Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The favourite to succeed TMay as CON leader, a Mr. Johnson, ge
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The favourite to succeed TMay as CON leader, a Mr. Johnson, gets his knuckles wrapped for a fake polling report
In January Mr. Johnson wrote in his Telegraph column that:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Unlike Boris
https://order-order.com/2019/04/12/remainer-academic-ipsos-boris/
I think this website has increasing gaps in its analysis since it became dominated by Remainers. Speaking to Conservative activists in the last few days, the mood is more one of rage than weariness. This delay has provoked a reaction among usually mild mannered Tories that I haven't seen since the Lisbon controversy. I don't think MPs have quite picked up on the extent of the anger yet but it will hit them shortly. Combined with a wipe out in the local elections and European elections, they will be in a state of shock and awe.
I actually think this is existential for the Tories if they don't get Brexit over the line. The only way that will happen is with a forced Deal vs No Deal choice. I think they need a new leader for that. Probably someone with more tactical intelligence than Boris.
Boris would not be the first politician to put his own gloss on the polling, nor will he be the last.
It would be accurate to say that if presented with a choice between No Deal and Revoke some polls show a very small majority preferring No Deal, But, it's certainly not the preferred choice of a majority.
As an aside, if you think the debate is toxic now, imagine if in such a referendum, the No Deal side won by 50.5% to 49.5%.
Both YouGov and Opinium have produced polls showing No Deal marginally ahead of Remain. Survation had Remain marginally ahead of No Deal.
But, those are the extreme options. Neither No Deal nor Remain command majority support in their own right.
"Opinium has repeatedly asked voters which of five possible options should be pursued if Parliament were to reject the current deal.
None of the options comes close to being backed by a majority.
The most popular every time - backed on average by just over a quarter - has been to leave without a deal at all."
9/1/19
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46735713
Good afternoon, everyone.
I'm not sure that your idea of holding a referendum but excluding what represents at least half of the population's preferred choice is going to fly, either as a matter of democracy or, more practically, by getting the numbers in Parliament.
I've mentioned before my confusion at a QT programme from Boston just before the referendum which seemed to show a strong Remain audience. I did wonder if I was in the wrong echo chamber when I went back to see the family.
My constituency in NW England, with only 58% Leave, is by comparison, a strong Remain area. But most of the strong Leave voters seem to be Labour. Obviously, the London people know better as always, but remember … there's over 30,000 Labour voters to only 6,000 Tory voters.
As much as I'd like comment pieces to contain somewhat traceable citations, this is not generally the way they're done.
But it doesn't mean that they should have assumed Boris was making it up. (Shows how little they trust him I guess!) I suppose he might not recall it upon being asked, or they might not have asked him, but the date of the piece would have been a big giveaway to the date of the poll. They can't reasonably have expected IPSOS to check for the existence of the polling themselves.
RFU to meet England's Billy Vunipola after he defended Australian's comments
https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/47909515
I point your attention to Dan Hodges blog published on 20th November, 2013
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100246867/a-year-ago-the-tories-were-bracing-for-a-heavy-defeat-now-theyre-going-for-the-win/
The piece contains alot of conjcture, opinion, sources - all good normal journalistic banter -
However the paragraph:
To underline the theory, he points to the poll of key seats, published by Lord Ashcroft, which gave Labour a 15 point lead. “We reran it in the seats we hold,” he said, “but included the name of the sitting MP. We were ahead by 2 per cent.”
Concerns me greatly.
I have some knowledge of how incumbency affects seats, and it does but not to 8%. Anyway Mr Hodges states it does.
As such since this 'reran' poll is now partially in the public domain it should now be fully disclosed as per the http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/objects.html 's rules.
There is of course another option that said poll simply does not exist in which case 1) of the editor's code of practice has been breached:
So I put it to you that either the poll must be published or else Mr Hodges has breached the PCC code.
Thank you for your time, and I trust you will deal with my complaint swiftly.
Regards,
That polling doesn't back up the assertions made by Boris Johnson.
“Of all the options suggested by pollsters – staying in the EU, coming out on Theresa May’ terms, or coming out on World Trade terms – it is the last, the so-called no-deal option, that is gaining in popularity. In spite of – or perhaps because of – everything they have been told, it is this future that is by some margin preferred by the British public.”
Any poll that didn't contain an explicit Remain/Revoke doesn't back the claims Boris made. That series of polls by Opinium didn't include an explicit Remain/Revoke option.
Opinium have an option of 'Leave with no deal', to a symmetrical question, they need a Remain/Revoke (without a further referendum) option.
That said, I agree the Tories are facing an existential crisis. Their Brexit obsessives are clearly going to vote for one of the Brexit parties, and their sensible remainers appear to be shopping around as well, judging from recent polls. Their core vote of people who just want competent economic management and a quiet life are probably looking on aghast at the chaos. And demotivated or defecting activists aren't going to be able to campaign positively or motivate supporters to turn out.
*dons flame-retardant anorak*
While your point is, I think, technically correct, and therefore the best kind of correct, it's fair to say parliamentary remain/revoke is largely seen as a fringe option - in practice "second ref with remain" largely represented "remain". If "remain" votes in the poll had been split between "parliament should do it" and "the people should do it" then this would artificially have inflated the lead "No deal" had over the remain-friendly options, which would likely have bolstered BoJo's case rather than harmed it.
Also bear in mind there will be no Brexit Party candidates in the locals and in my area there is one UKIP candidate standing in the entire borough.
I refer you to the comments made by West Midlands MEP Siôn Simon, when he stated that "Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906."
I am referring this matter to you on the basis that this statement was manifestly untrue. There was no such election, no "decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government".
Yours faithfully
TheWhiteRabbit
In total 191 MPs voted to revoke A50 if an extension wasn't granted, to avoid No Deal.
And the Mail will need a whole team of them.
2. Parliament votes for revoke on first reading.
3. PM announces a GE and gets EU extension to do it.
4. Wipe out of Remainers voting for revoke with no referendum.
5. New Leave dominated parliament allows Brexit to go through, with or without a deal.
6. Whatever the damage, next election is five years away.
In most constituencies the only revoke party would be chuk / lib dems while everyone else offers a variation on leave - so the revoke vote would have a simple choice while leave voters had multiple options.
Hence I suspect all revoke MPs would have a decent chance of retaining their seat.
Edit: 48%+ want to revoke?
And as for "forced Deal vs No Deal", very droll.
Oh and welcome.
I agree with your sentiments entirely. This is now very, very serious for the Tories.
This one does, at Table V202. It gives three choices No Deal, which has 44%, a delay to Brexit which has 14%, and Revoke A.50 which has 29%.
Might check and see if the Ladbrokes Exchange has the fastest qualifier market up.
It wouldn't matter what the parties are offering. The individual MPs exposed would have voted for Revoke. That is what would cover the literature.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/tale-of-two-unions/
What was the Percentage who voted to remain? Do you really expect that has dropped after the last 9 months - especially after May is forced to Accept EU elections and an October 31st departure date.
And remember the negotiations on the final deal with the EU haven’t even begun yet.
Three contingencies:
Ferrari double podium
Haas double top 6
Alfa Romeo double points
With Gasly being a bit poor so far, a single top 5 retirement might suffice for Haas to get their double top 6 finish. Alfa have been reliable so far and Giovinazzi was one place away from a point last time. Renault exploding again would be handy. It's obviously unlikely, but I do think the odds are too long. Only put down half a peanut, of course. And if it comes off I'll be bloody annoyed I didn't bet more. Yet also very pleased.
See her comments in November/December 2018 around the time of the ECJ case she brought on unilateral revocation.
So that new Tory leader would need to first fight and win a general election.
'Now that the inevitability of Brexit is a lot like virginity, once it is gone it is difficult to get back, so how will Brexit be deflowered? Let me introduce to you the concept of a confirmatory referendum with multiple options.'
Not sure but there are a few things off the top of my head:
1. A Brexiteer PM and Chancellor needed to lead the government as its daft having people implementing Brexit when they are just constantly depressed and think you're making a terrible mistake.
2. They should have disagreed with the EUs sequencing timetable at the outset.
3. Started with "No Deal" as the default position, planned accordingly and worked in to a trade deal from there.
4. All of the "double dealing" should have been canned. The government should have had a set position from the beginning rather than David Davis and DXEU doing one thing while May and Robbins were doing something else.
5. There should have been attempt to go cross party. Obviously you would have never got Jezza and Vince on board but attempts should have been made to bring on board people like Farage, Hoey and Gisela in some capacity. Approaches should have been made to Labour Remainers in Leave constituency's like Flint and Nandy to join the team in some capacity as well.
6. If your going to have a general election you'd better make sure you don't blow your majority at the end...
Just a few things off the top of my head.
I get the 'we shouldn't have a 2nd referendum until we have implemented the 1st' line but the fact is Parliament has not, and in all probability, will never pass the Deal as it stands while the EU has been consistent in saying it will not renegotiate the Deal.
It seems to me Leavers' best chance of achieving Brexit is now to get voters to approve the Deal.
It doesn't surprise me that activists of the I-can't-believe-it's-not-UKIP Party are enraged rather than weary but UKIP have never been a majority in the UK. Which is maybe a different issue facing the erstwhile* Conservative and Unionist Party in getting their way in parliament and general elections.
* The ascendency of "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" is another of David Cameron's failures. The modernisation programme is a distant memory.
Given various options, about 35% want to Revoke.
But I agree that the scenario is unlikely. The looming threat of this happening with a Revoke means MPs won't do it. The median MPs will either vote for a Deal or abstain and let No Deal happen.
This is why the Tories should get a new leader if they want the party to survive. They havent realised this yet. But they will after the local and European elections wipeout.
If party discipline breaks down any further, as it would likely have done in such a scenario, it isn't obvious to me that a majority would exist for any particular configuration or leader - agreeing to vote to revoke does not necessarily mean agreeing on what happens next. I wouldn't completely discount the possibility of, say, Hammond or Rudd or Tom Watson for PM... but am not confident anyone could pull in enough MPs elected on opposite-coloured rosettes to make this work.