How about we just have a people's vote in which only Sky customers who self respond can participate?
Ah - that's not what this poll is, though.
" Sky Data interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1,466 Sky customers online 20-23 July 2018. Data are weighted to the profile of the population. Sky Data is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules."
We could get BT and Virgin media to do their own customer polls just to check that Sky customers are nationally representative. Not sure how you poll those who only use Freeview. Because it is a representative sample of Sky customers.
And then there will be the medicine shortages. We will run out of drugs and people will die. They’re literally saying this. The head of output at Channel 4 News says a No Deal Brexit threatens the supply of insulin from the EU to the UK. ‘What are the government going to do to prevent type-1 diabetics dying?’, he asks. Erm, make a deal with an insulin-producing European country? Or import insulin from the US or India? This is a minor practical matter transformed by vested-interest Remoaners into a terrifying tale of diabetic death. They are happy to panic diabetes sufferers, to lower the quality of life of people with diabetes right now by telling them they might die soon, in the name of wounding Brexit. Such reckless cynicism.
(Although I thought that the demands about insulin supply were made by Sir Michael Rawlins, chairman of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, not 'The head of output at Channel 4 News'.)
Brendan is right to be contemptuous. It was the Head of Output at C4 News who added the shitty Chicken Licken "we are all going to dieeee" slant.
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
It may have been expected, but anyone thinking there was a high degree of certainty was kidding themselves
True, but there were some black-swan (or at least greyish-swan) events which intervened, the most swan-like of which was the wholly unexpected, indeed almost inconceivable, victory of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, and the resultant lack of any significant Remain campaign from the left-of-centre.
Did you see the theory that Brexit is George Osborne's fault? We should probably wait for TSE but the outline is that when Osborne flatlined the economy, it disproportionately impacted pasty-eaters and the poor, thus driving them to vote Leave.
Can one of the PB experts tell me why it is that the idea of a People's Vote seems to be so attractive whilst the idea of another Referendum seems to be so unpopular?
Good afternoon, everyone.
It’s purely the language of the question. Talk of another referendum is unpopular because of the negative suggestion that it’s asking the same question again, whereas people’s vote or final say are more positive words that suggest the question is about something different to what we already voted on two years ago.
Thank you, much appreciated. I'd look at the question asked before concluding the one or the other, myself. Probably, if Remain was on the ballot, I'd conclude it was the same question again.
Anyway, presumably there isn't much leeway for Ms Sturgeon to re-run the Scottish Independence referendum under the People's Vote tag.
In the comments someone claims the original photo is on Flickr and dated 4th August 1993 by the photographer. It's certainly no earlier than the late-mid 80s because if you zoom in you can see the coaches are bearing Network SouthEast livery.
It may have been expected, but anyone thinking there was a high degree of certainty was kidding themselves
True, but there were some black-swan (or at least greyish-swan) events which intervened, the most swan-like of which was the wholly unexpected, indeed almost inconceivable, victory of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, and the resultant lack of any significant Remain campaign from the left-of-centre.
Did you see the theory that Brexit is George Osborne's fault? We should probably wait for TSE but the outline is that when Osborne flatlined the economy, it disproportionately impacted pasty-eaters and the poor, thus driving them to vote Leave.
You mean, they voted Leave because Osborne amazingly managed to rescue the public finances from impending disaster with almost no increase in unemployment?
This photo from the previous thread does not look like 1980. Hairstyles, clothes, cars and that video camera all say 1990s to me. ttps://twitter.com/N_Amberfield/status/1023242097611218949/photo/1
Ooh that’s well spotted, I guess that’s why we call you Mr Observer. Much more likely to be 1990 than 1980.
And when did we introduce the yellow no-parking cone ?
We don't have government by opinion poll in this country.
After Brexit has happened, Remainers can campaign to rejoin. Campaigning to subvert the result of the last referendum isn't cricket.
It will be fascinating to see where the Parties go once we are out. IF leaving the EU either turns out to be wholly positive or neutral, it will become the new "normal" and everyone will move on to a raft of other issues some of which have been sadly neglected since June 2016.
IF, however, there are problems or it is sub-optimal in terms of its impact on the living standards and day-to-day life of the British public, what then ? Will the Conservatives be the first to break ranks and argue for some sort of "renegotiated relationship" with the EU or will it be a post-Corbyn Labour party ?
Genuinely don't know how this will play out into the 2020s and beyond.
And then there will be the medicine shortages. We will run out of drugs and people will die. They’re literally saying this. The head of output at Channel 4 News says a No Deal Brexit threatens the supply of insulin from the EU to the UK. ‘What are the government going to do to prevent type-1 diabetics dying?’, he asks. Erm, make a deal with an insulin-producing European country? Or import insulin from the US or India? This is a minor practical matter transformed by vested-interest Remoaners into a terrifying tale of diabetic death. They are happy to panic diabetes sufferers, to lower the quality of life of people with diabetes right now by telling them they might die soon, in the name of wounding Brexit. Such reckless cynicism.
(Although I thought that the demands about insulin supply were made by Sir Michael Rawlins, chairman of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, not 'The head of output at Channel 4 News'.)
Brendan is right to be contemptuous. It was the Head of Output at C4 News who added the shitty Chicken Licken "we are all going to dieeee" slant.
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
Appalling behaviour.
More worryingly, there’s probably a lot of diabetics and their families who saw this yesterday and don’t realise it’s, errr, incorrect.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
We don't have government by opinion poll in this country.
After Brexit has happened, Remainers can campaign to rejoin. Campaigning to subvert the result of the last referendum isn't cricket.
It will be fascinating to see where the Parties go once we are out. IF leaving the EU either turns out to be wholly positive or neutral, it will become the new "normal" and everyone will move on to a raft of other issues some of which have been sadly neglected since June 2016.
IF, however, there are problems or it is sub-optimal in terms of its impact on the living standards and day-to-day life of the British public, what then ? Will the Conservatives be the first to break ranks and argue for some sort of "renegotiated relationship" with the EU or will it be a post-Corbyn Labour party ?
Genuinely don't know how this will play out into the 2020s and beyond.
I lost a post at the top of the thread arguing that we will be back in within a decade of leaving, unless there is an awesome deal out there that no-one's spotted heading our way. I've changed my mind on this in the past month. In 10 years the current 21-35 age group will be in positions of power, and they simply won't stand for the nonsense of Brexit. Any deal that generation are against is unsustainable, therefore it will not sustain. And I don't see anything that the Tories are doing that can sustain even a few years at the moment.
It may have been expected, but anyone thinking there was a high degree of certainty was kidding themselves
True, but there were some black-swan (or at least greyish-swan) events which intervened, the most swan-like of which was the wholly unexpected, indeed almost inconceivable, victory of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, and the resultant lack of any significant Remain campaign from the left-of-centre.
Did you see the theory that Brexit is George Osborne's fault? We should probably wait for TSE but the outline is that when Osborne flatlined the economy, it disproportionately impacted pasty-eaters and the poor, thus driving them to vote Leave.
You mean, they voted Leave because Osborne amazingly managed to rescue the public finances from impending disaster with almost no increase in unemployment?
Actually a very substantial fall in unemployment.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control and that clearly did increase hostility towards the government. As you pointed out in your earlier contribution the absence of Corbyn as a supporter of remain made it much more tempting to vote against the government if you had been struggling or were just generally anti-Tory.
Leave were able to persuade people that this long period of declining real incomes was a result of "unfair" competition from EU immigrants whilst in fact it was an inevitable consequence of Brown's complete incompetence. Another fail by the remain campaign, I'm afraid.
And then there will be the medicine shortages. We will run out of drugs and people will die. They’re literally saying this. The head of output at Channel 4 News says a No Deal Brexit threatens the supply of insulin from the EU to the UK. ‘What are the government going to do to prevent type-1 diabetics dying?’, he asks. Erm, make a deal with an insulin-producing European country? Or import insulin from the US or India? This is a minor practical matter transformed by vested-interest Remoaners into a terrifying tale of diabetic death. They are happy to panic diabetes sufferers, to lower the quality of life of people with diabetes right now by telling them they might die soon, in the name of wounding Brexit. Such reckless cynicism.
(Although I thought that the demands about insulin supply were made by Sir Michael Rawlins, chairman of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, not 'The head of output at Channel 4 News'.)
Brendan is right to be contemptuous. It was the Head of Output at C4 News who added the shitty Chicken Licken "we are all going to dieeee" slant.
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
Appalling behaviour.
More worryingly, there’s probably a lot of diabetics and their families who saw this yesterday and don’t realise it’s, errr, incorrect.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
Panic buying of an on-prescription medication presumably means buying it over the internet with no guarantee of quality.
The people who need to be considering stock-piling of on-prescription things are the NHS, pharmacies, etc, surely.
Leave were able to persuade people that this long period of declining real incomes was a result of "unfair" competition from EU immigrants whilst in fact it was an inevitable consequence of Brown's complete incompetence. Another fail by the remain campaign, I'm afraid.
Also a very significant fall in the quality of employment. A very large increase in in-work poverty. A sizable decrease in real terms incomes.
What political use is a decrease in unemployment if it made everyone more poor and more miserable?
The problem with Remaining is what happens the first time the EU suggest some form of additional integration, say an EU army, or EU wide taxes?
Generally the UK gets opt-outs for stuff it doesn't want to join. Seems like an EU army might be something the British want to be part of though, if NATO continues to fall apart and/or pivot away from Europe. Weirdly it's something you could see the UK joining even if they *leave*...
For all grandmothers, here's how to suck an egg. Polls often have all sorts of minor errors because they use only samples. The most reliable are those weighted to be as like the real population as possible, but to be truly realistic, you need an awful lot of data. That's why real elections don't always turn out as they should.
It could be within a few percent. I'd expect a combination of exasperation with the process and the ludicrous project fear (diabetics dying on the street and mass starvation) to detach a few. That's why the EU are taking their time and are keen to extend the time available.
I was amused to see Channel 4 give the food nonsense a good hearing. Then they brought on a 'neutral spokesman' to comment on it - one Bad Ally. Campbell. Cue frothing at the mouth.
I still doubt they'll gamble on another referendum - too risky with our current voters.
And then there will be the medicine shortages. We will run out of drugs and people will die. They’re literally saying this. The head of output at Channel 4 News says a No Deal Brexit threatens the supply of insulin from the EU to the UK. ‘What are the government going to do to prevent type-1 diabetics dying?’, he asks. Erm, make a deal with an insulin-producing European country? Or import insulin from the US or India? This is a minor practical matter transformed by vested-interest Remoaners into a terrifying tale of diabetic death. They are happy to panic diabetes sufferers, to lower the quality of life of people with diabetes right now by telling them they might die soon, in the name of wounding Brexit. Such reckless cynicism.
(Although I thought that the demands about insulin supply were made by Sir Michael Rawlins, chairman of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, not 'The head of output at Channel 4 News'.)
Brendan is right to be contemptuous. It was the Head of Output at C4 News who added the shitty Chicken Licken "we are all going to dieeee" slant.
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
Appalling behaviour.
More worryingly, there’s probably a lot of diabetics and their families who saw this yesterday and don’t realise it’s, errr, incorrect.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
I must agree; any effect are likely to be considerably less dramatic (though not nothing).
Leave were able to persuade people that this long period of declining real incomes was a result of "unfair" competition from EU immigrants whilst in fact it was an inevitable consequence of Brown's complete incompetence. Another fail by the remain campaign, I'm afraid.
Also a very significant fall in the quality of employment. A very large increase in in-work poverty. A sizable decrease in real terms incomes.
What political use is a decrease in unemployment if it made everyone more poor and more miserable?
That's why Osborne deserves no credit.
Osborne' economic policy, aided by Cameron's failures of judgment, led to Brexit.
Leave were able to persuade people that this long period of declining real incomes was a result of "unfair" competition from EU immigrants whilst in fact it was an inevitable consequence of Brown's complete incompetence. Another fail by the remain campaign, I'm afraid.
Also a very significant fall in the quality of employment. A very large increase in in-work poverty. A sizable decrease in real terms incomes.
What political use is a decrease in unemployment if it made everyone more poor and more miserable?
That's why Osborne deserves no credit.
I don't recognise that description. The creation of the best part of 2m low paid jobs of course reduced the overall average wage. That does not mean that those in well paid employment necessarily suffered reductions in earnings. There was some reductions in real terms in the public sector. It also meant far fewer children growing up in workless households which is a good thing.
The growth of employment is something greatly to Osborne's credit. He was able to achieve this because we have an extremely flexible and open system of employment where it is reasonably easy to dismiss people if things are not working out. We also have a fairly generous inwork benefits system which incentivises employment. This is also a good thing. Only Germany has managed to match our achievements in this respect since the GFC. Almost all of the rest of the EU are, rightly, quite jealous.
A couple of weeks ago I pondered if he'd feel tempted to move to UKIP and take over control of that party. I doubt he's going to become Conservative leader, and I really doubt he'll become PM. Yet he is ambitious, easily bored, and a bit of an egomaniac. Being leader of a party he can somewhat mould might be very tempting.
It probably won't happen, but I found it an intriguing thought.
My understanding is that he is rather pressed for income to support his outgoings, and if there is any truth in that then unless UKIP has a lucrative revenue stream attached I would not expect him to go for it.
He could try running as an MEP, that seems to be well funded
Alternatively, what well-paid avenues are open to him? That is where I would expect Boris to go...
The problem with Remaining is what happens the first time the EU suggest some form of additional integration, say an EU army, or EU wide taxes?
Generally the UK gets opt-outs for stuff it doesn't want to join. Seems like an EU army might be something the British want to be part of though, if NATO continues to fall apart and/or pivot away from Europe. Weirdly it's something you could see the UK joining even if they *leave*...
EU armed forces are inevitable and necessary. It's interesting that structures that of the type that used to be the exclusive preserve of NATO (joint French/German C130 squadron, Hot Blade helicopter exercise in Portugal) are now run through the European Defence Agency.
Brendan is right to be contemptuous. It was the Head of Output at C4 News who added the shitty Chicken Licken "we are all going to dieeee" slant.
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
Appalling behaviour.
More worryingly, there’s probably a lot of diabetics and their families who saw this yesterday and don’t realise it’s, errr, incorrect.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
Panic buying of an on-prescription medication presumably means buying it over the internet with no guarantee of quality.
The people who need to be considering stock-piling of on-prescription things are the NHS, pharmacies, etc, surely.
Indeed, it could lead to people stocking up on medicines from unapproved suppliers, that may be stored incorrectly and may have expiry dates - if they actually contain what it says on the packet.
The government are of course preparing for all scenarios, there are many civil servants across departments who spend their days planning for things they hope will never happen.
My concern is the number of Pro-EU journalists spreading panic about Brexit, and if it continues the government are going to have to find ways of dealing with it. A free press must also be a responsible press, those at the top of media organisations need to rein in their staff, especially when it comes to social media use.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Harry Carr who runs Sky Data is an experienced pollster having worked for the likes of Ipsos MORI.
The poll is weighted correctly.
The concern with Sky Data is that their panel is based solely from Sky customers, which gives them theoretically the largest polling panel out there.
Is a panel compromised of just Sky customers, even properly weighted, truly representative?
By definition, if it's properly weighted then yes, it's representative.
The problem is that if the profile of the panel is unrepresentative then the scale of weighting necessary might be such that the responses of some individuals become so disproportionately important that they alone can drive meaningful changes in the overall figures.
More worryingly, there’s probably a lot of diabetics and their families who saw this yesterday and don’t realise it’s, errr, incorrect.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
I know what you mean. It is almost as bad as (say) suggesting the whole of Turkey is going to move here and drain the Social Security system and set up Sharia Law for everyone.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
What I would say about Sky Data is that their findings are usually broadly in line with other pollsters.
I guess that, like other pollsters, Sky Data makes most of its money from non-political survey and market research work and it will do everything it can to ensure its sample is representative of the population as a whole and not just Sky customers.
F1: Renault and Red Bull continue to be best friends forever: ttps://twitter.com/autosport/status/1023899790134923264
Ted Kravitz on Sky yesterday said that RBR are still using an old version of the MGU-H (which is what failed for Max yesterday), there’s been a new updated one available since Monaco, which Renault and McLaren are both using but for some reason RBR - possibly related to packaging - don’t want it.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
I don't think it osbornomics that shifted the young to Labour in 2017 so much as Tuition fees and Brexitism. We are leaving the era of economics driven voting, in the direction of culture war.
Harry Carr who runs Sky Data is an experienced pollster having worked for the likes of Ipsos MORI.
The poll is weighted correctly.
The concern with Sky Data is that their panel is based solely from Sky customers, which gives them theoretically the largest polling panel out there.
Is a panel compromised of just Sky customers, even properly weighted, truly representative?
By definition, if it's properly weighted then yes, it's representative.
The problem is that if the profile of the panel is unrepresentative then the scale of weighting necessary might be such that the responses of some individuals become so disproportionately important that they alone can drive meaningful changes in the overall figures.
It could be quite interesting to see whether the views of people who (in this case) don't have television at all are politically similar one way or another.
That is such an irony. The more the government plan for a no deal the more Brexiteers cry project fear but this time it is coming from their own side.
The move is very much towards remain and this is likely to become the electorates default position.
I do not know if TM has engineered this or not or that she is willing to be perceived by Brexiteers as betrayal but it is becoming increasingly clear that somehow the politics will see us remain
I also do not know how we get there but if we do it could see Boris being elected PM and taking on the EU from a seat at the table, which may well be the best outcome in truth
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
Oh bless you for saying that 34 is young.
Within the context of house-buying, it is.
The 18-24 age bracket is not very significant in the overall result of any election unless it's very close (in which case, *everything* is significant). it accounts for less than 10% of votes cast.
We don't have government by opinion poll in this country.
After Brexit has happened, Remainers can campaign to rejoin. Campaigning to subvert the result of the last referendum isn't cricket.
All persuasive arguments, I'm sure....
As I said below, leavers seem (for now) now to be arguing against the majority of the electorate. It will be interesting to see how this develops.
As was pretty much every government bar possibly the first Blair government mid term. Mrs Thatcher would have been turfed out of office in 1981. People reacted differently post implementation of those policies whereas talk of impending doom and disaster before hand might have led to a complete change of direction.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
I don't think it osbornomics that shifted the young to Labour in 2017 so much as Tuition fees and Brexitism. We are leaving the era of economics driven voting, in the direction of culture war.
Yes, I'd say that exactly (apart from the fact that tuition fees was economics-driven voting in Spades).
We don't have government by opinion poll in this country.
After Brexit has happened, Remainers can campaign to rejoin. Campaigning to subvert the result of the last referendum isn't cricket.
It will be fascinating to see where the Parties go once we are out. IF leaving the EU either turns out to be wholly positive or neutral, it will become the new "normal" and everyone will move on to a raft of other issues some of which have been sadly neglected since June 2016.
IF, however, there are problems or it is sub-optimal in terms of its impact on the living standards and day-to-day life of the British public, what then ? Will the Conservatives be the first to break ranks and argue for some sort of "renegotiated relationship" with the EU or will it be a post-Corbyn Labour party ?
Genuinely don't know how this will play out into the 2020s and beyond.
I lost a post at the top of the thread arguing that we will be back in within a decade of leaving, unless there is an awesome deal out there that no-one's spotted heading our way. I've changed my mind on this in the past month. In 10 years the current 21-35 age group will be in positions of power, and they simply won't stand for the nonsense of Brexit. Any deal that generation are against is unsustainable, therefore it will not sustain. And I don't see anything that the Tories are doing that can sustain even a few years at the moment.
Once the egg has been broken it is not easy to stick it back together again. Similarly with Brexit.
We could easily find ourselves in the situation whereby we had inflicted masses of economic and diplomatic damage on ourselves by leaving the EU, but that rejoining would actually do even more damage rather than repair the damage already made.
This would be an example of hysteresis.
For example, I think that even if we revoked A50 tomorrow, we'd probably still see the Medical Regulation Authority leave the UK. That damage is now done. If we were to leave without a transition period or trade deal then I'd expect we would lose some automotive/Airbus manufacturing over the following 5-10 years. Once it's gone the companies involved are unlikely to go through the bother of moving it back were we to rejoin. The damage would be done.
I think Brexit would be for life, not just for Christmas.
Toby Young is incredibly stupid. Of course this has to be run with AV. About time we had a thread on AV to educate the slow learners.
His point seems to be even more convoluted than that:
"You can design any poll to yield the result you want. If it was Leave v two different versions of Remain, Leave would win by > 48%."
I have no idea what his logic for that is.
Ask voters in a poll if they want a second referendum on Brexit or a people's vote to approve the deal to leave the EU and see if you get the same result. The question and the framing of it affects the result.
Why do you think those previously backing a second referendum decided to call for a people's vote instead?
This is an interesting story, about a man who was acquitted of a rape allegation wants it to be removed from an enhanced criminal record check. It won't be: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45004290
Reminds me a bit of that actor who starred in what was to be a BBC Christmas production (one-off thing). He was accused of sex crimes, the accusations have since been withdrawn and there won't be any court case. However, he's also been removed from the drama, the part recast and aired over Easter.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Most of the country has not experienced 'stratospheric house price increases' since 2008.
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
Oh bless you for saying that 34 is young.
It is young really. The average voter in the UK is about 50.
You're correct. The point is that politicians assert things are facts when they want them to be true. Is that always a lie? Mr Granny talked of people 'romancing' - a nicer term.
On both those occasions, we don't know the actual truth; they were both guesses and guesses presented as facts. They are believed by people who want them to be true, or suspect they might be.
Put not your trust in princes (or princesses).
The referendum politics were a case in point. Lies (or romancing) on both sides.
Remain have a majority in the media (newspapers are far less important than they used to be). They will get their views across better but it doesn't mean they're gospel. I believe what I want to believe and I suspect you do too.
I voted Leave, my wife voted Remain. No problem, that's life.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control...
I do appreciate British understatement, but I believe it was the largest decline in living standards since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. You are, somewhat, downplaying its severity and potential impact on contemporary politics.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
I'm halfway through Newey's book and he made some interesting observations about the McLaren of 2011-13. He says they had a decent car in 2011 but then ripped it up to do something completely different in 2012. And in 2013 he says their car looked like they'd copied the front of the Ferrari and the rear of the RedBull (or something like that). They've been rubbish ever since.
Red Bull do seem to have more retirements than other Renault-powered cars.
Knowing the legacy of Newey, it'll mostly be down to the packaging IMO. He can be rather aggressive with his designs.
Yes the comments made sense in that context, that the new part would likely have needed something else of aerodynamic importance changed to make it fit. They’d rather have a fast but unreliable car, where they can blame the unreliability on a Swiss watchmaker Renault, than a slower but more reliable car.
I can't imagine many will want a referendum after we have Brexited...
No, they will just want a Government to sort out the chaos, even if that means signing up to Schengen and the Euro
Rubbish.
This country will never sign up to the Euro.
Shame. It's been wonderful for Germany, and it would offer similar benefits to our service exports. It would be nice not getting scammed by those arseholes at Travelex, too.
Whether you recognise it is irrelevant. The electorate as a whole clearly recognised that due to stagnating real wages, and stratospheric house price increases, everyone in the UK apart from the property-rich got substantially poorer.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
Pensioners got rises well above prices throughout the period, mortgage payments were falling and low and income tax allowances have almost doubled for low earners. Your analysis is somewhat partial.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
I'm halfway through Newey's book and he made some interesting observations about the McLaren of 2011-13. He says they had a decent car in 2011 but then ripped it up to do something completely different in 2012. And in 2013 he says their car looked like they'd copied the front of the Ferrari and the rear of the RedBull (or something like that). They've been rubbish ever since.
Newey’s book is brilliant, probably second only to Sid Watkins’ book on the F1 reading list.
What I would say about Sky Data is that their findings are usually broadly in line with other pollsters.
I guess that, like other pollsters, Sky Data makes most of its money from non-political survey and market research work and it will do everything it can to ensure its sample is representative of the population as a whole and not just Sky customers.
I am sure it will be representative . However, if it is only of sky customers, then it will be sensational. I would sky viewers on balance to be Leavers.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control...
I do appreciate British understatement, but I believe it was the largest decline in living standards since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. You are, somewhat, downplaying its severity and potential impact on contemporary politics.
Caused by a raft of factors. Minimum Wage exerts considerable downward force on employment anywhere in the bottom third of the jobs market. A real unintended consequence of levelling down. Austerity / Tuition fees / tax take increasing as mentioned in the thread Pressure on households budget Pay restraint / Utility prices / Tuition fees Sterling value / Balance of Payments / static low productivity
to mention a few influencers of pressure on household budgets.
How about we just have a people's vote in which only Sky customers who self respond can participate?
Ah - that's not what this poll is, though.
" Sky Data interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1,466 Sky customers online 20-23 July 2018. Data are weighted to the profile of the population. Sky Data is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules."
We could get BT and Virgin media to do their own customer polls just to check that Sky customers are nationally representative. Not sure how you poll those who only use Freeview. Because it is a representative sample of Sky customers.
A lot and I mean a lot of Working Class people use dodgy Sky boxes, Android boxes and Firesticks to avoid paying the scandalous subscriptions. So voodo poll is a good way to describe it.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
I'm halfway through Newey's book and he made some interesting observations about the McLaren of 2011-13. He says they had a decent car in 2011 but then ripped it up to do something completely different in 2012. And in 2013 he says their car looked like they'd copied the front of the Ferrari and the rear of the RedBull (or something like that). They've been rubbish ever since.
Newey’s book is brilliant, probably second only to Sid Watkins’ book on the F1 reading list.
I got the former for my brother at Christmas but haven;t read it myself. Is it that good ?
I have a copy of the latter signed by Sid himself.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
I'm halfway through Newey's book and he made some interesting observations about the McLaren of 2011-13. He says they had a decent car in 2011 but then ripped it up to do something completely different in 2012. And in 2013 he says their car looked like they'd copied the front of the Ferrari and the rear of the RedBull (or something like that). They've been rubbish ever since.
Newey’s book is brilliant, probably second only to Sid Watkins’ book on the F1 reading list.
I got the former for my brother at Christmas but haven;t read it myself. Is it that good ?
I have a copy of the latter signed by Sid himself.
You never mentioned that before
Newey’s book is one of very few with an insight into how modern F1 works. I imagine Ross Brawn’s book is also rather good but I haven’t read that yet.
The broader battleground has also opened up a gap between two common ways of thinking about the midterms. National polls and historical voting patterns suggest that Democrats are only slight favorites to take the House, while early polls of individual districts, special election results and the ratings of expert prognosticators suggest that Democrats are in a stronger position.
...
On paper, the Republicans still have a big geographic advantage: There are only nine Republican-held districts that voted more strongly for Democrats in the last two presidential elections than the rest of the country did. But that advantage doesn’t seem to be helping the Republicans as much as it has in past cycles, when congressional election results were increasingly correlated with presidential results.
Instead, Democrats appear highly competitive in many conservative districts. Already, there are polls showing Democrats ahead in Kentucky’s Sixth District, West Virginia’s Third, North Carolina’s Ninth, New York’s 22nd and Montana’s at-large district. Mr. Trump won each by at least 10 points.
Mr. 86, McLaren were very foolish. As Newey said, they had a very good car then made drastic changes needlessly (regulations were changing the next season so there was little advantage in a massive change for a one-off year).
I think the UK could conceivably sign up for *a* Euro, but not the current one.
The problem is the last Eurozone crisis was treated as a liquidity crisis when it was a solvency crisis. There has been no solution to the solvency crisis because none of the solutions were politically palatable to Merkel.
A Eurozone that took the solvency crisis seriously, would be one modelled very much along the lines that the Thatcher always wanted.
Mr. Jessop, that does sound about right. But having a tight package (ahem) is not worth it if your engine blows every three races. McLaren had a car winning races at the start, middle, and end of 2012, yet they were nowhere in the title race because it was too unreliable.
I'm halfway through Newey's book and he made some interesting observations about the McLaren of 2011-13. He says they had a decent car in 2011 but then ripped it up to do something completely different in 2012. And in 2013 he says their car looked like they'd copied the front of the Ferrari and the rear of the RedBull (or something like that). They've been rubbish ever since.
Newey’s book is brilliant, probably second only to Sid Watkins’ book on the F1 reading list.
I got the former for my brother at Christmas but haven;t read it myself. Is it that good ?
I have a copy of the latter signed by Sid himself.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control...
I do appreciate British understatement, but I believe it was the largest decline in living standards since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. You are, somewhat, downplaying its severity and potential impact on contemporary politics.
The problem with Remaining is what happens the first time the EU suggest some form of additional integration, say an EU army, or EU wide taxes?
Generally the UK gets opt-outs for stuff it doesn't want to join. Seems like an EU army might be something the British want to be part of though, if NATO continues to fall apart and/or pivot away from Europe. Weirdly it's something you could see the UK joining even if they *leave*...
I think the UK would be far more relaxed about it if we’d left, because we wouldn’t see it as an agency of a superstate, and even more so if the Americans withdraw/pullback from NATO.
But, I don’t expect this. More likely is that NATO develops into a global Western alliance, rather than just a transatlantic one.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control...
I do appreciate British understatement, but I believe it was the largest decline in living standards since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. You are, somewhat, downplaying its severity and potential impact on contemporary politics.
It should be said, as this question seems to have gone quiet, that the UK really ought to seek assurance that Remain is even a legal option - never mind one that has agreement among the EU27, before it can be an answer in a new referendum.
In practical terms, unless you got moving on a re-referendum very soon, you'd presumably need an extension just to get it done in time, so the consent of the EU27 is a necessary condition. This would also be a pragmatic concern for the hypothetical Remain side, because the Leave side would want to claim that the UK would have to submit to a punishment beating and a Euro membership as the price of remaining, so the Remain side would want (and get) a clear statement to the contrary.
On the idea that there would be no legal way for the UK to stay in the EU even if they, the Commission, the European Parliament and the EU27 all unanimously wanted them to, I think there's a good reason people aren't spending a lot of time discussing it.
Comments
As a Type I Diabetic I think he should be down the road with a size 11 bootprint on his arse.
He did not appear to even bother to Fact Check the claims before turning me into a bit of mud to sling at the Govt. The "what when Type I diabetics start dying" was just trolling / shitstirring - if he had checked with the insulin manufacturing companies he would know they have contingency plans.
But - as a senior figure at C4 News - he didn't bother to check. Why am I not surprised?
Appalling behaviour.
After Brexit has happened, Remainers can campaign to rejoin. Campaigning to subvert the result of the last referendum isn't cricket.
Harry Carr who runs Sky Data is an experienced pollster having worked for the likes of Ipsos MORI.
The poll is weighted correctly.
The concern with Sky Data is that their panel is based solely from Sky customers, which gives them theoretically the largest polling panel out there.
Is a panel compromised of just Sky customers, even properly weighted, truly representative?
Anyway, presumably there isn't much leeway for Ms Sturgeon to re-run the Scottish Independence referendum under the People's Vote tag.
http://www.class37info.co.uk/fleet.aspx?strnumber=37191
"You can design any poll to yield the result you want. If it was Leave v two different versions of Remain, Leave would win by > 48%."
I have no idea what his logic for that is.
IF, however, there are problems or it is sub-optimal in terms of its impact on the living standards and day-to-day life of the British public, what then ? Will the Conservatives be the first to break ranks and argue for some sort of "renegotiated relationship" with the EU or will it be a post-Corbyn Labour party ?
Genuinely don't know how this will play out into the 2020s and beyond.
Some of the media need to be extremely careful about what they’re doing here, there’s a real risk of their being responsible for at best panic buying and at worst civil disorder, if they keep up this blatant scaremongering.
As I said below, leavers seem (for now) now to be arguing against the majority of the electorate. It will be interesting to see how this develops.
It is of course true that living standards declined somewhat during the years when the deficit was brought under control and that clearly did increase hostility towards the government. As you pointed out in your earlier contribution the absence of Corbyn as a supporter of remain made it much more tempting to vote against the government if you had been struggling or were just generally anti-Tory.
Leave were able to persuade people that this long period of declining real incomes was a result of "unfair" competition from EU immigrants whilst in fact it was an inevitable consequence of Brown's complete incompetence. Another fail by the remain campaign, I'm afraid.
The people who need to be considering stock-piling of on-prescription things are the NHS, pharmacies, etc, surely.
What political use is a decrease in unemployment if it made everyone more poor and more miserable?
That's why Osborne deserves no credit.
For all grandmothers, here's how to suck an egg. Polls often have all sorts of minor errors because they use only samples. The most reliable are those weighted to be as like the real population as possible, but to be truly realistic, you need an awful lot of data. That's why real elections don't always turn out as they should.
It could be within a few percent. I'd expect a combination of exasperation with the process and the ludicrous project fear (diabetics dying on the street and mass starvation) to detach a few. That's why the EU are taking their time and are keen to extend the time available.
I was amused to see Channel 4 give the food nonsense a good hearing. Then they brought on a 'neutral spokesman' to comment on it - one Bad Ally. Campbell. Cue frothing at the mouth.
I still doubt they'll gamble on another referendum - too risky with our current voters.
I am old enough to remember the (completely unnecessary) sugar buying panic of the early 70s, and the sugar my mother stocked up - which lasted for the next year...
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/jul/09/archive-rationing-sugar-shortage-looms
The growth of employment is something greatly to Osborne's credit. He was able to achieve this because we have an extremely flexible and open system of employment where it is reasonably easy to dismiss people if things are not working out. We also have a fairly generous inwork benefits system which incentivises employment. This is also a good thing. Only Germany has managed to match our achievements in this respect since the GFC. Almost all of the rest of the EU are, rightly, quite jealous.
He could try running as an MEP, that seems to be well funded
Alternatively, what well-paid avenues are open to him? That is where I would expect Boris to go...
Opposition parties are criticising the government over the register, saying it is "a means to divide the people of the country"."
https://news.sky.com/story/assam-register-four-million-people-risk-losing-citizenship-in-india-11454095
The government are of course preparing for all scenarios, there are many civil servants across departments who spend their days planning for things they hope will never happen.
My concern is the number of Pro-EU journalists spreading panic about Brexit, and if it continues the government are going to have to find ways of dealing with it. A free press must also be a responsible press, those at the top of media organisations need to rein in their staff, especially when it comes to social media use.
Especially the young, who were particularly badly shafted by Osbornomics, with predictable consequences for Tory support amongst the young.
The problem is that if the profile of the panel is unrepresentative then the scale of weighting necessary might be such that the responses of some individuals become so disproportionately important that they alone can drive meaningful changes in the overall figures.
I mean, who would ever do such a thing?
The updated version … "Print any bollocks that brings in the readers, as long as it doesn't fall foul of the courts."
I can't imagine many will want a referendum after we have Brexited...
Your point about Tory support among the young is just plain wrong. 33% of 25-34 year-olds voted Con in 2015, after five years of Osbornomics - only 3% less than voted for Labour and largely in line with previous trends.
F1: Renault and Red Bull continue to be best friends forever:
https://twitter.com/autosport/status/1023899790134923264
"I mean, who would ever do such a thing?"
Probably the same people who said that very few people will come from Eastern Europe or Rumania? Didn't Keith Vaz meet the only one?
Beforehand is quite another matter.
The other was various LEAVE groups busy indulging their own version of Project Fear
https://www.theredroar.com/2018/07/corbyn-promotes-southwark-transformed-featuring-speaker-expelled-over-antisemitism-row/
The move is very much towards remain and this is likely to become the electorates default position.
I do not know if TM has engineered this or not or that she is willing to be perceived by Brexiteers as betrayal but it is becoming increasingly clear that somehow the politics will see us remain
I also do not know how we get there but if we do it could see Boris being elected PM and taking on the EU from a seat at the table, which may well be the best outcome in truth
Red Bull do seem to have more retirements than other Renault-powered cars.
The 18-24 age bracket is not very significant in the overall result of any election unless it's very close (in which case, *everything* is significant). it accounts for less than 10% of votes cast.
We could easily find ourselves in the situation whereby we had inflicted masses of economic and diplomatic damage on ourselves by leaving the EU, but that rejoining would actually do even more damage rather than repair the damage already made.
This would be an example of hysteresis.
For example, I think that even if we revoked A50 tomorrow, we'd probably still see the Medical Regulation Authority leave the UK. That damage is now done. If we were to leave without a transition period or trade deal then I'd expect we would lose some automotive/Airbus manufacturing over the following 5-10 years. Once it's gone the companies involved are unlikely to go through the bother of moving it back were we to rejoin. The damage would be done.
I think Brexit would be for life, not just for Christmas.
Why do you think those previously backing a second referendum decided to call for a people's vote instead?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45004290
Reminds me a bit of that actor who starred in what was to be a BBC Christmas production (one-off thing). He was accused of sex crimes, the accusations have since been withdrawn and there won't be any court case. However, he's also been removed from the drama, the part recast and aired over Easter.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/30/electoral-college-2020-trump-747648
You're correct. The point is that politicians assert things are facts when they want them to be true. Is that always a lie? Mr Granny talked of people 'romancing' - a nicer term.
On both those occasions, we don't know the actual truth; they were both guesses and guesses presented as facts. They are believed by people who want them to be true, or suspect they might be.
Put not your trust in princes (or princesses).
The referendum politics were a case in point. Lies (or romancing) on both sides.
Remain have a majority in the media (newspapers are far less important than they used to be). They will get their views across better but it doesn't mean they're gospel. I believe what I want to believe and I suspect you do too.
I voted Leave, my wife voted Remain. No problem, that's life.
"The average voter in the UK is about 50."
We should make that the minimum voting age. Young 'uns can be doolally too.
This country will never sign up to the Euro.
It will shortly not be necessary - as we'll have Brexited.
Minimum Wage exerts considerable downward force on employment anywhere in the bottom third of the jobs market. A real unintended consequence of levelling down.
Austerity / Tuition fees / tax take increasing as mentioned in the thread
Pressure on households budget Pay restraint / Utility prices / Tuition fees
Sterling value / Balance of Payments / static low productivity
to mention a few influencers of pressure on household budgets.
I have a copy of the latter signed by Sid himself.
Newey’s book is one of very few with an insight into how modern F1 works. I imagine Ross Brawn’s book is also rather good but I haven’t read that yet.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/upshot/99-days-till-midterm-elections-battleground.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
The problem is the last Eurozone crisis was treated as a liquidity crisis when it was a solvency crisis. There has been no solution to the solvency crisis because none of the solutions were politically palatable to Merkel.
A Eurozone that took the solvency crisis seriously, would be one modelled very much along the lines that the Thatcher always wanted.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2018/07/labour-mps-aren-t-worried-about-fates-frank-field-and-kate-hoey
But, I don’t expect this. More likely is that NATO develops into a global Western alliance, rather than just a transatlantic one.
On the idea that there would be no legal way for the UK to stay in the EU even if they, the Commission, the European Parliament and the EU27 all unanimously wanted them to, I think there's a good reason people aren't spending a lot of time discussing it.