Re the polling and possible long term changes in party position, it seems to me that the LD position while promising is precarious and depends on Corbyn. Labour are still the obvious not-Tory choice in most seats and would surely regain a lot of LD tactical votes under a more moderate and anti-Brexit leader. Labour could regain a strong position very quickly under a different leader. THe longer Corbyn stays, the better the longer term prospects for LD as winning or coming second to the Conservatives in many seats at the next election would then make them the obvious non-Tory choice in those seats. LDs need an election with Corbyn still in place and ideally Brexit not resolved.
The Conservative position is more tricky, I think. Boris might regain some Brexit party voters (and again, more might vote tactically Conservative to keep out Labour or LD) but Brexit looks set to be either a disapointment for many (not doing no deal) or pretty much a disaster (doing no deal) or both (no deal disaster followed by reality biting and a deal being done). But any attempt to regain Brexit voters will severely test the loyalty of more moderate members and voters who might be tempted by LD.
If we leave by the next GE, what is Farage's offer ?
To rejoin but leave even harder this time.
If we leave they will have to rebrand as a minimum. More likely Farage goes for a pint and they end up as UKIP2.
Leaving with a deal will leave some unhappy, campaigning to end the deal - but probably not above UKIP's long term polling levels, likely below, depending on the hard-brexitness of the deal. However, that has proved impossible so far.
Leaving with no deal would destroy BP, but then I think the Conservatives will have plenty of other troubles.
This assumes Farage is going away. Farage is going nowhere. It will be the wrong king of no deal plus any whisper of any deal whatsoever about anything will bring on a full to brimming rally in Peterborough inveighing against The Man.
An interesting thought. It's difficult to see Corbyn's Labour as having much in common with what's gone before. He voted against his Party more often than he voted for it. So who exactly decides what the Labour Party position is or whether it's transitory or not? The Labour Party is a brand. The question of who owns the brand is not obvious
Sorry, Roger, you're talking through your hat there. Corbyn has always normally voted with the party - I forget the exact figure but it's far over 90%.
An interesting thought. It's difficult to see Corbyn's Labour as having much in common with what's gone before. He voted against his Party more often than he voted for it. So who exactly decides what the Labour Party position is or whether it's transitory or not? The Labour Party is a brand. The question of who owns the brand is not obvious
Sorry, Roger, you're talking through your hat there. Corbyn has always normally voted with the party - I forget the exact figure but it's far over 90%.
I think that noted right winger Roger's comment (a PB hall of famer, surely) says it all, Nick:
"a reborn Militant Tendancy. A dystopian vision of 1985 where Derek Hatton won. A party of re-nationalisation run by the unions. And that's before his pusillanimity over Brexit...."
Re the polling and possible long term changes in party position, it seems to me that the LD position while promising is precarious and depends on Corbyn. Labour are still the obvious not-Tory choice in most seats and would surely regain a lot of LD tactical votes under a more moderate and anti-Brexit leader. Labour could regain a strong position very quickly under a different leader. THe longer Corbyn stays, the better the longer term prospects for LD as winning or coming second to the Conservatives in many seats at the next election would then make them the obvious non-Tory choice in those seats. LDs need an election with Corbyn still in place and ideally Brexit not resolved.
The Conservative position is more tricky, I think. Boris might regain some Brexit party voters (and again, more might vote tactically Conservative to keep out Labour or LD) but Brexit looks set to be either a disapointment for many (not doing no deal) or pretty much a disaster (doing no deal) or both (no deal disaster followed by reality biting and a deal being done). But any attempt to regain Brexit voters will severely test the loyalty of more moderate members and voters who might be tempted by LD.
If we leave by the next GE, what is Farage's offer ?
To rejoin but leave even harder this time.
If we leave they will have to rebrand as a minimum. More likely Farage goes for a pint and they end up as UKIP2.
Leaving with a deal will leave some unhappy, campaigning to end the deal - but probably not above UKIP's long term polling levels, likely below, depending on the hard-brexitness of the deal. However, that has proved impossible so far.
Leaving with no deal would destroy BP, but then I think the Conservatives will have plenty of other troubles.
This assumes Farage is going away. Farage is going nowhere. It will be the wrong king of no deal plus any whisper of any deal whatsoever about anything will bring on a full to brimming rally in Peterborough inveighing against The Man.
With people like Jezziah I don't know whether they are deluded, stupid, naive or all of them. He is endlessly banging on about division in the party, and if only they get rid of the "Progress Death Cult" (the one that won three elections) then Labour will sweep to power.
Yet its not internal division thats the problem, its external. Its the division between Jezziah and the electorate. Because it literally doesn't matter what he thinks about Corbyn, or Progress, or fighting the right - the voters aren't having it. Its demonstrably clear from polling and election after election that Corbyn is despised by the majority of Labour voters. That whilst our general policies are popular individually, the notion of Corbyn McDonnell Abbott (Diane Abbott FFS - and we have the gall to attack Grayling) implementing them has our voters saying "no chance".
I don't know whether Jezziah and his ilk are deluded - they genuinely believe that the Israeli embassy is conspiring with neo-liberals to have YouGov produce fake polls. Or stupid - they genuinely think that what they think is what everyone should think and everyone who doesn't think that way is WRONG. Or Naive - no fucking clue how politics works thus believing the "Biased BBC only Skwarkbox is the truth" stuff. Or all of them.
In reality we know for some its none of them. They are smart, sophisticated, cunning. In their plan to destroy the Labour Party. They have no interest in power in the current system, they have to smash the system to transform the system into whatever it is they prefer. So why seize power at all?
What does it matter? Even the polls where Labour are top means Labour plus LibDems in coalition are short of a majority. Not that such a coalition will happen.
Fuck Corbyn up the wrong un
Also if the Lib Dems want to back Boris for a no deal that has a silver lining for 2 elections time from a Labour pov.
Marvellous. The Labour vote has collapsed - and it's all the fault of people who have absolutely no control over the Labour party or its policies. Of course it is.
Amazing isn’t it . It’s always someone else’s fault or a conspiracy.
They are not trying to stop corbyn succeeding because he never will, they are trying to save their party
They are transfixed by the answer being that the party's positioning is wrong, when the answer is that they themselves are in the wrong party.
An interesting thought. It's difficult to see Corbyn's Labour as having much in common with what's gone before. He voted against his Party more often than he voted for it. So who exactly decides what the Labour Party position is or whether it's transitory or not? The Labour Party is a brand. The question of who owns the brand is not obvious
The more I think on it, the more the Melenchon positioning seems the only long-term stable one for Labour. It can never escape its roots, culture and ties to the union movement.
Pretending it can somehow turn into a centre-left party free of all this is for the birds. Trying to out LibDem the LibDems is not a viable strategy.
Its core vote is with left wing trade unionists and the ethnic minorities, both of which are socially conservative constituencies. Economic left and social conservative is the widely perceived gap in our politics, which only Labour can fill.
So Nandy and Mann and Flint and co. are right.
The problem this presents - in the short term - is that the party is on the wrong side from its members. How this plays out remains to be seen.
Appealing primarily to trade unionists and ethnic minorities gives a very low ceiling, so essentially renders Labour a party like the greens, where you express an opinion that may be right or wrong, hope to influence others in your direction, but do not expect to be in power. Is that what Labour want to be?
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
Re the polling and possible long term changes in party position, it seems to me that the LD position while promising is precarious and depends on Corbyn. Labour are still the obvious not-Tory choice in most seats and would surely regain a lot of LD tactical votes under a more moderate and anti-Brexit leader. Labour could regain a strong position very quickly under a different leader. THe longer Corbyn stays, the better the longer term prospects for LD as winning or coming second to the Conservatives in many seats at the next election would then make them the obvious non-Tory choice in those seats. LDs need an election with Corbyn still in place and ideally Brexit not resolved.
The Conservative position is more tricky, I think. Boris might regain some Brexit party voters (and again, more might vote tactically Conservative to keep out Labour or LD) but Brexit looks set to be either a disapointment for many (not doing no deal) or pretty much a disaster (doing no deal) or both (no deal disaster followed by reality biting and a deal being done). But any attempt to regain Brexit voters will severely test the loyalty of more moderate members and voters who might be tempted by LD.
If we leave by the next GE, what is Farage's offer ?
To rejoin but leave even harder this time.
If we leave they will have to rebrand as a minimum. More likely Farage goes for a pint and they end up as UKIP2.
Leaving with a deal will leave some unhappy, campaigning to end the deal - but probably not above UKIP's long term polling levels, likely below, depending on the hard-brexitness of the deal. However, that has proved impossible so far.
Leaving with no deal would destroy BP, but then I think the Conservatives will have plenty of other troubles.
This assumes Farage is going away. Farage is going nowhere. It will be the wrong king of no deal plus any whisper of any deal whatsoever about anything will bring on a full to brimming rally in Peterborough inveighing against The Man.
At below 5% in the polls.
If there's one thing we've learned is that one underestimates Farage at one's peril.
An interesting thought. It's difficult to see Corbyn's Labour as having much in common with what's gone before. He voted against his Party more often than he voted for it. So who exactly decides what the Labour Party position is or whether it's transitory or not? The Labour Party is a brand. The question of who owns the brand is not obvious
Sorry, Roger, you're talking through your hat there. Corbyn has always normally voted with the party - I forget the exact figure but it's far over 90%.
Whilst you're right, you are damning his voting record with faint praise:
"In other words, whilst Labour was in government, Corbyn was consistently the most rebellious Labour MP, rebelling a total of 428 times. In opposition, he was a little less rebellious, in both absolute and relative terms, but still consistently in the top 10 most rebellious Labour MPs."
An interesting thought. It's difficult to see Corbyn's Labour as having much in common with what's gone before. He voted against his Party more often than he voted for it. So who exactly decides what the Labour Party position is or whether it's transitory or not? The Labour Party is a brand. The question of who owns the brand is not obvious
Sorry, Roger, you're talking through your hat there. Corbyn has always normally voted with the party - I forget the exact figure but it's far over 90%.
Whilst I am sure he normally voted for his party, and you are probably even right it is over 90% given how many non controversial votes there are, for balance according to his Wikipedia page:
"Between 1997 and 2010, during the most recent Labour Government, Corbyn was the Labour MP who voted most often against the party whip, including three-line whip votes. In 2005 he was identified as the second most rebellious Labour MP of all time when the party was in government. He was the most rebellious Labour MP in the 1997–2001 Parliament, the 2001–2005 Parliament[89] and the 2005–2010 Parliament, defying the whip 428 times while Labour was in power."
On topic, when Bastani et al were predicting that SLab would soon be matching UK Corbo Labour in the polls, I'm not sure that this was quite what they envisaged.
Re the polling and possible long term changes in party position, it seems to me that the LD position while promising is precarious and depends on Corbyn. Labour are still the obvious not-Tory choice in most seats and would surely regain a lot of LD tactical votes under a more moderate and anti-Brexit leader. Labour could regain a strong position very quickly under a different leader. THe longer Corbyn stays, the better the longer term prospects for LD as winning or coming second to the Conservatives in many seats at the next election would then make them the obvious non-Tory choice in those seats. LDs need an election with Corbyn still in place and ideally Brexit not resolved.
The Conservative position is more tricky, I think. Boris might regain some Brexit party voters (and again, more might vote tactically Conservative to keep out Labour or LD) but Brexit looks set to be either a disapointment for many (not doing no deal) or pretty much a disaster (doing no deal) or both (no deal disaster followed by reality biting and a deal being done). But any attempt to regain Brexit voters will severely test the loyalty of more moderate members and voters who might be tempted by LD.
If we leave by the next GE, what is Farage's offer ?
To rejoin but leave even harder this time.
If we leave they will have to rebrand as a minimum. More likely Farage goes for a pint and they end up as UKIP2.
Leaving with a deal will leave some unhappy, campaigning to end the deal - but probably not above UKIP's long term polling levels, likely below, depending on the hard-brexitness of the deal. However, that has proved impossible so far.
Leaving with no deal would destroy BP, but then I think the Conservatives will have plenty of other troubles.
This assumes Farage is going away. Farage is going nowhere. It will be the wrong king of no deal plus any whisper of any deal whatsoever about anything will bring on a full to brimming rally in Peterborough inveighing against The Man.
At below 5% in the polls.
If there's one thing we've learned is that one underestimates Farage at one's peril.
Farage would get some of the disgruntled NOTA vote.
How much of that there was would depend on how competent and relevant the established parties were.
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And they were wrong, as per the Burns report.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
Re the polling and possible long term changes in party position, it seems to me that the LD position while promising is precarious and depends on Corbyn. Labour are still the obvious not-Tory choice in most seats and would surely regain a lot of LD tactical votes under a more moderate and anti-Brexit leader. Labour could regain a strong position very quickly under a different leader. THe longer Corbyn stays, the better the longer term prospects for LD as winning or coming second to the Conservatives in many seats at the next election would then make them the obvious non-Tory choice in those seats. LDs need an election with Corbyn still in place and ideally Brexit not resolved.
The Conservative position is more tricky, I think. Boris might regain some Brexit party voters (and again, more might vote tactically Conservative to keep out Labour or LD) but Brexit looks set to be either a disapointment for many (not doing no deal) or pretty much a disaster (doing no deal) or both (no deal disaster followed by reality biting and a deal being done). But any attempt to regain Brexit voters will severely test the loyalty of more moderate members and voters who might be tempted by LD.
If we leave by the next GE, what is Farage's offer ?
To rejoin but leave even harder this time.
If we leave they will have to rebrand as a minimum. More likely Farage goes for a pint and they end up as UKIP2.
Leaving with a deal will leave some unhappy, campaigning to end the deal - but probably not above UKIP's long term polling levels, likely below, depending on the hard-brexitness of the deal. However, that has proved impossible so far.
Leaving with no deal would destroy BP, but then I think the Conservatives will have plenty of other troubles.
This assumes Farage is going away. Farage is going nowhere. It will be the wrong king of no deal plus any whisper of any deal whatsoever about anything will bring on a full to brimming rally in Peterborough inveighing against The Man.
Farage can spot winning and losing. Hence why he left Ukip after the referendum.
I actually think he will quit while he is ahead if we leave with a finality. If we are stuck in a May/civil service half way house he probably wont.
Interesting to look at the sequencing there. Little more than gradual drift for eighteen months. Coming first, the CUK launch appears to take 5% mostly from Labour, not hitting the LibDems at all. Then the BXP launch starts to take the Tories down, and steadily kills UKIP. Only when the Tories are pulled down below 30% do Labour supporters start to shift dramatically toward the LibDems. Which also kills of CUK. And later still comes the shift from Lab to Green.
Yes it is interesting isn't it. Strongly suggestive that which party you support is greatly affected by how the others are doing. So maybe Greens grudgingly support Labour to keep the Tories out, and likewise a lot of Lib Dem supporters? But if the Brexit Party splits the right they can indulge their true feelings. If so, Labour needs the Tories to get a boost.
I don't know if this has already been posted, but a new opinion poll has Wales voting 55% for Remain...
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
"It is not often outside election campaigns for a paper like the Times to make its main story it a Westminster voting intention poll from its own pollster."
Indeed.
It is also unusual for a paper 'like the Times' to lead with flimsy, unattributable gossip about the health of the Leader of the Opposition.
Looks like the Times is no longer a paper like the Times.
"The survey found that only 25% of Remain supporters intend to support Labour.
This compares with 48% of Remainers who said they would vote for Labour at the beginning of the year, and 40% who gave the party their backing at the end of April."
"It is not often outside election campaigns for a paper like the Times to make its main story it a Westminster voting intention poll from its own pollster."
Indeed.
It is also unusual for a paper 'like the Times' to lead with flimsy, unattributable gossip about the health of the Leader of the Opposition.
Looks like the Times is no longer a paper like the Times.
Two words for you: Hitler diaries.
Is that a Godwin?
Edit: I wasn't around, but wasn't there near constant speculation about Michael Foot's health while he held the same position?
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And fishing? That great working-class 'sport' ?
(As an aside, I've started seeing many more women fishing. Years ago I'd never see any, but anecdotally I'm seeing more and more as I wander around the countryside. Including one on the Cam on Sunday.)
I don't know if this has already been posted, but a new opinion poll has Wales voting 55% for Remain...
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
The same Wales which voted to put the Brexit Party first in the European Parliament elections in May? Remain of course led most of the final polls in 2016 too, Leave won
Interesting to look at the sequencing there. Little more than gradual drift for eighteen months. Coming first, the CUK launch appears to take 5% mostly from Labour, not hitting the LibDems at all. Then the BXP launch starts to take the Tories down, and steadily kills UKIP. Only when the Tories are pulled down below 30% do Labour supporters start to shift dramatically toward the LibDems. Which also kills of CUK. And later still comes the shift from Lab to Green.
The shift to the Lib Dems comes after the local election results are announced. So it would seem that there was growing support for the Lib Dems (reflected in the local election results) that wasn't picked up in the opinion polls until afterwards.
No-one wanted to admit to supporting the Lib Dems until they could see that other people were doing so too.
It's just one example of why we need to be cautious about opinion polls.
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And they were wrong, as per the Burns report.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
I suggest you get out in the fields more, Nick.
Cultural resonance is not the same as prosecutions. In a way that proves Nick's point. For all the prosecutions it gets very little attention.
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And they were wrong, as per the Burns report.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
I suggest you get out in the fields more, Nick.
Cultural resonance is not the same as prosecutions. In a way that proves Nick's point. For all the prosecutions it gets very little attention.
Depends whose culture. I always saw the Labour Party as championing those from non-mainstream cultures and communities.
"It is not often outside election campaigns for a paper like the Times to make its main story it a Westminster voting intention poll from its own pollster."
Indeed.
It is also unusual for a paper 'like the Times' to lead with flimsy, unattributable gossip about the health of the Leader of the Opposition.
Looks like the Times is no longer a paper like the Times.
Two words for you: Hitler diaries.
Is that a Godwin?
Edit: I wasn't around, but wasn't there near constant speculation about Michael Foot's health while he held the same position?
Michael Foot had been unfit for military service in WWII, although he'd volunteered before being called up, which encouraged the 'constant speculation'.
Chronic asthma, but still lived to 97. Which gives me, as a fellow asthmatic, cause for optimism.
Because remainers don't want their kids to go into the army.
Citation required.
But am I to infer from your comment Leavers are racists who would shoot innocent people?
I was being facetious, but who really wants their child to go into the army to be paid a pittance and potentially go to war?
If you're only recruiting from groups who have few options, then it's more likely that you'll end up with a disproportionate amount of recruits who don't meet the high standards expected of serving personnel.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
I don't know if this has already been posted, but a new opinion poll has Wales voting 55% for Remain...
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
The same Wales which voted to put the Brexit Party first in the European Parliament elections in May? Remain of course led most of the final polls in 2016 too, Leave won
Well, yes, the Brexit Party getting 32.5% of the vote is completely compatible with a Leave vote of 45%. The first number is smaller than the second one, so it can easily fit therein.
Not sure why it's remotely contentious or worth mentioning really.
"If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option."
I mean did you notice who your party leader is by any chance?
He is probably right that Labour will be offering it. The problem is they will be offering a myriad of other solutions like a jobs first Brexit, a Corbyn Brexit and of course will be against a Tory Brexit.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
Bill Cash is the modern Conservative Party? Bill Cash has been an MP since I was just 1 year old. He was an MP for 16 years before Boles was elected.
Doesn't make him right, though. In fact, as my family point out to me, increasing age doesn't necessarily mean increasing wisdom. Further, of course, if we hadn't been playing silly beggars over the past few years several of those posts might well have gone to Brits.
Because remainers don't want their kids to go into the army.
Citation required.
But am I to infer from your comment Leavers are racists who would shoot innocent people?
I was being facetious, but who really wants their child to go into the army to be paid a pittance and potentially go to war?
If you're only recruiting from groups who have few options, then it's more likely that you'll end up with a disproportionate amount of recruits who don't meet the high standards expected of serving personnel.
I assume you're being humorous. The armed forces have historically always been drawn predominantly from groups who have few option. They don't arrive with high standards, they have these beaten into them in basic training and beyond.
Why do you think kit & mess inspections and drill still play such a large part in military life? It instill discipline, teaches standards - and keeps idle hands out of mischief.
And, for the record, if one of my children elected to serve their country like this - yes, I'd be worried about them. But I'd also be proud of them.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
You shouldn’t be relaxed a nominal change of policy which will be fudged anyway with freedom to campaign for remain or leave will convince no one. The group at the top of the Labour Party are now seen for what they are by large swaths of voters.
FFS. I am embarrassed that such a cretin as Bill Cash could be part of party of which I am still a member and even more embarrassed that he is a member of our parliament. When are these wankers going to realise that the vast majority of Germans are massively less militaristic and racist than they are?
Interesting to look at the sequencing there. Little more than gradual drift for eighteen months. Coming first, the CUK launch appears to take 5% mostly from Labour, not hitting the LibDems at all. Then the BXP launch starts to take the Tories down, and steadily kills UKIP. Only when the Tories are pulled down below 30% do Labour supporters start to shift dramatically toward the LibDems. Which also kills of CUK. And later still comes the shift from Lab to Green.
The shift to the Lib Dems comes after the local election results are announced. So it would seem that there was growing support for the Lib Dems (reflected in the local election results) that wasn't picked up in the opinion polls until afterwards.
No-one wanted to admit to supporting the Lib Dems until they could see that other people were doing so too.
It's just one example of why we need to be cautious about opinion polls.
Also, it's Westminster voting intention. Perhaps these people did not intend to waste their vote on the LDs in a general election until the local election results suggested that, in an increasing number of seats, that vote might not be wasted.
I may be alone, but I would respond to a Westminster poll with the party I was likely to vote for in my constituency in an immediate election, not the party that currently most closely aligned with my priorities.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In more important news than Brexshit, today anyway, the Lords have reportedly come down in favour of a national care service funded like the NHS, and presumably integrated with it so that a person in a non-acute hospital for their final stay isn't evicted to a nursing home merely because 'someone else' pays.
Doubtless they had many hours of discussions and exhaustively discussed the options until this seemed the only one remaining. That's the benefit of having by and large a chamber whose makeup almost reflects the last 15-20 years' opinion polls and whose members either obey no whip or show a distinct independence from it (like Heseltine, Gummer or Patten).
PR might help but how do we get more intelligent and independent-minded MPs, closer to some of the retired experts in the HoL? No idea.
Bill Cash is the modern Conservative Party? Bill Cash has been an MP since I was just 1 year old. He was an MP for 16 years before Boles was elected.
Doesn't make him right, though. In fact, as my family point out to me, increasing age doesn't necessarily mean increasing wisdom. Further, of course, if we hadn't been playing silly beggars over the past few years several of those posts might well have gone to Brits.
I think Mr Thompson's point is that Bill Cash is a relic whose views are tangential to the position of most Conservative voters, members and MPs today.
Ok, certainly the first and the last, and hopefully an increasing proportion of the middle one as well.
"If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option."
I mean did you notice who your party leader is by any chance?
What can I say? Some things I know and this - that in the event of a GE before Brexit is delivered Labour will make a clear and unambiguous commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option - is one of them. The electoral imperative will trump Corbyn's reluctance.
What I am less sure about is how large an impact it will have.
I think it puts Labour right in the conversation for largest party - at least - but I do fear both Johnson and Farage.
However, all hypothetical, because as we both know there will NOT be a general election before Brexit is delivered.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
"If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option."
I mean did you notice who your party leader is by any chance?
What can I say? Some things I know and this - that in the event of a GE before Brexit is delivered Labour will make a clear and unambiguous commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option - is one of them. The electoral imperative will trump Corbyn's reluctance.
What I am less sure about is how large an impact it will have.
I think it puts Labour right in the conversation for largest party - at least - but I do fear both Johnson and Farage.
However, all hypothetical, because as we both know there will NOT be a general election before Brexit is delivered.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
I really don't get how you think Boris will solve all problems...
I don't know if this has already been posted, but a new opinion poll has Wales voting 55% for Remain...
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
The same Wales which voted to put the Brexit Party first in the European Parliament elections in May? Remain of course led most of the final polls in 2016 too, Leave won
Well, yes, the Brexit Party getting 32.5% of the vote is completely compatible with a Leave vote of 45%. The first number is smaller than the second one, so it can easily fit therein.
Not sure why it's remotely contentious or worth mentioning really.
The pro Brexit Brexit Party and Tories and UKIP combined got more votes in Wales in the European Parliament elections than the anti Brexit Plaid, LDs and Greens combined
Bill Cash is the modern Conservative Party? Bill Cash has been an MP since I was just 1 year old. He was an MP for 16 years before Boles was elected.
Doesn't make him right, though. In fact, as my family point out to me, increasing age doesn't necessarily mean increasing wisdom. Further, of course, if we hadn't been playing silly beggars over the past few years several of those posts might well have gone to Brits.
I think Mr Thompson's point is that Bill Cash is a relic whose views are tangential to the position of most Conservative voters, members and MPs today.
Ok, certainly the first and the last, and hopefully an increasing proportion of the middle one as well.
The relationship of Cash to the contemporary Tory Party is that of inspiring headmaster to wide-eyed, adoring schoolboys.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
I know you are a diehard Remainer but it was Boris who won the EU referendum, had Farage been leading the Leave campaign rather than Boris then Remain would probably have won it.
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
Bill Cash is the modern Conservative Party? Bill Cash has been an MP since I was just 1 year old. He was an MP for 16 years before Boles was elected.
Doesn't make him right, though. In fact, as my family point out to me, increasing age doesn't necessarily mean increasing wisdom. Further, of course, if we hadn't been playing silly beggars over the past few years several of those posts might well have gone to Brits.
I think Mr Thompson's point is that Bill Cash is a relic whose views are tangential to the position of most Conservative voters, members and MPs today.
Ok, certainly the first and the last, and hopefully an increasing proportion of the middle one as well.
The middle example is sadly becoming increasingly riddled with Bill Cash types; right wing, simplistic, obsessed with "the war" and ludicrously what they see as it's modern day equivalent, Brexit. Tory voters tend to be rather more sensible, and pillocks like Boris Johnson need to understand that winning an election will not be a question of being the most popular well recognised clown, particularly if Labour changes it's hopeless leadership
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
Oh sure. If we get a new leader then its a new narritive. But thats not what he said, it was "Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option". Lets assume thats true - I need convincing that the M&Ms will agree to what they will see as defeat by the "Progress Death Cult". If it is, what will be the Labour position in that referendum?
Labour under Jezbollah will campaign to LEAVE in that referendum. Yes, we deliver a referendum but we'll be sending that tosser Barry Gardiner on the telly explaining how a Labour government we aren't going to get would negptiate a super new deal with the EU to match all our current access but without free movement or payment or membership. Which we won't get.
Remain voters will take one look at that and tell us - quite rightly - to Go Fuck Ourselves.
In more important news than Brexshit, today anyway, the Lords have reportedly come down in favour of a national care service funded like the NHS, and presumably integrated with it so that a person in a non-acute hospital for their final stay isn't evicted to a nursing home merely because 'someone else' pays.
Doubtless they had many hours of discussions and exhaustively discussed the options until this seemed the only one remaining. That's the benefit of having by and large a chamber whose makeup almost reflects the last 15-20 years' opinion polls and whose members either obey no whip or show a distinct independence from it (like Heseltine, Gummer or Patten).
PR might help but how do we get more intelligent and independent-minded MPs, closer to some of the retired experts in the HoL? No idea.
Bang these numbers into Electoral Calculus and the results are interesting:
Lab 237 Con 199 BXP 85 LD 66 SNP 41 Green/PC 4
So how would that play out? A progressive coalition would be possible - Lab + LD + SNP is 345. Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen. The other way is BrexCon on 284 facing a squabbling divided collection of parties. A minority government united on core objectives facing off against a rabble fighting themselves
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
I know you are a diehard Remainer but it was Boris who won the EU referendum, had Farage been leading the Leave campaign rather than Boris then Remain would probably have won it.
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
He's also a serial liar. You can fool some of the people........
And the Referendum was three years ago. Most, if not all opinion polls and actual elections indicate that public opinion is at least reversed.
You shouldn’t be relaxed a nominal change of policy which will be fudged anyway with freedom to campaign for remain or leave will convince no one. The group at the top of the Labour Party are now seen for what they are by large swaths of voters.
I think the offer of the Ref (with Remain on the ballot) will be enough to give Labour a great chance of winning a highly polarized Brexit election.
You don't.
My hope is that we get that election and thus the chance to see who is right.
My expectation, however, is that we won't. I see Johnson agreeing an extension into 2020 and eventually getting a Brexit deal through.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
I know you are a diehard Remainer but it was Boris who won the EU referendum, had Farage been leading the Leave campaign rather than Boris then Remain would probably have won it.
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
Like many fanatics you speak only in absolutes. Apparently I am a die-hard remainer! Actually I would have been comfortable with the WA as a reflection of the rather foolish instruction of a marginal majority of the public that voted. In that I am pragmatic. What I am a die-hard on is Brexit's stupidity, and the abject lunacy of proposing "no-deal" for which there is absolutely no mandate. I am also a die-hard anti-Boris Tory member. He is a liar, a fraud, but worse than that, a complete incompetent who has zero management or genuine leadership skills. Some people like to see Britain led by leaders. Some are happy with clowns. Clearly you, like those who blindly follow Corbyn, prefer the latter
Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen.
I think LD and SNP might suck it up and let Corbyn be PM, in exchange for basically everything else they care about. The upside of Corbyn being way out of the mainstream of MPs is that he doesn't care that much either way about a lot of the thing everyone else cares about, so he might actually be quite easy to cut a deal with.
After all, if you're a new LD MP who just got elected off the back of Corbyn repelling centre-left voters in your constituency, why would you want to make Labour replace Corbyn and change your Winning Here formula?
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
I know you are a diehard Remainer but it was Boris who won the EU referendum, had Farage been leading the Leave campaign rather than Boris then Remain would probably have won it.
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
Like many fanatics you speak only in absolutes. Apparently I am a die-hard remainer! Actually I would have been comfortable with the WA as a reflection of the rather foolish instruction of a marginal majority of the public that voted. In that I am pragmatic. What I am a die-hard on is Brexit's stupidity, and the abject lunacy of proposing "no-deal" for which there is absolutely no mandate. I am also a die-hard anti-Boris Tory member. He is a liar, a fraud, but worse than that, a complete incompetent who has zero management or genuine leadership skills. Some people like to see Britain led by leaders. Some are happy with clowns. Clearly you, like those who blindly follow Corbyn, prefer the latter
To be fair to our pb colleague, he is happy with whoever with whoever leads the Conservative party at the time he is asked. Or whoever, in what appears to be a foregone conclusion election , whoever is most likely to lead it. Were a poll to appear suggesting that Jeremy Hunt is in the lead we would treated to posts praising his wisdom and sagacity.
Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen.
I think LD and SNP might suck it up and let Corbyn be PM, in exchange for basically everything else they care about. The upside of Corbyn being way out of the mainstream of MPs is that he doesn't care that much either way about a lot of the thing everyone else cares about, so he might actually be quite easy to cut a deal with.
After all, if you're a new LD MP who just got elected off the back of Corbyn repelling centre-left voters in your constituency, why would you want to make Labour replace Corbyn and change your Winning Here formula?
Because you're not willing to serve under a disgusting anti-semite? Maybe?
I don't know if this has already been posted, but a new opinion poll has Wales voting 55% for Remain...
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
The same Wales which voted to put the Brexit Party first in the European Parliament elections in May? Remain of course led most of the final polls in 2016 too, Leave won
Well, yes, the Brexit Party getting 32.5% of the vote is completely compatible with a Leave vote of 45%. The first number is smaller than the second one, so it can easily fit therein.
Not sure why it's remotely contentious or worth mentioning really.
The pro Brexit Brexit Party and Tories and UKIP combined got more votes in Wales in the European Parliament elections than the anti Brexit Plaid, LDs and Greens combined
That's strange. When I add up Plaid, LD, Greens, and ChUK, I get a larger number than BXP+Con+UKIP.
Ah - you omitted Change UK. Inconvenient to add them in, was it?
Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen.
I think LD and SNP might suck it up and let Corbyn be PM, in exchange for basically everything else they care about. The upside of Corbyn being way out of the mainstream of MPs is that he doesn't care that much either way about a lot of the thing everyone else cares about, so he might actually be quite easy to cut a deal with.
After all, if you're a new LD MP who just got elected off the back of Corbyn repelling centre-left voters in your constituency, why would you want to make Labour replace Corbyn and change your Winning Here formula?
Hmm - and when at his first cabinet meeting he hushes everyone and puts forward his document "Nationalising the Telecoms Industry" - what then?
Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen.
I think LD and SNP might suck it up and let Corbyn be PM, in exchange for basically everything else they care about. The upside of Corbyn being way out of the mainstream of MPs is that he doesn't care that much either way about a lot of the thing everyone else cares about, so he might actually be quite easy to cut a deal with.
After all, if you're a new LD MP who just got elected off the back of Corbyn repelling centre-left voters in your constituency, why would you want to make Labour replace Corbyn and change your Winning Here formula?
It is a good point. He would be pretty constrained in his loony tendencies. I would give such a government about 6 months before meltdown, though. No government or organisation can survive while an incompetent is in the lead position. It is the same reason why a Boris Johnson premiership will also not make 12 months. What a mess we are in!
Labour under Jezbollah will campaign to LEAVE in that referendum. Yes, we deliver a referendum but we'll be sending that tosser Barry Gardiner on the telly explaining how a Labour government we aren't going to get would negptiate a super new deal with the EU to match all our current access but without free movement or payment or membership. Which we won't get.
Remain voters will take one look at that and tell us - quite rightly - to Go Fuck Ourselves.
I dunno. A more subtle line would be, "we have people in our party on both sides but we will get the best deal we can and put it to a vote", which is quite a lot less remainiac-repellent.
Maybe you're right and they won't be able to help themselves but last time they were fairly ruthlessly voter-focused once it because time to write a manifesto, so it's not obvious to me that they'd throw the thing away for no good reason.
And, for the record, if one of my children elected to serve their country like this - yes, I'd be worried about them. But I'd also be proud of them.
I haven't got children but I'd get them to think long and hard about what they are getting themselves into. Then I'd be proud when they ignored my warnings.
I do have a nephew who lived with us a for a few years while his parents were abroad. He repaid my hospitality by joining the RAF and is now an A330MRTT driver. I'd rather he was in Belmarsh than Brize Norton.
Because remainers don't want their kids to go into the army.
Citation required.
But am I to infer from your comment Leavers are racists who would shoot innocent people?
I was being facetious, but who really wants their child to go into the army to be paid a pittance and potentially go to war?
If you're only recruiting from groups who have few options, then it's more likely that you'll end up with a disproportionate amount of recruits who don't meet the high standards expected of serving personnel.
I assume you're being humorous. The armed forces have historically always been drawn predominantly from groups who have few option. They don't arrive with high standards, they have these beaten into them in basic training and beyond.
Why do you think kit & mess inspections and drill still play such a large part in military life? It instill discipline, teaches standards - and keeps idle hands out of mischief.
And, for the record, if one of my children elected to serve their country like this - yes, I'd be worried about them. But I'd also be proud of them.
I agree with everything you say. The point I'm making is that when you're drawing on kids from certain backgrounds, things like the Jezza target practice will happen.
As a Labour supporter I am supremely relaxed about these polls. All that matters is where the votes fall at the next general election.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Yougov had Labour still behind the Tories even if they backed EUref2 and even if Starmer was leader on an EUref2 platform Labour would only be 1% ahead
Hypotheticals are meaningless. It is just an opinion, but I think a change of leader to someone like Starmer would be massive. @kinabalu may be a little over complacent, but there is some truth in what he says. The polls are extremely febrile at the moment, and the only thing we can be certain of is more uncertainty. a bit like the pointless exercise known as Brexit really
No, Starmer is UK Labour's Bill Shorten and he would lose white working class voters, Boris would still beat him
In your wettest dreams! How do you have such certainty about such a completely flawed individual? It makes you sound a little silly, like a parallel to a 20-something Corbyn fan singing "ooohhhhh Boris Johnson"
I know you are a diehard Remainer but it was Boris who won the
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
Like many fanatics you speak only in absolutes. Apparently I am a die-hard remainer! Actually I would have been comfortable with the WA as a reflection of the rather foolish instruction of a marginal majority of the public that voted. In that I am pragmatic. What I am a die-hard on is Brexit's stupidity, and the abject lunacy of proposing "no-deal" for which there is absolutely no mandate. I am also a die-hard anti-Boris Tory member. He is a liar, a fraud, but worse than that, a complete incompetent who has zero management or genuine leadership skills. Some people like to see Britain led by leaders. Some are happy with clowns. Clearly you, like those who blindly follow Corbyn, prefer the latter
To be fair to our pb colleague, he is happy with whoever with whoever leads the Conservative party at the time he is asked. Or whoever, in what appears to be a foregone conclusion election , whoever is most likely to lead it. Were a poll to appear suggesting that Jeremy Hunt is in the lead we would treated to posts praising his wisdom and sagacity.
Ouch! Mr Cole, you are not suggesting he is as fickle as his current hero, surely?
Bill Cash is the modern Conservative Party? Bill Cash has been an MP since I was just 1 year old. He was an MP for 16 years before Boles was elected.
Doesn't make him right, though. In fact, as my family point out to me, increasing age doesn't necessarily mean increasing wisdom. Further, of course, if we hadn't been playing silly beggars over the past few years several of those posts might well have gone to Brits.
I think Mr Thompson's point is that Bill Cash is a relic whose views are tangential to the position of most Conservative voters, members and MPs today.
Ok, certainly the first and the last, and hopefully an increasing proportion of the middle one as well.
The relationship of Cash to the contemporary Tory Party is that of inspiring headmaster to wide-eyed, adoring schoolboys.
He is more like Fwi-Song in Consider Phlebas. The other tory MPs are the Eaters.
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And they were wrong, as per the Burns report.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
I suggest you get out in the fields more, Nick.
“Insufficient evidence”? Aren’t you doing a Trump with that conclusion, claiming exoneration when it isn’t saying that at all?
Bang these numbers into Electoral Calculus and the results are interesting:
Lab 237 Con 199 BXP 85 LD 66 SNP 41 Green/PC 4
So how would that play out? A progressive coalition would be possible - Lab + LD + SNP is 345. Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen. The other way is BrexCon on 284 facing a squabbling divided collection of parties. A minority government united on core objectives facing off against a rabble fighting themselves
Does anyone know what the Brexit party ground game was like in Peterborough? My first reaction was they wouldn't have one. Then it was clear there was a huge turnout of supporters and presumably they must have some people who knew how to run a by election. After the event they claimed they had no data. That could have been an excuse, but with those numbers they should have been able to do mass deliveries and multiple canvasses, so having no initial data is no excuse.
The reason I ask is I can't see BXP getting 85 on those numbers without a targeted ground game and if they don't have the skills that is not going to happen. And on those numbers I would have thought the LDs would be a great deal higher, limited by only when they run out of troops to put into seats. They are going to be reluctant to move troops from targets to lower targets, which have limited local activists and data even if the evidence shows they are on for a potential win. Its the conflict between being too ambition and not ambitious enough.
Labour under Jezbollah will campaign to LEAVE in that referendum. Yes, we deliver a referendum but we'll be sending that tosser Barry Gardiner on the telly explaining how a Labour government we aren't going to get would negptiate a super new deal with the EU to match all our current access but without free movement or payment or membership. Which we won't get.
Remain voters will take one look at that and tell us - quite rightly - to Go Fuck Ourselves.
I dunno. A more subtle line would be, "we have people in our party on both sides but we will get the best deal we can and put it to a vote", which is quite a lot less remainiac-repellent.
Maybe you're right and they won't be able to help themselves but last time they were fairly ruthlessly voter-focused once it because time to write a manifesto, so it's not obvious to me that they'd throw the thing away for no good reason.
I actually made this point several times over the last couple of years, not necessarily on here but I laugh at the concept that the U.K. is negotiating with the EU. They know what outcome they want and it’s take it or leave with no deal. They have been working and planning for life without the U.K. from the day the vote result was known. continental businesses have been re-engineering supply chains, major U.K. based multi nationals have restructured their corporate structures moving them mainly to ROI. You only have to look at the labels on ‘UK’ products when out of the U.K. to discover where their corporate and customer services are now based.
The Hunting ban was really a cultural thing more than worries over the poor fox.
No it wasn't. I was in the core group and it was entirely about the animals, which is why it included hare coursing, which doesn't have any cultural resonance at all. Most of us had a long history of other animal welfare causes and have been pursuing them ever since as well. There's always some nutter who attaches himself to an issue with other motives, but the people who pushed it through over Tony's metaphorical dead body were all animal welfare people.
And they were wrong, as per the Burns report.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
I suggest you get out in the fields more, Nick.
“Insufficient evidence”? Aren’t you doing a Trump with that conclusion, claiming exoneration when it isn’t saying that at all?
It is what it is. Insufficient evidence. The report could not say that hunting was cruel to foxes. I'm sure if they could have said it was they would have done. They didn't say it wasn't cruel, but couldn't say it was.
He is probably right that Labour will be offering it. The problem is they will be offering a myriad of other solutions like a jobs first Brexit, a Corbyn Brexit and of course will be against a Tory Brexit.
I can imagine that there will be some soppy language about 'trying to negotiate a better deal' and about people being 'free to campaign on either side'.
However, Remainers are - as I think most now acknowledge - on the whole rational and intelligent individuals. So provided that the 'Ref2 with Remain as an option' commitment is clear, IMO it will be enough to bring them flocking in.
My slight concern is that there may be a large number of Remainers whose desire to cancel Brexit is outweighed by their antipathy to Jeremy Corbyn and the notion of a massive and irrreversible shift in the balance of wealth and power and opportunity in favour of working people.
This is a real concern - but I think (hope) it will be sufficiently mitigated by the knowledge that the best Labour can hope for is largest party, with their more radical impulses thus neutered by the need for support from SNP and LD.
And of course the dream outcome would be that this fear of a Labour outright majority is quelled to such an extent that Labour receive enough votes from moderate Remainers to win an outright majority.
This is unlikely but I've backed it at 7/1 because I think it is more of a possibility than most people believe.
But of course I need to keep this quiet. The more people start to think it might be possible the less likely it becomes to happen. Like England in a (men's) World Cup.
Bang these numbers into Electoral Calculus and the results are interesting:
Lab 237 Con 199 BXP 85 LD 66 SNP 41 Green/PC 4
So how would that play out? A progressive coalition would be possible - Lab + LD + SNP is 345. Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen. The other way is BrexCon on 284 facing a squabbling divided collection of parties. A minority government united on core objectives facing off against a rabble fighting themselves
Does anyone know what the Brexit party ground game was like in Peterborough? My first reaction was they wouldn't have one. Then it was clear there was a huge turnout of supporters and presumably they must have some people who knew how to run a by election. After the event they claimed they had no data. That could have been an excuse, but with those numbers they should have been able to do mass deliveries and multiple canvasses, so having no initial data is no excuse.
The reason I ask is I can't see BXP getting 85 on those numbers without a targeted ground game and if they don't have the skills that is not going to happen. And on those numbers I would have thought the LDs would be a great deal higher, limited by only when they run out of troops to put into seats. They are going to be reluctant to move troops from targets to lower targets, which have limited local activists and data even if the evidence shows they are on for a potential win. Its the conflict between being too ambition and not ambitious enough.
Stupid to ask for Corbyn's head. Just ask for PR and policies acceptable to Lib and SNP in a C&S arrangement. Take lessons from Arlene Foster if need be.
It may happen but I've not heard of a party in countries which have PR demanding the resignation of the leader of the other party. Finland has a five-party government, aka strong and stable. Presumably the leader of the largest is PM.
"Bookmaker William Hill has announced that it is consulting on plans to close about 700 betting shops.
It said a large number of redundancies was anticipated, with 4,500 employees at risk of losing their jobs.
The firm added that the move followed the government's decision in April to reduce the maximum stake on fixed-odds betting terminals to £2.
Since then, the company added, it had seen "a significant fall" in gaming machine revenues."
I am of course sorry for those losing their jobs, but a major scourge on Britain's high streets is clearly being reduced.
I'd much rather they be banned from advertising their online casinos on TV. I watched something on terrestrial TV with ads for the first time in months (possibly years) last night (Channel 4's Catch-22 adaptation), and seemingly every other advert was for an online casino. It's all over sports coverage as well. It's totally out of line with the government's approach to all other vaguely comparable activities (smoking/drinking/fast food), and the only reason I can see for a ban not being enforced is the same ridiculous vested interest nonsense that apparently nearly scuppered the FOBT clampdown.
What is the point of the whinge about it being madness then?
Either he means that it will be bad but not as bad as all that or he thinks that loyalty to his party compels him to do something which he thinks utterly stupid ie he puts party before country.
Comments
"a reborn Militant Tendancy. A dystopian vision of 1985 where Derek Hatton won. A party of re-nationalisation run by the unions. And that's before his pusillanimity over Brexit...."
Happy Independence Day - I assume there are some Americans on the site.
Yet its not internal division thats the problem, its external. Its the division between Jezziah and the electorate. Because it literally doesn't matter what he thinks about Corbyn, or Progress, or fighting the right - the voters aren't having it. Its demonstrably clear from polling and election after election that Corbyn is despised by the majority of Labour voters. That whilst our general policies are popular individually, the notion of Corbyn McDonnell Abbott (Diane Abbott FFS - and we have the gall to attack Grayling) implementing them has our voters saying "no chance".
I don't know whether Jezziah and his ilk are deluded - they genuinely believe that the Israeli embassy is conspiring with neo-liberals to have YouGov produce fake polls. Or stupid - they genuinely think that what they think is what everyone should think and everyone who doesn't think that way is WRONG. Or Naive - no fucking clue how politics works thus believing the "Biased BBC only Skwarkbox is the truth" stuff. Or all of them.
In reality we know for some its none of them. They are smart, sophisticated, cunning. In their plan to destroy the Labour Party. They have no interest in power in the current system, they have to smash the system to transform the system into whatever it is they prefer. So why seize power at all?
"In other words, whilst Labour was in government, Corbyn was consistently the most rebellious Labour MP, rebelling a total of 428 times. In opposition, he was a little less rebellious, in both absolute and relative terms, but still consistently in the top 10 most rebellious Labour MPs."
http://revolts.co.uk/?p=932
He has zero right to expect loyalty from Labour MPs.
"Between 1997 and 2010, during the most recent Labour Government, Corbyn was the Labour MP who voted most often against the party whip, including three-line whip votes. In 2005 he was identified as the second most rebellious Labour MP of all time when the party was in government. He was the most rebellious Labour MP in the 1997–2001 Parliament, the 2001–2005 Parliament[89] and the 2005–2010 Parliament, defying the whip 428 times while Labour was in power."
How much of that there was would depend on how competent and relevant the established parties were.
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
And I would also take issue with your point about coursing and cultural resonance. For someone now a born again countryman ("that nice man Mr Gove"), that is ignorance of stunning proportions. Wasn't it you who said you were happy never having been to the countryside or that you had no idea how it functioned? Have I got that wrong?
I don't have the figures to hand but a huge proportion of prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been for coursing, which activity has been a long-standing part of many communities from poshos to travellers.
I suggest you get out in the fields more, Nick.
I actually think he will quit while he is ahead if we leave with a finality. If we are stuck in a May/civil service half way house he probably wont.
"If there was a new referendum on EU membership in Wales today, the poll commissioned from Beaufort Research by WalesOnline, suggests that Remain would have a 10 percentage point lead over leave.
The poll of 1,000 people done in the first three weeks of June shows that when “don’t knows” and “won’t votes” are excluded, Remain would lead Leave by 55% to 45%. In the 2016 referendum, Leave led Remain by 52.53% to 47.47% in Wales."
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/remain-10-percentage-point-lead-16527262
Indeed.
It is also unusual for a paper 'like the Times' to lead with flimsy, unattributable gossip about the health of the Leader of the Opposition.
Looks like the Times is no longer a paper like the Times.
But am I to infer from your comment Leavers are racists who would shoot innocent people?
This compares with 48% of Remainers who said they would vote for Labour at the beginning of the year, and 40% who gave the party their backing at the end of April."
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-falls-into-fourth-place-in-new-opinion-poll-11756313
Is that a Godwin?
Edit: I wasn't around, but wasn't there near constant speculation about Michael Foot's health while he held the same position?
(As an aside, I've started seeing many more women fishing. Years ago I'd never see any, but anecdotally I'm seeing more and more as I wander around the countryside. Including one on the Cam on Sunday.)
No-one wanted to admit to supporting the Lib Dems until they could see that other people were doing so too.
It's just one example of why we need to be cautious about opinion polls.
If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option. Different ballgame.
I mean this quite literally. Labour offering Ref2 calls time on this game and starts another.
If the polls still show the party struggling at that juncture I will start to worry. But not until.
Chronic asthma, but still lived to 97. Which gives me, as a fellow asthmatic, cause for optimism.
If you're only recruiting from groups who have few options, then it's more likely that you'll end up with a disproportionate amount of recruits who don't meet the high standards expected of serving personnel.
"If this is before Brexit, Labour will be offering Ref2 with Remain as an option."
I mean did you notice who your party leader is by any chance?
Afghans 3.3
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/cricket/market/1.159363295
The first number is smaller than the second one, so it can easily fit therein.
Not sure why it's remotely contentious or worth mentioning really.
Why do you think kit & mess inspections and drill still play such a large part in military life? It instill discipline, teaches standards - and keeps idle hands out of mischief.
And, for the record, if one of my children elected to serve their country like this - yes, I'd be worried about them. But I'd also be proud of them.
'Depends whose culture. I always saw the Labour Party as championing those from non-mainstream cultures and communities'
I think we can safely say that Labour's commitment to minorities is restricted to those deemed 'underprivileged'.
https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination
I may be alone, but I would respond to a Westminster poll with the party I was likely to vote for in my constituency in an immediate election, not the party that currently most closely aligned with my priorities.
Doubtless they had many hours of discussions and exhaustively discussed the options until this seemed the only one remaining. That's the benefit of having by and large a chamber whose makeup almost reflects the last 15-20 years' opinion polls and whose members either obey no whip or show a distinct independence from it (like Heseltine, Gummer or Patten).
PR might help but how do we get more intelligent and independent-minded MPs, closer to some of the retired experts in the HoL? No idea.
Ok, certainly the first and the last, and hopefully an increasing proportion of the middle one as well.
What I am less sure about is how large an impact it will have.
I think it puts Labour right in the conversation for largest party - at least - but I do fear both Johnson and Farage.
However, all hypothetical, because as we both know there will NOT be a general election before Brexit is delivered.
Johnson will get the WA through in 2020.
Great Godwin actually. Got straight in there with the H bomb, no messing. Hats off.
Boris has the charisma and broad enough appeal to then beat Labour and win a majority at a general election and finally deliver the Brexit 52% of voters voted for
Labour under Jezbollah will campaign to LEAVE in that referendum. Yes, we deliver a referendum but we'll be sending that tosser Barry Gardiner on the telly explaining how a Labour government we aren't going to get would negptiate a super new deal with the EU to match all our current access but without free movement or payment or membership. Which we won't get.
Remain voters will take one look at that and tell us - quite rightly - to Go Fuck Ourselves.
It said a large number of redundancies was anticipated, with 4,500 employees at risk of losing their jobs.
The firm added that the move followed the government's decision in April to reduce the maximum stake on fixed-odds betting terminals to £2.
Since then, the company added, it had seen "a significant fall" in gaming machine revenues."
I am of course sorry for those losing their jobs, but a major scourge on Britain's high streets is clearly being reduced.
Lab 237
Con 199
BXP 85
LD 66
SNP 41
Green/PC 4
So how would that play out? A progressive coalition would be possible - Lab + LD + SNP is 345. Except that sensibly enough the price of that would be Corbyn's head and that can't happen. The other way is BrexCon on 284 facing a squabbling divided collection of parties. A minority government united on core objectives facing off against a rabble fighting themselves
And the Referendum was three years ago. Most, if not all opinion polls and actual elections indicate that public opinion is at least reversed.
You don't.
My hope is that we get that election and thus the chance to see who is right.
My expectation, however, is that we won't. I see Johnson agreeing an extension into 2020 and eventually getting a Brexit deal through.
What I am a die-hard on is Brexit's stupidity, and the abject lunacy of proposing "no-deal" for which there is absolutely no mandate. I am also a die-hard anti-Boris Tory member. He is a liar, a fraud, but worse than that, a complete incompetent who has zero management or genuine leadership skills. Some people like to see Britain led by leaders. Some are happy with clowns. Clearly you, like those who blindly follow Corbyn, prefer the latter
After all, if you're a new LD MP who just got elected off the back of Corbyn repelling centre-left voters in your constituency, why would you want to make Labour replace Corbyn and change your Winning Here formula?
Ah - you omitted Change UK. Inconvenient to add them in, was it?
Maybe you're right and they won't be able to help themselves but last time they were fairly ruthlessly voter-focused once it because time to write a manifesto, so it's not obvious to me that they'd throw the thing away for no good reason.
I do have a nephew who lived with us a for a few years while his parents were abroad. He repaid my hospitality by joining the RAF and is now an A330MRTT driver. I'd rather he was in Belmarsh than Brize Norton.
The reason I ask is I can't see BXP getting 85 on those numbers without a targeted ground game and if they don't have the skills that is not going to happen. And on those numbers I would have thought the LDs would be a great deal higher, limited by only when they run out of troops to put into seats. They are going to be reluctant to move troops from targets to lower targets, which have limited local activists and data even if the evidence shows they are on for a potential win. Its the conflict between being too ambition and not ambitious enough.
However, Remainers are - as I think most now acknowledge - on the whole rational and intelligent individuals. So provided that the 'Ref2 with Remain as an option' commitment is clear, IMO it will be enough to bring them flocking in.
My slight concern is that there may be a large number of Remainers whose desire to cancel Brexit is outweighed by their antipathy to Jeremy Corbyn and the notion of a massive and irrreversible shift in the balance of wealth and power and opportunity in favour of working people.
This is a real concern - but I think (hope) it will be sufficiently mitigated by the knowledge that the best Labour can hope for is largest party, with their more radical impulses thus neutered by the need for support from SNP and LD.
And of course the dream outcome would be that this fear of a Labour outright majority is quelled to such an extent that Labour receive enough votes from moderate Remainers to win an outright majority.
This is unlikely but I've backed it at 7/1 because I think it is more of a possibility than most people believe.
But of course I need to keep this quiet. The more people start to think it might be possible the less likely it becomes to happen. Like England in a (men's) World Cup.
It may happen but I've not heard of a party in countries which have PR demanding the resignation of the leader of the other party. Finland has a five-party government, aka strong and stable. Presumably the leader of the largest is PM.
Either he means that it will be bad but not as bad as all that or he thinks that loyalty to his party compels him to do something which he thinks utterly stupid ie he puts party before country.