Perceived wisdom on here seems to be that Corbyn's Labour is going to be absolutely hammered at the next general election. Yet I see no real evidence for that proposition. OK, he is down a couple of percent from Labour's score last year but it hardly a dreadful fall.
As discussed on here umpteen times before, Corbyn's personal ratings are awful, and most of the electorate don't think about politics between elections. So maybe Labour vote share will plummet come the day, but I suggest there is very little evidence of it so far.
That's a very 2010-2015 way of looking at it.
Possibly, Mr Paris. What would be the 2016 way of looking at it?
That UKIP figure must be irritating to some on here too, given that they have been saying the party is in collapse.
I don't know, but the one thing I'd probably take with a pinch of salt is the headline figure (for both sides) and I'd perhaps be wary of making any predictions 4 years out.
FWIW, without a split, I can't see it plummeting. But events, etc etc
Quite so, Mr. Paris, but we are asked regularly to believe that Corbyn will be a disaster. I merely ask for the evidence to back up such an assertion because I am damned if I can find it at the moment. I doubt he would win a GE, but I don't think he would lose too many seats either.
UKIP remaining in the low teens is also a complete mystery to me. Job done I would have thought and their voters would be drifting off to their natural homes. Apparently not.
Maybe the polls are genuinely complete nonsense, which would be a bit of a bugger for this site.
Job is clearly not done for UKIP until the UK is out of the single market as well as the EU and freedom of movement is brought to an end
Not forgetting the Provisional wing of UKIP who won't rest easy until the UK has been towed several hundred miles out into the Atlantic.
Indeed, preferably free of Scotland
UKIP have a Scottish MEP, the same as Conservatives and one more than Lib Dem.
Paddy's Twitter feed linked below has a link to what happened when someone put a microphone in front of the Irish boxer just after he stepped out of the ring. To say he turned the airwaves blue and directly alleged corruption would be something of an understatement.
Can't disagree with anything he said.
Indeed. Another one to add to the IOCs growing inbox, especially in light of the whistleblower report some weeks back. As a minimum they need to get new judges and referees ASAP for the remaining bouts - must be hundreds qualified in the USA alone.
I have found this on ICM website. 'Voting intentions: The vote figures shown in the tables are calculated after ICM has excluded those who are not registered, say they will not vote, refuse t o answer the question or don’t know who they would vote for (but see below). Adjustment process 1: ‘Partial Refuser’ Reallocatio n A.) 75% of 2015 Conservative and Labour voters who refu se to answer the vote intention question or say they don’t know, are added back to the party they voted for in 2015. B.) 50% of 2015 voters for all other parties who refuse to answer the vote intention question or say they don’t know, are added back to the party they voted for in 2015. Adjustment process 2: ‘Total Refuser’ Reallocation ‘Total refusers’ are people who refuse/DK their futu re vote intention AND also refuse/DK who they voted for in the previous General Election (2015). Given the lack of any political information about such respondents t o date, ICM has excluded them from the vote intention figures. However, our post-2015 Recall Survey revealed that Total Refusers (who were subsequently willing to te ll us what they did in the 2015 General Election) split disproportionately across dif ferent parties. Indeed, one important observation was that more than half of all T otal Refusers actually voted Conservative, with more than twice as many voting Cons ervative than Labour. Our new adjustment thus reallocates some Total Refuser s back into the poll sample. This is achieved in the following way: 1. The number of Total Refusers on any poll is multiplie d by the proportion of Partial Refusers who were (already) re-allocated in Adjustment Process 1. (For example, if 60% of Partial Refusers were added back, then 60% of Total Refusals will be added back). 2. Total Refusers are then multiplied by each party’s share of reallocated Partial Refusers. (For example, if 40% of already allocated P artial Refusals were 2015 Conservative voters, then 40% of remaining Total Refusals will be reallocated to the Conservatives). 3. ICM’s default position is that Total Refusers at least look like Partial Refusers in terms of political make-up. However, given the f indings of our Recall Poll, we believe that Total Refusals are probably even mor e pro-Conservative than pro-Labour. In order to allow for this, the share of Total Refusals added back to the Conservatives is increased by 20% (for example, from the 40% mentioned in (2, above) to 60%), with a corresponding reduction of 20% in the share of Total Refuser reallocation to Labour.' It would be good to know the impact of these adjustments. Not all pollsters would go along with the second part. Whether it is accurate remains to be seen.
Perceived wisdom on here seems to be that Corbyn's Labour is going to be absolutely hammered at the next general election. Yet I see no real evidence for that proposition. OK, he is down a couple of percent from Labour's score last year but it hardly a dreadful fall.
As discussed on here umpteen times before, Corbyn's personal ratings are awful, and most of the electorate don't think about politics between elections. So maybe Labour vote share will plummet come the day, but I suggest there is very little evidence of it so far.
That's a very 2010-2015 way of looking at it.
Possibly, Mr Paris. What would be the 2016 way of looking at it?
That UKIP figure must be irritating to some on here too, given that they have been saying the party is in collapse.
I don't know, but the one thing I'd probably take with a pinch of salt is the headline figure (for both sides) and I'd perhaps be wary of making any predictions 4 years out.
FWIW, without a split, I can't see it plummeting. But events, etc etc
Quite so, Mr. Paris, but we are asked regularly to believe that Corbyn will be a disaster. I merely ask for the evidence to back up such an assertion because I am damned if I can find it at the moment. I doubt he would win a GE, but I don't think he would lose too many seats either.
UKIP remaining in the low teens is also a complete mystery to me. Job done I would have thought and their voters would be drifting off to their natural homes. Apparently not.
Maybe the polls are genuinely complete nonsense, which would be a bit of a bugger for this site.
Job is clearly not done for UKIP until the UK is out of the single market as well as the EU and freedom of movement is brought to an end
Not forgetting the Provisional wing of UKIP who won't rest easy until the UK has been towed several hundred miles out into the Atlantic.
Honolulu is more remote from Washington, DC than London is
Honolulu is rather a long way from absolutely anywhere!!
Paddy's Twitter feed linked below has a link to what happened when someone put a microphone in front of the Irish boxer just after he stepped out of the ring. To say he turned the airwaves blue and directly alleged corruption would be something of an understatement.
Not surprised. Horrible and probably corrupt decision making.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
Perceived wisdom on here seems to be that Corbyn's Labour is going to be absolutely hammered at the next general election. Yet I see no real evidence for that proposition. OK, he is down a couple of percent from Labour's score last year but it hardly a dreadful fall.
As discussed on here umpteen times before, Corbyn's personal ratings are awful, and most of the electorate don't think about politics between elections. So maybe Labour vote share will plummet come the day, but I suggest there is very little evidence of it so far.
That's a very 2010-2015 way of looking at it.
Possibly, Mr Paris. What would be the 2016 way of looking at it?
That UKIP figure must be irritating to some on here too, given that they have been saying the party is in collapse.
I don't know, but the one thing I'd probably take with a pinch of salt is the headline figure (for both sides) and I'd perhaps be wary of making any predictions 4 years out.
FWIW, without a split, I can't see it plummeting. But events, etc etc
Quite so, Mr. Paris, but we are asked regularly to believe that Corbyn will be a disaster. I merely ask for the evidence to back up such an assertion because I am damned if I can find it at the moment. I doubt he would win a GE, but I don't think he would lose too many seats either.
UKIP remaining in the low teens is also a complete mystery to me. Job done I would have thought and their voters would be drifting off to their natural homes. Apparently not.
Maybe the polls are genuinely complete nonsense, which would be a bit of a bugger for this site.
Job is clearly not done for UKIP until the UK is out of the single market as well as the EU and freedom of movement is brought to an end
Not forgetting the Provisional wing of UKIP who won't rest easy until the UK has been towed several hundred miles out into the Atlantic.
Indeed, preferably free of Scotland
UKIP have a Scottish MEP, the same as Conservatives and one more than Lib Dem.
They also polled just 10% in Scotland in the same election compared to 27% nationally, not forgetting Scotland voted Remain
But, the vast majority of UKIP voters would back the Conservatives over Corbyn-led Labour. That matters in marginal seats. If we had the Australian voting system, the Conservatives would probably be ahead 60/40 on TPP.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
In terms of Tory % lead this poll is more like the 1987 result which had the Tories 11.8% ahead!
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
I suspect that the old fool is quite flexible physically, if not intellectually, from all that tending of his allotment.
It does rather remind me of the early abolitionist John Woolman who was such a principled/obstinate fellow that he always wore undyed clothing and travelled in steerage from North America to Britain. He insisted on travelling to York on the cheapest perch on the outside of the stagecoach, and died of pnemonia brought on by the journey.
But, the vast majority of UKIP voters would back the Conservatives over Corbyn-led Labour. That matters in marginal seats. If we had the Australian voting system, the Conservatives would probably be ahead 60/40 on TPP.
Indeed, many Tories must now regret opposing AV in 2011, as they would now be its biggest beneficiaries
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
I am not sure that the storage problem has been fully solved yet but it almost certainly will be by the time Hinkley Point is built. So it will a massively expensive white elephant.
Changing the building regs so that all new builds are obliged to have solar panels and heat exchangers, then Gas topping up solar and off-shore wind will do the trick once the new battery technology is perfected.
Is their enough lithium in the world for that?
Lithium batteries are very old technology, Mr. Evershed. Do try and keep up. Even the Telegraph has published articles about recent advances in battery technology. From what I have read recently it looks like a race between teams in the USA and a team in Italy who will crack the storage problem first and neither are relying on rare earths/metals.
About five years I think and the problem will be solved. Further advances and refinements will carry on, of course, but the basic problem will have been cracked.
The future is devolved electric (topped up with Gas) oil and, especially, nuclear have no part to play. September will be TM's first big test and, in my view , if she signs off on the Hinkley Point deal she will have failed on so many levels.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
It is a mistake to pay too much attention to regional crossbreaks because the sample sizes are so small with high resultant margins of error. Nevetheless I find the Scotland subsample interesting - SNP 45 Con 24 Lab 18. Could this be a further sign post Holyrood that the SNP has peaked?
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
True - but that coincided with the Expenses Scandal with Brown's Government very unpopular. Tory leads were a fair bit higher than we are even seeing today.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
ICM is normally GB - as are virtually all polls.
Thanks. So it's even worse than I thought and we're describing as good news a poll as bad as their worst election result in the age of universal suffrage.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
On the other hand national electoral support is much more fragmented than back in 1983. There was no UKIP or significant Green vote then . In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
It is a mistake to pay too much attention to regional crossbreaks because the sample sizes are so small with high resultant margins of error. Nevetheless I find the Scotland subsample interesting - SNP 45 Con 24 Lab 18. Could this be a further sign post Holyrood that the SNP has peaked?
Possibly, but unless one party can seize the Unionist vote and make it their own that is likely to remain irrelevant to the actual voting results.
I liked that description of the conservatives and Labour being locked in 'a fierce battle for who will come a distant second'. And until that battle is resolved the SNP will dominate.
It is however another staggering indictment of Corbyn's leadership that the party with by far the best chance of taking that place is the Conservatives. Admittedly he was dealt a poor hand, but he could scarce have played it worse.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
Worse I think Mr. Pit. If he is incapable of organising a journey so that he gets a seat, by what metric do people think he can organise the government of the UK. The chap is obviously a total tosser, but close to 30% of the electorate appear to be prepared to vote for his party.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
I am not sure that the storage problem has been fully solved yet but it almost certainly will be by the time Hinkley Point is built. So it will a massively expensive white elephant.
Changing the building regs so that all new builds are obliged to have solar panels and heat exchangers, then Gas topping up solar and off-shore wind will do the trick once the new battery technology is perfected.
Is their enough lithium in the world for that?
Stated lithium reserves are only those that have been currently mapped out as economical at current prices to cover a few decades of production.
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
I agree with that . Labour actually polled 28.3% in GB in 1983.
Is this poll GB or UK?
It would be surprising but not impossible. Labour in Wales have the same problems Labour in Scotland did, and have been fortunate that no one party has emerged to take them on a la the SNP. Outside the Valleys Labour's support has been dwindling steadily for years, helped by some leftist Tory leadership. If the referendum prompted a shift within the Valleys towards UKIP and Plaid, splitting the vote, Labour could find itself in real trouble very quickly and with little idea of how to get out of it.
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
It is a mistake to pay too much attention to regional crossbreaks because the sample sizes are so small with high resultant margins of error. Nevetheless I find the Scotland subsample interesting - SNP 45 Con 24 Lab 18. Could this be a further sign post Holyrood that the SNP has peaked?
Possibly, but unless one party can seize the Unionist vote and make it their own that is likely to remain irrelevant to the actual voting results.
I liked that description of the conservatives and Labour being locked in 'a fierce battle for who will come a distant second'. And until that battle is resolved the SNP will dominate.
It is however another staggering indictment of Corbyn's leadership that the party with by far the best chance of taking that place is the Conservatives. Admittedly he was dealt a poor hand, but he could scarce have played it worse.
My own view is that much of the increase in Tory support in Scotland is explained by the fact that former Tory voters who had been voting SNP -on the basis of an Anti-Labour tactical vote - have now returned to Tory ranks. There is also the personal vote for Davidson , though I suspect that helps the Tories more in Holyrood rather than for Westminster elections.It would tend to imply that the existing SNP vote is increasingly ex-Labour , and there has to be a distinct possibility that if things turn sour for SNP many of those ex-Labour voters will drift home too.I will not be too surprised if by 2020 we see the SNP at circa 40% with Labour on 26/27% and the Tories 22/23%.
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I am not sure many Americans support liberal western values. Indeed IS with their gun culture, mysogyny, homophobia and religious fundamentalism could be rednecks in robes.
Also worth noting that most (?all) of the recent US Islamist atrocities were perpetrated by people either born there or resident for many years, not recent immigrants.
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
Worse I think Mr. Pit. If he is incapable of organising a journey so that he gets a seat, by what metric do people think he can organise the government of the UK. The chap is obviously a total tosser, but close to 30% of the electorate appear to be prepared to vote for his party.
Probably the percentage of the US electorate who will be voting for the GOP in the Presidential despite their nominee.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Didn't it also just vote in PC in place of Labour?
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
Trump supports liberal western values? Well I guess that since you are supposed to learn something every day, my day is now complete.
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
I think they have finally dropped the question about membership of the German National Socialist Workers Party from the visa form....
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Didn't it also just vote in PC in place of Labour?
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Didn't it also just vote in PC in place of Labour?
My own view is that much of the increase in Tory support in Scotland is explained by the fact that former Tory voters who had been voting SNP -on the basis of an Anti-Labour tactical vote - have now returned to Tory ranks. There is also the personal vote for Davidson , though I suspect that helps the Tories more in Holyrood rather than for Westminster elections.It would tend to imply that the existing SNP vote is increasingly ex-Labour , and there has to be a distinct possibility that if things turn sour for SNP many of those ex-Labour voters will drift home too.I will not be too surprised if by 2020 we see the SNP at circa 40% with Labour on 26/27% and the Tories 22/23%.
That could very easily be true. But to recover that well, I think Labour need to offer more than the old clichés Corbyn represents.
What could really shake things up is if Davidson declared independence and rebranded as the Unionist party, a la the Ulster Unionists. That might take a lot of centrist support Labour had been relying on since the 1950s.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
Worse I think Mr. Pit. If he is incapable of organising a journey so that he gets a seat, by what metric do people think he can organise the government of the UK. The chap is obviously a total tosser, but close to 30% of the electorate appear to be prepared to vote for his party.
It's more likely to be 20% rather than 30% after the election campaign, when people who don't follow politics as we all do start listening to what he has to say.
I'd assumed that he'd got on the first train to depart rather than reserving a particular train, on the basis that the best schedules get messed around. But I'd also assume he has an assistant who is paid to sort out crap like late changes in plans.
The whole class-of-travel thing has got absurd though, driven by the print media who are having their own expenses clamped down on after decades of abuse. The idea that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his assistant and his red box should spend a couple of hours on a trip in Standard is absurd, yet it was a week's worth of headlines a couple of years ago. Any contractor knows he can get in a billable hour of work that pays for the upgrade ten times over. And the free bar.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
PC's handicap is that they are tied to the language issue which, whilst admirable in the role it has played in rescuing Welsh from potential extinction, is a huge negative in the English speaking areas of South Wales and prevents PC from replicating what the SNP has achieved in Scotland.
I understand they are currently considering rules to require councillors holding local surgeries across Wales to be able to deal with a Welsh speaking constituent in Welsh, which presents a big problem (and potentially a big cost) to councillors in South Wales, where hardly anyone speaks Welsh at all and next to no-one in exclusion. You can see why such zealotry doesn't play well in the valleys.
Has anyone else noticed the enormous extent to which so many answering a question start their reply with the word "So ....." A year or so back, I never heard this at all - the usual start to a reply was either "Erm" ....." or "Well...." or even in combination "Erm, well ....." Now I'm hearing "So ....." all the time and it really sounds rather odd, albeit more authoritative than the alternatives. Where does it come from? The U.S. I suspect, but does anyone know?
My own view is that much of the increase in Tory support in Scotland is explained by the fact that former Tory voters who had been voting SNP -on the basis of an Anti-Labour tactical vote - have now returned to Tory ranks. There is also the personal vote for Davidson , though I suspect that helps the Tories more in Holyrood rather than for Westminster elections.It would tend to imply that the existing SNP vote is increasingly ex-Labour , and there has to be a distinct possibility that if things turn sour for SNP many of those ex-Labour voters will drift home too.I will not be too surprised if by 2020 we see the SNP at circa 40% with Labour on 26/27% and the Tories 22/23%.
That could very easily be true. But to recover that well, I think Labour need to offer more than the old clichés Corbyn represents.
What could really shake things up is if Davidson declared independence and rebranded as the Unionist party, a la the Ulster Unionists. That might take a lot of centrist support Labour had been relying on since the 1950s.
I doubt that myself and suspect that the Tories have already had their recovery. I will be surprised if it goes much further - particularly re-Westminster elections.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
She won the Rhondda. If you had told me that a year ago, even after 1999, I would have laughed at you. And it is the Valleys she wants to focus on.
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
She won the Rhondda. If you had told me that a year ago, even after 1999, I would have laughed at you. And it is the Valleys she wants to focus on.
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
Very much a personal vote for her though with probably little wider significance.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Doc, I cannot claim anywhere near the local knowledge you have but I have a little from doing a couple of contracts in the Swansea area and a family connection
It seemed to me just about anyone with a bit of get up and go in them had already got up and gone. There are people there that are still waiting for Labour to re-open the mines, FFS. Huge amounts of public money has obviously been spent but it is still the most depressing part of the UK that I have ever been to. Even Liverpool was better.
This the bit that I don't understand, cannot understand. Those valleys are in shit state, the residents live in squalor, disease, ignorance, idleness and, to be fair, want. The five giants that Attlee was elected to slay in 1945. Seventy years later the people are still electing the same party who have so consistently failed. Why?
The only answer that I can up with os that the residents are terminally thick and should never have a vote.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
She won the Rhondda. If you had told me that a year ago, even after 1999, I would have laughed at you. And it is the Valleys she wants to focus on.
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
Very much a personal vote for her though with probably little wider significance.
Well, we shall see. If Labour loses votes to UKIP then Plaid may be able to win seats by standing still. Which is pretty much what will happen in England if Labour don't get their act together sharpish.
Anyway, I am off for the night. Have a good evening everyone.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
She won the Rhondda. If you had told me that a year ago, even after 1999, I would have laughed at you. And it is the Valleys she wants to focus on.
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
Plaid won 1 constituency seat in the Valleys and it went to their leader, Labour held all the rest. 5/6 of Plaids constituency seats came from West and North Wales. On the list in South Wales UKIP won 4 AMs, Plaid 4 AMs.
Perceived wisdom on here seems to be that Corbyn's Labour is going to be absolutely hammered at the next general election. Yet I see no real evidence for that proposition. OK, he is down a couple of percent from Labour's score last year but it hardly a dreadful fall.
As discussed on here umpteen times before, Corbyn's personal ratings are awful, and most of the electorate don't think about politics between elections. So maybe Labour vote share will plummet come the day, but I suggest there is very little evidence of it so far.
I think the only reasonably solid evidence is that the score is only just down on last year when generally oppositions rack up big leads at this point, but counter to that apparently that is not consistent across the entire period of opposition.
I think the assumption of Labour being hammered is on the basis they do even worse than polling currently suggests on the idea they are still being overstated. Now, frankly I do not know how Labour can be so high when they are tearing themselves to bits, but then I didn't know how the Tories were maintaining their position while tearing themselves to pieces pre-Brexit. I would not be surprised if Labour under Corbyn would be hammered, but it is not as certain as it seems like it should be.
Labour is actually down 3% on the 31% polled in GB in May 2015. A 12% Tory lead is an appalling poll for Labour despite being 4% down on the last ICM poll. Maybe some sign of May's honeymoon beginning to fade. In order to make like for like comparisons it would be good to know the estimated impact of any adjustments made by the pollster since last year.
?How is this ICM poll evidence May's honeymoon is fading?
Simply because the Tory lead has fallen from 16% to 12% with the Tory share now at 40% rather than 43%.
Ah, I misread - thought you said "despite being 4% down in the last ICM poll". Sorry!
This the bit that I don't understand, cannot understand. Those valleys are in shit state, the residents live in squalor, disease, ignorance, idleness and, to be fair, want. The five giants that Attlee was elected to slay in 1945. Seventy years later the people are still electing the same party who have so consistently failed. Why?
The only answer that I can up with os that the residents are terminally thick and should never have a vote.
You would assume wrong. Those people don't usually vote. But Labour has a big client state among the public sector employees who keep voting them back in in exchange for jobs, favours, housing etc.
That was why my family ultimately left the Valleys and moved to Gloucestershire.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
I am not sure that the storage problem has been fully solved yet but it almost certainly will be by the time Hinkley Point is built. So it will a massively expensive white elephant.
Changing the building regs so that all new builds are obliged to have solar panels and heat exchangers, then Gas topping up solar and off-shore wind will do the trick once the new battery technology is perfected.
Is their enough lithium in the world for that?
Lithium batteries are very old technology, Mr. Evershed. Do try and keep up. Even the Telegraph has published articles about recent advances in battery technology. From what I have read recently it looks like a race between teams in the USA and a team in Italy who will crack the storage problem first and neither are relying on rare earths/metals.
About five years I think and the problem will be solved. Further advances and refinements will carry on, of course, but the basic problem will have been cracked.
The future is devolved electric (topped up with Gas) oil and, especially, nuclear have no part to play. September will be TM's first big test and, in my view , if she signs off on the Hinkley Point deal she will have failed on so many levels.
I'm not at all sure about the economics of Hinckley Point, but five years to solve the problem of storage seems absurdly optimistic to me.
In a UK winter, for example, we can expect periods of cold, high-pressure weather with little wind of 4 days or more. If we assume an average winter uk electricity consumption of, say, 40 GW during such a period, this would give a required storage capacity of about 4000 GWh. That's an awful lot of battery!
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
Worse I think Mr. Pit. If he is incapable of organising a journey so that he gets a seat, by what metric do people think he can organise the government of the UK. The chap is obviously a total tosser, but close to 30% of the electorate appear to be prepared to vote for his party.
It's more likely to be 20% rather than 30% after the election campaign, when people who don't follow politics as we all do start listening to what he has to say.
I'd assumed that he'd got on the first train to depart rather than reserving a particular train, on the basis that the best schedules get messed around. But I'd also assume he has an assistant who is paid to sort out crap like late changes in plans.
The whole class-of-travel thing has got absurd though, driven by the print media who are having their own expenses clamped down on after decades of abuse. The idea that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his assistant and his red box should spend a couple of hours on a trip in Standard is absurd, yet it was a week's worth of headlines a couple of years ago. Any contractor knows he can get in a billable hour of work that pays for the upgrade ten times over. And the free bar.
Used to be allowed 1st class travel to London as you could do classified work. Once that stopped, consultants just sat in standard and twiddled their thumbs for four hours a day. Was so shortsighted.
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
While not fun for anyone who ticks the wrong box, one does wonder how they'd react if someone ticked yes! There are some really stupid terrorists out there, and you can want to wage violent jihad, but that doesn't mean you should lie on forms!
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
While not fun for anyone who ticks the wrong box, one does wonder how they'd react if someone ticked yes! There are some really stupid terrorists out there, and you can want to wage violent jihad, but that doesn't mean you should lie on forms!
But if you do lie on that form, your visa is invalid and you can be deported instantly, without the delay and expense of a trial.
Some pretty thinly veiled accusations there. Presumably american dominance in swimming, south korean in archery, chinese in ping pong and several other events where individual nations dominate are also suspect (that is, more suspect that any other event and winner, this is the olympics after all).
Did no one give up their seat for an elderly gentleman?
Not for this particular Marxist elderly gentleman who wants to tax them to oblivion and nationalise their house
Should we discriminate against people based on their political views? Discuss.
Given this guy we know earns gets paid £140k a year yet can't be arsed to put his hand in his pocket for an upgrade, he wouldn't get my seat either.
Worse I think Mr. Pit. If he is incapable of organising a journey so that he gets a seat, by what metric do people think he can organise the government of the UK. The chap is obviously a total tosser, but close to 30% of the electorate appear to be prepared to vote for his party.
It's more likely to be 20% rather than 30% after the election campaign, when people who don't follow politics as we all do start listening to what he has to say.
I'd assumed that he'd got on the first train to depart rather than reserving a particular train, on the basis that the best schedules get messed around. But I'd also assume he has an assistant who is paid to sort out crap like late changes in plans.
The whole class-of-travel thing has got absurd though, driven by the print media who are having their own expenses clamped down on after decades of abuse. The idea that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his assistant and his red box should spend a couple of hours on a trip in Standard is absurd, yet it was a week's worth of headlines a couple of years ago. Any contractor knows he can get in a billable hour of work that pays for the upgrade ten times over. And the free bar.
Used to be allowed 1st class travel to London as you could do classified work. Once that stopped, consultants just sat in standard and twiddled their thumbs for four hours a day. Was so shortsighted.
Another good example of a false economy driven by headlines. In business these things are always under review and exceptions can be made, eg night flights going straight to a customer meeting are best done in a class that allows for some sleep!
The CoE probably has a red box that never gets empty, yet for the sake of a couple of notes we would rather he sat on a train in Standard for half the day and kept it locked?
"‘The British are just phenomenal when it comes to the Olympic Games, and we're all just scratching our heads going “how do they lift so much when in so many events they have not even been in contention in the world championships?”' said Meares."
Perhaps because we concentrate on the Olympics above all else?
But, the vast majority of UKIP voters would back the Conservatives over Corbyn-led Labour. That matters in marginal seats. If we had the Australian voting system, the Conservatives would probably be ahead 60/40 on TPP.
Indeed, many Tories must now regret opposing AV in 2011, as they would now be its biggest beneficiaries
"‘The British are just phenomenal when it comes to the Olympic Games, and we're all just scratching our heads going “how do they lift so much when in so many events they have not even been in contention in the world championships?”' said Meares."
Perhaps because we concentrate on the Olympics above all else?
Funding is dependent on gold medals, not world championships. As the old saw has it, "You get what you measure".
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
While not fun for anyone who ticks the wrong box, one does wonder how they'd react if someone ticked yes! There are some really stupid terrorists out there, and you can want to wage violent jihad, but that doesn't mean you should lie on forms!
If someone ticked yes they would be put back on the plane, either for intending to commit acts of terrorism, or for the felony offence of lying on the form.
Knowing the US they'd probably go on the no fly list for life too, they really don't have any sense of humour - or should that be humor. Best have someone double check it if you're a little tipsy on the plane!
But, the vast majority of UKIP voters would back the Conservatives over Corbyn-led Labour. That matters in marginal seats. If we had the Australian voting system, the Conservatives would probably be ahead 60/40 on TPP.
Indeed, many Tories must now regret opposing AV in 2011, as they would now be its biggest beneficiaries
Shush, don't let TSE hear you!!
Not sure I get behind supporting a voting system because it gives your side an advantage at the ballot box.
The Tories narrowly beat Labour in the 2009 Euro elections in Wales
On a PR basis it's easier. I think we all know they won't win seats in the Valleys except under unusual circumstances of a four-way split, but I could see them picking up a lot of seats outside if the Labour vote continues to dwindle.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
Certainly in North Wales, Mid Wales and Pembrokeshire the Tories already have a number of seats and could expand them further, their prospects in Wales are certainly better than in inner London. The Valleys will almost certainly never vote Tory but they might vote UKIP, remember even Merthyr Tydfil voted Leave
Yet actually there are seats to watch are in and around Cardiff - Bridgend and Cardiff West are both gentrifying rapidly.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
Cardiff is the capital city and not really in the Valleys, although it is surrounded by them. At a general election of course Hamilton will not be leading UKIP. In Merthyr Tydfil at the last general election for example UKIP came second on 18%, Plaid fourth on 9.5%. Plaid's heartland is in West and North Wales
It was in west and North Wales. Do not underestimate the potential of Leanne Wood as an unabashed Welsh Valleys socialist to change that.
No evidence of that so far, the Valleys seem more concerned with controlling immigration than getting unabashed socialism, especially as they now get that from Labour anyway
She won the Rhondda. If you had told me that a year ago, even after 1999, I would have laughed at you. And it is the Valleys she wants to focus on.
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
Plaid won 1 constituency seat in the Valleys and it went to their leader, Labour held all the rest. 5/6 of Plaids constituency seats came from West and North Wales. On the list in South Wales UKIP won 4 AMs, Plaid 4 AMs.
Wales has been trending Conservative since 1970 (bar the 1987 and 1992 elections). Six Welsh Labour seats have majorities of 3,500 or less over the Tories. If they fall, the Conservatives will be on 17 seats.
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
While not fun for anyone who ticks the wrong box, one does wonder how they'd react if someone ticked yes! There are some really stupid terrorists out there, and you can want to wage violent jihad, but that doesn't mean you should lie on forms!
If someone ticked yes they would be put back on the plane, either for intending to commit acts of terrorism, or for the felony offence of lying on the form.
Knowing the US they'd probably go on the no fly list for life too, they really don't have any sense of humour - or should that be humor. Best have someone double check it if you're a little tipsy on the plane!
Having not been abroad for 15 years, probably best I try somewhere with fewer hoops and potential pitfalls!
A six-point lead for Trumpolini in Texas is only ten points less than Romney's lead there in 2012.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I thought they already asked people upon entry if they intend to practice bigamy or commit genocide, that sort of thing. Or stories (hopefully not true) of people who shared the name of someone on the no-fly list and kept getting messed around, so they just changed their name, suggesting the no fly list was predicated on the basis people planning trouble will always use their same name.
The US visa waiver form, as of a couple of years ago and I doubt it's changed, required you to tick a box on the form if you were "intending to commit acts of terrorism against the US during your visit"! It was in the middle of a bunch of other questions, some of which required ticks and some definitely didn't.
While not fun for anyone who ticks the wrong box, one does wonder how they'd react if someone ticked yes! There are some really stupid terrorists out there, and you can want to wage violent jihad, but that doesn't mean you should lie on forms!
If someone ticked yes they would be put back on the plane, either for intending to commit acts of terrorism, or for the felony offence of lying on the form.
Knowing the US they'd probably go on the no fly list for life too, they really don't have any sense of humour - or should that be humor. Best have someone double check it if you're a little tipsy on the plane!
Having not been abroad for 15 years, probably best I try somewhere with fewer hoops and potential pitfalls!
You do it online these days, and get approval before you even leave for the airport (although they could decide not to admit you for any reason at customs, as with any other country).
This the bit that I don't understand, cannot understand. Those valleys are in shit state, the residents live in squalor, disease, ignorance, idleness and, to be fair, want. The five giants that Attlee was elected to slay in 1945. Seventy years later the people are still electing the same party who have so consistently failed. Why?
The only answer that I can up with os that the residents are terminally thick and should never have a vote.
You would assume wrong. Those people don't usually vote. But Labour has a big client state among the public sector employees who keep voting them back in in exchange for jobs, favours, housing etc.
That was why my family ultimately left the Valleys and moved to Gloucestershire.
So the people in the valleys are too stupid to even vote and those that do have some oomphf have already left. I am not sure that is a helpful message, Doc.
"‘The British are just phenomenal when it comes to the Olympic Games, and we're all just scratching our heads going “how do they lift so much when in so many events they have not even been in contention in the world championships?”' said Meares."
Perhaps because we concentrate on the Olympics above all else?
Doesn't that rule out drug abuse, actually? Wouldn't people prepared to cheat want to win at both?
And good evening, everybody. I am very much enjoying the coverage of the Olympics offered by PB contributors - thank you all.
Comments
Clinton 48 .. Trump 39
http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_FL_081616.asp
Clinton 50.45 .. Trump 44.65
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/08/16/UPICVoter-poll-Hillary-Clinton-builds-on-lead-over-Donald-Trump/3211471355363/?spt=su&or=btn_tw
'Voting intentions:
The vote figures shown in the tables are calculated
after ICM has excluded those who
are not registered, say they will not vote, refuse t
o answer the question or don’t
know who they would vote for (but see below).
Adjustment process 1: ‘Partial Refuser’ Reallocatio
n
A.)
75% of 2015 Conservative and Labour voters who refu
se to answer the vote
intention question or say they don’t know, are added
back to the party they
voted for in 2015.
B.)
50% of 2015 voters for all other parties who refuse to
answer the vote
intention question or say they don’t know, are added
back to the party they
voted for in 2015.
Adjustment process 2: ‘Total Refuser’ Reallocation
‘Total refusers’ are people who refuse/DK their futu
re vote intention AND also
refuse/DK who they voted for in the previous General
Election (2015). Given the lack
of any political information about such respondents t
o date, ICM has excluded them
from the vote intention figures. However, our post-2015
Recall Survey revealed that
Total Refusers (who were subsequently willing to te
ll us what they did in the 2015
General Election) split disproportionately across dif
ferent parties. Indeed, one
important observation was that more than half of all T
otal Refusers actually voted
Conservative, with more than twice as many voting Cons
ervative than Labour.
Our new adjustment thus reallocates some Total Refuser
s back into the poll sample.
This is achieved in the following way:
1.
The number of Total Refusers on any poll is multiplie
d by the proportion of
Partial Refusers who were (already) re-allocated in
Adjustment Process 1.
(For example, if 60% of Partial Refusers were added
back, then 60% of Total
Refusals will be added back).
2.
Total Refusers are then multiplied by each party’s
share of reallocated Partial
Refusers. (For example, if 40% of already allocated P
artial Refusals were
2015 Conservative voters, then 40% of remaining Total
Refusals will be
reallocated to the Conservatives).
3.
ICM’s default position is that Total Refusers
at least
look like Partial Refusers
in terms of political make-up. However, given the f
indings of our Recall Poll,
we believe that Total Refusals are probably even mor
e pro-Conservative than
pro-Labour. In order to allow for this, the share of
Total Refusals added back
to the Conservatives is increased by 20% (for example,
from the 40%
mentioned in (2, above) to 60%), with a corresponding
reduction of 20% in
the share of Total Refuser reallocation to Labour.'
It would be good to know the impact of these adjustments. Not all pollsters would go along with the second part. Whether it is accurate remains to be seen.
Of course, they are doubtless doing slightly better in England than they were then - but at the expense of all (on these numbers surely all) those vital 41 seats in Scotland. Admittedly the Conservatives have lost 20 seats as well, but with their advantage in England that matters much less to them politically.
In this poll ICM shows the Tories ahead of Labour in Wales. Personally I rather doubt that!
Like you, I suspect this is a sampling error. But a sudden collapse with the Tories (who have a solid core vote) as beneficiaries shouldn't be ruled out altogether.
It does rather remind me of the early abolitionist John Woolman who was such a principled/obstinate fellow that he always wore undyed clothing and travelled in steerage from North America to Britain. He insisted on travelling to York on the cheapest perch on the outside of the stagecoach, and died of pnemonia brought on by the journey.
Edit - mind you, we all knew that the SNP wouldn't win 50 seats in Scotland, Jeremy Corbyn couldn't become Labour leader, and that Remain would win the referendum.
We also all knew Donald Trump was a loose cannon, but that's turned out to be correct.
About five years I think and the problem will be solved. Further advances and refinements will carry on, of course, but the basic problem will have been cracked.
The future is devolved electric (topped up with Gas) oil and, especially, nuclear have no part to play. September will be TM's first big test and, in my view , if she signs off on the Hinkley Point deal she will have failed on so many levels.
And no doubt people will be flocking to his banner now that he has unveiled his big idea for detecting terrorists - ask people if they support liberal Western values, because terrorists never do.
Undeniably a stroke of sheer genius. If only this brilliant idea had been conceived a couple of decades ago, countless lives could have been saved.
I liked that description of the conservatives and Labour being locked in 'a fierce battle for who will come a distant second'. And until that battle is resolved the SNP will dominate.
It is however another staggering indictment of Corbyn's leadership that the party with by far the best chance of taking that place is the Conservatives. Admittedly he was dealt a poor hand, but he could scarce have played it worse.
I find it hard to believe the Valleys will vote in large numbers for a UKIP led by Neil Hamilton, but they might siphon enough votes away from Labour to let Plaid in.
http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2016/08/wrong-chemical-dumped-into-olympic-pool-green-smelly-unsafe/
Why on Earth were the organisers saying it was safe before they knew what had caused the problem?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/31/rare_metals_mineral_reserves_talk_preamble/
Explains the meaning of reserves, and why most We-Are-Running-Of-X stories are junk
Also worth noting that most (?all) of the recent US Islamist atrocities were perpetrated by people either born there or resident for many years, not recent immigrants.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/wales-constituencies/W09000044
What could really shake things up is if Davidson declared independence and rebranded as the Unionist party, a la the Ulster Unionists. That might take a lot of centrist support Labour had been relying on since the 1950s.
I'd assumed that he'd got on the first train to depart rather than reserving a particular train, on the basis that the best schedules get messed around. But I'd also assume he has an assistant who is paid to sort out crap like late changes in plans.
The whole class-of-travel thing has got absurd though, driven by the print media who are having their own expenses clamped down on after decades of abuse. The idea that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his assistant and his red box should spend a couple of hours on a trip in Standard is absurd, yet it was a week's worth of headlines a couple of years ago. Any contractor knows he can get in a billable hour of work that pays for the upgrade ten times over. And the free bar.
I understand they are currently considering rules to require councillors holding local surgeries across Wales to be able to deal with a Welsh speaking constituent in Welsh, which presents a big problem (and potentially a big cost) to councillors in South Wales, where hardly anyone speaks Welsh at all and next to no-one in exclusion. You can see why such zealotry doesn't play well in the valleys.
Has anyone else noticed the enormous extent to which so many answering a question start their reply with the word "So ....."
A year or so back, I never heard this at all - the usual start to a reply was either "Erm" ....." or "Well...." or even in combination "Erm, well ....."
Now I'm hearing "So ....." all the time and it really sounds rather odd, albeit more authoritative than the alternatives. Where does it come from? The U.S. I suspect, but does anyone know?
Is it also worth pointing out she doesn't actually speak Welsh?
Old farts? Anyone seen JackW recently, or has he been sojourning in Rio?
It seemed to me just about anyone with a bit of get up and go in them had already got up and gone. There are people there that are still waiting for Labour to re-open the mines, FFS. Huge amounts of public money has obviously been spent but it is still the most depressing part of the UK that I have ever been to. Even Liverpool was better.
This the bit that I don't understand, cannot understand. Those valleys are in shit state, the residents live in squalor, disease, ignorance, idleness and, to be fair, want. The five giants that Attlee was elected to slay in 1945. Seventy years later the people are still electing the same party who have so consistently failed. Why?
The only answer that I can up with os that the residents are terminally thick and should never have a vote.
Anyway, I am off for the night. Have a good evening everyone.
That was why my family ultimately left the Valleys and moved to Gloucestershire.
In a UK winter, for example, we can expect periods of cold, high-pressure weather with little wind of 4 days or more. If we assume an average winter uk electricity consumption of, say, 40 GW during such a period, this would give a required storage capacity of about 4000 GWh. That's an awful lot of battery!
In honour of SeanT "these Olympics will never match London", some shameless aftertiming (well, sort of...)
Skybet: Jason Kenny and Laura Trott both to win two Gold Medals each @ 28/1
There is method in their madness.
Good night all.
Men's Omnium Points Race 6\6 Final
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-3743708/Team-GB-s-gold-medal-winning-cycling-stars-accused-cheating-Olympic-rivals-following-Rio-success.html#comments
Wah, Wah, its not fair!!!
Honestly why don;t they just JOIN REMAIN.
The CoE probably has a red box that never gets empty, yet for the sake of a couple of notes we would rather he sat on a train in Standard for half the day and kept it locked?
Perhaps because we concentrate on the Olympics above all else?
I know, some of that stuff quoted is pretty radical. Could we threaten to see them in court?
Could be worse though, I may have chosen an applicable-to-all-days philosopher
The UK Cycling team clearly doesn;t show its hand in the interim. Its a deliberate policy and has been for years.
Knowing the US they'd probably go on the no fly list for life too, they really don't have any sense of humour - or should that be humor. Best have someone double check it if you're a little tipsy on the plane!
He used to silence people that way...
And good evening, everybody. I am very much enjoying the coverage of the Olympics offered by PB contributors - thank you all.