Well come this time next week we will have witnessed the greatest f##k-up in modern British GE history....just what f##k up will it be....that Kim Jong May has managed to lose against a terrorist sympathizer and his band of marxists or the polling companies need to just shut down.
On past performance you'd tend to favour the later...
It's on the walk to the polling booth that the British electorate, at a GE, has usually sobered up, and voted sensibly one way or another. They stopped doing that at the EU Ref, thinking instead "fuck it". On the way to the polling booth next week, if they do say "fuck it", what is in store - not freedom or reclaiming power or a perceived riskless choice - but another politician. OK, one on the left promising all kinds of goodies, but a British politician nevertheless and the UK electorate is used to those and might see through Jeremy as a result on the day.
Or then again they might just say "fuck it".
Good Post Many may well think they have nothing to lose.
Tories only offering more of the same. Austerity drop in living standards and now they are coming for your house too.
Some will like the Status Quo as they perceive it in some way "safer".
Labour Party defending millionaires at the expense of working people again, I see...
Yeh I bet millionaire are flocking to Labour and worse off workers are drifting further away!!
Corbyn should really have said on the side of the few not the many really.
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
That'd be a yes you're defending millionaires, then?
Only in your little world.
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
Well come this time next week we will have witnessed the greatest f##k-up in modern British GE history....just what f##k up will it be....that Kim Jong May has managed to lose against a terrorist sympathizer and his band of marxists or the polling companies need to just shut down.
On past performance you'd tend to favour the later...
It's on the walk to the polling booth that the British electorate, at a GE, has usually sobered up, and voted sensibly one way or another. They stopped doing that at the EU Ref, thinking instead "fuck it". On the way to the polling booth next week, if they do say "fuck it", what is in store - not freedom or reclaiming power or a perceived riskless choice - but another politician. OK, one on the left promising all kinds of goodies, but a British politician nevertheless and the UK electorate is used to those and might see through Jeremy as a result on the day.
Or then again they might just say "fuck it".
Good Post Many may well think they have nothing to lose.
Tories only offering more of the same. Austerity drop in living standards and now they are coming for your house too.
Some will like the Status Quo as they perceive it in some way "safer".
Labour Party defending millionaires at the expense of working people again, I see...
Yeh I bet millionaire are flocking to Labour and worse off workers are drifting further away!!
Corbyn should really have said on the side of the few not the many really.
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
That'd be a yes you're defending millionaires, then?
Only in your little world.
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
Just spoke to a very friend for an hour about stuff and the election.
She based in Richmond, committed liberal democrat. She thinks based on canvass returns; they are doing better in Twickenham, Richmond Park, Kingston, Carshalton but really bad in Sutton, Southwark and Wood Green.
She expects 2 gains in London - Twickenham + Kingston; holds in Carshalton and Richmond Park
That would be a staggeringly good result for the LDs. My percentage likelihoods would be:
I reckon that on a good day, they'll win two, but my central scenario would be one (Twickenham).
Ironic, really, given that Vince is - alongside Tim Farron - the LibDem I have least time for.
I don't know if this makes any sense, but the canvass returns show lib dems beating tories in Fulwell, Teddington and South Twickenham. (wards in twickenham)
That makes perfect sense. Heathrow is also a bigger issue in Twickenham than in Richmond Park.
Have they still not clocked yet that a new runway north of the existing field will mean a lot fewer planes over Twickenham?
Why would they want to transfer the misery of noisy overhead flights to someone else? They are LibDems, not Tories.
She seems to procrastinate for months before half-heartedly taking the most reckless of the available options and then hiding while the consequences play out.
Exactly what I thought when I got the same leaflet.
The Tories call an election voluntarily three years too early, and their key slogan is that the other side presents a dangerous risk. What strategic mastermind is thinking up this stuff?
Well come this time next week we will have witnessed the greatest f##k-up in modern British GE history....just what f##k up will it be....that Kim Jong May has managed to lose against a terrorist sympathizer and his band of marxists or the polling companies need to just shut down.
On past performance you'd tend to favour the later...
It's on the walk to the polling booth that the British electorate, at a GE, has usually sobered up, and voted sensibly one way or another. They stopped doing that at the EU Ref, thinking instead "fuck it". On the way to the polling booth next week, if they do say "fuck it", what is in store - not freedom or reclaiming power or a perceived riskless choice - but another politician. OK, one on the left promising all kinds of goodies, but a British politician nevertheless and the UK electorate is used to those and might see through Jeremy as a result on the day.
Or then again they might just say "fuck it".
Good Post Many may well think they have nothing to lose.
Tories only offering more of the same. Austerity drop in living standards and now they are coming for your house too.
Some will like the Status Quo as they perceive it in some way "safer".
Labour Party defending millionaires at the expense of working people again, I see...
Yeh I bet millionaire are flocking to Labour and worse off workers are drifting further away!!
Corbyn should really have said on the side of the few not the many really.
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
That'd be a yes you're defending millionaires, then?
Only in your little world.
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
Well come this time next week we will have witnessed the greatest f##k-up in modern British GE history....just what f##k up will it be....that Kim Jong May has managed to lose against a terrorist sympathizer and his band of marxists or the polling companies need to just shut down.
On past performance you'd tend to favour the later...
It's on the walk to the polling booth that the British electorate, at a GE, has usually sobered up, and voted sensibly one way or another. They stopped doing that at the EU Ref, thinking instead "fuck it". On the way to the polling booth next week, if they do say "fuck it", what is in store - not freedom or reclaiming power or a perceived riskless choice - but another politician. OK, one on the left promising all kinds of goodies, but a British politician nevertheless and the UK electorate is used to those and might see through Jeremy as a result on the day.
Or then again they might just say "fuck it".
Good Post Many may well think they have nothing to lose.
Tories only offering more of the same. Austerity drop in living standards and now they are coming for your house too.
Some will like the Status Quo as they perceive it in some way "safer".
Labour Party defending millionaires at the expense of working people again, I see...
Yeh I bet millionaire are flocking to Labour and worse off workers are drifting further away!!
Corbyn should really have said on the side of the few not the many really.
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
That'd be a yes you're defending millionaires, then?
Only in your little world.
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
I thought millionaires avoid IHT anyway?
That was before Jezza though.
LOL. Is he going to go round personally to collect it?
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
She may only have a short innings in number 10, but she's reached the level of paranoid delusion usually reserved only for PMs who last a decade in power.
Well come this time next week we will have witnessed the greatest f##k-up in modern British GE history....just what f##k up will it be....that Kim Jong May has managed to lose against a terrorist sympathizer and his band of marxists or the polling companies need to just shut down.
On past performance you'd tend to favour the later...
It's on the walk to the polling booth that the British electorate, at a GE, has usually sobered up, and voted sensibly one way or another. They stopped doing that at the EU Ref, thinking instead "fuck it". On the way to the polling booth next week, if they do say "fuck it", what is in store - not freedom or reclaiming power or a perceived riskless choice - but another politician. OK, one on the left promising all kinds of goodies, but a British politician nevertheless and the UK electorate is used to those and might see through Jeremy as a result on the day.
Or then again they might just say "fuck it".
Good Post Many may well think they have nothing to lose.
Tories only offering more of the same. Austerity drop in living standards and now they are coming for your house too.
Some will like the Status Quo as they perceive it in some way "safer".
Labour Party defending millionaires at the expense of working people again, I see...
Yeh I bet millionaire are flocking to Labour and worse off workers are drifting further away!!
Corbyn should really have said on the side of the few not the many really.
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
That'd be a yes you're defending millionaires, then?
Only in your little world.
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
I thought millionaires avoid IHT anyway?
That was before Jezza though.
Won't be any millionaires left with Jezza in power...they will have all left or due to maximum wage won't be able to earn enough.
Whatever happens now, May will not be PM this time next year, will she?
Seems unlikely at the moment ........ but say the polls are wrong by the same degree as they were last time, she'll have a majority around 90. The spreads suggest 70ish, Baxter predicts 74. Is that really such a disaster?
That could be the answer! Look at the pols and factor in how wrong they usually are
Which just takes you back to the old wisdom of they under estimate the right and over estimate the left
I'm not sure left/right is particularly relevant right now.
This is status quo / anti status quo. The polls are as likely to be underestimating labour as they are the tories.
I think it was @pulpstar who was the first to notice the comments btl on the daily mail were really anti-May after the campaign kicked in.
She's a liar, liar ooooh.
The anti status quo being a bloke who has been an MP 34 years?
If you cant see Corbyn is anti SQ you should probably visit SpecSavers
The amazing thing is that people who participated in an anti establishment kicking last June, then cheered another one on in November now seem surprised that the anti establishment mood is turning on the most pro-establishment party of all.
As some early social movement theorists put it;
"there is always enough discontent in any society to supply the grass-roots support for a movement if the movement is effectively organized and has at its disposal the power and resources of some established elite group" Turner & Tillan 1972 (p. 251)
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
Interestingly though, they didn't unleash the Living Wage - even though they must surely have done the groundwork for it.
Anybody know the story of why they didn't show the goodies before the election?
All it takes is for the tories to win the borders/north of scotland and labour to win back the edinburgh/glasgow and its areas and the SNP goose is cooked.
Really I remember ED BEING SHOUTED AT for refusing to apologise for Lab overspending and that theres no money left note
And it made zero difference. Same with Gordo being rubbish in the debates and Bigot-gate.
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only real change from start to end of campaign was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
Really I remember ED BEING SHOUTED AT for refusing to apologise for Lab overspending and that theres no money left note
And it made zero difference. Same with Gordo being rubbish in the debates and Bigot-gate.
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only change was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
You could theorise that the corbocharge is from the same ilk as the Cleggasm and will have the same result. If you were so minded.
I can understand why the young might go over to Corbyn because he seems different and offers change (even if I think they have not really bothered to understand him or his policies).
The trouble is the sort of Marxist policies he offers will hurt the young more than anyone else and the young are deluded if they think all the lovely free things they (and everyone else) have been offered will be paid for by Philip Green and his friends or those on £80K or more.
If Corbyn wins, they will learn this lesson the hard way, as the rest of us had to in the 1970's, the sort of economy and society which Corbyn wants to bring us back to.
Corbynism may well be like Trump and Brexit. But all of them are deluded versions of nostalgia not realistic attempts to engage with the world as it is now or as it is likely to be.
Incidentally, a Jewish friend of mine expressed some concern about how things might turn out in a Corbyn Britain. This was after the abuse doled out to Emma Barnett some of which seemed to focus on her being Jewish.
That someone should even feel like this in 21st century Britain I find deeply depressing.
(As I do the prospect of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary......)
I have never thought much of May. But the Lib Dems have really disappointed me - nationally anyway. Locally they have been very active.
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
This may seem - and probably is - a profoundly naive question for PB experts from a relative novice on this site, but why is the private polling by parties deemed to be more accurate that the published polls? Are different methods used?
Really I remember ED BEING SHOUTED AT for refusing to apologise for Lab overspending and that theres no money left note
And it made zero difference. Same with Gordo being rubbish in the debates and Bigot-gate.
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only change was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
You could theorise that the corbocharge is from the same ilk as the Cleggasm and will have the same result. If you were so minded.
Well I did ask earlier the following question....
Did the Cleggasm continue in the polls all the way to the GE, or did we see signs of it tailing off in the final week or two of the campaign?
I don't know the answer (I could look it up, but I was hoping our panel of experts would chime in). I do remember the Daily Mail went into overdrive with its negative stories about him following the first debate, no idea if that really had any impact.
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
Interestingly though, they didn't unleash the Living Wage - even though they must surely have done the groundwork for it.
Anybody know the story of why they didn't show the goodies before the election?
The common sense answer is that they don't want to make any expensive promises while Brexit plays out and we still have a deficit, hence the rather dry manifesto - bar a valiant effort to address the social care "crisis" which spectacularly backfired of course.
But who wants to vote for that when free owls are on offer from the other side?
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
This may seem - and probably is - a profoundly naive question for PB experts from a relative novice on this site, but why is the private polling by parties deemed to be more accurate that the published polls? Are different methods used?
Evening all. I see some are still thinking May will scrape through a majority.
I'm struggling to understand. True May has been dreadful and the manifesto was badly received. The polling movement can't all be due to this though. The social care policy was badly communicated but as I think I said before I actually support the principle housing assets are going to have to be used in this way in the future if we want fairness within the generations. I also don't understand Corbyn's appeal. He is still the same disagreeable character whose MPs didn't want.. His manifesto has lots of goodies but surely people realise that they have to be paid for some way down the line. And hasn't nationalisation and it's like had its day? Why would people vote for this now when they declined it when it was offered the first time round? Then again I didn't understand the appeal of Brexit.
I will be voting Conservative but sadly I expect to see a Labour government this time next week.
Also Indo-Irish - Indian born father, Irish born mother.
Fine Gael are the Irish Tories, right?
Talent trumps quotas, as always.
AIUI both FG and FF are centre-right, with FG being marginally more so. They are the descendants of the two sides in the Irish Civil War: Fianna Fail from the (losing) anti-Treaty side and Fine Gael from the pro-Treaty side.
Really I remember ED BEING SHOUTED AT for refusing to apologise for Lab overspending and that theres no money left note
And it made zero difference. Same with Gordo being rubbish in the debates and Bigot-gate.
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only change was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
You could theorise that the corbocharge is from the same ilk as the Cleggasm and will have the same result. If you were so minded.
Well I did ask earlier the following question....
Did the Cleggasm continue in the polls all the way to the GE, or did we see signs of it tailing off in the final week or two of the campaign?
I don't know the answer (I could look it up, but I was hoping our panel of experts would chime in). I do remember the Daily Mail went into overdrive with its negative stories about him following the first debate, no idea if that really had any impact.
It tailed off a little from the initial surge but the events of poll polls all had high 20s. They got 23. They had been as high as 34 in one poll and we're getting the odd 30 all the way through from there. Nothing under 24.
Really I remember ED BEING SHOUTED AT for refusing to apologise for Lab overspending and that theres no money left note
And it made zero difference. Same with Gordo being rubbish in the debates and Bigot-gate.
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only change was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
You could theorise that the corbocharge is from the same ilk as the Cleggasm and will have the same result. If you were so minded.
Well I did ask earlier the following question....
Did the Cleggasm continue in the polls all the way to the GE, or did we see signs of it tailing off in the final week or two of the campaign?
I don't know the answer (I could look it up, but I was hoping our panel of experts would chime in). I do remember the Daily Mail went into overdrive with its negative stories about him following the first debate, no idea if that really had any impact.
It tailed off a little from the initial surge but the events of poll polls all had high 20s. They got 23. They had been as high as 34 in one poll and we're getting the odd 30 all the way through from there. Nothing under 24.
Yeah, there was one poll where the LDs were in the lead.
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
This may seem - and probably is - a profoundly naive question for PB experts from a relative novice on this site, but why is the private polling by parties deemed to be more accurate that the published polls? Are different methods used?
In the past it hasn't. But 2015 Messina and his team claim to have had much more accurate polling. Labour on the other hand, had some signs, but not until the very end (and they didn't tell Ed).
Messina is supposed to have huge databases where he has 100s of parameters on masses of target swings voters. Literally how often you go for a shit type stuff. YouGov have similar stuff, but it has been shown to be horrendously flawed (Dave Gorman did a special on it and it was hilarious the kind of crap they had, Marxists love Ant, Fascists love Dec, but nobody can tell which is which).
Messina isn't looking at the population as a whole, he is looking at only target voters that could swing the election.
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
This may seem - and probably is - a profoundly naive question for PB experts from a relative novice on this site, but why is the private polling by parties deemed to be more accurate that the published polls? Are different methods used?
I'd like to know that as well.
Isn't it that the party private polling is done on an order of magnitude bigger scale (and in cost) than the regular polling done for the media organisations?
Or maybe it's just frustration that we don't get to see it!
Meanwhile In the real world a party Manifesto on the side of the many and against the excesses of Capitalism is gaining support.
Get over it
In the real world, the Labour manifesto is none of those things. It accepts benefit cuts - ironic given opposition to them was what won Corbyn the leadership - has no realistic tax proposals, and consists mostly of middle class bribes on free universities and bungs to the elderly while promising somebody else will pay for any more spending, plus massive fiscal transfers from poor to rich via higher borrowing.
The only Marx that Corbyn ever resembled is a sort of less funny, less intelligent Groucho. However, for whatever cold comfort you can find in this, Rufus T Firefly became President and won his wholly unnecessary war after bankrupting the country.
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
This may seem - and probably is - a profoundly naive question for PB experts from a relative novice on this site, but why is the private polling by parties deemed to be more accurate that the published polls? Are different methods used?
I'd like to know that as well.
The daily canvassing returns and info from their candidates on the ground should provide the real picture
The Tory private polling (which was accurate) showed no real change throughout the campaign. None of the much publicized gaffes such as the Ed Stone changed much at all.
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
Interestingly though, they didn't unleash the Living Wage - even though they must surely have done the groundwork for it.
Anybody know the story of why they didn't show the goodies before the election?
The common sense answer is that they don't want to make any expensive promises while Brexit plays out and we still have a deficit, hence the rather dry manifesto - bar a valiant effort to address the social care "crisis" which spectacularly backfired of course.
But who wants to vote for that when free owls are on offer from the other side?
I'm talking about 2015 - Osborne surely knew he was going to announce the Living Wage if they won the election, or at least would have done some of the preparatory work for it. Yet even though polls were at some times not looking good for the Tories, they kept the goodies hidden in the bag. Did they not think the Living Wage was an attractive policy? Did they not believe how bad the polls looked? Or was the Living Wage actually only decided on after they won?
Also Indo-Irish - Indian born father, Irish born mother.
Fine Gael are the Irish Tories, right?
Talent trumps quotas, as always.
Not really. More like the Orange book liberals, with FF being more populist. Although in Europe Fine Gael do sit with the centre right Christian Democrat parties
Comments
http://www.kerrang.com/
Higher Income taxes Lower IHT threshold may suggest otherwise to the Many mind.
So why call an unnecessary election Tezzie's?
https://twitter.com/SurryKnight/status/870620296826429441
https://twitter.com/stephenpaton134/status/870656393698791424
The Tories call an election voluntarily three years too early, and their key slogan is that the other side presents a dangerous risk. What strategic mastermind is thinking up this stuff?
Plastics chemicals 'affecting people's sexuality' claims Telford Lib Dem election candidate Susan King
https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/politics/general-election-2017/2017/06/01/plastics-chemicals-affecting-peoples-sexuality-claims-telford-lib-dem-election-candidate-susan-king/
The Daily YouGov's scared them and that caused Cameron to go balls to the wall for the last 2 weeks.
JC up in 40%s
"there is always enough discontent in any society to supply the grass-roots support for a movement if the movement is effectively organized and has at its disposal the power and resources of some established elite group" Turner & Tillan 1972 (p. 251)
Anybody know the story of why they didn't show the goodies before the election?
In the two previous GE with debates etc, the only real change from start to end of campaign was "I agree with Nick" Cleggasm, and even that didn't end up anywhere near as large as the polls suggested.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&tvcontrol=Y&CON=40&LAB=43&LIB=9&UKIP=3&Green=1&NewLAB=&TVCON=10&TVLAB=25&TVLIB=50&TVUKIP=0&TVGreen=0&SCOTCON=24&SCOTLAB=30&SCOTLIB=7&SCOTUKIP=0&SCOTGreen=0&SCOTNAT=38&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2015
Following RCs on Hammond next PM, but also backed Rudd. She seems to be the only Tory with some fight in her.
In response to @RochdalePioneers' excellent post earlier:-
I can understand why the young might go over to Corbyn because he seems different and offers change (even if I think they have not really bothered to understand him or his policies).
The trouble is the sort of Marxist policies he offers will hurt the young more than anyone else and the young are deluded if they think all the lovely free things they (and everyone else) have been offered will be paid for by Philip Green and his friends or those on £80K or more.
If Corbyn wins, they will learn this lesson the hard way, as the rest of us had to in the 1970's, the sort of economy and society which Corbyn wants to bring us back to.
Corbynism may well be like Trump and Brexit. But all of them are deluded versions of nostalgia not realistic attempts to engage with the world as it is now or as it is likely to be.
Incidentally, a Jewish friend of mine expressed some concern about how things might turn out in a Corbyn Britain. This was after the abuse doled out to Emma Barnett some of which seemed to focus on her being Jewish.
That someone should even feel like this in 21st century Britain I find deeply depressing.
(As I do the prospect of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary......)
I have never thought much of May. But the Lib Dems have really disappointed me - nationally anyway. Locally they have been very active.
Did the Cleggasm continue in the polls all the way to the GE, or did we see signs of it tailing off in the final week or two of the campaign?
I don't know the answer (I could look it up, but I was hoping our panel of experts would chime in). I do remember the Daily Mail went into overdrive with its negative stories about him following the first debate, no idea if that really had any impact.
But who wants to vote for that when free owls are on offer from the other side?
Talent trumps quotas, as always.
I'm struggling to understand. True May has been dreadful and the manifesto was badly received. The polling movement can't all be due to this though. The social care policy was badly communicated but as I think I said before I actually support the principle housing assets are going to have to be used in this way in the future if we want fairness within the generations. I also don't understand Corbyn's appeal. He is still the same disagreeable character whose MPs didn't want.. His manifesto has lots of goodies but surely people realise that they have to be paid for some way down the line. And hasn't nationalisation and it's like had its day? Why would people vote for this now when they declined it when it was offered the first time round? Then again I didn't understand the appeal of Brexit.
I will be voting Conservative but sadly I expect to see a Labour government this time next week.
I don't want an owl
Messina is supposed to have huge databases where he has 100s of parameters on masses of target swings voters. Literally how often you go for a shit type stuff. YouGov have similar stuff, but it has been shown to be horrendously flawed (Dave Gorman did a special on it and it was hilarious the kind of crap they had, Marxists love Ant, Fascists love Dec, but nobody can tell which is which).
Messina isn't looking at the population as a whole, he is looking at only target voters that could swing the election.
Or maybe it's just frustration that we don't get to see it!
I can barely remember the 70s, so will be nice to revisit my tender years
The only Marx that Corbyn ever resembled is a sort of less funny, less intelligent Groucho. However, for whatever cold comfort you can find in this, Rufus T Firefly became President and won his wholly unnecessary war after bankrupting the country.
Labour candidates havent seen swing. Pollsters are all tories
NEW THREAD
Although in Europe Fine Gael do sit with the centre right Christian Democrat parties