Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties are remarkably adept at adopting policy positions which seem almost designed to shore up the buoyant working class Tory/Brexit Party vote.
Latest YouGov Labour overall 30%. Labour C2DEs 31%. Tory + Brexit +UKIP C2DEs 46%.
I agree that many middle class Lefties are totally out of touch with life in a Northern town. But their hearts are in the right place.
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs or wealthy parts of city centres and towns rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
The Tories will certainly get a hard Brexiteer to succeed May even if she does manage to stay until December, however it would need that hard Brexiteer to get a majority in a general election for that hard Brexit given even if May gets her Deal through and then goes it will likely be with at least a Customs Union in the Political Declaration for the future relationship given the current hung parliament
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The estates are crime ridden thanks to the huge cuts in police numbers under your government.
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
Well Farage isn't personally popular, given his repeated failures to win Westminster elections, including that memorable occasion he finished third in a two horse race.
Make him Mr Anti-NHS man and say he'll flog the NHS to his mate Trump, put that on the side of a bus, and he'll lose, once again.
Farage is the only party leader other than May, Cameron and Blair to win most votes in a UKwide election in the last 15 years
Perhaps better to say he was the only non Tory or Labour leader to win a national election in over a century - albeit perhaps only 75 years depending on how you classify the 1931 national government.
He is very popular and very unpopular - but then few politicians who everyone liked ever achieved much or changed much.
Excellent news that Seth Moulton has entered the Democrat race to be the next POTUS. It's a crowded field but he's an excellent candidate and cream rises to the top. Place your bets, please.
Representative Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, a third-term congressman who has pushed for a “new generation of leadership” in Washington, declared his candidacy for president on Monday, becoming the 19th candidate to enter the Democratic primary field."
Anecdata from the weekend's canvassing - Brexit has faded a bit and people are actually starting to mention local issues (mostly housing cost). Still meeting pissed-off voters who won't vote because of Brexit (they don't usually say who they voted for before, but my instinct suggests usually Tory), but in sonewhat smaller numbers. My expectation at present - good LD results, fair Lab results, Tories weak but not disastrous.
At a personal level we've now rung every doorbell in my ward and are going round again to fill in gaps. A second canvass in one election is a luxury I never had as an MP!
Looks like Buttigieg is helping Sanders by eating into the Biden, Warren and Harris vote while leaving Sanders untouched and even slightly up and now on top in New Hampshire, the key first primary state
Well Farage isn't personally popular, given his repeated failures to win Westminster elections, including that memorable occasion he finished third in a two horse race.
Make him Mr Anti-NHS man and say he'll flog the NHS to his mate Trump, put that on the side of a bus, and he'll lose, once again.
I think there are many ways to censure Farage politically.
The NHS is one way. The fact he wants a No Deal Brexit is another. Yes, I realise that some want Brexit at any price but a No Deal Brexit means consequences. The problem for Farage opponents is not that Farage is popular in attracting 50% plus of the vote. It is that the Brexit supporting media are using him to try and influence Brexit or try and stop it slipping through their fingers as currently seems likely. I would try discrediting the media he relies on for support and their double standards in saying Corbyn is a risk to the country whilst blindly backing Farage for the European elections. Farage is a massive risk for the economy and therefore the country.
Looks like Buttigieg is helping Sanders by eating into the Biden, Warren and Harris vote while leaving Sanders untouched and even slightly up and now on top in New Hampshire, the key first primary state
I agree Sanders comes out well, although I am not sure the shift is necessarily directly Biden -> Buttegieg; rather I think it is Biden -> Undecided; Undecided - Buttegieg.
P.s. misread the graph slightly - changes now corrected.
To change the topic, I note that Prof Ronnie MacDonald (Scotland's most eminent macroeconomist) has said the Scottish Government could not practically keep the pound on a temporary basis after independence, as proposed by Nicola Sturgeon, as it would lack the currency reserves required immediately after separation to keep clearing the balance of payments. It would have no choice but to let its new currency float (downwards) on the international exchanges.
Can't help worrying that, the Tory party having committed suicide, its last act may be a No Deal Brexit.
It is precisely because May has not done a No Deal Brexit and we are still in the EU the Brexit Party is rising in the polls at the Tories expense, given the hung parliament as I said it likely takes a comforyable Tory majority at the next general election for No Deal
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians and ‘informed’ commentators don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
Of course the same folk seem to think the UK can somehow reverse climate change single handed with a few sit down protests and Mrs May ‘taking action’!
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The estates are crime ridden thanks to the huge cuts in police numbers under your government.
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
Cuts in police numbers were down to May and Osborne , neither of whom are right-wing populists. Police numbers are not the only reason for crime though tougher sentencing (not just rehabilitation) more stop and search etc is required too
Most small business owners do not want to be taxed out of existence, no
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
The Tories will certainly get a hard Brexiteer to succeed May even if she does manage to stay until December, however it would need that hard Brexiteer to get a majority in a general election for that hard Brexit given even if May gets her Deal through and then goes it will likely be with at least a Customs Union in the Political Declaration for the future relationship given the current hung parliament
So we will continue to have three Gammon parties. This may be of some value until Brexit is achieved, but what then? It won't matter too much if Farage and Ukip retreat to their caves, but what of the Conservative Party? Boris's populism could be widely popular, but it's hard to see any of the ERG types leading the Tories to electoral success.
Well Farage isn't personally popular, given his repeated failures to win Westminster elections, including that memorable occasion he finished third in a two horse race.
Make him Mr Anti-NHS man and say he'll flog the NHS to his mate Trump, put that on the side of a bus, and he'll lose, once again.
Farage is the only party leader other than May, Cameron and Blair to win most votes in a UKwide election in the last 15 years
Perhaps better to say he was the only non Tory or Labour leader to win a national election in over a century - albeit perhaps only 75 years depending on how you classify the 1931 national government.
He is very popular and very unpopular - but then few politicians who everyone liked ever achieved much or changed much.
May has become the living embodiment of the Brexit logjam. She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad and she refuses to pick the least worst, choosing largely to stare at the board and hoping it spontaneously changes to a more favourable position in front of her eyes. Meanwhile a highly unstable situation has found a narrow localised window of stability, like a coin balanced on its edge.
Until she leaves or is removed then I can't see how anything progresses.
A new Conservative leader may not necessarily do any better in trying to deliver Brexit but I would think the new dynamic would be enough to make the coin fall over one way or another.
Anecdata from the weekend's canvassing - Brexit has faded a bit and people are actually starting to mention local issues (mostly housing cost). Still meeting pissed-off voters who won't vote because of Brexit (they don't usually say who they voted for before, but my instinct suggests usually Tory), but in sonewhat smaller numbers. My expectation at present - good LD results, fair Lab results, Tories weak but not disastrous.
At a personal level we've now rung every doorbell in my ward and are going round again to fill in gaps. A second canvass in one election is a luxury I never had as an MP!
Sounds a pretty accurate assessment of the national picture and well done on your canvassing efforts
Looks like Buttigieg is helping Sanders by eating into the Biden, Warren and Harris vote while leaving Sanders untouched and even slightly up and now on top in New Hampshire, the key first primary state
I agree Sanders comes out well, although I am not sure the shift is necessarily directly Biden -> Buttegieg; rather I think it is Biden -> Undecided; Undecided - Buttegieg.
P.s. misread the graph slightly - changes now corrected.
It does look like some centrist non Sanders voters are moving to Buttigieg but the main effect is to give Sanders the lead
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
The Tories will certainly get a hard Brexiteer to succeed May even if she does manage to stay until December, however it would need that hard Brexiteer to get a majority in a general election for that hard Brexit given even if May gets her Deal through and then goes it will likely be with at least a Customs Union in the Political Declaration for the future relationship given the current hung parliament
So we will continue to have three Gammon parties. This may be of some value until Brexit is achieved, but what then? It won't matter too much if Farage and Ukip retreat to their caves, but what of the Conservative Party? Boris's populism could be widely popular, but it's hard to see any of the ERG types leading the Tories to electoral success.
If the Tories ignore their Leave voters though they face electoral oblivion, given 52% of the country voted Leave there are plenty of Gammons around.
I agree Boris is the Tories best bet rather than a Steve Baker or Mark Francois type
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The estates are crime ridden thanks to the huge cuts in police numbers under your government.
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
Cuts in police numbers were down to May and Osborne , neither of whom are right-wing populists. Police numbers are not the only reason for crime though tougher sentencing (not just rehabilitation) more stop and search etc is required too
Most small business owners do not want to be taxed out of existence, no
London has nearly twice as many police officers now as it did in 1939 when there were roughly the same number of residents. There was far less crime then and arguably far more poverty.
It clearly is more complex than the cuts in police numbers or poverty.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The estates are crime ridden thanks to the huge cuts in police numbers under your government.
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
Cuts in police numbers were down to May and Osborne , neither of whom are right-wing populists. Police numbers are not the only reason for crime though tougher sentencing (not just rehabilitation) more stop and search etc is required too
Most small business owners do not want to be taxed out of existence, no
London has nearly twice as many police officers now as it did in 1939 when there were roughly the same number of residents. There was far less crime then and arguably far more poverty.
It clearly is more complex than the cuts in police numbers or poverty.
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
Every right of centre party relies on fooling the working class to gain power. Be they conservatives, populists or Fascists.
Working class Tories vote against their self interest without realising it. In contrast middle class lefties do so deliberately.
Middle class lefties happily vote for open door immigration and more easily available plumbers and nannies etc more human rights laws for lawyers are in their own self interest and left-wing policies for schools while they send their own children private. If they employ a good accountant they can lessen their tax bill too, working class voters who vote for fight wing populists do so as they believe controlled immigration, a tough approach to crime and discipline in schools and a strong nation state are in their own best interests
The vast majority of middle-class people neither send their children to private schools nor employ accountants. A significant number are, however, happy to pay higher taxes to achieve a fairer, more equal society that is at ease with itself.
Most of them employ immigrant plumbers and electricians and live in leafy suburbs rather than crime ridden estates though.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
The estates are crime ridden thanks to the huge cuts in police numbers under your government.
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
Cuts in police numbers were down to May and Osborne , neither of whom are right-wing populists. Police numbers are not the only reason for crime though tougher sentencing (not just rehabilitation) more stop and search etc is required too
Most small business owners do not want to be taxed out of existence, no
London has nearly twice as many police officers now as it did in 1939 when there were roughly the same number of residents. There was far less crime then and arguably far more poverty.
It clearly is more complex than the cuts in police numbers or poverty.
May has become the living embodiment of the Brexit logjam. She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad and she refuses to pick the least worst, choosing largely to stare at the board and hoping it spontaneously changes to a more favourable position in front of her eyes. Meanwhile a highly unstable situation has found a narrow localised window of stability, like a coin balanced on its edge.
Until she leaves or is removed then I can't see how anything progresses.
A new Conservative leader may not necessarily do any better in trying to deliver Brexit but I would think the new dynamic would be enough to make the coin fall over one way or another.
"She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad" - zugzwang is the technical term.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
If we have No Deal Brexit plus Corbynism maybe, No Deal Brexit alone will make us a little poorer but if we have a tax cutting, deregulating government we can still attract business investment and counteract that
May has become the living embodiment of the Brexit logjam. She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad and she refuses to pick the least worst, choosing largely to stare at the board and hoping it spontaneously changes to a more favourable position in front of her eyes. Meanwhile a highly unstable situation has found a narrow localised window of stability, like a coin balanced on its edge.
Until she leaves or is removed then I can't see how anything progresses.
A new Conservative leader may not necessarily do any better in trying to deliver Brexit but I would think the new dynamic would be enough to make the coin fall over one way or another.
"She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad" - zugzwang is the technical term.
Ah, good word, new one to me. I like it. It also makes me think of Numberwang! Thanks.
I like the header Mike and I think it is an interesting point but there would be two reasons I wouldn't be sure a focus on the NHS would hit Farage and may indeed help him.
Firstly, I'm not sure the idea that the sacred cow of the NHS holds any more. Yes, people want free and decent healthcare but there is a growing realisation the NHS itself doesn't work well for many people, particularly if you are poor and can't articulate your concerns. There is a difference between the NHS as an institution and free and decent healthcare as a principle. One does not have to equate to the other.
Secondly, and more important, I think Farage will try and link reform of the Healthcare system - and of social welfare and housing - with the immigration issue to push support. There are enough people out there who believe that the current system, both in benefits and housing, is a soft touch for immigrants because, in the case of health, it is free at the point of use and, for housing, based on need. His argument would be that, by introducing an insurance system, we would going back to the founding principles of the welfare state.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
As it happens, the UK did break with economic orthodoxy in the 1930's, coming off the Gold standard and devaluing sterling, and imposing tariffs, and did very well.
May has become the living embodiment of the Brexit logjam. She is not stalemated but all of her potential moves are bad and she refuses to pick the least worst, choosing largely to stare at the board and hoping it spontaneously changes to a more favourable position in front of her eyes. Meanwhile a highly unstable situation has found a narrow localised window of stability, like a coin balanced on its edge.
Until she leaves or is removed then I can't see how anything progresses.
A new Conservative leader may not necessarily do any better in trying to deliver Brexit but I would think the new dynamic would be enough to make the coin fall over one way or another.
May and Robbins started out playing for a Remainer/Leave neutral stalemate.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
If we have No Deal Brexit plus Corbynism maybe, No Deal Brexit alone will make us a little poorer but if we have a tax cutting, deregulating government we can still attract business investment and counteract that
A No Deal Brexit will make us a lot poorer, there is no doubt about it. It seems like madness that those who support No Deal Brexit are confronted by economic projections and just say they don't believe them! They offer no credible counter narrative and the pro Brexit media just keep the Brexit supporters view reinforced with their jingoistic froth and inaccurate reporting of news. The media in this country has too much control of politics. In the 1930s the daily mail had a tight grasp of politics and now the Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, The Sun and Daily Express are leading this country to ruin...
Can't help worrying that, the Tory party having committed suicide, its last act may be a No Deal Brexit.
It is precisely because May has not done a No Deal Brexit and we are still in the EU the Brexit Party is rising in the polls at the Tories expense, given the hung parliament as I said it likely takes a comforyable Tory majority at the next general election for No Deal
No doubt you are right that if we had left with No Deal, the Brexit Party would not be rising in the polls!
But leaving with No Deal would equally have represented suicide for the Tories. Just with different beneficiaries.
When was the precise moment the Tories committed suicide? When they committed themselves to a referendum? When they lost the referendum? When they elected Theresa May?
"If you can look into the seeds of time, And say which grain will grow and which will not ..." Or even do it five years retrospectively ...
To change the topic, I note that Prof Ronnie MacDonald (Scotland's most eminent macroeconomist) has said the Scottish Government could not practically keep the pound on a temporary basis after independence, as proposed by Nicola Sturgeon, as it would lack the currency reserves required immediately after separation to keep clearing the balance of payments. It would have no choice but to let its new currency float (downwards) on the international exchanges.
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
Carl Benjamin, a social media activist who previously tweeted “I wouldn’t even rape you” to the Labour MP Jess Phillips, argued in a now-deleted YouTube video that feminism had caused male mental health to deteriorate, prompting more mass killings.
“This is what feminism has wrought – a generation of men who do not know what to do, who are being demonised for what they are,” said Benjamin, who uses the name Sargon of Akkad on social media.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
As it happens, the UK did break with economic orthodoxy in the 1930's, coming off the Gold standard and devaluing sterling, and imposing tariffs, and did very well.
Yes, the Jarrow march never existed and millions were never out of work. You have said the 1930s were a golden era before and you are fundamentally wrong. We did not suffer as badly as say the US as they had an agricultural problem as well as trade collapse. Remember the UK in the 1930s had the Empire to trade with. You are not comparing like with like. The 1930s were a period of unapparelled poverty and distress. It is one of the reasons Labour got in by a landslide in 1945. Some people did well in the 1930s but many did poorly. I should not confuse an economic recovery mid 1930s and the consequences of re-armament for economic success.
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
No one has done that as no sizeable nation in population terms has ever left the EU single market and customs union - but there is a first for everything! If of course no one ever tries no one will ever know the potential long term gains of doing so.
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
Bit of a straw man there - I’m not aware there is a serious argument about autarky which there was in the 30s
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
Carl Benjamin, a social media activist who previously tweeted “I wouldn’t even rape you” to the Labour MP Jess Phillips, argued in a now-deleted YouTube video that feminism had caused male mental health to deteriorate, prompting more mass killings.
“This is what feminism has wrought – a generation of men who do not know what to do, who are being demonised for what they are,” said Benjamin, who uses the name Sargon of Akkad on social media.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
I hadn't heard of Carl Benjamin, but I was aware of "Sargon of Akkad" as a byword for all manner of right-wing online bigotry. If he is really a UKIP candidate, I think blaming feminists for provoking mass murder is probably only the tip of the archived iceberg.
To change the topic, I note that Prof Ronnie MacDonald (Scotland's most eminent macroeconomist) has said the Scottish Government could not practically keep the pound on a temporary basis after independence, as proposed by Nicola Sturgeon, as it would lack the currency reserves required immediately after separation to keep clearing the balance of payments. It would have no choice but to let its new currency float (downwards) on the international exchanges.
There are countries that unilaterally use the Euro (Montenegro, Kosovo) or US Dollar (Ecuador, Panama, Zimbabwe). How do they do it and why wouldn't an independent Scotland be able to?
The way to defeat Farage on Brexit is to challenge him on Brexit. Pin him down on detail. Spell out the consequences.
You mean challenge the idea we could do what 180 plus nations do - live outside the EU’s orbit? And most of them aren’t G8 members,
How many of those 180 plus nations have left the single market and customs union and moved to WTO terms? And how many of them made it a success, can you even name half a dozen?
It has nothing to do with whether people "have faith in the UK to succeed or not". The fact is the UK currently has access to the biggest developed single market in the world. If you leave you no longer have those preferential terms.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
As it happens, the UK did break with economic orthodoxy in the 1930's, coming off the Gold standard and devaluing sterling, and imposing tariffs, and did very well.
Yes, the Jarrow march never existed and millions were never out of work. You have said the 1930s were a golden era before and you are fundamentally wrong. We did not suffer as badly as say the US as they had an agricultural problem as well as trade collapse. Remember the UK in the 1930s had the Empire to trade with. You are not comparing like with like. The 1930s were a period of unapparelled poverty and distress. It is one of the reasons Labour got in by a landslide in 1945. Some people did well in the 1930s but many did poorly. I should not confuse an economic recovery mid 1930s and the consequences of re-armament for economic success.
It does tend to be the 1930's slump that Americans remember, but here in Britain the economic hard times were mostly in the 1920s, and things improved rapidly after 1932. Indeed the next few years were an economic boom time in most of Britain, with British industry leading the world in the new industries of automotive, light engineering, radio etc, even before rearmament. Patchy, of course and mostly benefitting the newer cities, while the heavy industries, ship building and coal mines remained depressed.
Soon have those rootless cosmopolitans begging for mercy.
There's no real evidence that Labour are in a meltdown.
I've heard all this before. Never seems to happen and there's nothing about TIG to inspire thoughts to the contrary. All that is happening is that, for the moment, the right wing vote is splitting Tory - Brexit.
The left will hold up because they're far less vexed about Brexit anyway. The whole shebang was all about a tory civil war.
So my prediction is that Labour will handsomely win the local elections.
Some fecking idiot with a barbecue has caused devastation across moorland in the Pennines. Straight after an arsonist set fire to Ilkley Moor.
String these feckers up.
A left wing gammon - not an everyday sight. Moorland naturally recovers from burning, which is ecologically beneficial as it increases the supply of young heather shoots, which birds can eat, as against stiff old heather, which they can't.
Soon have those rootless cosmopolitans begging for mercy.
There's no real evidence that Labour are in a meltdown.
I've heard all this before. Never seems to happen and there's nothing about TIG to inspire thoughts to the contrary. All that is happening is that, for the moment, the right wing vote is splitting Tory - Brexit.
The left will hold up because they're far less vexed about Brexit anyway. The whole shebang was all about a tory civil war.
So my prediction is that Labour will handsomely win the local elections.
So do I. There are reasons it's not a certainty but it doesnt seen as impactful as many think it should be.
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
Carl Benjamin, a social media activist who previously tweeted “I wouldn’t even rape you” to the Labour MP Jess Phillips, argued in a now-deleted YouTube video that feminism had caused male mental health to deteriorate, prompting more mass killings.
“This is what feminism has wrought – a generation of men who do not know what to do, who are being demonised for what they are,” said Benjamin, who uses the name Sargon of Akkad on social media.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
Carl Benjamin, a social media activist who previously tweeted “I wouldn’t even rape you” to the Labour MP Jess Phillips, argued in a now-deleted YouTube video that feminism had caused male mental health to deteriorate, prompting more mass killings.
“This is what feminism has wrought – a generation of men who do not know what to do, who are being demonised for what they are,” said Benjamin, who uses the name Sargon of Akkad on social media.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Will it really matter? No one expects Farage* to have any policies other than Brexit 2: Die Harder.
*except Nige himself. 'On 12 April 2019, Farage said that there was "no difference between the Brexit party and Ukip in terms of policy"'
Did he really say that meaning our current UKIP? if so then it is just his ego and Battern's keeping us from a single united swivel eyed loon party.
The Farage party and the Conservativeshave the same problem over the NHS. To their younger, wealthier officer class it is a needlesss throwback and long overdue flogging off to the spivs. To their core voters, (the elderly and the C1 and C2 social conservatives) it is the one part of the welfare state that they rely and count on.
The challenge with the NHS is the focus on structure. I think most would agree there is a critical role for the state in financing health provision, and that free at the point of need has a lot of merit (although it’s not perfect).
It is frustrating though that it’s not possible to make any changes or improvements without being accused of trying to destroy the NHS. Surely we should all be motivated about looking for the best outcomes from whatever funds are available
+1
Ultimately what matters is providing quality healthcare that is free at point of use.
Whether that is provided by unicorns, the NHS, or some other system is entirely besides the point.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
Carl Benjamin, a social media activist who previously tweeted “I wouldn’t even rape you” to the Labour MP Jess Phillips, argued in a now-deleted YouTube video that feminism had caused male mental health to deteriorate, prompting more mass killings.
“This is what feminism has wrought – a generation of men who do not know what to do, who are being demonised for what they are,” said Benjamin, who uses the name Sargon of Akkad on social media.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
I'd also focus on the monster Farage created at UKIP.
This is positively incel.
A leading Ukip candidate for the European elections argued that feminism was responsible for a rise in the number of men carrying out mass murders, because the killers felt disenfranchised and “out of options”, it has emerged.
“Before your stupid social justice feminist bullshit, it didn’t happen on this scale. It’s crazy – this is a disease of the modern age,” Benjamin said in the 2014 video, recorded after the murder of six people in California that year by a 22-year-old man who said the killings were a response to women rejecting him sexually.
“You are responsible for perpetuating it, by disenfranchising these poor fucking guys who don’t have any options left,” Benjamin said.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
Surround yourself with good people, they say. Nigel Farage has consistently done the opposite. Draw the obvious conclusions.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
Or simpler still, regardless of Farage's discomfort or otherwise with racists, a party whose raison d'etre is nationalism will inevitably attract them.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
Surround yourself with good people, they say. Nigel Farage has consistently done the opposite. Draw the obvious conclusions.
Well you yourself said he got rid of the people who said the bad things instantly, so the obvious conclusion to draw is...
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
I think you can noticeably shift what people have in their heads at the ballot box more easily than you can sway them on any issue as strongly felt as Brexit.
We know for example simply asking questions about Brexit prior to voting intention moves respondents' views away from Con/Lab and towards TIG/Brexit/UKIP,
I don't see why you couldn't as a vote winning strategy. Indeed I think it is favourable to going on and on about Brexit, which has never had the effect of anything other than encouraging the outsider parties and Farage in particular.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
Surround yourself with good people, they say. Nigel Farage has consistently done the opposite. Draw the obvious conclusions.
Well you yourself said he got rid of the people who said the bad things instantly, so the obvious conclusion to draw is...
He has had to do it over and over again. I can’t imagine why he is just so extraordinarily unlucky.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
Right wing populists never have the interests of the working class at heart. They pretend to - often successfully - but it's a con. That is why they are always backed by and hang out with shadowy billionaires and seedy aristocrats.
So should I say it? Should I break the cardinal rule of sober internet discussion and make the comparison that must not speak its name?
Hang it, yes I will.
Farage is just like Piers Morgan.
They do when you consider most working class voters are more concerned about immigration, were more likely to vote Leave and want tougher action on crime than the middle class.
Which does rather beg the question: will the Conservatives reduce immigration? I assume they may (or may not) reduce the rate of increase, but they won't throw it into reverse.
The best way to reduce immigration is to trash the economy.
Therefore, if your primary concern is reducing immigration, you should probably vote for Jeremy Corbyn.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
Surround yourself with good people, they say. Nigel Farage has consistently done the opposite. Draw the obvious conclusions.
Well you yourself said he got rid of the people who said the bad things instantly, so the obvious conclusion to draw is...
He has had to do it over and over again. I can’t imagine why he is just so extraordinarily unlucky.
He'll be unlucky not to win the next National Election
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
The fact that Farage left UKIP because of the kind of people who you quote, and is openly critical of them himself, would make this approach backfire spectacularly. It would probably get his new party some more votes though.
He set up his new party and with a month had to get rid of both the chief executive and the treasurer because of, shall we call them unfortunate?, past utterances. He doesn’t seem to have left his past behind.
Alastair, I am sorry to say it, but you just divide everyone into who is on your side and who isn't, forgive the former anything, and criticise the latter for everything. You didn't used to be like this.
Don’t you think that is a bit extraordinary for month one of a shiny new party?
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
If he had been illegally drinking on a train and said he wanted to chop up David Cameron and put him in his freezer people would criticize him, Diane Abbott and George Osborne do so and it is cheered on. The debate is so stupid now with such outrageous double standards, people who think of themselves as open minded dividing everyone into Leavers and Remainers before they decide what is right and wrong, that it's quite pathetic. Others try it all the time but you should be above it
Surround yourself with good people, they say. Nigel Farage has consistently done the opposite. Draw the obvious conclusions.
Well you yourself said he got rid of the people who said the bad things instantly, so the obvious conclusion to draw is...
He has had to do it over and over again. I can’t imagine why he is just so extraordinarily unlucky.
I also don't recall the Leadership Election for the Brexit Party.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
If the House of Commons revoked Brexit before the next general election and May implements that and still leads the Tories I would not rule anything out, including Farage and the Brexit Party winning most seats or even a majority, voters who care about keeping the NHS as is rather than Brexit will vote Labour regardless anyway
Soon have those rootless cosmopolitans begging for mercy.
There's no real evidence that Labour are in a meltdown.
I've heard all this before. Never seems to happen and there's nothing about TIG to inspire thoughts to the contrary. All that is happening is that, for the moment, the right wing vote is splitting Tory - Brexit.
The left will hold up because they're far less vexed about Brexit anyway. The whole shebang was all about a tory civil war.
So my prediction is that Labour will handsomely win the local elections.
I predict the Tories will win the local elections in terms of seats given only the Shires are up, Scotland, Wales and London are not having local elections this year and as UKIP and the Brexit Party are only standing in less than 20% of wards. Labour might win the National Estimated Voteshare but that is a projection across the country of estimated voteshare not an actual tally of votes cast
I'm sure Farage could beat his previous attempts but I just can't see him coming near winning a majority in a general election. It would require him replacing the Conservatives and Labour seriously splitting in one election IMO. At best he would make a breakthrough and get seats into high double figures but I'm highly sceptical on that.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
That does assume rational behavior by voters and I’m starting to wonder if that is possible. I hope your right but as I said earlier whilst everybody is arguing which is worse, Corbyn or no deal the anything is possible
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything othercky seats in Parliament. They vote to are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
That does assume rational behavior by voters and I’m starting to wonder if that is possible. I hope your right but as I said earlier whilst everybody is arguing which is worse, Corbyn or no deal the anything is possible
It is no longer absurd to imagine a Tory Party, led perhaps by a Jeremy Hunt desperately trying to reconcile the unreconcilable, falling behind a Faragasm-led Brexit Party.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything othercky seats in Parliament. They vote to are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
Whilst I think it is good for stimulating discussion, I do think the header is kind of pointless as far as its basic premise is concerned. I don't honestly think that anything other than a very tiny fraction of voters vote for Farage's party (either UKIP in the past or the Brexit Party now) in the hope or expectation that he will be PM or even necessarily have more than a couple of lucky seats in Parliament. They vote to send a message about our relationship with the EU and also to punish the other parties for their arrogance. The only time when the votes are really meaningful is when it comes to the EU elections. At that point they are hoping to send as many disruptive MEPs as possible to Strasbourg. The message is effectively the same, only the target differs.
But what happens when they win “by accident”?
The only elections they are currently ever going to 'win' in the UK are the EU elections. Everyone knows that and if they ever looked like getting close to winning significant seats at Westminster then exactly the sorts of things that Mike is highlighting here would be at the forefront of any campaign against them. It simply isn't going to happen.
That does assume rational behavior by voters and I’m starting to wonder if that is possible. I hope your right but as I said earlier whilst everybody is arguing which is worse, Corbyn or no deal the anything is possible
It is no longer absurd to imagine a Tory Party, led perhaps by a Jeremy Hunt desperately trying to reconcile the unreconcilable, falling behind a Faragasm-led Brexit Party.
Say 25% Brexit; 24% Tories...
One seat and largest party in a coalition respectively?
I'm sure Farage could beat his previous attempts but I just can't see him coming near winning a majority in a general election. It would require him replacing the Conservatives and Labour seriously splitting in one election IMO. At best he would make a breakthrough and get seats into high double figures but I'm highly sceptical on that.
It also relies on over 30% of voters being fixated on leaving the EU above all else. I would put that cohort below 15%. There is then maybe 10% just as fixated on the remain side.
Everyone else will choose where to place their cross for other reasons.
Mike’s on the money there. I suggested to someone recently that Farage should join the SDP, and was told his views on the NHS were one of the main reasons they are incompatible.
Funnily enough, when my dad was in a NHS hospital in 2016, the staff I spoke to were in favour of privatisation, but said no party was bold enough to do it.
As Goodwin said the other day, one effect of the EU referendum has been to make UK more european, in the sense we now have a flourishing National Populist party.
Which is true, but I don't know how long it will last. May's version of the Conservative party is Christian Democrat, Farage is National Conservative, and Labour is turning itself into a Socialist party in the European sense, not the "provisional wing of the trade unions" that it was pre-Blair. However, I assume Gannon's cash-grab will eventually refocus the Cons to be proper Atlanticist Conservatives when/if Boris gets in, and eventually McDonnell will/may succeed Corbyn and return Labour to its roots. Happy to be contradicted on this.
In 1939 there were around 304,000 reported crime incidents in England and Wales. In 2017 there were 10.7 million according to the Home office.
Now I accept the definitions changed a bit, we didn’t have online crime then or as widespread drug use and maybe people didn’t report crimes as much back in 1939 but I expect that doesn’t account for the entire 30 fold plus rise.
I doubt the figures for London were that different relatively.
Of course if you can provide evidence crime levels are lower now than in 1939 be my guest.
It is no longer absurd to imagine a Tory Party, led perhaps by a Jeremy Hunt desperately trying to reconcile the unreconcilable, falling behind a Faragasm-led Brexit Party.
Say 25% Brexit; 24% Tories...
One seat and largest party in a coalition respectively?
To be fair on those sorts of numbers UNS would no longer work, because the remaining Tories are likely more geographically concentrated. By that point you've probably reached a tipping point where large numbers of constituencies, particularly coastals, fall to the cyan wave.
I'm sure Farage could beat his previous attempts but I just can't see him coming near winning a majority in a general election. It would require him replacing the Conservatives and Labour seriously splitting in one election IMO. At best he would make a breakthrough and get seats into high double figures but I'm highly sceptical on that.
People said the same about the SNP before the 2015 general election and look what happened then.
Remember a majority of Tory voters and a majority of Labour seats voted Leave, if the House of Commons then proceeded to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit Leave voters will be so disgusted with the political establishment they will try anything to register that disgust, including voting Brexit Party
Mike’s on the money there. I suggested to someone recently that Farage should join the SDP, and was told his views on the NHS were one of the main reasons they are incompatible.
Funnily enough, when my dad was in a NHS hospital in 2016, the staff I spoke to were in favour of privatisation, but said no party was bold enough to do it.
They would indeed like to be paid more money.
I suspect they were being polite. No NHS staff I know, or knew, liked the idea.
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
The Tories have appeased him at every opportunity. and he keeps coming back for more.
They should tell him and his gang to fuck off and see what happens.
The Tories have tried jolly hard to squish Nigel, but he just keeps coming back to make their lives a misery. Surely they've only got the one nuclear option left: sack Theresa and then mega-ultra-super-hard Brexit.
The Tories have appeased him at every opportunity. and he keeps coming back for more.
They should tell him and his gang to fuck off and see what happens.
I'm sure Farage could beat his previous attempts but I just can't see him coming near winning a majority in a general election. It would require him replacing the Conservatives and Labour seriously splitting in one election IMO. At best he would make a breakthrough and get seats into high double figures but I'm highly sceptical on that.
People said the same about the SNP before the 2015 general election and looked what happened then.
Remember a majority of Tory voters and a majority of Labour seats voted Leave, if the House of Commons then proceeded to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit Leave voters will be so disgusted with the political establishment they will try anything to register that disgust, including voting Brexit Party
If Farage could get everyone who voted for Brexit to vote for him in a general election then he could win. That won't happen though.
I'm sure Farage could beat his previous attempts but I just can't see him coming near winning a majority in a general election. It would require him replacing the Conservatives and Labour seriously splitting in one election IMO. At best he would make a breakthrough and get seats into high double figures but I'm highly sceptical on that.
People said the same about the SNP before the 2015 general election and looked what happened then.
Remember a majority of Tory voters and a majority of Labour seats voted Leave, if the House of Commons then proceeded to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit Leave voters will be so disgusted with the political establishment they will try anything to register that disgust, including voting Brexit Party
If Farage could get everyone who voted for Brexit to vote for him in a general election then he could win. That won't happen though.
It could if the House of Commons revoked Article 50, in fact just getting to 40% and around 80% of Leave voters voting Brexit Party could see Farage and the Brexit Party win a majority under FPTP
Comments
Edited extra bit: apologies, I must be off now.
Few of them are small business people either who are particularly affected by heavy tax rates
I guess you are inferring that most small business owners are money grabbing Tories.
He is very popular and very unpopular - but then few politicians who everyone liked ever achieved much or changed much.
Sander 30 (+4)
Biden 18 (-4)
Buttegeig 15 (+13)
Warren 5 (-5)
Harris 4 (-6)
The field.
At a personal level we've now rung every doorbell in my ward and are going round again to fill in gaps. A second canvass in one election is a luxury I never had as an MP!
The NHS is one way. The fact he wants a No Deal Brexit is another. Yes, I realise that some want Brexit at any price but a No Deal Brexit means consequences. The problem for Farage opponents is not that Farage is popular in attracting 50% plus of the vote. It is that the Brexit supporting media are using him to try and influence Brexit or try and stop it slipping through their fingers as currently seems likely. I would try discrediting the media he relies on for support and their double standards in saying Corbyn is a risk to the country whilst blindly backing Farage for the European elections. Farage is a massive risk for the economy and therefore the country.
P.s. misread the graph slightly - changes now corrected.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/04/21/independent-scotland-would-forced-dump-pound-day-one-floating/
I merely point out its perfectly practical to be outside both as 90 per cent of the world is. Even the other trade areas don’t require full freedoms of movement either.
It just comes back to whether you have faith in the UK to succeed or not. And these days far too many of our politicians and ‘informed’ commentators don’t as it might involve a bit more hard work.
Of course the same folk seem to think the UK can somehow reverse climate change single handed with a few sit down protests and Mrs May ‘taking action’!
Most small business owners do not want to be taxed out of existence, no
Until she leaves or is removed then I can't see how anything progresses.
A new Conservative leader may not necessarily do any better in trying to deliver Brexit but I would think the new dynamic would be enough to make the coin fall over one way or another.
I agree Boris is the Tories best bet rather than a Steve Baker or Mark Francois type
It clearly is more complex than the cuts in police numbers or poverty.
Countries tried economic nationalism in the 1930s and it did not work. I seriously think Brexiteers are stupidly naive in what they advocate and nothing better than deluded dreamers in tearing down a framework that has seen prosperity within the UK reach record levels. It may not be distributed fairly but that is not a trade policy but one of social justice.
The world does not owe an individual or a country a living. Unfortunately it looks like the UK is going to be the first country to show the rest of the world what happens when prosperity is taken for granted.
Pull the other one.
Firstly, I'm not sure the idea that the sacred cow of the NHS holds any more. Yes, people want free and decent healthcare but there is a growing realisation the NHS itself doesn't work well for many people, particularly if you are poor and can't articulate your concerns. There is a difference between the NHS as an institution and free and decent healthcare as a principle. One does not have to equate to the other.
Secondly, and more important, I think Farage will try and link reform of the Healthcare system - and of social welfare and housing - with the immigration issue to push support. There are enough people out there who believe that the current system, both in benefits and housing, is a soft touch for immigrants because, in the case of health, it is free at the point of use and, for housing, based on need. His argument would be that, by introducing an insurance system, we would going back to the founding principles of the welfare state.
Samsung Galaxy Fold launch officially delayed – no release date in sight
https://www.techradar.com/news/samsung-galaxy-fold-launch-delayed
Samsung has postponed the release of its folding smartphone, days after several early reviewers said the screens on their devices had broken.
The company said the Galaxy Fold had been delayed so it could "fully evaluate the feedback and run further internal tests".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48013395
It was never going to end well.
But leaving with No Deal would equally have represented suicide for the Tories. Just with different beneficiaries.
When was the precise moment the Tories committed suicide? When they committed themselves to a referendum? When they lost the referendum? When they elected Theresa May?
"If you can look into the seeds of time, And say which grain will grow and which will not ..." Or even do it five years retrospectively ...
Another A50 extension in October anyone?
https://twitter.com/paulembery/status/1120383628905799685?s=21
String these feckers up.
I've heard all this before. Never seems to happen and there's nothing about TIG to inspire thoughts to the contrary. All that is happening is that, for the moment, the right wing vote is splitting Tory - Brexit.
The left will hold up because they're far less vexed about Brexit anyway. The whole shebang was all about a tory civil war.
So my prediction is that Labour will handsomely win the local elections.
Ultimately what matters is providing quality healthcare that is free at point of use.
Whether that is provided by unicorns, the NHS, or some other system is entirely besides the point.
The simpler conclusion is that Nigel Farage is very comfortable around unhinged racists and homophobes. I won’t speculate why that might be.
We know for example simply asking questions about Brexit prior to voting intention moves respondents' views away from Con/Lab and towards TIG/Brexit/UKIP,
I don't see why you couldn't as a vote winning strategy. Indeed I think it is favourable to going on and on about Brexit, which has never had the effect of anything other than encouraging the outsider parties and Farage in particular.
Therefore, if your primary concern is reducing immigration, you should probably vote for Jeremy Corbyn.
Say 25% Brexit; 24% Tories...
Everyone else will choose where to place their cross for other reasons.
‘far less crime then"
Pull the other one.’
In 1939 there were around 304,000 reported crime incidents in England and Wales. In 2017 there were 10.7 million according to the Home office.
Now I accept the definitions changed a bit, we didn’t have online crime then or as widespread drug use and maybe people didn’t report crimes as much back in 1939 but I expect that doesn’t account for the entire 30 fold plus rise.
I doubt the figures for London were that different relatively.
Of course if you can provide evidence crime levels are lower now than in 1939 be my guest.
But yes, probably nowhere near enough to "win".
Remember a majority of Tory voters and a majority of Labour seats voted Leave, if the House of Commons then proceeded to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit Leave voters will be so disgusted with the political establishment they will try anything to register that disgust, including voting Brexit Party
They should tell him and his gang to fuck off and see what happens.