A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
The poster aims for a certain demographic. The fact that it can reach that demographic and receive a reaction of that's understandable or that's acceptable rather than that's disgusting shows how badly the current political classes are in understanding let alone representing that demographic.
I agree - the poster IS disgusting. But here is the difference between a Britain's First "disgusting" poster reviled by almost everyone and a UKIP "disgusting" poster that me and thee may find disgusting but millions do not.
I have my views. My morality. My judgement about right and wrong. I cannot impose my value and judgements upon others. So regardless of what I think about the poster, providing that its legal then its not up to me to ban it to protect the minds of others whose morality and judgement is different to my own.
Otherwise I'd be Mary Whitehouse.
There was nothing wrong with Mary Whitehouse. She reflected a moral group and used her pressure group to try and make things more decent (in her view). I struggle to think what she would have made of the Internet age, and popular mediums like the Daily Mail site.
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
'Yes, nine years ago there was a massive financial collapse that did huge damage to the global economy. Wages are stagnant across the developed world.'
Completely wrong, as the extensive report from the Resolution Foundation shows wages were stagnant in the UK from 2003 - 2008, camouflaged a little by cheap on demand credit and government handouts.
[PDF]Gaining from growth - Resolution Foundation www.resolutionfoundation.org/.../Gaining_from_growth_-_The_final_report_of_the... by C Gibson-Smith - Related articles ic growth and the pay of ordinary workers. Bailey, J. ... Decoupling of Wage Growth and Productivity ..... stagnant wages and employment, the state is set to add.
You see this is extraordinary, a Conservative MP says the country is overrun by foreigners. I'm sure NO Remainers will vote for such a racist party at the next election.
73% will vote on Thursday of which about 60% will turn up.
60% of 73 % is 44%.
So we have 71% turnout of which 44% vote on the day and 27% voted before that poster or Thursdays dreadful event.
Thst means that JUST UNDER 40% OF THOSE WHO WILL VOTE HAVE ALREADY VOTED.
Its over - remain have already lost, hence all the signs of bitterness and capitulation.
Labours famous Postal Vote machine has won it for Brexit.
I' think you can be pretty sure the 27% who have used their postal vote would not have been undecideds. Their votes would be the same if they'd voted in person. This is about the 10/15% undecideds who will probably make up their mind this week
A European army is a much better concept than us taking no collective action on matters that directly impact upon Europe- like Libyan stabilisation and border controls.
You see this is extraordinary, a Conservative MP says the country is overrun by foreigners. I'm sure NO Remainers will vote for such a racist party at the next election.
What would be the polling if the question was "do you think the country is overrun by foreigners?" 'Yes' might be higher than many of us would assume.
It never fails to amaze me that once again on here and elsewhere Farage has apparently blown it.
In my experience the Farage naysayers for all their flowery rhetoric ALWAYS call it wrong about the impact on public opinion that his actions will have. You are all talking to yourselves, and for gambling people your strategy of consistently backing a losing position, suggests the bookies must love you to bits. I would put more faith in my local town hall clock being correct, which although broken is at least right twice a day.
Farage is the supreme campaigner, he has had no equal in British poltics for the last 20 years, and all this fake moral judgement on him whilst ignoring exactly the same thing from others, will be as ineffective as every attempt in the past. All it will do it reinforce the view of the 70% of the population who are concerned about the issue pf immigration, is that once again those who caused the problem are trying to shut down debate by attacking the only person brave who has been brave enough to raise it.
Obviously that explains his magnificent record at General Elections.
I'd say 4m votes, an enormous increase on 2010 was magnificent.
Which seat did he win?
We both know the answer to that question, ukip have 1/650 representation in parliament, amongst the electorate it is much very much higher.
And I'll remind you that you voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration to tens of thousands.
You're a hypocrite.
You've no idea what my reasons for voting were. But to help. Immigration and Europe weren't among them. So now we've edablished I'm not a hypocrite, or at least not in the way you're suggesting.
The problem with Farage is that for every voter he attracts he repels at least 2 others.
You voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration, as did millions of others, please don't hide from that.
Do you think we should manage the population numbers?
A simple yes or no will suffice (as unlikely as that is)
Quite happy to answer. Yes I'd personally like to see some control on unskilled immigration.. I dont however think the economic risk makes leaving the EU worthwhile. The notion of sovereignty is neither here nor there. It won't make any difference to me.
Speaking of hypocrisy, would you say that claiming not to be a racist party but producing posters like Thursdays go hand in hand,? Just asking...
Farage has some similarities to Cameron. He is a politician and will do what is necessary to win. They have both become unpopular for that reason.
"No ifs, no buts." Was that Farage or Cameron? I forget.
I have some sympathy for Jezza, he is honest at least, but he's a loser.
Jezza is spinning two plates - he's really anti-EU for lots of reasons, but pro immigration open borders as an international socialism sort. So he's sounding very tepid on the first, yet oddly keen on the other.
Hmm. Do we have specific evidence that non-voters are voting this time?
None at all. I haven't seen anything from any of the pollsters (they all appear a little nervous) so no hard data. But we have seen the effects of data gathered by others. I've been out on the doors and on street stalls. People down as Won't Vote are voting this time. People who say "you're all the same" are motivated this time. And we've seen the party responses to the polling data - Labour HQ seemed to crap itself when they collated all the VID numbers together a week and a half ago. The Tories called an emergency press conference to announce nothing new. And we saw swings in the polls.
It could all be anecdote. But the mood feels very different to previous elections....
There are two completely contradictory trends here. On the one hand, we get anecdote (usually from the already strongly committed) that previous non-voters will turn out; on the other, street-level activity is non-existent: no hand-delivered leaflets, no canvassing in person or by telephone, precious few posters - and so on. Street stall seem popular but that's about it.
The contrast with the SIndyRef is huge. There, you simply could not miss that there was a gigantic political event happening; here, if you don't watch the news and don't read the papers, you easily could - and could certainly decide that it wasn't important. Sure, there'll be some WNVs (GE) who will vote in the referendum but then there'll be some going the other way too, who are either too confused by the debate to decide how to vote or don't think it's that big a deal.
I'm sticking with my central prediction of 63%.
Where do you live? Almost my entire borough has been leafleted at least once over the last 3 months.
Just watched it. Very funny as he usually is, and not particularly surprised at his view or angle. Not going to shift many floating voters in the next three days though.
The desperately sad thing is that while he’s right we may well vote to Leave. Then at some point in the next 18 months or so whoever is PM will expliain to us all that the only alternative is EEA or whatever, and the terms include freedom of movement.
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
Why should we allow our freedom to live where we like in the EU be sacrificed to in order to appease Mrs Duffy's distaste for neighbours of a certain type? Doesn't her freedom end where mine begins?
Hmm. Do we have specific evidence that non-voters are voting this time?
None at all. I haven't seen anything from any of the pollsters (they all appear a little nervous) so no hard data. But we have seen the effects of data gathered by others. I've been out on the doors and on street stalls. People down as Won't Vote are voting this time. People who say "you're all the same" are motivated this time. And we've seen the party responses to the polling data - Labour HQ seemed to crap itself when they collated all the VID numbers together a week and a half ago. The Tories called an emergency press conference to announce nothing new. And we saw swings in the polls.
It could all be anecdote. But the mood feels very different to previous elections....
Yes, but are they and will they though? Have they actually bothered to register? Will they actually go out and queue in the rain to vote on Thursday, or have something better to do and rationalise that their 'one vote' won't make much difference?
Leading Leaver Leadsom calls for more deficit after Leave vote to help economy through uncertainty (in Telegraph):
"Even if the continual scaremongering of the Remain side were to create short term uncertainty after a vote to leave, then a temporary fiscal stimulus would be the obvious choice instead of punishing the poor. Government 10 year interest rates have fallen to a record low : borrowing is cheaper than ever."
Osborne needs to pounce on this.
So there you go - the austerity that Tory Leavers so vocally supported, that they claimed was absolutely essential and that has inflicted so much damage on public services and to those on low incomes, turns out to have been not so essential after all. It was a choice. And these people are claiming to care about working class voters. Pull the other one.
Eh, online that comparison has been made since he came back with the 'deal' so I don't find it quite as impactful as it might be on someone who hasn't been following the minutiae who turned in to the programme.
Cameron's face is what made it a special moment. He looked like he wanted the ground to swallow him up... And then when he came over all Flashman and started finger pointing and ranting about Winston.
Mr. Tyson, multi-lateral co-operation doesn't require either cessation of sovereignty or doing nothing.
British armed forces personnel are loyal to this country and recognise Her Majesty as commander-in-chief. You want them saluting Juncker and obeying foreign commanders on a permanent basis? It's a horrendous idea.
Again, I find myself in agreement. Politics is a nasty business.
I would like it to be sweet and pure but it's not. I don't agree with some views but that is my subjective judgement. I don't claim to have a monopoly on judgement or knowledge. If I did, I would be a dictator or seventeen again.
Mr. Gin, must disagree. Whilst Cameron took a hit over Chamberlain, his Churchill response (whilst total nonsense) was well-delivered and, I imagine, would've gone down relatively well with most people.
You think too small, which seats hasn't he won in relation to this referendum.
There is more to politics then sitting with a stick up your rear orifice nodding in agreement with the other delicate flowers of polite political debate.
I'd argue that HE hasn't won any seats and is in serious danger of actually losing Leave the referendum. Which I have to say I would find somewhat amusing.
Mr. Gin, must disagree. Whilst Cameron took a hit over Chamberlain, his Churchill response (whilst total nonsense) was well-delivered and, I imagine, would've gone down relatively well with most people.
He took more damage over migration and Turkey.
When they start using "Winston" you know they're in trouble... That and Sam Cam writing articles in the papers are the tell tale signs things have gone wrong....
So to be clear you are defending the poster? Let's be clear here.
I don't like the poster personally. It is an exaggeration of a problem that is a concern for a lot of people, but hardly the first exaggeration by either side in this horrible campaign. We've reached a similar position as that in the US with Trump, in which a certain percentage of the population have lost all patience with political correctness and are excited by politicians that are seen to be ignoring - or deliberately flying in the face of - political correctness taboos altogether.
The poster is intended for the WWC base of Leave; Gove can then come out and say he "shudders" to reflect the middle class Leavers.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
What I despise about this poster (apart from its obvious Goebbels iconography) is that it has sod all to do with the EU. The people depicted in this poster are displaced populations from war torn areas outside the EU. It would be similar to Italy having a campaign against the EU showing a boat full of migrants.
That is why for me the idea of a European army is entirely persuasive- a joint force to deal with the Libyan coastline, the borders onto Turkey, and to help with reconstruction of war torn areas. This is in all our interests.
Ignoring the point about an EU army for a moment. Are you actually suggesting that Western powers should invade yet another muslim country that has been taken over by extremists?
Have you learnt ansolutrly nothing from Afghanistan of Iraq?
I have no view on the poster, this campaign has produced dozens, none of which are produced by the group leaders, they are created by ad agencies. Most have a negligible effect.
You see you and I both want to control immigration, the only difference is you (indirectly) call me a racist. I have never uttered a racist word in my life nor applauded any type of racism but ho hum, its your default setting.
Would you vote for Andrea Leadsom who says the country is overrun by foreigners?
Mr. Tyson, multi-lateral co-operation doesn't require either cessation of sovereignty or doing nothing.
British armed forces personnel are loyal to this country and recognise Her Majesty as commander-in-chief. You want them saluting Juncker and obeying foreign commanders on a permanent basis? It's a horrendous idea.
They already to obey foreign commanders on a permanent basis.
You see this is extraordinary, a Conservative MP says the country is overrun by foreigners. I'm sure NO Remainers will vote for such a racist party at the next election.
What would be the polling if the question was "do you think the country is overrun by foreigners?" 'Yes' might be higher than many of us would assume.
Ipsos MORI have done a poll on this which shows how perceptions are out of line with reality. "Some of the key things we get wrong (and right) are: 1) EU immigrants: we massively overestimate how many EU-born people now live in the UK. On average we think EU citizens make up 15% of the total UK population (which would be around 10.5m people), when in reality it’s 5%1 (around 3.5m people). Those who intend to vote to leave overestimate EU immigration more: they think 20% of the UK population are EU immigrants, compared with the average guess of 10% among those who intend to vote “remain”." https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx
It never fails to amaze me that once again on here and elsewhere Farage has apparently blown it.
In my experience the Farage naysayers for all their flowery rhetoric ALWAYS call it wrong about the impact on public opinion that his actions will have. You are all talking to yourselves, and for gambling people your strategy of consistently backing a losing position, suggests the bookies must love you to bits. I would put more faith in my local town hall clock being correct, which although broken is at least right twice a day.
Farage is the supreme campaigner, he has had no equal in British poltics for the last 20 years, and all this fake moral judgement on him whilst ignoring exactly the same thing from others, will be as ineffective as every attempt in the past. All it will do it reinforce the view of the 70% of the population who are concerned about the issue pf immigration, is that once again those who caused the problem are trying to shut down debate by attacking the only person brave who has been brave enough to raise it.
Obviously that explains his magnificent record at General Elections.
I'd say 4m votes, an enormous increase on 2010 was magnificent.
Which seat did he win?
We both know the answer to that question, ukip have 1/650 representation in parliament, amongst the electorate it is much very much higher.
And I'll remind you that you voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration to tens of thousands.
You're a hypocrite.
You've no idea what my reasons for voting were. But to help. Immigration and Europe weren't among them. So now we've edablished I'm not a hypocrite, or at least not in the way you're suggesting.
The problem with Farage is that for every voter he attracts he repels at least 2 others.
You voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration, as did millions of others, please don't hide from that.
Do you think we should manage the population numbers?
A simple yes or no will suffice (as unlikely as that is)
The notion of sovereignty is neither here nor there. It won't make any difference to me.
Yes it will. You'll have no mechanism to change government policy by peaceful means. The only alternative to bad government will be revolution or apathy. That's not a good thing.
Anecdote alert. Spoke to a Commonwealth Leaver last night. Something like "before I came to the UK I thought it was a strong country, but when I got here I realised it doesn't stand up for itself, it has no confidence in itself." She then said something that was particularly amusing - she thought that 'US' could easily be replaced with 'EU' in Hugh Grant's bombastic, pro-Brit, anti-US speech in the movie 'Love Actually'. A particularly inspired bit of thinking, I thought. Richard Curtis would be turning in his grave if he was dead, mind!
Leading Leaver Leadsom calls for more deficit after Leave vote to help economy through uncertainty (in Telegraph):
"Even if the continual scaremongering of the Remain side were to create short term uncertainty after a vote to leave, then a temporary fiscal stimulus would be the obvious choice instead of punishing the poor. Government 10 year interest rates have fallen to a record low : borrowing is cheaper than ever."
Osborne needs to pounce on this.
So there you go - the austerity that Tory Leavers so vocally supported, that they claimed was absolutely essential and that has inflicted so much damage on public services and to those on low incomes, turns out to have been not so essential after all. It was a choice. And these people are claiming to care about working class voters. Pull the other one.
Your pretzel logic is as shapely as Sturgeon's. You're on Osborne's side, my friend.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
The poster aims for a certain demographic. The fact that it can reach that demographic and receive a reaction of that's understandable or that's acceptable rather than that's disgusting shows how badly the current political classes are in understanding let alone representing that demographic.
I agree - the poster IS disgusting. But here is the difference between a Britain's First "disgusting" poster reviled by almost everyone and a UKIP "disgusting" poster that me and thee may find disgusting but millions do not.
I have my views. My morality. My judgement about right and wrong. I cannot impose my value and judgements upon others. So regardless of what I think about the poster, providing that its legal then its not up to me to ban it to protect the minds of others whose morality and judgement is different to my own.
Otherwise I'd be Mary Whitehouse.
There was nothing wrong with Mary Whitehouse. She reflected a moral group and used her pressure group to try and make things more decent (in her view). I struggle to think what she would have made of the Internet age, and popular mediums like the Daily Mail site.
There was a very great deal wrong with Mary Whitehouse and her ilk, namely their attempt to censor and bully the freedom of thought and expression out of existence.
I suspect Leave will be very relieved about the FTSE.
People have become immune to proclamations of economic armageddon from politicians if they don't do what they are told.
However, if there are really visible signs of economic armageddon (pound tanking, FTSE freefall), then I think that would have strongly favoured Remain.
As regards the poster, I think it is dangerous tactic by Remain to focus on it.
It might work, but it keeps immigration as the topic for the final week. And I am just not sure that this is a good idea for Remain.
So to be clear you are defending the poster? Let's be clear here.
I don't like the poster personally. It is an exaggeration of a problem that is a concern for a lot of people, but hardly the first exaggeration by either side in this horrible campaign. We've reached a similar position as that in the US with Trump, in which a certain percentage of the population have lost all patience with political correctness and are excited by politicians that are seen to be ignoring - or deliberately flying in the face of - political correctness taboos altogether.
The poster is intended for the WWC base of Leave; Gove can then come out and say he "shudders" to reflect the middle class Leavers.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
What I despise about this poster (apart from its obvious Goebbels iconography) is that it has sod all to do with the EU. The people depicted in this poster are displaced populations from war torn areas outside the EU. It would be similar to Italy having a campaign against the EU showing a boat full of migrants.
That is why for me the idea of a European army is entirely persuasive- a joint force to deal with the Libyan coastline, the borders onto Turkey, and to help with reconstruction of war torn areas. This is in all our interests.
I find the poster and its motivations disgusting but it is entirely to do with the EU.
It is not a picture of people fleeing from a wartorn nation to the first safe nation as is supposed to happen (for their safety as much as other things). Instead it is a picture of people moving from a wartorn nation then marching thousands of miles and crossing about ten different (safe) international borders to reach Germany.
It was a dangerous mess made permissable by a combination of Merkel's messed up invitation for people to arrive, but refusal to provide a safe and legal journey to make ... and the Schengen area's lack of borders making the journey possible.
As I said at the time, if Merkel was to be generous and let the needy arrive then she should have provided safe passage rather than a dangerous and treacherous Darwinian survival of the fittest.
So to be clear you are defending the poster? Let's be clear here.
I don't like the poster personally. It is an exaggeration of a problem that is a concern for a lot of people, but hardly the first exaggeration by either side in this horrible campaign. We've reached a similar position as that in the US with Trump, in which a certain percentage of the population have lost all patience with political correctness and are excited by politicians that are seen to be ignoring - or deliberately flying in the face of - political correctness taboos altogether.
The poster is intended for the WWC base of Leave; Gove can then come out and say he "shudders" to reflect the middle class Leavers.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
It is disgusting to use a photo from the Guardian. Why sink down to their standards?
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
Why should we allow our freedom to live where we like in the EU be sacrificed to in order to appease Mrs Duffy's distaste for neighbours of a certain type? Doesn't her freedom end where mine begins?
Have you, Mr FE ever been to Rochdale? I lived there in the early 60’s and still go occasionaly. It’s a very different town to what it was. The architecture is a bit better, the town hall is clean, and even more impressive, but the people are very different.
Again, I find myself in agreement. Politics is a nasty business.
I would like it to be sweet and pure but it's not. I don't agree with some views but that is my subjective judgement. I don't claim to have a monopoly on judgement or knowledge. If I did, I would be a dictator or seventeen again.
Happily the great and the good have no such concerns. They DO know best, they WILL tell people what to think and how to act and the sheep WILL do as they're told as There Is No Alternative.
They can only spin this TINA bullshit for so long before people realise its a con and look for different representation. In this country we have an electoral system bent to the whim of the big parties making it hard for alternative views to be represented. Which is why I have faith in a big turnout here as there was in Scotland (ok, not that big, but better than a GE)
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
Please. Do you really think all those displaced war torn populations who settle in Germany or Norway or Sweden over 5 years, learn the language, settle down, get jobs, become naturalised citizens will all want to come to the UK. They are just doing this as a cover to move to the UK? That is their grand plan?
The fact that the EU struggles with it's borders....how in the hell is us pulling out of the EU going to help. It'll only make it worse. Plus, if we pull out do you think the likes of France are going to be as cooperative with us now in stopping the flow of migrants coming through their pressure points.
What'll help with EU borders is to cooperate better together through structures like a joint army....and our role in the EU is crucial here.
Seeing the childish and spurious arguments from UKIP and their racist ilk- the millions of migrants who are itching to get here under the cover of EU naturalisation, the imminent arrival of Turkey....it really is pathetic and tiresome.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
The poster aims for a certain demographic. The fact that it can reach that demographic and receive a reaction of that's understandable or that's acceptable rather than that's disgusting shows how badly the current political classes are in understanding let alone representing that demographic.
I agree - the poster IS disgusting. But here is the difference between a Britain's First "disgusting" poster reviled by almost everyone and a UKIP "disgusting" poster that me and thee may find disgusting but millions do not.
I have my views. My morality. My judgement about right and wrong. I cannot impose my value and judgements upon others. So regardless of what I think about the poster, providing that its legal then its not up to me to ban it to protect the minds of others whose morality and judgement is different to my own.
Otherwise I'd be Mary Whitehouse.
There was nothing wrong with Mary Whitehouse. She reflected a moral group and used her pressure group to try and make things more decent (in her view). I struggle to think what she would have made of the Internet age, and popular mediums like the Daily Mail site.
There was a very great deal wrong with Mary Whitehouse and her ilk, namely their attempt to censor and bully the freedom of thought and expression out of existence.
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
The righteous indignation over this poster from PBers who I am sure I remember critisising Merkel in strident terms when she created this tidal wave is something to behold. I seem to remember Cameron being praised to the skies for his measured approach in not letting them in. Was he being racist?
I agree. The poster is tame compared to the Campaign broadcast which unlike the mild xenophobia in the poster was overtly racist
It never fails to amaze me that once again on here and elsewhere Farage has apparently blown it.
In my experience the Farage naysayers for all their flowery rhetoric ALWAYS call it wrong about the impact on public opinion that his actions will have. You are all talking to yourselves, and for gambling people your strategy of consistently backing a losing position, suggests the bookies must love you to bits. I would put more faith in my local town hall clock being correct, which although broken is at least right twice a day.
Farage is the supreme campaigner, he has had no equal in British poltics for the last 20 years, and all this fake moral judgement on him whilst ignoring exactly the same thing from others, will be as ineffective as every attempt in the past. All it will do it reinforce the view of the 70% of the population who are concerned about the issue pf immigration, is that once again those who caused the problem are trying to shut down debate by attacking the only person brave who has been brave enough to raise it.
Obviously that explains his magnificent record at General Elections.
I'd say 4m votes, an enormous increase on 2010 was magnificent.
Which seat did he win?
We both know the answer to that question, ukip have 1/650 representation in parliament, amongst the electorate it is much very much higher.
And I'll remind you that you voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration to tens of thousands.
You're a hypocrite.
You've no idea what my reasons for voting were. But to help. Immigration and Europe weren't among them. So now we've edablished I'm not a hypocrite, or at least not in the way you're suggesting.
The problem with Farage is that for every voter he attracts he repels at least 2 others.
You voted for a party that pledged to reduce immigration, as did millions of others, please don't hide from that.
Do you think we should manage the population numbers?
A simple yes or no will suffice (as unlikely as that is)
The notion of sovereignty is neither here nor there. It won't make any difference to me.
Yes it will. You'll have no mechanism to change government policy by peaceful means. The only alternative to bad government will be revolution or apathy. That's not a good thing.
Of course I will. Id just for ukip or the like. Regardless, if I was a Tory voter in Liverpool or a Labour voter in Chichester I'd have absolutely no say anyway. No change.
That "Breaking Point" poster is not racist, and it annoys me that some people say it is. Racism is a real problem and I wish more people exercised their brains to try to distinguish and recognise it.
Survation's distinction between "inflammatory" and "fair" is typical pollster idiocy, reminiscent of questions such as "Which is the main issue for you - immigration, housing or the economy?" Garbage in, garbage out. To think that a newspaper would pay a pollster to ask such a stupid question almost beggars belief. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the population - outside of the la-la land of pollsters and their friends in advertising - believe the poster to be both inflammatory and fair.
They'd have been better asking "What is your reaction to this poster? 'I dislike it a lot', 'I dislike it', 'I neither like nor dislike it', 'I like it', 'I like it a lot'?" You rarely get good information about people's feelings (especially men's feelings) by asking them to get a handle on them by applying their intellect, and even less so if you don't apply your own intellect to come up with categories that can pass for being mutually exclusive. But pollsters are only as competent as the demand requires. Otherwise they'd lose profits.
I thought Remain might get someone a bit better known than Sayeeda Warsi to switch sides. Her move will help Remain get its vote out. It may also help Leave get theirs out.
The effect of Jo Cox's murder? Not huge, but what effect it's had has been to induce leading Leave figures to pull their punches on Cameron, at a time when he'd ballsed it up on TV a week before and they had him and Remain not just on the ropes, but on the floor with the referee starting his count.
Now everything is supposed to be nicy-nicy so they can't whack him to kingdom come when he gets up. Thus has the murder helped Remain.
But I still doubt that the government can win against both the Sun and the Daily Mail if they seriously get the bit between their teeth. The last time the Sun backed the losing side in any British general election or referendum was in 1974. The Mail on Sunday has backed Remain. Will the Daily Mail? The Sunday Times has backed Brexit, whereas the Times supports Remain. Perhaps the result will depend on whether the Daily Mail gets its kicking boots on. If the Daily Mail prints a front page similar to Farage's poster, and if both the Sun and the Daily Mail give their readers posters for their windows, it will probably be curtains for Remain. Pussying out and saying "Aw, were we too obnoxious? We'll tone it down, then" would lose it.
It's not true that if people are still talking about immigration in the last week then Remain have won. The opposite is true. For the Leave side, the referendum is about immigration, immigration, immigration. Wall-to-wall talk about immigration will help Leave both get its vote out and win votes from Remain.
Hmm. Do we have specific evidence that non-voters are voting this time?
None at all. I haven't seen anything from any of the pollsters (they all appear a little nervous) so no hard data. But we have seen the effects of data gathered by others. I've been out on the doors and on street stalls. People down as Won't Vote are voting this time. People who say "you're all the same" are motivated this time. And we've seen the party responses to the polling data - Labour HQ seemed to crap itself when they collated all the VID numbers together a week and a half ago. The Tories called an emergency press conference to announce nothing new. And we saw swings in the polls.
It could all be anecdote. But the mood feels very different to previous elections....
There are two completely contradictory trends here. On the one hand, we get anecdote (usually from the already strongly committed) that previous non-voters will turn out; on the other, street-level activity is non-existent: no hand-delivered leaflets, no canvassing in person or by telephone, precious few posters - and so on. Street stall seem popular but that's about it.
The contrast with the SIndyRef is huge. There, you simply could not miss that there was a gigantic political event happening; here, if you don't watch the news and don't read the papers, you easily could - and could certainly decide that it wasn't important. Sure, there'll be some WNVs (GE) who will vote in the referendum but then there'll be some going the other way too, who are either too confused by the debate to decide how to vote or don't think it's that big a deal.
I'm sticking with my central prediction of 63%.
Given the postal vote numbers that would be bad news for Remain
Hmm. Do we have specific evidence that non-voters are voting this time?
None at all. I haven't seen anything from any of the pollsters (they all appear a little nervous) so no hard data. But we have seen the effects of data gathered by others. I've been out on the doors and on street stalls. People down as Won't Vote are voting this time. People who say "you're all the same" are motivated this time. And we've seen the party responses to the polling data - Labour HQ seemed to crap itself when they collated all the VID numbers together a week and a half ago. The Tories called an emergency press conference to announce nothing new. And we saw swings in the polls.
It could all be anecdote. But the mood feels very different to previous elections....
There are two completely contradictory trends here. On the one hand, we get anecdote (usually from the already strongly committed) that previous non-voters will turn out; on the other, street-level activity is non-existent: no hand-delivered leaflets, no canvassing in person or by telephone, precious few posters - and so on. Street stall seem popular but that's about it.
The contrast with the SIndyRef is huge. There, you simply could not miss that there was a gigantic political event happening; here, if you don't watch the news and don't read the papers, you easily could - and could certainly decide that it wasn't important. Sure, there'll be some WNVs (GE) who will vote in the referendum but then there'll be some going the other way too, who are either too confused by the debate to decide how to vote or don't think it's that big a deal.
I'm sticking with my central prediction of 63%.
Where do you live? Almost my entire borough has been leafleted at least once over the last 3 months.
Wakefield.
But one leaflet in three months is still sub-local election activity: hardly indicative of a 70%+ turnout.
On a related note, with either side have targetted GOTV operations? I don't really see how they can. I'm expecting a couple of universal auto-generated text messages on the day and that'll be it.
Again, I find myself in agreement. Politics is a nasty business.
I would like it to be sweet and pure but it's not. I don't agree with some views but that is my subjective judgement. I don't claim to have a monopoly on judgement or knowledge. If I did, I would be a dictator or seventeen again.
Cicero said it best. "We don't live in Plato's Republic, but rather the cess pit of Romulus.". There's never been a golden age of clean politics. Lies, spin, exaggeration, negative campaigning come with the territory.
A quick word on the count process overnight on Thursday. Now that I've had my count/poll agent paperwork through I've been able to clarify how they are doing this. And basically its similar to a General Election only instead of counting in 650 constituencies its counting in c. 350 council areas. Each one totals the votes in its area, declares a local result, and count HQ in Manchester keeps an overall tally. That way the TV pundits will be able to track who is voting for what and how many are voting and can draw conclusions from it. Just like the SINDY map I hope for a BREXIT map showing how the regions have voted. That could make for fascinating reading, one which I suspect our big parties will struggle to comprehend.
What I'll be looking for at our count is (to start with) turnout compared to our two constituencies in the GE, and then which way they are going. Could be a long night, happily I am ok with doing a 2 days on the bounce job now and then and am working from home Friday anyway.
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
It seems to me that Remain have been desperate to make this about Farage from the beginning and have been frustrated by his relatively low profile during the campaign, a campaign led by Gove and Boris. Their last final attempt to bring him centre stage is this poster, a poster which shows a tiny proportion, not even 1%, of the net migration that remainers want to continue coming into this country indefinitely.
Those of a certain mindset used to lament that they could not get the staff anymore. Inside the EU that is not true and the local oiks can be safely ignored. Similarly, the tradesmen get put back in their place, thankful for what work they can get and their wages diminished. And it is pretty much impossible to get a council house in the south of England as larger and newly arrived families jump the queue. But that is not really a problem for the ABs either is it?
The greedy and selfish haves may prevail with their moral blackmail and blatant self interest on Thursday but I hope not.
Wow. Defending Farage's poster.
So all that guff about sovereignty was just that, was it? Actually it boils down to the foreigners coming over here and taking our houses and jobs.
(David I always let me pre-first coffee posts wait a bit, perhaps re-read them before I press "post comment").
Not your house or your job Topping, don't you worry.
And there are lots of good reasons for voting Leave.
Yep, Topping will be fine when we Brexit. So will I, so will you. No problem either for those who do not need to work or for the retired. Unfortunately, it will b a different story for millions of our countrymen. But at least we stop the Turks engulfing us within the next five years so it will be worth it.
Not so Southam. Those who work as tradesmen, the young looking for work in shops, restaurants and cafes, those who need their employers to invest in training them, those hoping to get on the housing ladder but currently finding themselves outbid, many, many people will find themselves better off and with better prospects. The left used to claim it cared about such people but clearly they were lying.
It is possible that GDP might not rise as fast but neither will the population so whether that actually makes us worse off per capita is hard to predict.
If GDP does not rise as fast - the most benign Brexit consequence - then that means more public services cuts and higher taxes. But, as I say, you, me, Topping and plenty of other posters on here will be absolutely fine.
No it doesn't. GDP per capita is the number to watch, not GDP.
Leading Leaver Leadsom calls for more deficit after Leave vote to help economy through uncertainty (in Telegraph):
"Even if the continual scaremongering of the Remain side were to create short term uncertainty after a vote to leave, then a temporary fiscal stimulus would be the obvious choice instead of punishing the poor. Government 10 year interest rates have fallen to a record low : borrowing is cheaper than ever."
Osborne needs to pounce on this.
So there you go - the austerity that Tory Leavers so vocally supported, that they claimed was absolutely essential and that has inflicted so much damage on public services and to those on low incomes, turns out to have been not so essential after all. It was a choice. And these people are claiming to care about working class voters. Pull the other one.
Your pretzel logic is as shapely as Sturgeon's. You're on Osborne's side, my friend.
Nope, we just happen to agree on staying in the EU. But I do like the fact Leadsom has essentially endorsed John McDonnell's economic and fiscal policy, and shown that austerity was inflicted on the poor and the vulnerable through choice, not necessity.
Anecdote alert. Spoke to a Commonwealth Leaver last night. Something like "before I came to the UK I thought it was a strong country, but when I got here I realised it doesn't stand up for itself, it has no confidence in itself." She then said something that was particularly amusing - she thought that 'US' could easily be replaced with 'EU' in Hugh Grant's bombastic, pro-Brit, anti-US speech in the movie 'Love Actually'. A particularly inspired bit of thinking, I thought. Richard Curtis would be turning in his grave if he was dead, mind!
"The British are Mugs" is a common refrain among those who arrived here in the 1950s and 1960s, and it is a phrase expressed as a statement of disbelief rather than derision.
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
Why should we allow our freedom to live where we like in the EU be sacrificed to in order to appease Mrs Duffy's distaste for neighbours of a certain type? Doesn't her freedom end where mine begins?
Yes. That's why we have democracy to decide these sort of things. You have one vote; she has one vote.
Leading Leaver Leadsom calls for more deficit after Leave vote to help economy through uncertainty (in Telegraph):
"Even if the continual scaremongering of the Remain side were to create short term uncertainty after a vote to leave, then a temporary fiscal stimulus would be the obvious choice instead of punishing the poor. Government 10 year interest rates have fallen to a record low : borrowing is cheaper than ever."
Osborne needs to pounce on this.
Someone missed the "Even if" at the start - and the paragraph clearly puts the blame on Scaremongering Remainers. So if Osborne jumps on this he'll get a spear down his throat.
For anyone interested in the asylum seeker/immigration/foreigner debate - regardless of political allegiance - Tom Bower's Broken Vows gives a lot of detail about Blair's first term in power and the way immigration was handled.
Safe to say - and again, political allegiance aside - it is very, very illuminating and you can see how the seeds of a very toxic and divisive issue were sown.
I have no view on the poster, this campaign has produced dozens, none of which are produced by the group leaders, they are created by ad agencies. Most have a negligible effect.
You see you and I both want to control immigration, the only difference is you (indirectly) call me a racist. I have never uttered a racist word in my life nor applauded any type of racism but ho hum, its your default setting.
Would you vote for Andrea Leadsom who says the country is overrun by foreigners?
You lot really are getting your wires crossed.
Just answer my question. Are the two compatible? Do you consider the poster acceptable or not? Coming from a Kipper I guess having no view is as close to admitting it's vile as you're going to get.
I don't agree with what she said, although I note you are subtly changing what was actually tweeted. Would vote for her? Probably. Unlike ukip the Tories are about more than one issue. MOST of which I agree with their stance on..
Why should we allow our freedom to live where we like in the EU be sacrificed to in order to appease Mrs Duffy's distaste for neighbours of a certain type? Doesn't her freedom end where mine begins?
That's a classic irregular verb:
* I want to choose where I live
* She has distaste for certain neighbours
There's probably also
* Her freedom puts limits on mine - BAD! DIRTY! WRONG!
* My freedom is what I deserve; it's just me being myself - GOOD! THE UNIVERSE WORKING AS IT SHOULD! Never mind any effect on trash!
You don't get this "universal suffrage" thing, do you?
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
You're an experienced punter, if a price looks too good to be true there's usually a reason for it. I don't follow that market but the serious players on betfair are traders, as you know. You'll find better 1/6 shots elsewhere.
'It seems to me that Remain have been desperate to make this about Farage from the beginning and have been frustrated by his relatively low profile during the campaign, a campaign led by Gove and Boris'
Spot on, they could then smear anyone that supported Leave as waycists.
There's that deliberate misspelling again.
Childish and very weird.
It captures the whining tone of the SJWs perfectly.
A very lukewarm response to my question. Ditto Rochdale. The poster is effing disgusting. Pure and simple.
The poster aims for a certain demographic. The fact that it can reach that demographic and receive a reaction of that's understandable or that's acceptable rather than that's disgusting shows how badly the current political classes are in understanding let alone representing that demographic.
I agree - the poster IS disgusting. But here is the difference between a Britain's First "disgusting" poster reviled by almost everyone and a UKIP "disgusting" poster that me and thee may find disgusting but millions do not.
I have my views. My morality. My judgement about right and wrong. I cannot impose my value and judgements upon others. So regardless of what I think about the poster, providing that its legal then its not up to me to ban it to protect the minds of others whose morality and judgement is different to my own.
Otherwise I'd be Mary Whitehouse.
There was nothing wrong with Mary Whitehouse. She reflected a moral group and used her pressure group to try and make things more decent (in her view). I struggle to think what she would have made of the Internet age, and popular mediums like the Daily Mail site.
There was a very great deal wrong with Mary Whitehouse and her ilk, namely their attempt to censor and bully the freedom of thought and expression out of existence.
Which would be quite popular today.
I vividly recall the enormous fuss and pressure put on ABC about SOAP! The whole Moral Majority movement in the US was just like Mary Whitehouse with knobs on.
Farage runs rings around the moribund political thinking of the establishment and the commentariat in this country, and to be honest he doesn't have to try very hard.
Which is why he's failed time and again to get elected.
Leave have shot up the polls since the Electoral Commission helped put Farage back in his box. If Leave wins it will be despite not because of Farage.
Tyson. Merkel offers a million Muslim immigrants a place in Germany, a few years later they have German passports and a right to live next door to Mrs Duffy. The EU refuses to enforce its own external borders. So the EU is an issue, a massive issue, in Middle-Eastern migration to the UK. This country's downtrodden WWC plebs are bright enough to see this. Not a judgment call but a statement of the obvious.
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
Why should we allow our freedom to live where we like in the EU be sacrificed to in order to appease Mrs Duffy's distaste for neighbours of a certain type? Doesn't her freedom end where mine begins?
Have you, Mr FE ever been to Rochdale? I lived there in the early 60’s and still go occasionaly. It’s a very different town to what it was. The architecture is a bit better, the town hall is clean, and even more impressive, but the people are very different.
And, just to be clear, I’m voting Remain.
I'm not sure how your comment relates to my point, which was that would I resent the curtailment of my freedom to live where I like in the EU in order to appease the sensibilities of those who would prefer neighbours of a certain type.
I'm expecting a YouGov tonight and a final one Wednesday night, but neither of those have been confirmed
I'd also expect an ORB tonight, but they may push it to later on this week, again no confirmation either way.
On a totally unrelated note, Leave is now out to to 3.8 this morning.
Poll in the offing?
I think it is folk in the City coming in this morning and turning on their computers and having a little dabble. I was going to post this last night and say that the Monday morning return to work run would likely bring quite a significant trend to remain.
It's not true that if people are still talking about immigration in the last week then Remain have won. The opposite is true. For the Leave side, the referendum is about immigration, immigration, immigration. Wall-to-wall talk about immigration will help Leave both get its vote out and win votes from Remain.
I agree with you on that. Remain would be wanting the last few days to be focussed on the economy. But it is immigration. A fail for Remain.
'It seems to me that Remain have been desperate to make this about Farage from the beginning and have been frustrated by his relatively low profile during the campaign, a campaign led by Gove and Boris'
Spot on, they could then smear anyone that supported Leave as waycists.
There's that deliberate misspelling again.
Childish and very weird.
It captures the whining tone of the SJWs perfectly.
As someone with a speech impediment I don't find it perfectly amusing.
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
You're an experienced punter, if a price looks too good to be true there's usually a reason for it. I don't follow that market but the serious players on betfair are traders, as you know. You'll find better 1/6 shots elsewhere.
Trump is going to be the Republican nominee, traders aren't perfect !
I have no view on the poster, this campaign has produced dozens, none of which are produced by the group leaders, they are created by ad agencies. Most have a negligible effect.
You see you and I both want to control immigration, the only difference is you (indirectly) call me a racist. I have never uttered a racist word in my life nor applauded any type of racism but ho hum, its your default setting.
Would you vote for Andrea Leadsom who says the country is overrun by foreigners?
You lot really are getting your wires crossed.
Just answer my question. Are the two compatible? Do you consider the poster acceptable or not? Coming from a Kipper I guess having no view is as close to admitting it's vile as you're going to get.
I don't agree with what she said, although I note you are subtly changing what was actually tweeted. Would vote for her? Probably. Unlike ukip the Tories are about more than one issue. MOST of which I agree with their stance on..
tbh you ramble and prevaricate so much I've forgotten what the question was, I'm happy to answer anything directly, unlike yourself. I've spent lots of time with Nigel, we disagree on several things but on the whole his views are very similar to mine. We believe in a small state, low tax, strong judiciary and armed forces, controlled immigration, grammar schools and fracking. The poster is not an image I'd use but the ad agency clearly think it will be effective, who knows?
Run the numbers. 60% of current immigration is non-EU, under British control already and therefore irrelevant to Brexit. Non EU immigration is also thought to be quite tight. For various reasons we will want a level of free movement with the EU - so people can trade, family members, students. Then there will be labour demands where jobs will be filled by immigrants or not at all. While that might be tightened up, it won't be eliminated. Put all that together AT MOST you are likely to see a third reduction in EU immigration, or a 15% reduction overall. That isn't a transformative change in terms of the issues that people have raised: lack of cohesion, pressure on public services etc.
However we will want to do a deal with the EU. If we want access to the single market via the EEA, we are formally committed to freedom of movement, ie no change from present. Even if it's a less formal arrangement, we're dealing with an EU where half the voting members are New Europe who don't appreciate discriminatory immigration policies and being treated as second class countries.
Rather than peddling false promises of reducing immigration it would be kinder to those left behind by globalisation to face reality and come up with ways of supporting them. Help them to better compete in a globalised world and mitigate the worst effects of it. Which is the point Jeremy Corbyn made yesterday. This is as much an issue for Remain as for Leave. I know there are people in the Leave camp who are thinking deeply about these issues. Not so much in Remain. It's a live topic on the EU itself. I am not sure they are proposing good solutions, but it's a discussion we should be engaging in. Otherwise you leave the way clear to the Farages of this world.
But one leaflet in three months is still sub-local election activity: hardly indicative of a 70%+ turnout.
On a related note, with either side have targetted GOTV operations? I don't really see how they can. I'm expecting a couple of universal auto-generated text messages on the day and that'll be it.
Hell yes. We've been canvassing nearly every day for a month and have a full-scale GOTV operation for those who seemed to be leaning Remain - I'm signed up from 10am to 9pm, and I'm by no means the most enthusiastic.
I'm expecting a YouGov tonight and a final one Wednesday night, but neither of those have been confirmed
I'd also expect an ORB tonight, but they may push it to later on this week, again no confirmation either way.
On a totally unrelated note, Leave is now out to to 3.8 this morning.
Poll in the offing?
I think it is folk in the City coming in this morning and turning on their computers and having a little dabble. I was going to post this last night and say that the Monday morning return to work run would likely bring quite a significant trend to remain.
Sorry campers- but I got caught up in the golf.
Wall to wall Remain ads are back in Canary Wharf this morning as well.
Suspect they'll be run daily until polling day now.
Farage has some similarities to Cameron. He is a politician and will do what is necessary to win. They have both become unpopular for that reason.
"No ifs, no buts." Was that Farage or Cameron? I forget.
I have some sympathy for Jezza, he is honest at least, but he's a loser.
Jezza is spinning two plates - he's really anti-EU for lots of reasons, but pro immigration open borders as an international socialism sort. So he's sounding very tepid on the first, yet oddly keen on the other.
He didn't say he was pro-immigration nor was he oddly keen.
On the Andrew Marr show, asked if there could be an upper limit for immigration, Mr Corbyn said: "I don't think you can have one while you have the free movement of labour." Which is true. He went on to say "If you actually deliberately lower living standards and increase poverty in certain countries in south-east and eastern Europe then you're bound to have a flow of people looking for somewhere else to go."
He is refreshingly honest but a poor political spinner.
"I'd argue that HE hasn't won any seats and is in serious danger of actually losing Leave the referendum."
Of course you would, presumably because you seem to think in a simple linear process. You would probably have been an aide to Field Marshal Haig in 1916, when his solution to the carnage of thefirst day of the Somme was not to think laterally, but to just repeat the mistake in the hope of a different outcome
You'd argue black was white if you thought it supported your position, however all that reveals is that you have a closed mind to the facts, evidenced from the outcomes of past examples of the same faux outrage against Farage.
Farage runs rings around the moribund political thinking of the establishment and the commentariat in this country, and to be honest he doesn't have to try very hard.
He couldn't even win in Thanet. He repels more than he attracts. He is no messiah. As to the rest of your post, all I can say is that you are capable of drawing an enormous amount of conclusions based on the fact I don't rate Farage at all.
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
You're an experienced punter, if a price looks too good to be true there's usually a reason for it. I don't follow that market but the serious players on betfair are traders, as you know. You'll find better 1/6 shots elsewhere.
Trump is going to be the Republican nominee, traders aren't perfect !
Interesting coverage on Brexit today in La Reppublica.
Italians living in London...some have them have just discovered that their partners are voting Brexit. My wife has said that she would find it more palatable if I she discovered if I was having an affair....and from an Italian women who has spelled out over the years the excruciating consequences to me if I did this, that is really saying something.
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
You're an experienced punter, if a price looks too good to be true there's usually a reason for it. I don't follow that market but the serious players on betfair are traders, as you know. You'll find better 1/6 shots elsewhere.
Trump is going to be the Republican nominee, traders aren't perfect !
Traders aren't interested in the outcome
Exactly, which is why we shouldn't get too carried away with betting odds. They are working from the same data as the rest of us.
Farage runs rings around the moribund political thinking of the establishment and the commentariat in this country, and to be honest he doesn't have to try very hard.
Which is why he's failed time and again to get elected.
Leave have shot up the polls since the Electoral Commission helped put Farage back in his box. If Leave wins it will be despite not because of Farage.
Debate tomorrow night in Wembley is crucial, IMHO. Leave team is good, same as for ITV, but we mustn't forget how much the format and measured moderation of ITV helped Leave last time.
IMHO, the BBC moderation will be much more aggressive and a crowd of 6,000 is much more different to a studio audience of a few hundred.
Interesting coverage on Brexit today in La Reppublica.
Italians living in London...some have them have just discovered that their partners are voting Brexit. My wife has said that she would find it more palatable if I she discovered if I was having an affair....and from an Italian women who has spelled out over the years the excruciating consequences to me if I did this, that is really saying something.
NB. The owner of La Reppublica lives in Switzerland. I wonder why ?
Unnoticed, there's a big betting trend taking place on Betfair that in any other week would be worth several threads.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
Blimey. I went in for £200 again at 1.06 - I think that was a good bet. 1.16 is an incredible price - this should be 1.03 at the most.
You're an experienced punter, if a price looks too good to be true there's usually a reason for it. I don't follow that market but the serious players on betfair are traders, as you know. You'll find better 1/6 shots elsewhere.
Trump is going to be the Republican nominee, traders aren't perfect !
Traders aren't interested in the outcome
I have 312 bets both backing and laying the GOP nomination race. One might call it.....
Comments
FWIW I think we should encourage immigration but to a numerical limit effected by a points system - and this is not possible within the EU.
'Yes, nine years ago there was a massive financial collapse that did huge damage to the global economy. Wages are stagnant across the developed world.'
Completely wrong, as the extensive report from the Resolution Foundation shows wages were stagnant in the UK from 2003 - 2008, camouflaged a little by cheap on demand credit and government handouts.
[PDF]Gaining from growth - Resolution Foundation
www.resolutionfoundation.org/.../Gaining_from_growth_-_The_final_report_of_the...
by C Gibson-Smith - Related articles
ic growth and the pay of ordinary workers. Bailey, J. ... Decoupling of Wage Growth and Productivity ..... stagnant wages and employment, the state is set to add.
Speaking of hypocrisy, would you say that claiming not to be a racist party but producing posters like Thursdays go hand in hand,? Just asking...
Tricky one. Was it Farage before his resignation as leader?
This is the great unknown.
#Perfect
British armed forces personnel are loyal to this country and recognise Her Majesty as commander-in-chief. You want them saluting Juncker and obeying foreign commanders on a permanent basis? It's a horrendous idea.
Again, I find myself in agreement. Politics is a nasty business.
I would like it to be sweet and pure but it's not. I don't agree with some views but that is my subjective judgement. I don't claim to have a monopoly on judgement or knowledge. If I did, I would be a dictator or seventeen again.
He took more damage over migration and Turkey.
Have you learnt ansolutrly nothing from Afghanistan of Iraq?
I have no view on the poster, this campaign has produced dozens, none of which are produced by the group leaders, they are created by ad agencies. Most have a negligible effect.
You see you and I both want to control immigration, the only difference is you (indirectly) call me a racist. I have never uttered a racist word in my life nor applauded any type of racism but ho hum, its your default setting.
Would you vote for Andrea Leadsom who says the country is overrun by foreigners?
You lot really are getting your wires crossed.
"Some of the key things we get wrong (and right) are:
1) EU immigrants: we massively overestimate how many EU-born people now live in the UK. On average we think EU citizens make up 15% of the total UK population (which would be around 10.5m people), when in reality it’s 5%1 (around 3.5m people). Those who intend to vote to leave overestimate EU immigration more: they think 20% of the UK population are EU immigrants, compared with the average guess of 10% among those who intend to vote “remain”."
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx
People have become immune to proclamations of economic armageddon from politicians if they don't do what they are told.
However, if there are really visible signs of economic armageddon (pound tanking, FTSE freefall), then I think that would have strongly favoured Remain.
As regards the poster, I think it is dangerous tactic by Remain to focus on it.
It might work, but it keeps immigration as the topic for the final week. And I am just not sure that this is a good idea for Remain.
It is not a picture of people fleeing from a wartorn nation to the first safe nation as is supposed to happen (for their safety as much as other things).
Instead it is a picture of people moving from a wartorn nation then marching thousands of miles and crossing about ten different (safe) international borders to reach Germany.
It was a dangerous mess made permissable by a combination of Merkel's messed up invitation for people to arrive, but refusal to provide a safe and legal journey to make ... and the Schengen area's lack of borders making the journey possible.
As I said at the time, if Merkel was to be generous and let the needy arrive then she should have provided safe passage rather than a dangerous and treacherous Darwinian survival of the fittest.
And, just to be clear, I’m voting Remain.
They can only spin this TINA bullshit for so long before people realise its a con and look for different representation. In this country we have an electoral system bent to the whim of the big parties making it hard for alternative views to be represented. Which is why I have faith in a big turnout here as there was in Scotland (ok, not that big, but better than a GE)
The fact that the EU struggles with it's borders....how in the hell is us pulling out of the EU going to help. It'll only make it worse. Plus, if we pull out do you think the likes of France are going to be as cooperative with us now in stopping the flow of migrants coming through their pressure points.
What'll help with EU borders is to cooperate better together through structures like a joint army....and our role in the EU is crucial here.
Seeing the childish and spurious arguments from UKIP and their racist ilk- the millions of migrants who are itching to get here under the cover of EU naturalisation, the imminent arrival of Turkey....it really is pathetic and tiresome.
Donald Trump is currently last matched at 1.17 on the "next Republican nominee" market. There is good liquidity at 1.16. To quote the rules: "This market will be settled on the candidate voted to be the Republican Party nominee as a result of the 2016 Republican National Convention."
That means that serious punters think that there is a better than 6/1 chance that Donald Trump will be blocked by the Republican party establishment despite having won more votes than any other Republican Primary candidate and with an absolute majority of delegates.
Just extraordinary.
'Those with shares in Andrea Leadsom as next Conservative leader might wish to be made aware of this:'
Oh dear,getting a bit desperate this morning ?
Survation's distinction between "inflammatory" and "fair" is typical pollster idiocy, reminiscent of questions such as "Which is the main issue for you - immigration, housing or the economy?" Garbage in, garbage out. To think that a newspaper would pay a pollster to ask such a stupid question almost beggars belief. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the population - outside of the la-la land of pollsters and their friends in advertising - believe the poster to be both inflammatory and fair.
They'd have been better asking "What is your reaction to this poster? 'I dislike it a lot', 'I dislike it', 'I neither like nor dislike it', 'I like it', 'I like it a lot'?" You rarely get good information about people's feelings (especially men's feelings) by asking them to get a handle on them by applying their intellect, and even less so if you don't apply your own intellect to come up with categories that can pass for being mutually exclusive. But pollsters are only as competent as the demand requires. Otherwise they'd lose profits.
I thought Remain might get someone a bit better known than Sayeeda Warsi to switch sides. Her move will help Remain get its vote out. It may also help Leave get theirs out.
The effect of Jo Cox's murder? Not huge, but what effect it's had has been to induce leading Leave figures to pull their punches on Cameron, at a time when he'd ballsed it up on TV a week before and they had him and Remain not just on the ropes, but on the floor with the referee starting his count.
Now everything is supposed to be nicy-nicy so they can't whack him to kingdom come when he gets up. Thus has the murder helped Remain.
But I still doubt that the government can win against both the Sun and the Daily Mail if they seriously get the bit between their teeth. The last time the Sun backed the losing side in any British general election or referendum was in 1974. The Mail on Sunday has backed Remain. Will the Daily Mail? The Sunday Times has backed Brexit, whereas the Times supports Remain. Perhaps the result will depend on whether the Daily Mail gets its kicking boots on. If the Daily Mail prints a front page similar to Farage's poster, and if both the Sun and the Daily Mail give their readers posters for their windows, it will probably be curtains for Remain. Pussying out and saying "Aw, were we too obnoxious? We'll tone it down, then" would lose it.
It's not true that if people are still talking about immigration in the last week then Remain have won. The opposite is true. For the Leave side, the referendum is about immigration, immigration, immigration. Wall-to-wall talk about immigration will help Leave both get its vote out and win votes from Remain.
But one leaflet in three months is still sub-local election activity: hardly indicative of a 70%+ turnout.
On a related note, with either side have targetted GOTV operations? I don't really see how they can. I'm expecting a couple of universal auto-generated text messages on the day and that'll be it.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/14736/
What I'll be looking for at our count is (to start with) turnout compared to our two constituencies in the GE, and then which way they are going. Could be a long night, happily I am ok with doing a 2 days on the bounce job now and then and am working from home Friday anyway.
Safe to say - and again, political allegiance aside - it is very, very illuminating and you can see how the seeds of a very toxic and divisive issue were sown.
Coming from a Kipper I guess having no view is as close to admitting it's vile as you're going to get.
I don't agree with what she said, although I note you are subtly changing what was actually tweeted.
Would vote for her? Probably. Unlike ukip the Tories are about more than one issue. MOST of which I agree with their stance on..
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode/times/prod/web/bin/779c8c6c-3648-11e6-92b0-ed83f2a0360d.jpg?crop=3296,2197,0,0&resize=758
Survation and Ipsos Mori: Thursday morning
I'm expecting a YouGov tonight and a final one Wednesday night, but neither of those have been confirmed
I'd also expect an ORB tonight, but they may push it to later on this week, again no confirmation either way.
And a ComRes sometime this week too.
On a totally unrelated note, Leave is now out to to 3.8 this morning.
Poll in the offing?
* I want to choose where I live
* She has distaste for certain neighbours
There's probably also
* Her freedom puts limits on mine - BAD! DIRTY! WRONG!
* My freedom is what I deserve; it's just me being myself - GOOD! THE UNIVERSE WORKING AS IT SHOULD! Never mind any effect on trash!
You don't get this "universal suffrage" thing, do you?
nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50110.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_(TV_series)#Pre-broadcast_protests_and_controversy
Leave have shot up the polls since the Electoral Commission helped put Farage back in his box. If Leave wins it will be despite not because of Farage.
Sorry campers- but I got caught up in the golf.
Mr. Topping, that's not permanent. UK troops do not swear allegiance to the US or to NATO, but to the Queen.
Nor is NATO seeking to impose other, non-military responsibilities upon us, grabbing powers in other areas through deceit and undemocratic means.
The two situations are not remotely comparable.
Then, I fear, the fun/trouble really starts.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/20/our-votes-will-cancel-each-other-out-families-falling-out-over-brexit
However we will want to do a deal with the EU. If we want access to the single market via the EEA, we are formally committed to freedom of movement, ie no change from present. Even if it's a less formal arrangement, we're dealing with an EU where half the voting members are New Europe who don't appreciate discriminatory immigration policies and being treated as second class countries.
Rather than peddling false promises of reducing immigration it would be kinder to those left behind by globalisation to face reality and come up with ways of supporting them. Help them to better compete in a globalised world and mitigate the worst effects of it. Which is the point Jeremy Corbyn made yesterday. This is as much an issue for Remain as for Leave. I know there are people in the Leave camp who are thinking deeply about these issues. Not so much in Remain. It's a live topic on the EU itself. I am not sure they are proposing good solutions, but it's a discussion we should be engaging in. Otherwise you leave the way clear to the Farages of this world.
Martin Skrtel, First Goalscorer at 40/1 with publicity shy Paddy Power.
But that's London - not at all sure it's general.
Suspect they'll be run daily until polling day now.
On the Andrew Marr show, asked if there could be an upper limit for immigration, Mr Corbyn said: "I don't think you can have one while you have the free movement of labour." Which is true. He went on to say "If you actually deliberately lower living standards and increase poverty in certain countries in south-east and eastern Europe then you're bound to have a flow of people looking for somewhere else to go."
He is refreshingly honest but a poor political spinner.
As to the rest of your post, all I can say is that you are capable of drawing an enormous amount of conclusions based on the fact I don't rate Farage at all.
Italians living in London...some have them have just discovered that their partners are voting Brexit. My wife has said that she would find it more palatable if I she discovered if I was having an affair....and from an Italian women who has spelled out over the years the excruciating consequences to me if I did this, that is really saying something.
IMHO, the BBC moderation will be much more aggressive and a crowd of 6,000 is much more different to a studio audience of a few hundred.
I can remember a Queen song....reminds me of Space Invaders. Somehow they metabolise back......
I cannot though imagine what the pathway would be now to get rid of Trump.