has any reason to amplify. The Green Party of England and Wales are actively anti growth, actively anti capitalist, actively pro wealth redistribution - that doesn't benefit anyone who owns a paper or a tv network. And talking about them, even negatively, gives them too much press. Better off not reporting on them and focussing on people it's easier to paint as trouble makers - protesters.
Farage and his position doesn't harm capital, and if anything pushes the Overton window further rightwards, so is actively helpful to the status quo. So it's fine to amplify him or any other right wing clown show that turns up.
Correcting for you "he Green just have a message that no one has any reason to amplify" and "The Green Party of England and Wales are actively anti growth, actively anti capitalist, actively pro wealth redistribution - that doesn't benefit anyone"
You're so edgy and clever
Anti-growth, anti-capitalist, and pro-wealth redistribution, is a very niche political viewpoint.
Isn't that a very Tory policy? So long as the wealth is redistributed in the right way obvs.
Trying to work out what actually motivates the modern Parliamentary Conservative Party (other than a desire to enjoy the fruits of office) is pretty difficult.
An interesting challenge.
I think that they are patriotic in a general way, they want the UK to do well, grow faster than average, count for something in the world and be a good place to run a business and make money. I think that they want people in general to share that growth and increase in wealth but they seem depressingly indifferent to the equality of that distribution. They want a fairly socially liberally country but like conservatives throughout the ages they think we have gone far enough and possibly too far in some areas. They have a strong belief that the private sector is "better" than the public sector, not just more efficient but somehow morally superior.
Above all, though, they don't seem to be willing to do the hard work of working out how to achieve those ideals, they seem to believe (and they are not alone in this delusion in the political class) that talking about things is at least, possibly even more important, than doing. It is a huge flaw.
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
The idea that you can dissociate a word or a sentence from its context is of interest to etymologists, philosophers, and people who are desperate for an excuse to say something that thing they know they probably shouldn't say.
So yes, if you like. You can construct an elaborate wrapper for "offensive" comments that means they are no longer "meant" in "that" way.
But people will usually guess what you're up to.
Not at all I gave you an example of something no one found offensive, not the giver nor the receiver of the comment. The fact a third party unaware of any context decided on my behalf I have been offended is offensive....this is why I refute the whole anti school of thought....you just want to be the thought police, you want a world that no one can ever be offended even if they aren't part of the conversation. Those people can go suck dicks in hell
Rob Ford @robfordmancs · 4h Replying to @robfordmancs Just as 2010-15 saw UKIP mobilise support among voters who wanted a more radical approach on the core issue which exercised them most, could 2024-29 see Greens achieve the same kind of breakthrough among young grads exercised by the climate emergency?
No. The Greens just don't have the coherent messaging or leadership to achieve that. They have co-leaders for a start.
UKIP were led by the (hateful but charismatic) Farage. The Greens would need something similar. Unlike the Lib Dems they don't have the local power base or second places in constituencies to build up from the base either.
I also think, more then that, the Green just have a message that no one with a microphone has any reason to amplify. The Green Party of England and Wales are actively anti growth, actively anti capitalist, actively pro wealth redistribution - that doesn't benefit anyone who owns a paper or a tv network. And talking about them, even negatively, gives them too much press. Better off not reporting on them and focussing on people it's easier to paint as trouble makers - protesters.
Farage and his position doesn't harm capital, and if anything pushes the Overton window further rightwards, so is actively helpful to the status quo. So it's fine to amplify him or any other right wing clown show that turns up.
Correcting for you "he Green just have a message that no one has any reason to amplify" and "The Green Party of England and Wales are actively anti growth, actively anti capitalist, actively pro wealth redistribution - that doesn't benefit anyone"
You're so edgy and clever
Anti-growth, anti-capitalist, and pro-wealth redistribution, is a very niche political viewpoint.
Isn't that a very Tory policy? So long as the wealth is redistributed in the right way obvs.
Trying to work out what actually motivates the modern Parliamentary Conservative Party (other than a desire to enjoy the fruits of office) is pretty difficult.
An interesting challenge.
I think that they are patriotic in a general way, they want the UK to do well, grow faster than average, count for something in the world and be a good place to run a business and make money. I think that they want people in general to share that growth and increase in wealth but they seem depressingly indifferent to the equality of that distribution. They want a fairly socially liberally country but like conservatives throughout the ages they think we have gone far enough and possibly too far in some areas. They have a strong belief that the private sector is "better" than the public sector, not just more efficient but somehow morally superior.
Above all, though, they don't seem to be willing to do the hard work of working out how to achieve those ideals, they seem to believe (and they are not alone in this delusion in the political class) that talking about things is at least, possibly even more important, than doing. It is a huge flaw.
For me it is easy , they want power to fill their pockets, their friends and families pockets and to hell with the plebs. In any other walk of life lots of them would be in jail.
Several years ago a pharmacy department where I worked had a student who was a ‘very enthusiastic’ Moslem. Behind his back he was known as The Ayatollah! I had to restrain him from putting’The Truth about Islam’ leaflets out on the counter where people collected their medicines, and we had to find him a space where he could pray several times a day. It wouldn’t have been quite as difficult if we hadn’t had a Fundamentalist Christian in the department at the same time!
According to that York antiracism strategy, the population of York in 200 AD may have been "predominantly Black" and they need to look at why their BAME population is not growing as fast as some other areas.
Several years ago a pharmacy department where I worked had a student who was a ‘very enthusiastic’ Moslem. Behind his back he was known as The Ayatollah! I had to restrain him from putting’The Truth about Islam’ leaflets out on the counter where people collected their medicines, and we had to find him a space where he could pray several times a day. It wouldn’t have been quite as difficult if we hadn’t had a Fundamentalist Christian in the department at the same time!
Finding him a space to pray no problem
Allowing him to put pamphlets out only a problem if he is insisting they have to have one. Leaving a pile and they can take one if they like I don't regard as a problem
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
The idea that you can dissociate a word or a sentence from its context is of interest to etymologists, philosophers, and people who are desperate for an excuse to say something that thing they know they probably shouldn't say.
So yes, if you like. You can construct an elaborate wrapper for "offensive" comments that means they are no longer "meant" in "that" way.
But people will usually guess what you're up to.
Not at all I gave you an example of something no one found offensive, not the giver nor the receiver of the comment. The fact a third party unaware of any context decided on my behalf I have been offended is offensive....this is why I refute the whole anti school of thought....you just want to be the thought police, you want a world that no one can ever be offended even if they aren't part of the conversation. Those people can go suck dicks in hell
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
The idea that you can dissociate a word or a sentence from its context is of interest to etymologists, philosophers, and people who are desperate for an excuse to say something that thing they know they probably shouldn't say.
So yes, if you like. You can construct an elaborate wrapper for "offensive" comments that means they are no longer "meant" in "that" way.
But people will usually guess what you're up to.
Not at all I gave you an example of something no one found offensive, not the giver nor the receiver of the comment. The fact a third party unaware of any context decided on my behalf I have been offended is offensive....this is why I refute the whole anti school of thought....you just want to be the thought police, you want a world that no one can ever be offended even if they aren't part of the conversation. Those people can go suck dicks in hell
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
The idea that you can dissociate a word or a sentence from its context is of interest to etymologists, philosophers, and people who are desperate for an excuse to say something that thing they know they probably shouldn't say.
So yes, if you like. You can construct an elaborate wrapper for "offensive" comments that means they are no longer "meant" in "that" way.
But people will usually guess what you're up to.
Not at all I gave you an example of something no one found offensive, not the giver nor the receiver of the comment. The fact a third party unaware of any context decided on my behalf I have been offended is offensive....this is why I refute the whole anti school of thought....you just want to be the thought police, you want a world that no one can ever be offended even if they aren't part of the conversation. Those people can go suck dicks in hell
Mermaids vs LGB Alliance is like a microcosm of the ‘culture war’. On one side, a rather strange charity that has drunk from the identitarian cup and which supports social insanities like the blocking of puberty. On the other, a charity that understands science, defends free association and free speech, and promotes rights for gay people. It’s irrationalism vs reason. The dead end of identity politics vs the light of gay liberation. Overgrown children vs sensible adults. I know whose side I’m on.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
More than £18,500,000,000 was spent on IT consultants?
So about four million IT consultant days?
Surely she can't be that stupid (and bad at maths?), so must be a liar?
She has fallen down the twitter rabbit hole and just parrots all sorts of stuff that isn't true, then rages the MSM isn't reporting it. The thing is that there are loads of open goals if you want to bash the government, just needs to do some sanity checking first.
Of course doesn't help when the likes of the FT printed similar numpty story reporting £100bn covid tenders, when it was tenders that mentioned covid as one motivatng factor behind the need to update equipment over the next 10 years and thus insert tender.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
Also exactly what MPs are for. Though it was the MPs of the Conservative Party, or perhaps coalition, who imposed those legal limits, HYUFD might like to consider.
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
The idea that you can dissociate a word or a sentence from its context is of interest to etymologists, philosophers, and people who are desperate for an excuse to say something that thing they know they probably shouldn't say.
So yes, if you like. You can construct an elaborate wrapper for "offensive" comments that means they are no longer "meant" in "that" way.
But people will usually guess what you're up to.
Not at all I gave you an example of something no one found offensive, not the giver nor the receiver of the comment. The fact a third party unaware of any context decided on my behalf I have been offended is offensive....this is why I refute the whole anti school of thought....you just want to be the thought police, you want a world that no one can ever be offended even if they aren't part of the conversation. Those people can go suck dicks in hell
You think I want a world where no one can ever be offended? Fuck me, you've come out with some fishy rubbish in your time but that one takes the biscuit. Have you ever met me? I take great pains in making sure when I insult someone they stay insulted. I might not be very good at it, but it's blatant I'm trying as hard as I can.
In fact, I suspect that someone who was quite active on here until recently has gone off in a huff because of a particularly acidic remark I left. Now I'm not proud of that (oh fuck off, I am) but given the sheer effort I put into annoying people (it's harder than it looks), how you can come to THAT conclusion is baffling, even for someone like you who is definitely in the top 90%.
What I said above is actually probably something you agree with if you stop and engage your... hmmm I suppose brain is the nearest concept... for a moment. Your complaint was that some busybody took a comment out of context. And my point is that if people do that, they're either engaged in something esoteric or up to no good.
But no, you thought I was attacking you because I like to pluck your tail every now and then. And so you come back with the perhaps the most hurtful thing you could have said to me... that you hadn't actually noticed my attempts to injure people with my words. I think I might have to flounce as well now!
No I was not thinking you were attacking me, I was trying to get the point across that third parties should not be taken seriously when taking offence on behalf of others. This is where all the anti drives lead...hear someone saying something. You think it racist/sexist/homophobic/duckist whatever....your thoughts really aren't important if the person who its directed at doesnt
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
More than £18,500,000,000 was spent on IT consultants?
So about four million IT consultant days?
Surely she can't be that stupid (and bad at maths?), so must be a liar?
She has fallen down the twitter rabbit hole and just parrots all sorts of stuff that isn't true, then rages the MSM isn't reporting it. The thing is that there are loads of open goals if you want to bash the government, just needs to do some sanity checking first.
Of course doesn't help when the likes of the FT printed similar numpty story reporting £100bn covid tenders, when it was tenders that mentioned covid as one motivatng factor behind the need to update equipment over the next 10 years and thus insert tender.
You don't need to sanity check first on Twitter. Numpties of all persuasions will gobble any old rubbish up, and spread it too. The job is to spread damage, not truth. Vorderman is quite successful, since this is not the first time her efforts have made it here. I think she was even right on the other occasion I saw, but I might be misremembering.
If you get a reputation of partisan spreader of BS, you just end up preaching to your own choir. See "Racheal" from Swindon.
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
I voted for May's Tories in 2019 in the European Parliament elections when 30% voted for Farage's party. So on that basis arguably 30% of voters are rightwards of me
Your logic is sound, except that most voters didn't vote in that election. So 30% of voters in that election are rightward of you. I'd also suggest that that was something of a single-issue election.
I don't think you're an extremist, I should say. But you are much more 'traditional values' than most people I know in real life.
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
I voted for May's Tories in 2019 in the European Parliament elections when 30% voted for Farage's party. So on that basis arguably 30% of voters are rightwards of me
Your logic is sound, except that most voters didn't vote in that election. So 30% of voters in that election are rightward of you. I'd also suggest that that was something of a single-issue election.
I don't think you're an extremist, I should say. But you are much more 'traditional values' than most people I know in real life.
I'm not even sure if you can read that much into it. @BartholomewRoberts voted Brexit Party then, and is likely to go LibDem this time around.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
British number five Liam Broady caused one of the biggest shocks at this year's Wimbledon with a remarkable five-set win over Norwegian fourth seed Casper Ruud on a frenzied Centre Court.
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
I voted for May's Tories in 2019 in the European Parliament elections when 30% voted for Farage's party. So on that basis arguably 30% of voters are rightwards of me
Your logic is sound, except that most voters didn't vote in that election. So 30% of voters in that election are rightward of you. I'd also suggest that that was something of a single-issue election.
I don't think you're an extremist, I should say. But you are much more 'traditional values' than most people I know in real life.
I'm not even sure if you can read that much into it. @BartholomewRoberts voted Brexit Party then, and is likely to go LibDem this time around.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
I understand Starmer has rejected increasing the 2 child allowance today, and seems to support his candidate in Uxbridge against London's labour mayor
I know @bigjohnowls upsets some on here, but to be honest Starmer is risking upsetting the left of his party, as he moves to Blair and Brown influenced policies
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
Ha ha but was it an offensive comment?
Not to me
Well then I guess by your metric it wasn't an offensive comment.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
Ha ha but was it an offensive comment?
Not to me
Well then I guess by your metric it wasn't an offensive comment.
Not in the least, however imagine if someone overheard it and went squealing to hr. Why do they get to be offended on my behalf and endanger your job when the person you made the comment to wasnt offended?
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
I understand Starmer has rejected increasing the 2 child allowance today, and seems to support his candidate in Uxbridge against London's labour mayor
I know @bigjohnowls upsets some on here, but to be honest Starmer is risking upsetting the left of his party, as he moves to Blair and Brown influenced policies
He is not going against the Mayor, he is saying the same as I am, that we should expand the zone, but also provide more mitigation to those hardest hit. If he was PM it would be trivial to organise that.
More than £18,500,000,000 was spent on IT consultants?
So about four million IT consultant days?
Surely she can't be that stupid (and bad at maths?), so must be a liar?
She has fallen down the twitter rabbit hole and just parrots all sorts of stuff that isn't true, then rages the MSM isn't reporting it. The thing is that there are loads of open goals if you want to bash the government, just needs to do some sanity checking first.
Of course doesn't help when the likes of the FT printed similar numpty story reporting £100bn covid tenders, when it was tenders that mentioned covid as one motivatng factor behind the need to update equipment over the next 10 years and thus insert tender.
You don't need to sanity check first on Twitter. Numpties of all persuasions will gobble any old rubbish up, and spread it too. The job is to spread damage, not truth. Vorderman is quite successful, since this is not the first time her efforts have made it here. I think she was even right on the other occasion I saw, but I might be misremembering.
If you get a reputation of partisan spreader of BS, you just end up preaching to your own choir. See "Racheal" from Swindon.
Can't help thinking pb is hearing a lot more about Carol Vorderman since yesterday's papers contained this:-
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
We all know the answer to that, but I have never read @HYUFD condemn Johnson and his disciples whose toxic behaviour has trashed the conservative party and it even continues today with Pincher
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I don't really believe there is a rock solid base of right wing nationalist, or Corbynist. That is just a comfort blanket for the fanatics concerned. They can always do worse.
British number five Liam Broady caused one of the biggest shocks at this year's Wimbledon with a remarkable five-set win over Norwegian fourth seed Casper Ruud on a frenzied Centre Court.
Ok I am going to suggest something here, see what people think
There is no such thing as an offensive comment.
There are comments that are offensive dependent on the person saying them and the context they are saying them in.
Agree/disagree?
Everything is just mass and forces, nothing has any meaning beyond what people attach to it. But you are asking the question in the context in which words have meaning attached to them, otherwise your question itself would be meaningless. Some words express thoughts that are offensive in a general enough sense, to enough people in enough conrexts, that it makes sense to say they are offensive comments. At least that's what your mum said last night.
I hope you haven't been fucking my mum....she has been dead 10 years plus so you might end up with a dribbly cock
Ha ha but was it an offensive comment?
Not to me
Well then I guess by your metric it wasn't an offensive comment.
Not in the least, however imagine if someone overheard it and went squealing to hr. Why do they get to be offended on my behalf and endanger your job when the person you made the comment to wasnt offended?
I guess I can think of occasions when it might be the right thing and others where it might not be, depending on the context.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on again
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
The Tories were polling higher under Johnson last summer than now
Via @DeltapollUK , 29 Jun-3 Jul (+/- vs 23-26 Jun)
The REFCON combined score of 30% is the lowest I think I've seen. That's the right wing core vote - absolute baseline. The totals add to 97% so with Plaid in the mix too that doesn't leave much for unprompted "UKIP" or other right wing parties either.
And yet, I don't think it's the case that a right wing country has suddenly become a left wing country.
I think what this shows is that most people don't fit into a category of right wing or left wing but simply vote for whoever they think is best, or least bad. (Though I'd say that isn't true of most people on here, who are more interested in ideas than most people are.)
I think it probably does indicate the base level of truly right wing nationalist / traditionalist support is around the 30% mark, like the base level of proper class warrior Corbynish or eco leftism is somewhere around 30%. Add on perhaps 3-4% of people who are truly Scottish or Welsh separatist above all (rather than just say anti-Tory and opting tactically for the SNP or Plaid) and 5-6% who are true ideological liberals, and that leaves you around 30% or a bit more of the moderately centre-left or centre-right who are potential floating voters. It seems that 30% is almost entirely opting for Labour, Lib Dems or SNP currently.
I think far fewer than 30% are of the truly right wing sort, and far fewer than 30% are Corbynish. The current Tories aren't really truly right wing, as HYUFD will tell you. I'd say there's only about 10% or so at or rightwards of HYUFD. And similarly, I don't think there's much more than 10% truly Corbynist. You get the likes of kinabalu - I wouldn't call him a Corbynist, but he voted Labour last time because he found the Tories so awful. So the Labour vote last time definitely wasn't all Corbynist.
I voted for May's Tories in 2019 in the European Parliament elections when 30% voted for Farage's party. So on that basis arguably 30% of voters are rightwards of me
Your logic is sound, except that most voters didn't vote in that election. So 30% of voters in that election are rightward of you. I'd also suggest that that was something of a single-issue election.
I don't think you're an extremist, I should say. But you are much more 'traditional values' than most people I know in real life.
I'm not even sure if you can read that much into it. @BartholomewRoberts voted Brexit Party then, and is likely to go LibDem this time around.
The thing is that voting for Brexit then was not a "right wing" vote like HYUFD claims, since it was a disposable vote that led to nobody becoming an MEP.
It was a "respect democracy" vote, and that's neither left nor right.
Which is why it could get 30%, albeit at a low turnout, but no more should be read into it.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
The Tories were polling higher under Johnson last summer than now
No Tory poll leads since 6th December 2021. Redfield + Wilton.
British number five Liam Broady caused one of the biggest shocks at this year's Wimbledon with a remarkable five-set win over Norwegian fourth seed Casper Ruud on a frenzied Centre Court.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Not all Hindus are Tories, FFS! I told you before, not all Hindus in India are BJP!
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
The Tories were polling higher under Johnson last summer than now
You have just made my case
The polling today is a direct result of toxic Johnson and Truss even with the reminder of Pincher today
Johnson and his disciples have 'ratnered' the party and it will take a very long time to recover and it certainly will not recover under the ERG and right wingers like yourself, who seem to be in thrall with the likes of Farage and Trump
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Not all Hindus are Tories, FFS! I told you before, not all Hindus in India are BJP!
Though Modi does seem very popular with my Gujerati, Tamil and Bengali Indian colleagues. Less so with the Sikhs and Keralans.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Not all Hindus are Tories, FFS! I told you before, not all Hindus in India are BJP!
Though Modi does seem very popular with my Gujerati, Tamil and Bengali Indian colleagues. Less so with the Sikhs and Keralans.
Well, I was born in Kerala, so maybe I'm biased
Seriously, Kerala has never elected BJP MPs at national level, or BJP MLAs at state level.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
The Tories were polling higher under Johnson last summer than now
You have just made my case
The polling today is a direct result of toxic Johnson and Truss even with the reminder of Pincher today
Johnson and his disciples have 'ratnered' the party and it will take a very long time to recover and it certainly will not recover under the ERG and right wingers like yourself, who seem to be in thrall with the likes of Farage and Trump
Truss maybe and her disastrous budget leading to surging interest rates hitting mortgage holders.
If Johnson was still in place that budget would never have occurred and Truss would never have become PM. It did far more damage to the Tory poll rating than partygate ever did
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
But why isn't it a safe Tory seat? I know you follow Tory politics quite closely so are likely to have the answer?
Uxbridge has never been a safe Tory seat ie in the top 100 safest Tory seats and always had a Tory MP since 1945.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on
You simply cannot bring yourself to condemn Johnson can you, but merely prattle out excuses for the inexcusable
The Tories were polling higher under Johnson last summer than now
You have just made my case
The polling today is a direct result of toxic Johnson and Truss even with the reminder of Pincher today
Johnson and his disciples have 'ratnered' the party and it will take a very long time to recover and it certainly will not recover under the ERG and right wingers like yourself, who seem to be in thrall with the likes of Farage and Trump
Truss maybe and her disastrous budget leading to surging interest rates hitting mortgage holders.
If Johnson was still in place that budget would never have occurred. It did far more damage to the Tory poll rating than partygate ever did
You will not utter the words, almost as if is blasphemous to criticise your 'exalted Johnson' who by the way created Truss leadership due to his spectacular fall into disgrace
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Not all Hindus are Tories, FFS! I told you before, not all Hindus in India are BJP!
Though Modi does seem very popular with my Gujerati, Tamil and Bengali Indian colleagues. Less so with the Sikhs and Keralans.
Well, I was born in Kerala, so maybe I'm biased
Seriously, Kerala has never elected BJP MPs at national level, or BJP MLAs at state level.
Quite a lot of our staff are Keralan, and it is on my list of places to go. Sounds really quite beautiful.
I think it easy for outsiders to underestimate how diverse India is. Modi's Hindutva authoritarianism does seem popular in Leicester Hindus though.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
You spectacularly miss the point
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
You spectacularly miss the point
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
You also voted for Blair twice in 1997 and 2001.
You are a Tory leaning swing voter, not a true Tory core voter.
To be that you would have to vote Tory at every general election, win or lose.
Just as to be a true Labour core voter you would have to have voted for Blair, Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now be voting for Starmer.
Everybody else is a swing voter to some degree (with a handful of core LD and SNP voters too)
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
ULEZ is deeply unpopular with Nick Ferrari and fans of Nick Ferrari. Those who live in the ULEZ expansion zone, don't want their children to die of respiratory disease, are not Tories and who own a compliant vehicle, not so much.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
You spectacularly miss the point
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
You also voted for Blair twice.
You are Tory leaning swing voter, not a true Tory core voter.
To be that you would have to vote Tory at every general election, win or lose
Sadly you are the worst advert for the conservative party I know, and your constant insults to conservative supporters is shameful and frankly quite disturbing
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
You spectacularly miss the point
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
You also voted for Blair twice.
You are Tory leaning swing voter, not a true Tory core voter.
To be that you would have to vote Tory at every general election, win or lose
Sadly you are the worst advert for the conservative party I know, and your constant insults to conservative supporters is shameful and frankly quite disturbing
If you were a real true Tory you would have voted for Major in 1997, Hague in 2001 and would now still vote for Rishi next year. Sorry but that is just the truth
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
You spectacularly miss the point
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
You also voted for Blair twice in 1997 and 2001.
You are a Tory leaning swing voter, not a true Tory core voter.
To be that you would have to vote Tory at every general election, win or lose.
Just as to be a true Labour core voter you would have to have voted for Blair, Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now be voting for Starmer.
Everybody else is a swing voter to some degree (with a handful of core LD and SNP voters too)
"You can't be", "not a true", "You are" The way you love to be the arbiter of who we are and how we vote makes you sound deranged.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Putting by elections on one side, here is a bit of betting post anecdata, bearing in mind that Labour on some polls are going to wipe out the Tories (23 point lead today etc).
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Did they all vote Tory in 1997 when the Tories held Uxbridge? Or 1966 when Labour won Uxbridge?
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
Except to say that at the 1966 election I was 11 (life was never better than then as I was in top year juniors and England won the World Cup), the answers, my friend, are blowing in the wind and sticking to the wall.
British number five Liam Broady caused one of the biggest shocks at this year's Wimbledon with a remarkable five-set win over Norwegian fourth seed Casper Ruud on a frenzied Centre Court.
Wimbledon is like the FA cup of tennis.
Ruud 4th seed ?!
He was around 200-1 on Betfair iirc.
Seeding is done on the basis of ATP ranking, but Ruud is not exactly known as a grass court player. Of his career finals, 15 have been on clay, 7 on hard, none on grass. There are fewer grass tournaments, but still.
He'd also have achieved his best performance at Wimbledon had he won today (he's only had four appearances to be fair).
So it's not massively surprising that he was very unfancied for a person theoretically seeded to make the semi-finals.
Starmer just written the Tories next leaflet in the Uxbridge by election for them.
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
I thought it was a safe Tory seat? What happened, was the incumbant MP a bit naughty?
No it was always a Labour or LD council seat, never been Tory until this week
Uxbridge......
On current polls Labour should win Uxbridge. Opposition to ULEZ expansion and the high Hindu vote there however could mean a shock Tory hold. That would give Rishi a rather better summer holiday break than Sir Keir I would expect (albeit I think Labour could get very close in Selby)
Not all Hindus are Tories, FFS! I told you before, not all Hindus in India are BJP!
Though Modi does seem very popular with my Gujerati, Tamil and Bengali Indian colleagues. Less so with the Sikhs and Keralans.
Well, I was born in Kerala, so maybe I'm biased
Seriously, Kerala has never elected BJP MPs at national level, or BJP MLAs at state level.
Quite a lot of our staff are Keralan, and it is on my list of places to go. Sounds really quite beautiful.
I think it easy for outsiders to underestimate how diverse India is. Modi's Hindutva authoritarianism does seem popular in Leicester Hindus though.
In 2011, Kerala was 55% Hindu, 27% Muslim, 18% Christian. Population 33 million.
Comments
https://twitter.com/michaelpforan/status/1676977835448172544?s=20
- the collapsing living standards and public services,
- sky high taxes,
- soaring mortgage rates,
- a PM with a charisma bypass
- the lack of any positive narrative from the Government
- after 13 years they don't have anyone else to blame,
the miracle is that a quarter of the country are willing to back the Conservatives in opinion polls, and indeed in real elections a couple of months ago Labour were only 7-9% ahead in the national share of the vote.
Re-join 41%
Stay out 16%
Not clear 20%
Don't know 23%
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1676984351500775429?s=20
I think that they are patriotic in a general way, they want the UK to do well, grow faster than average, count for something in the world and be a good place to run a business and make money. I think that they want people in general to share that growth and increase in wealth but they seem depressingly indifferent to the equality of that distribution. They want a fairly socially liberally country but like conservatives throughout the ages they think we have gone far enough and possibly too far in some areas. They have a strong belief that the private sector is "better" than the public sector, not just more efficient but somehow morally superior.
Above all, though, they don't seem to be willing to do the hard work of working out how to achieve those ideals, they seem to believe (and they are not alone in this delusion in the political class) that talking about things is at least, possibly even more important, than doing. It is a huge flaw.
@carolvorders
Steve Barclay is in charge of our health and welfare #NHS75.
He says we've learned AI lessons during Covid and he's taking those forward!!
Test and Trace anyone? £37 BILLION most of which went to private IT consultants at up to £6,000 per day.
GENERAL ELECTION NOW
https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1676563571583352833
More than £18,500,000,000 was spent on IT consultants?
So about four million IT consultant days?
Surely she can't be that stupid (and bad at maths?), so must be a liar?
Edit - called it.
It wouldn’t have been quite as difficult if we hadn’t had a Fundamentalist Christian in the department at the same time!
https://www.ieruk.org.uk/strategy
Allowing him to put pamphlets out only a problem if he is insisting they have to have one. Leaving a pile and they can take one if they like I don't regard as a problem
'Sir Keir Starmer has refused to take a side in a by-election dispute over whether to expand London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Under plans from Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, the clean-air zone is set to become three times bigger from 29 August.
But Labour's candidate in this month's Uxbridge by-election, Danny Beales, wants the expansion halted.
In a BBC interview, the Labour leader declined to say which view he backed.
He added that Mr Khan was trying to fulfil his legal obligations to reduce emissions, whilst Mr Beales was trying to fight for his future constituents.
"Both of those things have to be accommodated," he added.
The Labour leader has previously said that Mr Khan was "right" to expand the zone, arguing last month it was part of the fight to curb lung cancer.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66124191
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-will-jolyon-maugham-take-the-hint/
Of course doesn't help when the likes of the FT printed similar numpty story reporting £100bn covid tenders, when it was tenders that mentioned covid as one motivatng factor behind the need to update equipment over the next 10 years and thus insert tender.
See the Cambridge local by election this week where Labour even lost a seat they held to the Tories over the Labour council's unpopular congestion charge
Not sure I agree with that. You do get people who deliberately seek to offend.
The Rejoiners are, I'm afraid, splendidly delusional, suffering from confirmation bias.
Britons would be most likely to vote for a party that advocates... (17 June)
...FOR joining the EU 29%
...AGAINST joining the EU 24%
31% would be most likely to vote for a party that prioritises other issues first.
I'd also suggest that that was something of a single-issue election.
I don't think you're an extremist, I should say. But you are much more 'traditional values' than most people I know in real life.
At least that's what your mum said last night.
Wimbledon is like the FA cup of tennis.
Someone else with you at the time could well be offended on your behalf.
I know @bigjohnowls upsets some on here, but to be honest Starmer is risking upsetting the left of his party, as he moves to Blair and Brown influenced policies
Minister Johnny Mercer's outspoken wife accuses Carol Vorderman of 'driving me up the f***ing wall' being an 'attack dog' who is 'inciting hate' against Tories despite knowing 'nothing about politics'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12264667/Minister-Johnny-Mercers-wife-accuses-Carol-Vorderman-attack-dog-against-Tories.html
He was around 200-1 on Betfair iirc.
On the plus side the tests were free.
Indeed Labour won Uxbridge from 1945-1955 under Attlee and Labour also won Uxbridge in 1966 under Wilson.
In 1997 the Tories only narrowly held on and New Labour targeted it hard in the subsequent by election that summer but the Tories held on again
It was a "respect democracy" vote, and that's neither left nor right.
Which is why it could get 30%, albeit at a low turnout, but no more should be read into it.
ABdPJ fans please explain!
The polling today is a direct result of toxic Johnson and Truss even with the reminder of Pincher today
Johnson and his disciples have 'ratnered' the party and it will take a very long time to recover and it certainly will not recover under the ERG and right wingers like yourself, who seem to be in thrall with the likes of Farage and Trump
https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1676996665591361536?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Seriously, Kerala has never elected BJP MPs at national level, or BJP MLAs at state level.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66120958
If Johnson was still in place that budget would never have occurred and Truss would never have become PM. It did far more damage to the Tory poll rating than partygate ever did
I am part of a basically one nation Tory family. All my immediate family generally vote Tory; we are centrist right moderate liberals; I haven't voted otherwise in a GE since the 1970s. I firmly supported Major in 1997, and it never crossed my mind really to buy into Blair's project
Of the 6 in my immediate family not one intends at the moment to vote Tory. I think on the day not more than one will do so. The turning point for me was Patersongate, and since then it has got much worse.
It's a small sample, but it is backed by the polls. I no longer think a Tory wipeout is impossible.
Do they live in London where ULEZ is deeply unpopular? Are they Hindu with whom Rishi is particularly popular?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiGNghQe0wo
I think it easy for outsiders to underestimate how diverse India is. Modi's Hindutva authoritarianism does seem popular in Leicester Hindus though.
@algarkirk makes an honest point and you prevaricate
I can align with his comments, as my family vote conservative but of the 9 who do only 1 is likely, and at present I may vote labour to get Robin Miller out, as he is one of the 25 who want to stop carers coming into our country
You are a Tory leaning swing voter, not a true Tory core voter.
To be that you would have to vote Tory at every general election, win or lose.
Just as to be a true Labour core voter you would have to have voted for Blair, Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now be voting for Starmer.
Everybody else is a swing voter to some degree (with a handful of core LD and SNP voters too)
The way you love to be the arbiter of who we are and how we vote makes you sound deranged.
He'd also have achieved his best performance at Wimbledon had he won today (he's only had four appearances to be fair).
So it's not massively surprising that he was very unfancied for a person theoretically seeded to make the semi-finals.