politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going back to your constituencies. Alastair Meeks on not takin

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going back to your constituencies. Alastair Meeks on not taking seat predictors too seriously in times of change

Obviously, you should not treat opinion polls very seriously at all, especially when no general election is on hand. Respondents are being asked an artificial question (there is no general election tomorrow) with no real-world consequences hanging on their answer. 

Read the full story here

RobD

Thanks for the header, Alastair.

DecrepitJohnL

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

JackW

Third like .... Er .... who knows !!!

StuartDickson

Complacency is the Conservative USP. It’s what they do. It’s their thing.

You cannot be a Tory without being complacent.

#RuthForFM

complacent
/kəmˈpleɪs(ə)nt/
adjective
showing smug or uncritical satisfaction with oneself or one's achievements.
synonyms: Smug, self-satisfied, pleased with oneself, proud of oneself, self-approving, self-congratulatory, self-admiring, self-regarding

StuartDickson

JackW said:

Third like .... Er .... who knows !!!

Nobody

..if ElectoralCalculus is to be believed. If you pump these new numbers into Baxter you end up with just SNP and LIb Dem MPs in Scotland. No other party wins a single seat.

JackW

StuartDickson said:

JackW said:

Third like .... Er .... who knows !!!

Nobody

..if ElectoralCalculus is to be believed. If you pump these new numbers into Baxter you end up with just SNP and LIb Dem MPs in Scotland. No other party wins a single seat.

Ha ha .... However I think CHUK Lite will probably not be third. Probably ....

Nigelb

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

No, it’s essentially the same question. To which no one right now has a clue as to the answer.

Alastair’s duck race in a whirlpool sums it up nicely. Whirlpools can persist for some time, or dissipate rapidly.

Nigelb

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

Sean_F

This is a good article. An election along these lines might even test John Curtice.

StuartDickson

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

Consider yourself lucky it was only three days. You’ve just described several decades of political coverage by BBC Scotland News: deferential cringing. Leading every report and getting continuous banner headlines. #LabConsRool

SquareRoot

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

like him or loathe him, Trump is news. At least he got it right about Sadiq Khan..

Nigelb

SquareRoot said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

like him or loathe him, Trump is news. At least he got it right about Sadiq Khan..

I didn’t argue he shouldn’t be reported. Just that the coverage is out of all proportion to the visit’s significance.
And two pillocks having a spat is not news.

SquareRoot

Nigelb said:

SquareRoot said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

like him or loathe him, Trump is news. At least he got it right about Sadiq Khan..

I didn’t argue he shouldn’t be reported. Just that the coverage is out of all proportion to the visit’s significance.
And two pillocks having a spat is not news.

In todays world it is news.. live with it. it isn't going to change, in fact the more petty it is, the more likely it is to be reported.

AlastairMeeks

I must thank @AndyJS for supplying me with the information about the Conservative constituency vote shares, as mentioned in this article.

SquareRoot

….and its taken Brexit off the headlines for a while.. thank God for that.

StuartDickson

Nigelb said:

Alastair’s duck race in a whirlpool sums it up nicely. Whirlpools can persist for some time, or dissipate rapidly.

Adamnán of Iona wrote of the Corryvreckan in the 7th century. Brexit more resembles a permanent geographical feature like the “Cauldron of the speckled seas” than a toddler’s passing bathtime preoccupation.

kjohnw

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

DecrepitJohnL

Nigelb said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

No, it’s essentially the same question. To which no one right now has a clue as to the answer.

Alastair’s duck race in a whirlpool sums it up nicely. Whirlpools can persist for some time, or dissipate rapidly.

It is a different question, is it not? One is, will voters treat the next election as normal or as Brexit-dominated; in other words, will they vote Lab/Con as normal or LD/TBP for or against Brexit? The other question, which the header addresses, is what will be the consequences for Westminster in the latter case?

RobinWiggs

Sean_F said:

This is a good article. An election along these lines might even test John Curtice.

Oh, I think he be safe sticking with the usual “It’s been a terrrrrible night for the Tories”.

Or is that the other one?

Foxy

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

not_on_fire

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

They’ve agreed a sale price now?

Casino_Royale

Good article.

Unsaid, but crucial: the candidates both Labour and the Conservatives choose for putative next Prime Minister.

When General Election Day is upon you, and pencils are sharpened, that’s often what most floating voters have in their minds when they cast their votes.

DecrepitJohnL

If the next election is seen as Brexit-dominated, this might hurt Labour less than the Conservatives because both of the Brexit-issue parties, LibDem and TBP, are seen as right wing -- TBP because of Farage, Widdecombe and Ukip, and the LibDems because they were in coalition with the blue team less than a decade before the next election, be it in 2022 or this coming October.

It will therefore be easier for Conservative supporters to jump ship on Brexit, whether for or against.

So though AW's OP takes issue with the seat predictions, they might get the right result even if for the wrong reasons. Labour to be the largest single party, although I'd go further and suggest a Labour majority might be on the cards.

dr_spyn

America's President who was a womanising war monger and serial drug abuser visits London was warmly greeted by The PM, press and people.

The fake news was that a clean cut, war hero with a beautiful wife was beyond reproach. JFK's mythology wiped out the difficult bitss.

StuartDickson

DecrepitJohnL said:

... will voters treat the next election as normal or as Brexit-dominated?

The next 20 general elections in England are going to be Brexit-dominated. Irrespective if you Revoke, Deal or No Deal. Nothing and no one can now hinder that. England has made her bed, and she must now lie in it. Fortunately the other members of the Union have a choice whether they want to share the distinctively unsatisfying position. We are not in the mood for bending over.

StuartDickson

dr_spyn said:

America's President who was a womanising war monger and serial drug abuser visits London was warmly greeted by the PM, press and people.

The fake news was that a clean cut, war hero with a beautiful wife was beyond reproach. JFK's mythology wiped out the difficult bits.

Indeed. Sucking up to unpleasant creeps is a bit of a BBC forté.

#RuthForFM

Foxy

DecrepitJohnL said:

If the next election is seen as Brexit-dominated, this might hurt Labour less than the Conservatives because both of the Brexit-issue parties, LibDem and TBP, are seen as right wing -- TBP because of Farage, Widdecombe and Ukip, and the LibDems because they were in coalition with the blue team less than a decade before the next election, be it in 2022 or this coming October.

It will therefore be easier for Conservative supporters to jump ship on Brexit, whether for or against.

So though AW's OP takes issue with the seat predictions, they might get the right result even if for the wrong reasons. Labour to be the largest single party, although I'd go further and suggest a Labour majority might be on the cards.

Except that is the Labour leadership line that is most out of line with membership feeling on Brexit.

That is why Labour did so badly in the Locals and Euros. It is very complacent of Labour to expect these voters to return. There are good alternatives to Lab in most parts of the country. Lab should hold about 150 seats in the inner cities even on a grossly reduced share, but is no where near the gains needed to form a majority government.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Boris' odds back down to 1.72 on Ladbrokes.

AlastairMeeks

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

StuartDickson

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Boris' odds back down to 1.72 on Ladbrokes.

Ruthie better get back on the blower.

DecrepitJohnL

StuartDickson said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

... will voters treat the next election as normal or as Brexit-dominated?

The next 20 general elections in England are going to be Brexit-dominated. Irrespective if you Revoke, Deal or No Deal. Nothing and no one can now hinder that. England has made her bed, and she must now lie in it. Fortunately the other members of the Union have a choice whether they want to share the distinctively unsatisfying position. We are not in the mood for bending over.

The effects of Brexit probably will dominate the next few elections, and not necessarily to the advantage of the Conservatives. If it does go pear-shaped, the Tories will have taken us out of the EU against its own advice. That is the crucial part: against its own advice. A government which gave us the Project Fear warnings will in the end have disregarded them in order to leave the EU. On the other hand, if JRM is right and we are hundreds of billions better off, then there will be a brief honeymoon then back to politics as normal.

What all that means for Scotland, I am not sure. It might well break from the UK and later rejoin the EU. But an independent Scotland, like an independent UK, will still trade mainly with its largest neighbour and will be a rule taker rather than a rule maker. Whether that will improve the lives of individual Scots, and by what mechanism, is less certain.

SouthamObserver

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

DecrepitJohnL

Foxy said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

If the next election is seen as Brexit-dominated, this might hurt Labour less than the Conservatives because both of the Brexit-issue parties, LibDem and TBP, are seen as right wing -- TBP because of Farage, Widdecombe and Ukip, and the LibDems because they were in coalition with the blue team less than a decade before the next election, be it in 2022 or this coming October.

It will therefore be easier for Conservative supporters to jump ship on Brexit, whether for or against.

So though AW's OP takes issue with the seat predictions, they might get the right result even if for the wrong reasons. Labour to be the largest single party, although I'd go further and suggest a Labour majority might be on the cards.

Except that is the Labour leadership line that is most out of line with membership feeling on Brexit.

That is why Labour did so badly in the Locals and Euros. It is very complacent of Labour to expect these voters to return. There are good alternatives to Lab in most parts of the country. Lab should hold about 150 seats in the inner cities even on a grossly reduced share, but is no where near the gains needed to form a majority government.

That is the point. There are not good alternatives to Labour. The LibDems and TBP are seen as right wing. There is also the point that in any case, Labour supporters tend to be less exercised by Brexit in the first place.

Now it might be that voters desert Labour over Jeremy Corbyn's plan to nationalise people's gardens or whatever else the papers make of what so far is only a report and not policy, but not, I think, over Brexit.

StuartDickson

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

Identifiers in order of popularity:

1. England/Scotland/Wales
2. Great Britain
3. your local area
4. Europe
5. your nearest city
6. the western world
7. the global community
8. the Commonwealth (ouch!)

Perhaps the sun really did set on the British Empire? We must have been preoccupied with something else and didn’t even notice. Ta Dave.

JosiasJessop

dr_spyn said:

America's President who was a womanising war monger and serial drug abuser visits London was warmly greeted by The PM, press and people.

The fake news was that a clean cut, war hero with a beautiful wife was beyond reproach. JFK's mythology wiped out the difficult bitss.

JFK's electioneering also got us damned near to nuclear oblivion. He was an incredibly poor president.

Foxy

DecrepitJohnL said:

Foxy said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

If the next election is seen as Brexit-dominated, this might hurt Labour less than the Conservatives because both of the Brexit-issue parties, LibDem and TBP, are seen as right wing -- TBP because of Farage, Widdecombe and Ukip, and the LibDems because they were in coalition with the blue team less than a decade before the next election, be it in 2022 or this coming October.

It will therefore be easier for Conservative supporters to jump ship on Brexit, whether for or against.

So though AW's OP takes issue with the seat predictions, they might get the right result even if for the wrong reasons. Labour to be the largest single party, although I'd go further and suggest a Labour majority might be on the cards.

Except that is the Labour leadership line that is most out of line with membership feeling on Brexit.

That is why Labour did so badly in the Locals and Euros. It is very complacent of Labour to expect these voters to return. There are good alternatives to Lab in most parts of the country. Lab should hold about 150 seats in the inner cities even on a grossly reduced share, but is no where near the gains needed to form a majority government.

That is the point. There are not good alternatives to Labour. The LibDems and TBP are seen as right wing. There is also the point that in any case, Labour supporters tend to be less exercised by Brexit in the first place.

Now it might be that voters desert Labour over Jeremy Corbyn's plan to nationalise people's gardens or whatever else the papers make of what so far is only a report and not policy, but not, I think, over Brexit.

We clearly interpret the massive swing of Labour voters to Lib Dems, Greens and even CHUK in the Euros differently! It is also a swing that we saw in the Locals and see now in GE polling.

YBarddCwsc

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

The Brexit Party also have to find 650 Parliamentary candidates who can appear normal and not say something obviously stupid, incendiary, racist or misogynistic during the course of an electoral campaign.

I am not too worried about the Brexit Party gaining many seats.

SouthamObserver

I have just turned 55 and I think Boris Johnson will be the last Tory PM of my lifetime. I also think I’ll die a citizen of England, not of the UK. But the good news is that I think our trading relationship with the Faeroe Islands will be better than it has been since the 12th century.

Foxy

That IpsosMori has some other interesting results:

https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1135847762065596417?s=19

https://twitter.com/IpsosMORI/status/1135848910772195329?s=19

FF43

I wouldn't assume the Conservatives will be damaged as much as they deserve to be for the Brexit disaster. Iceland is an example here. The Independent Party were almost entirely responsible for the banking crisis and economic crash. They briefly allowed the Socialists to take the blame for sorting out the mess and came back reascendant.

franklyn

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

FF43

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

The interesting finding in that survey is that Remainers DON'T associate more with the Western and global worlds. The EU is both a globalist and a protectionist construct. It looks like Remainers are more attracted by the protectionist element.

SouthamObserver

Foxy said:

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

malcolmg

StuartDickson said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

Consider yourself lucky it was only three days. You’ve just described several decades of political coverage by BBC Scotland News: deferential cringing. Leading every report and getting continuous banner headlines. #LabConsRool

Exactly , we live it every day with the EBC regional sockpuppet team.

Theuniondivvie

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

The fawning will certainly aid Trump's delusion of his own family becoming American royalty.

It's just the sort of propagandist puffery one would expect from a state broadcaster. Of course the BBC isn't a state broadcaster, or so I'm constantly informed.

logical_song

YBarddCwsc said:

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

The Brexit Party also have to find 650 Parliamentary candidates who can appear normal and not say something obviously stupid, incendiary, racist or misogynistic during the course of an electoral campaign.

I am not too worried about the Brexit Party gaining many seats.

True, but they will also have to not said "something obviously stupid, incendiary, racist or misogynistic" at any time on their social media accounts. Which is much more difficult.

malcolmg

StuartDickson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Boris' odds back down to 1.72 on Ladbrokes.

Ruthie better get back on the blower.

A complete about turn speech re Boris being great and her best pal will have been written weeks ago, we got phase one recently.

malcolmg

Shows the calibre of our Imperial Masters.......... this bozo wants to be PM

Here is Sajid Javid's newly-launched leadership website: https://www.teamsaj.com/

And here is its privacy policy, which appears to have been copied straight from Raab's: All processing is carried out either by consent or either under the legitimate interest of Dominic Raab MP"

IanB2

(1/2) The fundamental issue arising from the lead is how” the UNS model worked in the first place. It was developed (or observed) at a time of two-party contests between a government and an opposition, with swings from former to latter.

Say the government was elected with 45% vote share to the opposition party’s 40%, but is now unpopular and comes out of the election with 40% as the opposition takes power with 45% (the other 15% being various ‘others’ not in contention in most seats). And imagine three seats, Brokerland where the government last time won with 63% to the opposition’s 25%, opposition-held Minetown with 27% to 58%, and marginal Suburbville won by the government with 45% to 43%.

The government is unpopular and nationally one in nine of its supporters have either switched to vote for the opposition, or stayed at home (or backed a minor party) and been replaced by a motivated opposition voter who abstained before.

The question is why - instead of one in nine deserting across the country, such that the outgoing government polls 56% in Brokerland, 40% in Suburbville, and 24% in Minetown - the actual result is better for the government in its stronghold at 58% and worse in the opposition stronghold dropping right down to 22%.

It can’t be the campaigning, because both parties throw everything into Suburbville, cancelling each other out, with the voters of Brokerland and Minetown untroubled by calls at the door.

...

IanB2

(2/2) AIR the research from the 50s-70s posited two theories. What I would call the “neighbour” theory suggested that, in Minetown, government supporters are in a minority and, as they go about their daily business, are forever meeting people moaning about the government (most of whom didn’t vote for it in the first place). Whereas in Brokerland government voters still mostly encounter its loyalists. Similarly, in Brokerland voters rarely meet enthusiastic supporters of the opposition party, whereas in Minetown they are all around. The combined effect of these interactions is to magnify discontent with the government in areas where it is weak, and suppress it in areas of strength.

The second theory is of vested interest. Having been elected from seats like Brokerville, the government has looked after its supporters, but its policies have impacted less favourably on the citizens of Minetown. Thus when it comes to the election a greater proportion of government supporters in Minetown are unhappy.

This is all very credible - but the key point is that this logic applies solely to dissatisfaction with a sitting government. It also rests upon a generalised national discontent with a government, rather than unhappiness with one particular policy whose opponents are not evenly distributed (other than the vested interest dimension).

The model has no relevance to levels of support for a third party (other than in picking up former government voters), or voters switching between one third party and another, or between the opposition and third parties. Indeed when it comes to third parties, the entirely reasonable theory that people are influenced by the views of those around them directs towards the opposite of a UNS - that a third party surge should be magnified in its areas of existing strength. Which is of course what we generally see, both up and down (the LibDem collapse of 2015 was focused on its stronger seats; a UNS model would have required negative vote shares in some seats).

All of the above suggests that a UNS model should have almost no relevance to the current political situation. We use it because it’s easy and lazy and enables vote-seat predictions to be made without hugely complex models full of questionable assumptions.

But I haven’t, for quite some time, seen any research into whether the swings we have seen in 21st century elections are best reflected or even accurately modelled using UNS. Perhaps there’s a PHD for someone waiting here?

WhisperingOracle

Theuniondivvie said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

The fawning will certainly aid Trump's delusion of his own family becoming American royalty.

It's just the sort of propagandist puffery one would expect from a state broadcaster. Of course the BBC isn't a state broadcaster, or so I'm constantly informed.

It's because the Royals are involved. The BBC is at is most paranoid of being accused of disloyalty and not discharging its remit properly by the persistent rightwing press whenever they are.

Cyclefree

SouthamObserver said:

Foxy said:

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

We will be in a weaker position anyway. If we were to leave the EU with a WA and then get an FTA with them, there would be some goodwill: a country makes a decision and goes about implementing it in a grown up way and countries would know the terms of our trade with our nearest neighbour.

But leaving with no deal puts us in a very weak position vis a vis the EU and with all other states. There will be a desperation to get deals just to show that something has come out of Brexit. Far from being independent and sovereign we will be cringing and desperate and taken advantage of. It will be pathetic and humiliating.

But apparently a No Deal exit is what the people voted for.

Foxy

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to look forward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

RochdalePioneers

Yesterday was instructive for anyone wanting to see how the Labour Party evolves from here.

According to the cancer-supporting members yesterday was a triumph. Rather than bend his life-long and always flawless principles by attending the state visit as invited, Jezbollah instead boycotted it and gave a foaming at the mouth rant to the protest crowd. Instead of commemorating our shared sacrifice in blood he chose to shat on it from the stage.

And in doing so the Corbynites cheered him on - its FANTASTIC that instead of acting like a Prime Minister in waiting he acted like a sad old man howling at the moon in self-righteous petulance. Its PERFECT that he stood up to the neo-liberal and boycotted. Once Corbyn leads Labour to the inevitable 704 seat majority in the next general election, all Corbyn has to do is address the protest rally outside 1,600 Pennsylvania Avenue he chose to organise rather than meet the President inside - address the rally and the neolibs will FALL.

A Wazzock leading the party. Wazzocks inside the party cheering on the cretinous stupidity of turning 119 years of socialist struggle for power into a Socialist Worker protest.

I for one cannot wait for the divorce to happen.

kinabalu

JosiasJessop said:

JFK's electioneering also got us damned near to nuclear oblivion. He was an incredibly poor president.

And followed by the greatest.

LBJ was such an operator that he could even have got the Withdrawal Agreement through Parliament - possibly.

WhisperingOracle

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to lokkforward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

The over-memorialising will continue, I fear, because the second world war has become modern Britain's creation myth, and the backdrop of both its positive and negative expressions of nationalism, from the concept of a lone democratic stand against fascism to Brexit. As long as the last veterans are standing it is also still justified to me, and when they are gone it will not be.

IanB2

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to look forward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

Some sympathy with your argument - but I suspect we wont be clear of it until the centenary anniversaries of WWII are passed. At that point the memory of wars that affected and engaged the whole country will have passed away.

DavidL

I agree with Alastair's head piece that there are break points at which models really fail. The most extreme example in this country was Scottish Labour in 2015 when a previously dominant party collapsed and was left with a single seat. SLAB had some of the most venal, stupid and incompetent MPs in the Commons as well as some of the best. It did not matter a whit. All bar 1 were swept away. Something similar happened in Canada in 1993 where a majority party was reduced to 2 seats.

Are one of the big 2 going to face something equally apocalyptic at the next election? They are both doing the best. The Tories are wearing out the self destruct button and Corbyn is surely now close to the end game having irritated so many supporters.

Some have complained that the Tory candidates have focused too much on Brexit but it is entirely justified. If the new leader cannot find a path to resolve it TBP could very well replace the Tories.

Labour's task is easier, just get a new and more competent leader. Emily Thornberry struggled to explain yesterday why abusing the elected leader of our closest and most important ally was in the national interest or even remotely sensible for someone who might be FS in weeks. But there is no doubt that she would be a far more formidable opponent than Corbyn.

Cyclefree

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to lokkforward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

It is always important to remember. While I agree there is no need for over the top sentimentality and endless ceremonies, which can detract, I do think it matters that we should be conscious of our good fortune and what it took to make and preserve it. My mother knew bombing and hunger and fear and separation from family; her grand-daughter at the same age had a vastly more peaceful upbringing. That is worth - quietly - celebrating, not forgetting.

Looking forward is best done from a solid foundation, part of which is properly understanding our past. Complacency is never an attractive characteristic, even in a society.

Nigelb

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

The interesting finding in that survey is that Remainers DON'T associate more with the Western and global worlds. The EU is both a globalist and a protectionist construct. It looks like Remainers are more attracted by the protectionist element.

A strange conclusion - particularly as leave voters associate less with ALL of those categories...

Streeter

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

FFS. How long will this country persist in looking back to faded glory?

Recidivist

I've just seen a tweet that says the bookies have stopped taking bets on the Peterborough by election?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

I agree with Alastair's head piece that there are break points at which models really fail. The most extreme example in this country was Scottish Labour in 2015 when a previously dominant party collapsed and was left with a single seat. SLAB had some of the most venal, stupid and incompetent MPs in the Commons as well as some of the best. It did not matter a whit. All bar 1 were swept away. Something similar happened in Canada in 1993 where a majority party was reduced to 2 seats.

Are one of the big 2 going to face something equally apocalyptic at the next election? They are both doing the best. The Tories are wearing out the self destruct button and Corbyn is surely now close to the end game having irritated so many supporters.

Some have complained that the Tory candidates have focused too much on Brexit but it is entirely justified. If the new leader cannot find a path to resolve it TBP could very well replace the Tories.

Labour's task is easier, just get a new and more competent leader. Emily Thornberry struggled to explain yesterday why abusing the elected leader of our closest and most important ally was in the national interest or even remotely sensible for someone who might be FS in weeks. But there is no doubt that she would be a far more formidable opponent than Corbyn.

There is no-one Labour could pick who would be worse than Corbyn. As bad, for sure - but not worse. The Tories will almost certainly end up with someone worse than May. And that is saying something!

NickPalmer

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

The interesting finding in that survey is that Remainers DON'T associate more with the Western and global worlds. The EU is both a globalist and a protectionist construct. It looks like Remainers are more attracted by the protectionist element.

Point of order - the survey does show that Remainers associate much more with the global community than Leavers. It's still a minority but the difference is marked. As they don't associate more with the Western world, I assume this is mostly the Guardianistas like me, who feel closer to, say, an intellectual socialist in India than to Donald Trump, and who in principle doesn't think nationality is a very useful guide and personal type is more important.

CD13

Mr L,

A lot of politics is perception and Mrs Thornberry comes over as patronising and a touch sneery. if 'Spitting Image' were still here, she'd be toast. It doesn't matter how sensible the words if the image is wrong. With a bit of coaching, she might become a contender.

Foxy

WhisperingOracle said:

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to lokkforward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

The over-memorialising will continue, I fear, because the second world war has become modern Britain's creation myth, and the backdrop of both its positive and negative expressions of nationalism, from the concept of a lone democratic stand against fascism to Brexit. As long as the last veterans are standing it is also still justified to me, and when they are gone it will not be.

I suspect that the amount of archive film of WW2 will make it a perennial for some time. I don't mind serious history and analysis, but rather the over sentimentalised mawkishness. In particular the soldier as sacrificial victim theme. The purpose of being a soldier was not do die, it was to kill. My own grandfather was in Mesopotamia attempting to shoot and bayonet Turks. I have no idea whether he managed it or not and probably he was right not to talk of it.

Cyclefree

WhisperingOracle said:

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to lokkforward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

The over-memorialising will continue, I fear, because the second world war has become modern Britain's creation myth, and the backdrop of both its positive and negative expressions of nationalism, from the concept of a lone democratic stand against fascism to Brexit. As long as the last veterans are standing it is also still justified to me, and when they are gone it will not be.

WW2 as Britain standing alone is one of those myths which in part fuels some of the Brexit mythology, as does the so-called “special relationship”. All countries need some sort of myth to keep going - see France or even the US. But if it goes too far it blinds a country to reality, which is what is happening to Britain today, I fear.

A proper understanding of history is essential. We often seem to have the worst combination: gross over-sentimentality combined with a Boys Own understanding of what actually happened.

Still, we can honour and thank those veterans who are still with us and listen to their stories while we still can. That seems to me to be an entirely fitting and decent thing to do.

DavidL

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to look forward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

I can't help thinking that for us at least the Queen is a very important link to those days. When she finally goes I think perspectives will change quite quickly. We of course have many veterans from more recent conflicts and not a few dead to remember. The Falklands, 2 Gulf wars, Yugoslavia, we have not been short of 19th century style professional wars involving professional soldiers but not troubling the rest of us.

Theuniondivvie

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

The fawning will certainly aid Trump's delusion of his own family becoming American royalty.

It's just the sort of propagandist puffery one would expect from a state broadcaster. Of course the BBC isn't a state broadcaster, or so I'm constantly informed.

It's because the Royals are involved. The BBC is at is most paranoid of being accused of disloyalty and not discharging its remit properly by the persistent rightwing press whenever they are.

Aye, just so. Of course a 'national broadcaster' averting its eyes from every pecadillo of the First Family would be Trump's ideal.

Nigel_Foremain

Foxy said:

That IpsosMori has some other interesting results:

https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1135847762065596417?s=19

https://twitter.com/IpsosMORI/status/1135848910772195329?s=19

I suspect that many Leave supporters believe that the Commonwealth is actually called the British Commonwealth aka The British Empire. Hilarious that they should think it more important than our relationship with the EU. Totally deluded.

isam

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

‘The place you grew up’ is the option relevant to the Somewhere/anywhere question

Big_G_NorthWales

Streeter said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

FFS. How long will this country persist in looking back to faded glory?

I hope our Country continues to pay its respect to all those who have fallen indefinitely. It is not faded glory, it is not even glory, it is a sacrifice given by tens of thousands of young men and women in defence of our freedom

MarqueeMark

YBarddCwsc said:

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

The Brexit Party also have to find 650 Parliamentary candidates who can appear normal and not say something obviously stupid, incendiary, racist or misogynistic during the course of an electoral campaign.

I am not too worried about the Brexit Party gaining many seats.

Were you not too worried about Leave winning? Of Trump becoming President? It won't be who they are, but what they represent, that gets them elected.

FF43

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

The US wants to sweep away drugs effectiveness and cost assessments and approved lists of drugs through programmes such as NICE and HRA. It wants third countries to have American levels of healthcare costs and clinical effectiveness.

It doesn't like single payer healthcare systems such as the NHS in its current form. Trump was loose in his talk of the NHS being on the table.

WhisperingOracle

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

D-Day should be remembered. A reasonable point, though, is that many of the different commemorations of the war seem to be continual in the last few years, at a moment when Britain needs to be urgently engaged with the present.

Although I also then don't think it's a coincidence that the particular memories it's engaging with are buttressing Brexit, I also think the wishes of the surviving veterans on this topic should be paramount ; and I'm sure most of them would like the ceremonies to continue for at least the next five years or so.

NickPalmer

Interesting discussion of swing in the header by Alastair and the substantial contribution by IanB2. They're clearly both right that traditional models break down in these circumstances. I'm sure there ARE models that will work, though - it's not quite as random as swirling bathwater.

Possibly the Peterborough by-election will give us some clues. If the Tory vote holds up in circumstances where the Brexit challenge to Labour offers an obvious alternative, it will show a certain hardcore resistance. Likewise the Labour vote, since it can't be said that Peterborough's recent experience of Labour MPs (or indeed any MPs) has been very encouraging. If the LibDems boom, it'll show that there's substance to their rise that is resistant to tactical voting. And if the Brexit vote simply pulverises everyone, that'll of course be a Stark Warning to all of us.

_Anazina_

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

I think it’s been fawning and awful. The BBC is unwatchable nowadays. I long since gave up on it since the hopeless and irritating Laura K took sway.

Theuniondivvie

DavidL said:

I agree with Alastair's head piece that there are break points at which models really fail. The most extreme example in this country was Scottish Labour in 2015 when a previously dominant party collapsed and was left with a single seat. SLAB had some of the most venal, stupid and incompetent MPs in the Commons as well as some of the best. It did not matter a whit. All bar 1 were swept away. Something similar happened in Canada in 1993 where a majority party was reduced to 2 seats.

Are one of the big 2 going to face something equally apocalyptic at the next election? They are both doing the best. The Tories are wearing out the self destruct button and Corbyn is surely now close to the end game having irritated so many supporters.

Some have complained that the Tory candidates have focused too much on Brexit but it is entirely justified. If the new leader cannot find a path to resolve it TBP could very well replace the Tories.

Labour's task is easier, just get a new and more competent leader. Emily Thornberry struggled to explain yesterday why abusing the elected leader of our closest and most important ally was in the national interest or even remotely sensible for someone who might be FS in weeks. But there is no doubt that she would be a far more formidable opponent than Corbyn.

The days of SLab having some of the best MPs in the commons were pretty distant by 2015.

Nigel_Foremain

Theuniondivvie said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Nigelb said:

Am I alone in being seriously annoyed with the BBC reporting of the Trump visit ?

The deferential cringe I can understand, as a more or less unavoidable consequence of their ‘impartiality’ remit.
That it should lead every report and get continuous banner headlines over a number of days for, what is essentially a ceremonial bit of international flattery, is less justifiable.

The fawning will certainly aid Trump's delusion of his own family becoming American royalty.

It's just the sort of propagandist puffery one would expect from a state broadcaster. Of course the BBC isn't a state broadcaster, or so I'm constantly informed.

It's because the Royals are involved. The BBC is at is most paranoid of being accused of disloyalty and not discharging its remit properly by the persistent rightwing press whenever they are.

Aye, just so. Of course a 'national broadcaster' averting its eyes from every pecadillo of the First Family would be Trump's ideal.

Speaking of alleged peccadillos (and accusations of much worse), how are things going for the fat little twerp who used to lead the SNP? Is Nicola still defending him or has she cut her old friend lose yet? Just wondering.

matt

IanB2 said:

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to look forward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

Some sympathy with your argument - but I suspect we wont be clear of it until the centenary anniversaries of WWII are passed. At that point the memory of wars that affected and engaged the whole country will have passed away.

The test of that will be whether the memory of, and services relating to, WW1 fades. I hope it does, but doubt it will.

Nigel_Foremain

MarqueeMark said:

YBarddCwsc said:

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

The Brexit Party also have to find 650 Parliamentary candidates who can appear normal and not say something obviously stupid, incendiary, racist or misogynistic during the course of an electoral campaign.

I am not too worried about the Brexit Party gaining many seats.

Were you not too worried about Leave winning? Of Trump becoming President? It won't be who they are, but what they represent, that gets them elected.

They represent small-f fascism and not-so-covert sympathy for the agenda of a hostile foreign power. Any that get elected to our Mother of Parliaments will be symbols of shame.

OblitusSumMe

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

If you look at absolute vote numbers then UKIP lost half a million votes between EP2014 and GE2015. That's not a bad baseline to have in mind for the Brexit Party, which would give them 4.75m votes at a GE2020, or about 15% of the vote.

Maybe this time is different, but it's not a bad starting point.

Foxy

DavidL said:

Foxy said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

I have a long interest in history, including military history, and still see patients who are veterans. Just this week I saw an old fellow who spent his youth flying Dakotas to resupply in the Far East and an old lady who was a RAF cypher clerk.

Nonetheless, after the centenary of 1918 and this last D Day that veterans are likely to attend, and presumably the 75th anniversary of VE and VJ day next year, it is time to stop remembering and to look forward. A lot of this memoralising is getting very mawkish, and not very British.

I can't help thinking that for us at least the Queen is a very important link to those days. When she finally goes I think perspectives will change quite quickly. We of course have many veterans from more recent conflicts and not a few dead to remember. The Falklands, 2 Gulf wars, Yugoslavia, we have not been short of 19th century style professional wars involving professional soldiers but not troubling the rest of us.

Yes, I think that true of the Queen. Serving in uniform, in the unglamorous role of driver, was an important symbolic act.

AlastairMeeks

NickPalmer said:

Interesting discussion of swing in the header by Alastair and the substantial contribution by IanB2. They're clearly both right that traditional models break down in these circumstances. I'm sure there ARE models that will work, though - it's not quite as random as swirling bathwater.

Possibly the Peterborough by-election will give us some clues. If the Tory vote holds up in circumstances where the Brexit challenge to Labour offers an obvious alternative, it will show a certain hardcore resistance. Likewise the Labour vote, since it can't be said that Peterborough's recent experience of Labour MPs (or indeed any MPs) has been very encouraging. If the LibDems boom, it'll show that there's substance to their rise that is resistant to tactical voting. And if the Brexit vote simply pulverises everyone, that'll of course be a Stark Warning to all of us.

I agree that there are models that will work. The problem is identifying them in advance.

YouGov's model at the last election coped very well with remade coalitions, in England and Wales at least. I'd pay a lot of attention to what that produced.

SouthamObserver

OblitusSumMe said:

SouthamObserver said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Is not a more fundamental question the extent to which the European elections were treated by voters as a de facto referendum on Brexit? It is by no means clear that this would apply to a general election. The picture at the top reminds us that in the 2015 and 2017 elections, the latter ostensibly called on the issue of Brexit, Ukip was wiped out and the LibDems nearly so.

The Euro elections gave a strong read on the percentage of the electorate for which Brexit is likely to be a very big deal. Basically, it’s over half of any likely GE turnout. But that still leaves millions of votes up for grabs based on other issues. This is why I think the Brexit party is likely to drain a substantial portion of its vote percentage in a GE.

If you look at absolute vote numbers then UKIP lost half a million votes between EP2014 and GE2015. That's not a bad baseline to have in mind for the Brexit Party, which would give them 4.75m votes at a GE2020, or about 15% of the vote.

Maybe this time is different, but it's not a bad starting point.

Looks about right to me.

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

I don't think that's actually true.

D-Day was in June 1944. By this time, Germany was in retreat in the south through Italy and the east from Russia. It had already essentially lost the war - as had Japan.

So what would have happened if D-Day had failed for the Allies in the worst possible way: say we'd got a massive amount of men and material over there, and then faced another Dunkirk?

Aside from the tragic loss of life, not much. The Allies had enough men and material to fight on three fronts, the Italian and eastern fronts were still open - and Germany would still be losing, and still need to defend France and the French coastline in case we tried again.

And then the US would have dropped the first nuclear bomb on Berlin, not Hiroshima.

Mid-1944 was far too late for Germany - they'd already lost the war. Even without nukes, they wouldn't have lasted much past 1946, unless Hitler somehow came to a pact with Stalin - and it's hard to see that happening.

Even if the whole of Germany ended up under Russian control, I don't think Europe now, 75 years later, would be in a 'far worse' state.

CD13

The more extreme Left do have a strand of anti-Americanism and it can permeate to the less extreme sometimes. Yes, the Septics can be barmy, they voted for Trump, but he was democratically elected.


That's what puzzles me. Not so much his election - Hillary was always a poor candidate. Vote for me because I have a vagina, I used to live in the White House, and it's my turn - but the fact that some here are happy to march against another nation's democratic decision.

'Who do you think you are?' would be my reaction were I American. It's the old illusion that people consider their own judgement impeccable. Motes in eyes, and all that.

matt

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Streeter said:

franklyn said:

I hope that on the anniversary of D-Day we can all, on this site, put aside our petty and parochial differences and reflect on the selfless sacrifice of those who died in Normandy, and the freedom from tyranny that they achieved. Perhaps we should also reflect on those political giants, Churchill and Roosevelt and compare them to the pygmies who lead us now. Finally we should think of the fact that we have had the longest period of peace in Western Europe for a thousand years. We are the first for centuries who have not had to experience the horrors of war.
Rest in peace all those who fell; you did not die in vain.

FFS. How long will this country persist in looking back to faded glory?

I hope our Country continues to pay its respect to all those who have fallen indefinitely. It is not faded glory, it is not even glory, it is a sacrifice given by tens of thousands of young men and women in defence of our freedom

Do you do that for the dead from The Boer War(s), The Napoleonic Wars, The Seven Years War or, or, or? Indefinite is an awfully long time and memories are sometimes better left to lie.

FF43

Nigelb said:

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

The interesting finding in that survey is that Remainers DON'T associate more with the Western and global worlds. The EU is both a globalist and a protectionist construct. It looks like Remainers are more attracted by the protectionist element.

A strange conclusion - particularly as leave voters associate less with ALL of those categories...

Remainers are more (non-European) "globalist" than Leavers, who aren't at all globalist. Point I'm making, Remainers aren't that globalist either in absolute terms or compared with their identification with Europe.

MarqueeMark

WhisperingOracle said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

D-Day should be remembered. A reasonable point, though, is that the many of the different commemorations of the war seem to be continual in the last few years, at a moment when Britain needs to be urgently engaged with the present.

Although I also then don't think it's a coincidence that the particular memories it's engaging with are buttressing Brexit, I also think the wishes of the surviving veterans on this topic should be paramount ; and I'm sure most of them would like the ceremonies to continue for at least the next five years or so.

If we get to the level of remembering that Northern Ireland revels in, we'll have taken it too far. Until then, we should treat it as a duty to commemorate industrial scale sacrifice in a conflict that engulfed the planet because of idealogy. We should remember D-Day as we should remember the Holocaust and the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan.

_Anazina_

CD13 said:

The more extreme Left do have a strand of anti-Americanism and it can permeate to the less extreme sometimes. Yes, the Septics can be barmy, they voted for Trump, but he was democratically elected.


That's what puzzles me. Not so much his election - Hillary was always a poor candidate. Vote for me because I have a vagina, I used to live in the White House, and it's my turn - but the fact that some here are happy to march against another nation's democratic decision.

'Who do you think you are?' would be my reaction were I American. It's the old illusion that people consider their own judgement impeccable. Motes in eyes, and all that.

Millions more Americans voted for Hillary. Trumpton ‘won’ merely because of the vagaries of the Electoral College.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jessop, the Iron Curtain being 500 or 1,000 miles further west would've been a far worse situation.

SouthamObserver

FF43 said:

kjohnw said:

Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

NHS is no longer part of trade deal

The US wants to sweep away drugs effectiveness and cost assessments and approved lists of drugs through programmes such as NICE and HRA. It wants third countries to have American levels of healthcare costs and clinical effectiveness.

It doesn't like single payer healthcare systems such as the NHS in its current form. Trump was loose in his talk of the NHS being on the table.

It wasn’t loose talk. It was merely repeating what the US ambassador had already said. Of course increased access to NHS contracts, tenders and the rest will be on the table in a trade deal. And if we want a deal - assuming we’ve not killed one off by dumping on Ireland - then we’ll have to give Congress what it wants.

HYUFD

At the moment the polling shows the Brexit Party certainly ahead of the Tories in votes and seats and another hung parliament. If the Brexit Party take the lead as Opinium shows they even get most seats in that hung parliament.

If the Brexit Party win the Peterborough by election tomorrow that will also show the situation is worse for the main parties than the seat predictors predict as Labour still hold Peterborough on current polling with electoral calculus for example.

Pulpstar

JosiasJessop said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

I don't think that's actually true.

D-Day was in June 1944. By this time, Germany was in retreat in the south through Italy and the east from Russia. It had already essentially lost the war - as had Japan.

So what would have happened if D-Day had failed for the Allies in the worst possible way: say we'd got a massive amount of men and material over there, and then faced another Dunkirk?

Aside from the tragic loss of life, not much. The Allies had enough men and material to fight on three fronts, the Italian and eastern fronts were still open - and Germany would still be losing, and still need to defend France and the French coastline in case we tried again.

And then the US would have dropped the first nuclear bomb on Berlin, not Hiroshima.

Mid-1944 was far too late for Germany - they'd already lost the war. Even without nukes, they wouldn't have lasted much past 1946, unless Hitler somehow came to a pact with Stalin - and it's hard to see that happening.

Even if the whole of Germany ended up under Russian control, I don't think Europe now, 75 years later, would be in a 'far worse' state.

Europe would look very different without West Germany being all in the western post WW2 power axis mind. Not sure where the impetus to create the EU would have come from, as at its very heart it is essentially a peace deal between France and Germany.

WhisperingOracle

MarqueeMark said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

D-Day should be remembered. A reasonable point, though, is that the many of the different commemorations of the war seem to be continual in the last few years, at a moment when Britain needs to be urgently engaged with the present.

Although I also then don't think it's a coincidence that the particular memories it's engaging with are buttressing Brexit, I also think the wishes of the surviving veterans on this topic should be paramount ; and I'm sure most of them would like the ceremonies to continue for at least the next five years or so.

If we get to the level of remembering that Northern Ireland revels in, we'll have taken it too far. Until then, we should treat it as a duty to commemorate industrial scale sacrifice in a conflict that engulfed the planet because of idealogy. We should remember D-Day as we should remember the Holocaust and the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan.

Yes. What I hope we avoid is a situation where in 20 years we are still only and most prominently remembering only those events most helpful to a British national self-image ; D-Day, VE Day, Battle of Britain day and others. Heroic national events should be remembered, but in a proportionate context, too.

Foxy

@IanB2 There wassome interesting work in the JRF report on Brexit on the influence of peers and locality on voting, confirming your ideas on minetown and brokerville. Those with intermediate education and skills in Leave areas were more likely to vote leave than demographic equivalents in Remain areas. In other words, voters take their cues from what is happening in their immediate environment. The message is that a Brexit that fails to deliver in Leaverstan is going to struggle to retain support, unless things markedly improve there.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/brexit-vote-explained-poverty-low-skills-and-lack-opportunities

Pulpstar

HYUFD said:

At the moment the polling shows the Brexit Party certainly ahead of the Tories in votes and seats and another hung parliament. If the Brexit Party take the lead as Opinium shows they even get most seats in that hung parliament.

If the Brexit Party win the Peterborough by election tomorrow that will also show the situation is worse for the main parties than the seat predictors predict as Labour still hold Peterborough on current polling with electoral calculus for example.

The Tories will be given some room again by the voters, but there is a very clear message from the "right pool" that the Tories and Brexit Party are broadly fishing - Boris (Or one of the other seven dwarves) needs to take us out of the EU.
Indeed Boris repeats the claim here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48521389

HYUFD

CD13 said:

The more extreme Left do have a strand of anti-Americanism and it can permeate to the less extreme sometimes. Yes, the Septics can be barmy, they voted for Trump, but he was democratically elected.


That's what puzzles me. Not so much his election - Hillary was always a poor candidate. Vote for me because I have a vagina, I used to live in the White House, and it's my turn - but the fact that some here are happy to march against another nation's democratic decision.

'Who do you think you are?' would be my reaction were I American. It's the old illusion that people consider their own judgement impeccable. Motes in eyes, and all that.

Even Obama's and Clinton's America was not loved by the hard left if not loathed like George W Bush and Trumps America. The only American politicians the UK hard left has much time for are self described socialist or like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez