Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Despite 34% voters thinking Jeremy Corbyn personally has anti-
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Despite 34% voters thinking Jeremy Corbyn personally has anti-Semitic views Boris Johnson’s approval ratings are near identical to Corbyn
if("undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper)window.datawrapper={};window.datawrapper["qfCJl"]={},window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].embedDeltas={"100":880,"200":643,"300":590,"400":564,"500":537,"700":511,"800":511,"900":511,"1000":511},window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-qfCJl"),window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].iframe.style.height=window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in a.data["datawrapper-height"])if("qfCJl"==b)window.datawrapper["qfCJl"].iframe.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px"});
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And I don’t think JC is anti-semitic, though he may well be critical of Israel.
(FPT) I prefer Capitalism to Socialism, but stories of greed like this sicken me:
The mother-of-two planned to buy the freehold, priced at £5,000, as soon as she had the money. But a year later the property developer sold it to an offshore investment company which repriced it at £50,000.
https://news.sky.com/story/rip-off-leasehold-reforms-dont-go-far-enough-say-campaigners-11322160
> On the contrary - I think it can be used generically to refer to people who through their actions, and idiocy, aid people hostile to their own interests.
I'm very much in favour of de-partisan-ing insults. It's why I think snowflake applies to both right and left. Ans useful idiot is a useful enough phrase to be restricted solely to one side of the spectrum or ties to marxism.
Which is not to say people don't use it in the manner you describe, but getting one's panties in a twist about it seems like an overreaction. Nor does some people overusing it mean it can never apply to anyone.
Politics evolves, political language evolves as well, you don't have to be stuck in a 1980s mindset and assume everyone else is, even if some clearly are.
Edit - and you are right, Boris's example clearly was in that context. But I think we can co-opt it to wider use.
Some might say Boris is in some ways a useful idiot.
These are individual homes, not blocks of flats. (They should never have been leasehold in the first place.)
I agree that we should not be in this position, however.
In the vast majority of cases, the leasehold was entirely unnecessary; in any event, the idea of a ground rent doubling every ten years was not appropriate. It was disproportionate to the costs (if any) it was designed to cover.
His Lordship appears to be channeling his inner Donald there!
Poor old Dr Vince!
I don't know how long this mood will last but it feels pretty much like it will be with me for the next few years.
Re Yougov I see May now leads 39/26 as best PM, and her rating is 41% to 31% for Corbyn.
That being said there really is no reason for them to go up at all save for the invention of the secure long-term income funding stream.
(I don't have to be logical.)
Fidesz 44%, Jobbik 21% MSZP 14% giving Orban 142 of 199 seats and a supermajority.
If I was to launch a new party (if I did, it probably wouldn't even get my vote), I'd ignore Brexit as much as possible and develop a platform of policies for a post-Brexit country.
It must be a constant struggle to get by on such an income.
I'm sure I could find a way to struggle by on that even after Hammond has
stolentaxed a large chunk of it.Agree completely that any political movement needs to develop policies for a post-Brexit world. I know this is an unpopular view but I think, like with the Russian situation, that everyone in politics now needs to come together and seek to take advantage of the opportunities of Brexit.
Anyone recognise this poster up today in Hungary????
Or something like that.
Another issue is that the people who are talking most about setting one up are people who are distinctly unfresh.
The Donald tweets:
Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price...
https://twitter.com/novaramedia/status/982979605974999040
We know what that will mean.
As has been pointed out on here many times - the blessed church of St. Jeremy will not broke any criticism or adverse comment concerning the anointed one. Pravda here we come...
And will be furious if the Blairites form a new party!
In any case according to yougov Hammond has a net approval rating of -44%, worse than Boris' -41%. Though Rees Mogg has a higher approval rating than both at -37%
https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/Philip_Hammond
https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/Boris_Johnson
https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/Jacob_Rees_Mogg
They aren't cited in their normal polling.
He's a right Dutch shunt (sic)
So we see why any new party is going to struggle to get off the ground.
On the one side, you have a substantial bloc of the electorate who think Jeremy Corbyn is evil incarnate and the Labour Party the most incompetent, unpleasant and frightening group the world has ever seen whose sole aim is to reduce the country and themselves to penury. The only way to prevent this nightmare is to stay resolutely with Theresa May and the Conservatives.
On the other hand, you have a substantial bloc of the electorate who regard Theresa May as the most uncaring, selfish and narrow-minded Prime Minister in the country's history. She surrounds herself with the likes of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg who are interested only in the plight of the wealthy. The sole aim of the Conservative Party is to reduce both themselves and their community to penury and make the bulk of the population little more than slaves. The only way to end this nightmare is to stay resolutely with Jeremy Corbyn and Labour.
For those of us who agree with either both propositions or neither it's a uniquely depressing prospect.
Sometime he’s going to cause a really big shunt.
justin124 said:
» show previous quotes
I don't bet but I do not recall your prediction of 21 SNP losses in 2017.
LOL, I offer a bet and the snowflake Tory hurls an insult. You cretinous cowardly half-witted dullard , go F**** yourself
https://twitter.com/EFCFansCorner_/status/982965725685043200
(Yes, in the second leg Herr Klopp would have rested the likes of Firmino, Salah, Ox, Trent A-A, and Robbo)
PS: I could not think of a bigger insult than Tory
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/983001044979453952
PS , you missed a * out , mine deliberately had 4, pay attention next time you have to try and help your buddy
That's no formula for any party, and it's a misdiagnosis anyway. It's just disliking being given only two choices, (or only one choice if you decide the other is unacceptable). This leads to either reluctant voting for something you don't really want, or weighing up two things you dislike to choose which one you least despise.
Unsurprisingly, this leads to people believing neither of those two choices actually represent them, and leads to disillusionment with politics and politicians and, occasionally, a call for an alternative. From about 1980 to 2010, the Lib Dems harnessed that discontent, but lost it when they accepted some real power.
People even go further and diagnose the political system, which promotes only two choices.
I think it's further than that. There are two views on democratic government: "adversarial" and "consensual", and those who hold either view often find the other completely foreign to their thinking.
"Adversarial" is majoritarian: run an election, whichever choice gets more votes than any other, "wins", and puts its views into practice untramelled by anyone else. Everyone who loses has to suck it up; they'll get another chance soon enough. As it's rare for any choice to get a proper majority (over 50% of votes), even with the polarisation you see in majoritarian electoral systems, most people feel unrepresented to a significant degree - even many of those who voted for "the winner", as they feel almost coerced into voting for a less-bad choice. Advocates say "what you see is what you get" and feel it's faster to react. And as party members tend to have the strongest ideological support for any party, they'll least like the idea of compromising.
"Consensual" is proportional: run an election, and build a government from compromise between the views in an attempt to represent the views of as many as possible. Doesn't always work that way, but does tend to end up with people feeling better represented. Advocates point out that people can vote more "honestly" for their own views, and governments represent more of the population and do so better. On the other hand, you acn argue that no-one gets exactly what they voted for (a counter to that is that the Government's supposed to represent everyone, not just those who voted for Party X).
You can get that wider choice in the latter forms of Government, and I think that wider choice is what's being wanted. It can't be provided by any one party, whether a new one, the Lib Dems, or the existing Big Two.
Without a different electoral system and the associated view becoming embedded, this will continue to happen, and we'll continue to get resentment and polarisation.
Why am I getting an advert for "Mature Women Who Always Say Yes" when I log in?
The adverts you see is based on what you've been looking searching for.
I think even if we had a proportional system we'd have a recognisable centre-right bloc and a recognisable centre-left bloc of parties. There would be smaller parties outside the blocs - some would join one bloc or another periodically and others would always sit beyond the two blocs.
The core task for any new party is, as you say, to define what it is, what it stands for. In doing so, it will automatically lose a swathe of the electorate who will simply not agree with it. The lazier commentators will try and pigeon hole it in terms of "left" and "right" but hopefully it will be beyond that and be its own thing. In the same way seeing everything through the prism of A50 and EU withdrawal doesn't help.
Trying to come up with solutions to the problems of the 2020s and beyond is a real challenge - we've scarcely got to grips with the big issues (housing, demographics) and bigger ones (Artificial Intelligence) are looming. The parties that invest time and effort in thinking now will reap the reward in the longer term.
Ostensibly, the centre and centre-left has failed to respond intellectually to the events of 2008 when a decade of cheap food, cheap fuel, cheap money and rising asset values came to a violent end on their watch. Was it their fault ? To a point, yes, but the economic battlefield was abandoned to the extremes be it austerity or reckless borrowing. Neither of these work, we all know that, but plotting a clear economic path in the future is and remains a huge series of questions.
Labour is in “a much more dangerous situation” than during the Militant Tendency insurgency of the 1980s because left-wing activists are “increasingly in control” he claimed."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-latest-danger-disintegration-roy-hattersley-warns-a8294721.html
They said six men were arrested over plans to carry out a "violent crime".'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43690192
"Housing Minister Dominic Raab told The Sunday Times that: “Based on the ONS data, the advice to me from the department is that in the last 25 years we have seen immigration put house prices up by something like 20%.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/tory-housing-minister-dominic-raab-warns-that-immigration-has-pushed-up-house-prices-n27b7lq8j
The phrase has been applied to other areas - during the troubles, there was a small group of MPs who would simply regurgitate the excuses published in An Phoblacht whenever the PIRA did something a bit OTT.