Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Latest YouGov favourability polling shows the enormous mountai

SystemSystem Posts: 12,171
edited September 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Latest YouGov favourability polling shows the enormous mountain that Corbyn has to scale

It was 3 years ago that YouGov began issuing leader favourability ratings a move that followed suggestions from me. I’ve long been in the leader ratings matter much more than voting intention numbers camp and the format I most like is when poll samples are asked whether they favour a particular political leader or not.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    First!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.
  • How many sitting days have been lost to date? Has the horse already bolted?
  • TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    Labour's problem is Jeremy Corbyn.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,900
    Afternoon all :)

    A propos very little but from my interest:

    Today's horse race meeting at Happy Valley was cancelled because of security concerns. It's the first meeting lost since the crisis began and given the power of the Hong Kong Jockey Club (HKJC), the status of horse racing as an income stream and the fact they bet like heroes with race turnover that British racing can only envy, it's a serious development.

    Closer to home, the closure of Hills betting shops continues apace - the shop in East Ham on the Barking Road closed after racing on Saturday and talking to a Hills Manager in a shop in the City on Saturday (and we had time to talk!) he reckoned further closures were inevitable. The other chains are holding the line for now and activity around the FOBT machines has improved since the spring but well below the pre=April levels.
  • Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.
  • TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
  • TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    Since the run up to the Euros Labour's biggest problem has been bleeding europhile voters to the LDs/Greens/Plaid. Now they are offering a People's Vote.
  • I wonder whether anyone has pointed out during the Supreme Court Case that proroguing parliament for the purpose of pushing through a no-deal exit was discussed as a possibility during the Conservative leadership election? It is obvious to anyone that is not a moron that Johnson and Cummings have done this for this reason and this reason alone. The fact that they are lying about it is unfortunate. It really is a question of whether there are any points in law that make it illegal I guess, and whether he has also lied to the Sovereign, just as he has lied to everyone else in his life.
  • Meanwhile in real world economics inflation is increasingly further below target at just 1.7% - must blow the minds of all those repeatedly telling me a collapsing pound guaranteed surging inflation.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited September 2019

    TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    Yes but we are beyond that. We have a marker as to what the country wants. Labour would be better off just saying they would negotiate a soft Brexit which for all the world looked like remaining. Plenty on both sides would be happy with that. It is of course not remaining but no one else is offering it.
  • TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    The 2015 referendum pledge was before the referendum and no party was proposing leaving without one. So if you wanted to leave you had to vote for a referendum-backing party and if you didn't you could ignore it as you were confident the referendum would fail anyway [ha!]

    It was also before we polarised on the subject. The evidence is that post-2016 the public has increasingly become entrenched and polarised with no centre ground on the subject.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    edited September 2019

    TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    Because we had the refereudm and we voted to LEAVE?

    Given the way MPs have bored the pants off everyone for the past three years and refused to implement the result I would think most people would rather not experiance another referendum for the rest of their lives at this point.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Pulpstar said:


    FF43 said:

    r people who don't care what gets decided, as long as something does, so we can move on. It's a distinctive policy. Problem, it seems most people don't want to move on, yet, despite saying they do. The morass continues.

    People only want to move on if their side wins ;)
    A pithy summary of our current problems to be sure.
    I approve that message.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    Meanwhile in real world economics inflation is increasingly further below target at just 1.7% - must blow the minds of all those repeatedly telling me a collapsing pound guaranteed surging inflation.

    That won't feed through for a while. Plus oil prices are up.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Corbyn can only surprise on the upside, it's his secret weapon.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    I wonder whether anyone has pointed out during the Supreme Court Case that proroguing parliament for the purpose of pushing through a no-deal exit was discussed as a possibility during the Conservative leadership election? It is obvious to anyone that is not a moron that Johnson and Cummings have done this for this reason and this reason alone. The fact that they are lying about it is unfortunate. It really is a question of whether there are any points in law that make it illegal I guess, and whether he has also lied to the Sovereign, just as he has lied to everyone else in his life.

    Eadie said it (proroguing for political reasons) wasn't illegal.
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    Yes but we are beyond that. We have a marker as to what the country wants. Labour would be better off just saying they would negotiate a soft Brexit which for all the world looked like remaining. Plenty on both sides would be happy with that. It is of course not remaining but no one else is offering that.
    Is there actual evidence that plenty on both sides would be happy with that.

    Evidence seems to be that those who want to remain really want to remain - those who want to leave really want to leave.

    Suggesting we leave but remain may satisfy a few but I don't see that it really satisfies either leavers or remainers. Sometimes the centre ground is the best place to be as the population is like a bell curve so that's where most people are - but sometimes the centre ground is empty and for good reason. If you're at a binary train platform you can stand on the westbound or northbound platform - or stand on the eastbound or southbound platform. But pick a platform and go there. Don't stand on the tracks saying "this is the centre"!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    Yes but we are beyond that. We have a marker as to what the country wants. Labour would be better off just saying they would negotiate a soft Brexit which for all the world looked like remaining. Plenty on both sides would be happy with that. It is of course not remaining but no one else is offering that.
    Is there actual evidence that plenty on both sides would be happy with that.

    Evidence seems to be that those who want to remain really want to remain - those who want to leave really want to leave.

    Suggesting we leave but remain may satisfy a few but I don't see that it really satisfies either leavers or remainers. Sometimes the centre ground is the best place to be as the population is like a bell curve so that's where most people are - but sometimes the centre ground is empty and for good reason. If you're at a binary train platform you can stand on the westbound or northbound platform - or stand on the eastbound or southbound platform. But pick a platform and go there. Don't stand on the tracks saying "this is the centre"!
    Dunno. Like the WA it would get us out of any number of EU institutions and requirements although I appreciate that the rhetoric will be that it's not really leaving. But if you look at the facts, it would be leaving but in a soft, cuddly way and hence both sides have elements to like and dislike.

    Maybe we should send @Richard_Tyndall on a speaking tour of the UK to explain its benefits.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    kle4 said:

    Corbyn can only surprise on the upside, it's his secret weapon.

    Certainly in recent times it's a remarkably well kept secret ....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215

    Seems like the guy who confronted Johnson is genuine AND a Labour activist.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/18/nhs-destroyed-boris-johnson-father-sick-child-hospital-london

    I'm truly shocked.
    MaxPB said:

    Meanwhile in real world economics inflation is increasingly further below target at just 1.7% - must blow the minds of all those repeatedly telling me a collapsing pound guaranteed surging inflation.

    That won't feed through for a while. Plus oil prices are up.
    The inclusion of long term broadly neutral/deflationary tech stuff in the indexes is something that helps keep inflation figures under control I think.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Meanwhile in real world economics inflation is increasingly further below target at just 1.7% - must blow the minds of all those repeatedly telling me a collapsing pound guaranteed surging inflation.

    I have never known a major economic event in my lifetime where the consequences didn't turn out to be something different from all the predictions.
  • TOPPING said:

    Dunno. Like the WA it would get us out of any number of EU institutions and requirements although I appreciate that the rhetoric will be that it's not really leaving. But if you look at the facts, it would be leaving but in a soft, cuddly way and hence both sides have elements to like and dislike.

    Maybe we should send @Richard_Tyndall on a speaking tour of the UK to explain its benefits.

    I'm not suggesting its bad - and had it been sold well it could have been where we'd end up - I'm suggesting it wouldn't actually be something both sides will be happy with.

    Leavers mostly have a reason they want to leave - whether it be control of laws or borders or whatever - and largely what you suggest won't do that.
    Remainers mostly have a reason they want to remain - whether it be part of the "European family" or able to shape European laws or whatever - and nominally at least what you suggest won't do that.

    Its a shame people have polarised, but I think they have.
  • GIN1138 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Labour's problem is that what has been presented is preventing Labour voters from voting for any policy.

    Voting for Labour would, rather, be voting for a process because the strategy as is doesn't give any certainty of outcome.

    If you were a hard Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because they aren't offering that; if you were a remainer you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up leaving; and if you were a soft Brexiter you wouldn't vote for Labour because you might end up remaining.

    The promise of a referendum on the issue is said to have won the 2015 election for the Tories. It's not immediately clear why making the same promise would be a negative for Labour.
    Because we had the refereudm and we voted to LEAVE?

    Given the way MPs have bored the pants off everyone for the past three years and refused to implement the result I would think most people would rather not experiance another referendum for the rest of their lives at this point.
    ... half of us...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    edited September 2019
    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.
  • Seems like the guy who confronted Johnson is genuine AND a Labour activist.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/18/nhs-destroyed-boris-johnson-father-sick-child-hospital-london


    I'm surprised.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Seems like the guy who confronted Johnson is genuine AND a Labour activist.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/18/nhs-destroyed-boris-johnson-father-sick-child-hospital-london


    I'm surprised.
    About all Labour can offer these days - ranty ranting.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    I like Lady Hale. I think she wanted to be Miss Marple when she grew up.
  • Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    Absurd. It would be journalistic malpractice for her not to do so.
  • TOPPING said:

    Dunno. Like the WA it would get us out of any number of EU institutions and requirements although I appreciate that the rhetoric will be that it's not really leaving. But if you look at the facts, it would be leaving but in a soft, cuddly way and hence both sides have elements to like and dislike.

    Maybe we should send @Richard_Tyndall on a speaking tour of the UK to explain its benefits.

    I'm not suggesting its bad - and had it been sold well it could have been where we'd end up - I'm suggesting it wouldn't actually be something both sides will be happy with.

    Leavers mostly have a reason they want to leave - whether it be control of laws or borders or whatever - and largely what you suggest won't do that.
    Remainers mostly have a reason they want to remain - whether it be part of the "European family" or able to shape European laws or whatever - and nominally at least what you suggest won't do that.

    Its a shame people have polarised, but I think they have.
    There is a difference between happy, content, acceptance and distraught.

    I will not be happy with any Brexit outcome from here.
    I would be content with soft Brexit.
    I would accept 2nd ref or revoke.
    I would be distraught with no deal.

    As a country we cant get anywhere near a majority for a happy outcome as for many of us there are no good outcomes anymore. We should be aiming to maximise the contents and minimise the distraughts.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    It would only be relevant if the meeting between him and Johnson was a set up. Otherwise he's a parent of a patient in a children's hospital who is quite a liberty to make political points ( and point out Jonson's dishonesty) in a Johnson visit, with press in tow, that is clearly political.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    I can now see the logic in No 10 ruling out a deal with Farage so early. The news cycle has moved on from that and events such as the hospital incident are increasingly framing Johnson as THE candidate of the right.
  • Mr. kle4, the sooner we defeat those filthy neutrals the better.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,387
    kle4 said:

    Corbyn can only surprise on the upside, it's his secret weapon.

    It is still a hopeless endeavour when Boris is creating some of the best comedy of his career.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    And Labour less chance of squeezing the Lib Dems.
    He has a very good point (& thanks, Philip, for noting it) - and it will be interesting to see if those figures change at all.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936
    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    It would only be relevant if the meeting between him and Johnson was a set up. Otherwise he's a parent of a patient in a children's hospital who is quite a liberty to make political points ( and point out Jonson's dishonesty) in a Johnson visit, with press in tow, that is clearly political.
    Amusing the difference between this and the Guardian’s editorial on Cameron. This one is above reproach because he is the father of a sick child....
  • If he didn’t want a camera in his face why did he go up to the Prime Minister?

    https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1174324811411132423?s=20
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    edited September 2019
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    Absurd. It would be journalistic malpractice for her not to do so.
    Quite. It would be wrong for her to add "...so his view doesn't count". But reliable journalism requires sufficient context about protagonists' motivation for readers to understand what's happening.

    I absolutely support this guy's right to challenge Johnson, and his personal experience as a parent (and comic ability to point out the bleedin' obvious cameras) strengthen that challenge. But I'm glad I *also* know he's someone who outside of hospitals makes a point of publicly calling out Tory failure.

    Or: if Laura tells us "an MP has voted against Boris Johnson", our understanding and interpretation of that fact is different depending on whether it's Jeremy Corbyn, Ken Clarke or Jacob Rees-Mogg.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    And Labour less chance of squeezing the Lib Dems.
    He has a very good point (& thanks, Philip, for noting it) - and it will be interesting to see if those figures change at all.
    At first take you'd have to assume people who say they're going to vote Lib Dem.... are probably going to vote Lib Dem.

    I've got the green vote down as much much more likely to collapse in for Labour's benefit.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    If he didn’t want a camera in his face why did he go up to the Prime Minister?

    https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1174324811411132423?s=20

    How often are you presented with the opportunity to tell the PM what you think of his party coupled with stress and tiredness. He let rip I would hope I would have the balls to do the same
  • Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    And Labour less chance of squeezing the Lib Dems.
    He has a very good point (& thanks, Philip, for noting it) - and it will be interesting to see if those figures change at all.
    LD voters wont see it as Labour squeezing them, most will see it as voting anti Brexit, anti Johnson. LD activists might be concerned about their national vote share being squeezed but voters have different priorities.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236
    Pulpstar said:



    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    And Labour less chance of squeezing the Lib Dems.
    He has a very good point (& thanks, Philip, for noting it) - and it will be interesting to see if those figures change at all.
    At first take you'd have to assume people who say they're going to vote Lib Dem.... are probably going to vote Lib Dem.

    I've got the green vote down as much much more likely to collapse in for Labour's benefit.
    Of course - but striking numbers like these are always helpful.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    Leaders letting themselves be berated by members of the public (even if they are Labour activits) doesn't do any harm to them whatsoever as long as they don't do an El Gord and get over-heard insulting them afterwards. ;)

    Better than Theresa May going from one staged managed event after another and never actually coming into cotact with "normal" members of the public.
  • nichomar said:

    If he didn’t want a camera in his face why did he go up to the Prime Minister?

    https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1174324811411132423?s=20

    How often are you presented with the opportunity to tell the PM what you think of his party coupled with stress and tiredness. He let rip I would hope I would have the balls to do the same
    I don’t doubt the sincerity of a worried father - it’s his fatuous supporters on Twitter who look foolish.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    That regard will go out the window if he deals or even suggests a deal which farage thinks would be a sell out
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    Leaders letting themselves be berated by members of the public (even if they are Labour activits) doesn't do any harm to them whatsoever as long as they don't do an El Gord and get over-heard insulting them afterwards. ;)

    Better than Theresa May going from one staged managed event after another and never actually coming into cotact with "normal" members of the public.
    Yes I think this sort of out and about getting heckled etc is a much better look than Maybot staged events.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936
    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    It would only be relevant if the meeting between him and Johnson was a set up. Otherwise he's a parent of a patient in a children's hospital who is quite a liberty to make political points ( and point out Jonson's dishonesty) in a Johnson visit, with press in tow, that is clearly political.
    Amusing the difference between this and the Guardian’s editorial on Cameron. This one is above reproach because he is the father of a sick child....
    Not amusing at all and I don't know what your point is. The two cases have nothing in common. David Cameron has the right not to have the death of his son dragged into a broader political point.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Thinking about it, the only way Labour's new Brexit strategy has a hope of working is if Corbyn puts someone in charge of the Brexit portfolio who says they want Brexit and will vote for the deal in a referendum (Caroline Flint?), but who nonetheless pledges to accept whatever the referendum result is.

    Unfortunately, the chances of this happening are zero, since #FBPE Twitter are already screaming just because Corbyn hasn't pledged to have the EU flag surgically attached to his body forevermore. They'll insist on the policy becoming Remainy, utterly oblivious to the fact that the policy is already toxic to a lot of Labour Leave voters, and that those Labour Leave voters will be (just as in 2017) the difference between a hung parliament and a Tory landslide.

    Johnson romps home in any election held soon.
  • Pulpstar said:



    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    And Labour less chance of squeezing the Lib Dems.
    He has a very good point (& thanks, Philip, for noting it) - and it will be interesting to see if those figures change at all.
    At first take you'd have to assume people who say they're going to vote Lib Dem.... are probably going to vote Lib Dem.

    I've got the green vote down as much much more likely to collapse in for Labour's benefit.
    Peoples votes are very fluid at the moment. The tories may actually be more likely to win a majority if the forecast is a hung parliament, rather than if the forecast is a small Tory majority as that may influence hundreds of thousands of tactical votes that could decide 50 swing seats. Yes voters probably vote the way they intend in the sense of it being odds on, but Id be happy to back 7/2 a random LD opinion poll preference votes a different way at the next GE.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936
    FF43 said:

    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346

    Laura being ratioed by the #FBPE / #GTTO / I <3 Corbyn lot for her tweet pointing out this pertinent fact.</p>

    It would only be relevant if the meeting between him and Johnson was a set up. Otherwise he's a parent of a patient in a children's hospital who is quite a liberty to make political points ( and point out Jonson's dishonesty) in a Johnson visit, with press in tow, that is clearly political.
    Amusing the difference between this and the Guardian’s editorial on Cameron. This one is above reproach because he is the father of a sick child....
    Not amusing at all and I don't know what your point is. The two cases have nothing in common. David Cameron has the right not to have the death of his son dragged into a broader political point.
    Yet it was, in quite a disgusting fashion, by the Guardian yesterday.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Waaaah Boris wants a Trump Brexit to destroy the NHS!

    Religious fanaticism is always dangerous whether your deity is a sky fairy or the NHS.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Do you not think you'd be prone to hyperbole if your child was seriously ill and (as you saw it) not getting adequate medical care?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936
    Danny565 said:

    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Do you not think you'd be prone to hyperbole if your child was seriously ill and (as you saw it) not getting adequate medical care?
    That’s fair, but it is a common refrain.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    PBTories implying that this guy is only claiming the NHS is in a mess because he's a Labour activist...

    Have you people considered the possibility that this man (and others like him) might be a Labour activist because he's seen the damage that Tory policies do?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Danny565 said:

    PBTories implying that this guy is only claiming the NHS is in a mess because he's a Labour activist...

    Have you people considered the possibility that this man (and others like him) might be a Labour activist because he's seen the damage that Tory policies do?

    Well at least we're leaving the EU (partly) because we want to give the NHS £350M a week boost! :D
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    But the scenario would be less attractive for Johnson if the Benn Act prevents Brexit on 31st October.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936
    GIN1138 said:

    Danny565 said:

    PBTories implying that this guy is only claiming the NHS is in a mess because he's a Labour activist...

    Have you people considered the possibility that this man (and others like him) might be a Labour activist because he's seen the damage that Tory policies do?

    Well at least we're leaving the EU (partly) because we want to give the NHS £350M a week boost! :D
    Labour want to spend that on Eastern Europe instead, apparently. :p
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    Hillary Clinton is layable at 26 on the Betfair exchange for the Democrat nomination.

    Is she really going to want to run and make the Democrat nomination process look like a complete joke after her 2016 experience ?!

    QTWTAIN I suggest.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    TGOHF said:

    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Waaaah Boris wants a Trump Brexit to destroy the NHS!

    Religious fanaticism is always dangerous whether your deity is a sky fairy or the NHS.
    or Brexit
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    But the scenario would be less attractive for Johnson if the Benn Act prevents Brexit on 31st October.

    I doubt very much Johnson wants to take us out without a deal. He wants to be stopped by parliament so he can win a GE then get us out with May ver 1.01 reheated.
  • Danny565 said:

    PBTories implying that this guy is only claiming the NHS is in a mess because he's a Labour activist...

    Have you people considered the possibility that this man (and others like him) might be a Labour activist because he's seen the damage that Tory policies do?

    If you give the PM an earful during a photo op and it turns out your twitter feed says you are a Labour activist and photographer ( so understand the power of an image ) those are relevent facts which will be commented on. Noone is disputing he is the parent of a sick child who is entitled to express his view.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    rcs1000 said:

    Wow what I find incredible are the sub-breaks for the two candidates to be PM with other parties voters.

    Johnson has a 93% unfavourable with Lib Dem voters - hardly shocking, he won't be appealing to them. But remarkably Corbyn also has a 74% unfavourable including a 44% very unfavourable with Lib Dems. That's going to be making a mountain for Corbyn to appeal to Lib Dems who are going to view it as "a pox on both your houses".

    But look at the sub-break for Brexit Party voters. 93% unfavourable [inc. 83% very unfavourable] for Corbyn and 73% favourable for Johnson.

    Those sub-breaks if true - and they're well outside of any margin for error - suggests a Johnson-inspired/Corbyn-opposing squeeze of the Brexit Party is entirely plausible.

    However a Corbyn-inspired/Johnson-opposing squeeze of the Lib Dems [as occurred in 2017] is looking quite unlikely.

    So in summary, you think LDs who have a 93% unfavourable rating of Johnson wont oppose him? Perhaps if Tories/Labour had equal shots at govt you might be close, but given its either hung parliament or Tory majority (with a perception right or wrong from LD voters that also means no deal crashout) it seems far more likely they will vote anti Tory where the LDs cant win.
    I think Philip's point is simply that the, because Johnson is so well regarded by BXP voters, that he has a good chance of squeezing them, particularly in the most marginal of seats.
    Why particularly in marginal seats?
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    Corbyn's Brexit policy is genius. It has managed to piss off everybody equally and his loyal disciples will love that. They'll coalesce on Twitter defending him to the hilt.

    Sitting on the fence is the new principled.

    THE ABSOLUTE BOY.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Pulpstar said:

    I can now see the logic in No 10 ruling out a deal with Farage so early. The news cycle has moved on from that and events such as the hospital incident are increasingly framing Johnson as THE candidate of the right.

    ...and the most popular with C2DE's I think?
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Danny565 said:

    PBTories implying that this guy is only claiming the NHS is in a mess because he's a Labour activist...

    Have you people considered the possibility that this man (and others like him) might be a Labour activist because he's seen the damage that Tory policies do?

    PBers can't imagine politics actually being important to somebody's life rather than just a hobby they are slightly too obsessive about. I still remember the astonishment that the Grenfell survivors might respond to what happened with political activism, and the accompanying conspiracy theories
  • Pulpstar said:

    Hillary Clinton is layable at 26 on the Betfair exchange for the Democrat nomination.

    Is she really going to want to run and make the Democrat nomination process look like a complete joke after her 2016 experience ?!

    QTWTAIN I suggest.

    Im against her, Id imagine the main scenario why people are backing is a contested convention with no clear winner opening up the field. Around 100/1 sounds like a better price, think its not impossible but why it would be her specifically in such a scenario is a giant leap of faith.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115

    If he didn’t want a camera in his face why did he go up to the Prime Minister?

    https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1174324811411132423?s=20

    *The NHS is being destroyed

    *The NHS will receive more funding this year than any other year in its history

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215
    edited September 2019

    Pulpstar said:

    Hillary Clinton is layable at 26 on the Betfair exchange for the Democrat nomination.

    Is she really going to want to run and make the Democrat nomination process look like a complete joke after her 2016 experience ?!

    QTWTAIN I suggest.

    Im against her, Id imagine the main scenario why people are backing is a contested convention with no clear winner opening up the field. Around 100/1 sounds like a better price, think its not impossible but why it would be her specifically in such a scenario is a giant leap of faith.
    I think if it's a contested convention then whoever has the most delegates will probably win*. They're all competing against each other but the need to beat Trump will err trump other considerations.

    * Maybe not Sanders, certainly Warren or Biden
  • Danny565 said:

    Thinking about it, the only way Labour's new Brexit strategy has a hope of working is if Corbyn puts someone in charge of the Brexit portfolio who says they want Brexit and will vote for the deal in a referendum (Caroline Flint?), but who nonetheless pledges to accept whatever the referendum result is.

    Unfortunately, the chances of this happening are zero, since #FBPE Twitter are already screaming just because Corbyn hasn't pledged to have the EU flag surgically attached to his body forevermore. They'll insist on the policy becoming Remainy, utterly oblivious to the fact that the policy is already toxic to a lot of Labour Leave voters, and that those Labour Leave voters will be (just as in 2017) the difference between a hung parliament and a Tory landslide.

    Johnson romps home in any election held soon.

    Would be good to see Flint back in the cabinet/shadow cabinet, as well. Starmer could be moved to Justice, and Burgon thankfully can be demoted at last.
  • RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    In the Labour years I could call my GP and be given an appointment on the same day. I could also choose to have an appointment on a Saturday. Now I will be given an appointment 3-4 weeks hence if I am lucky. Weekdays only. And they will tell me how busy they are and couldn't I just see a nurse instead.

    Destruction may be too strong a word but the service is significantly worse, and continuing to deteriorate.
  • Is that so funny?

    Much of politics is spin and salesmanship, a lesson than May never learned.

    It’s a reason Churchill* survived disasters that Chamberlain couldn’t.

    (*For the record, I am not comparing Boris to Churchill)
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    But the scenario would be less attractive for Johnson if the Benn Act prevents Brexit on 31st October.
    I doubt very much Johnson wants to take us out without a deal. He wants to be stopped by parliament so he can win a GE then get us out with May ver 1.01 reheated.

    Maybe - but Farage and the Brexit Party would be more dangerous to him.
  • Is that so funny?

    Much of politics is spin and salesmanship, a lesson than May never learned.

    It’s a reason Churchill* survived disasters that Chamberlain couldn’t.

    (*For the record, I am not comparing Boris to Churchill)
    There are only two people who would be stupid enough to compare Bozo with Churchill. One uses the nom de plume HYUFD, and the other is otherwise known as Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson
  • RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    In the Labour years I could call my GP and be given an appointment on the same day. I could also choose to have an appointment on a Saturday. Now I will be given an appointment 3-4 weeks hence if I am lucky. Weekdays only. And they will tell me how busy they are and couldn't I just see a nurse instead.

    Destruction may be too strong a word but the service is significantly worse, and continuing to deteriorate.
    Some of it is due to an aging population. Some of it perhaps due to GPs who want to be paid as though they run businesses when in fact have the safest jobs in the world, with the best gold plated pensions.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    Corbyn might even table a VONC in his own leadership....
  • Danny565 said:

    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Do you not think you'd be prone to hyperbole if your child was seriously ill and (as you saw it) not getting adequate medical care?

    And being lied to!

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    To be fair I can still get a GP appointment on the same day by logging in and booking one online at like 7am. The oldies have to wait until 8:30am to ring reception!
  • Is that so funny?

    Much of politics is spin and salesmanship, a lesson than May never learned.

    It’s a reason Churchill* survived disasters that Chamberlain couldn’t.

    (*For the record, I am not comparing Boris to Churchill)
    I think it may be the hypocrisy that it is the same people who did the trashing of the deal who are now rebranding it that he finds funny?

    Fully agree that this PMs greatest (only?) strength is selling an idea and that was Mays greatest weakness.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215

    To be fair I can still get a GP appointment on the same day by logging in and booking one online at like 7am. The oldies have to wait until 8:30am to ring reception!

    Ye my GP system is a bit weird, you need to log your symptons online and then you get called back with an appointment time but it has worked well enough for me, you get seen the same day provided you can make it to one of the three practices in the group.
  • Johnson is, of course, a liar. But is he a good liar or a bad one? Is a good liar someone who can lie brazenly or lie convincingly? Like Trump, Johnson does the former very well. But, also like Trump, he is useless at the latter. For me, the best liars of he last few year have been Theresa May and John McDonnell.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Pulpstar said:

    To be fair I can still get a GP appointment on the same day by logging in and booking one online at like 7am. The oldies have to wait until 8:30am to ring reception!

    Ye my GP system is a bit weird, you need to log your symptons online and then you get called back with an appointment time but it has worked well enough for me, you get seen the same day provided you can make it to one of the three practices in the group.
    If i want to see my GP who is PT itsca three week or more wait...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    The Brexit party is not committed enough to leave for that. Enough just may not do it despite it crippling leave. In fairness Boris is doing all he can to persuade them he is their man.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited September 2019

    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    In the Labour years I could call my GP and be given an appointment on the same day. I could also choose to have an appointment on a Saturday. Now I will be given an appointment 3-4 weeks hence if I am lucky. Weekdays only. And they will tell me how busy they are and couldn't I just see a nurse instead.

    Destruction may be too strong a word but the service is significantly worse, and continuing to deteriorate.
    In the Labour years our GP practice was frankly pretty awful. It has massively improved, beyond all recognition, in the Conservative-led years.

    This has b*** all to do with Labour or the Conservatives, however. It is because the previous GP partnership collapsed in acrimony and the new lot who were awarded the contract are miles better. No doubt the deterioration you've seen is equally useless in drawing any national conclusions.
  • RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    Did you actually watch (and listen to) the clip? Whatever the state of the NHS, what on earth possessed Boris to deny the press was there?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    RobD said:

    CatMan said:
    It’s the relentless hyperbole which gets me. Destroying the NHS? Give me a break.
    That is a tired line, as cliched as they come, true. Though I accept the point made someone can be genuine and an activist.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,616
    edited September 2019
    Pulpstar said:

    justin124 said:

    How likely is it that Corbyn will table a VNOC on - say - 19th/20th October before Johnson can bring back any Deal to the Commons?

    Lol Johnson is practically begging him to do so.
    Assuming Boris lost a VONC on 19th/20th, it would mean there would have to be a guarantee of somebody to replace him as PM forthwith. Or he sits out that 14 day period and waits for No Deal to just roll long..... He would not have the confidence of the House to send a letter to the EU requiring an extension. But there is no-one else to send it either. Means it is not his fault, as he has been VONCed.

    Even crazier if the EU have offered a deal. With no extension permitted.
This discussion has been closed.