Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What might mess up Tory strategy – Brexit is a much much bigge

245

Comments

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    That’s roughly what I’ve been saying for months. But here I don’t even have that choice to make as the Oranges have run away, endorsing the Greens who we all know are Corbyn with extra environmentalism.

    So I do not know what do to now.
    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?
    As a last resort, it’s an option I am considering. But it really feels like ducking responsibility.
    Then what's your biggest priority and which of the available horrid choices do you think is most likely to achieve it?
  • stodge said:

    HYUFD said:



    What a stupid poll question, even the points system Boris wants would still enable EU citizens to live and work in the UK if they have the skills we need

    The question no one wants to ask or answer is what about the EU citizens already here who don't "have the skills we need".

    Well the people we need are a mix of high skilled and low skilled, not so much medium skilled. For high skilled points criteria works pretty well. For low skilled it doesnt.

    EU immigrants from the EU14 are prominent in education, science and professional jobs, whereas they are underrepresented in retail, transport, construction, manufacturing and support services where the newer EU countries provide more of the people.

    We conflate the two and pretend we dont need the low skilled so can pick the best immigrants available and have high financial barriers. We cant as we do need low skilled immigration.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    Derby North is the Lab seat with the 21st smallest lead over Con, (2015 Votes) and only a modest Lib Dem votes to squeeze (2262 votes) and votes for Brexit 54%

    Will he split the lab vote?? I suspect only a few hundred at most? but no local knowledge.
  • CatMan said:
    People like the right in principle. They don't like the numbers in practice.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Drutt said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    That’s roughly what I’ve been saying for months. But here I don’t even have that choice to make as the Oranges have run away, endorsing the Greens who we all know are Corbyn with extra environmentalism.

    So I do not know what do to now.
    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?
    A kobayashi maru election? How very PB.
    Hmmmm... if only it were possible to reprogram the simulation so that we could rescue ourselves...
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Alistair said:

    Apparently Ian Murray's leaflet doesn't mention Jez or Labour at all...

    https://twitter.com/AngelicNat38/status/1194337908578275331

    Woah, the Printers note even says it is on behalf of Ian Murray not the Labour Party. Is that okay?
    Depends if he gets it out before his nomination is accepted.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    BigRich said:

    Derby North is the Lab seat with the 21st smallest lead over Con, (2015 Votes) and only a modest Lib Dem votes to squeeze (2262 votes) and votes for Brexit 54%

    Will he split the lab vote?? I suspect only a few hundred at most? but no local knowledge.
    I suspect that he will get enough votes to allow the Tories to win the seat.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pulpstar said:

    Apparently Ian Murray's leaflet doesn't mention Jez or Labour at all...

    https://twitter.com/AngelicNat38/status/1194337908578275331

    I'd have a serious think about voting for him in Edinburgh South, probably more so than any other remain & labour candidate. I expect unionist tacticals will get him over the line.
    Murray is safe as houses built to a stringent building code. A decent return on your money in exactly a month's time would be to put all your betting cash on him to win.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    That’s roughly what I’ve been saying for months. But here I don’t even have that choice to make as the Oranges have run away, endorsing the Greens who we all know are Corbyn with extra environmentalism.

    So I do not know what do to now.
    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?
    As a last resort, it’s an option I am considering. But it really feels like ducking responsibility.
    Then what's your biggest priority and which of the available horrid choices do you think is most likely to achieve it?
    That’s what I am trying to work out.
  • Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Good answers!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Labour @1.22 in Edinburgh South is free money.

    Literally the only thing that could stop it is Murray running as an Independent.
  • Noo said:

    Noo said:


    It's hard to separate out the person from the appearance though. So this kind of exercise is probably doomed to a double-subjectivity. I tried to add the Lib Dems in, but I figured I'm be lynched by the Brexiters for saying that Nick Clegg is a properly beautiful man, and gets his own category.
    Plus, it's really hard to find pictures of Vince Cable looking young. He seems to have been the same age for the past forty years.

    Oh, screw it, here's the Lib Dems too:

    Beautiful:
    Nick Clegg

    Possibly attractive in the right light:
    William Hague
    Ming Campbell
    Tony Blair
    Paddy Ashdown
    David Cameron
    Michael Howard

    Goofy but still got "something":
    John Major
    Charles Kennedy
    Gordon Brown
    David Steel
    Ed Miliband
    Vince Cable

    Gurning lunatics but not totally disgusting:
    Jo Swinson
    Jeremy Corbyn
    Margaret Thatcher
    Theresa May

    Skin crawling:
    Tim Farron
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Neil Kinnock
    James Callaghan

    Hippocrocodogomoose:
    Michael Foot
    Boris Johnson

    Come at me, PB, this is the hill I choose to die on.
    Luciana Berger and Gloria de Piero are pretty hot.
  • Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,156
    It's just sad - Corbyn didnt save him and he still worships him.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing to suburbanites will do better in swing state Iowa than some of the other candidates.

    I think Buttigieg does better than Biden in Iowa and Arizona. And Wisconsin was won - by a massive margin - by an openly lesbian woman last year, so hard to conclude that gayness is going to be a big negative there. Indeed, the only states where his homosexuality is likely to be a big issue (like North Carolina), were probably out of reach to any Democratic nominee in 2020.
    Interesting about Buttigieg. I have been banging on about him on here for a while now, and in particular, saying a surprise was coming in Iowa.

    Hope some of you are on. Ever since Axelrod said this guy is the deal many months ago, I've been on. Very very green.


    But DYOR.
    Bobby Axelrod?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Looks as if I will wait up for the Derby North result after all.
  • stodge said:

    HYUFD said:



    What a stupid poll question, even the points system Boris wants would still enable EU citizens to live and work in the UK if they have the skills we need

    The question no one wants to ask or answer is what about the EU citizens already here who don't "have the skills we need".

    If the question is about EU citizens claiming unemployment benefits then note that:

    Unemployment rates in the UK: EU immigrants 3.4% UK citizens 4.1% non EU 5.7%
    % of unemployed claiming benefits: EU 16%, UK 26%, non EU 19%

    so % of workforce unemployed and claiming benefits: EU 0.5% UK 1% non EU 1.1%

    Id say the answer is just wait for them to get a job or for them to choose to leave to somewhere they have greater prospects. It is just 1 in 200 of the EU workforce.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    That’s unfair to imbeciles.
  • HYUFD said:

    Except Labour are on just 28% and 29% with Yougov and Survation today, so the Labour vote is already down to its core with pro Brexit 2017 Labour voters already having switched to the Tories or Brexit Party. Boris with Yougov today does not need to convert a single extra Labour voter, as long as he holds the current Tory vote he would still win a landslide

    Bloody Survation fieldwork was from last week! I will have to adjust ELBOW for week-ending 10th Nov again!
    OK, so including Survation, ELBOW for week-ending 10th November:

    CON 38.1% (+0.2)
    LAB 28.2% (+1.9)
    LD 16.1% (+0.1)
    BXP 9.1% (-1.3)
    SNP 3.7% (+0.1)
    GRN 3.4% (-0.2)
    PC 0.6% (-0.2)
    Oth 0.8% (-0.5)

    CON lead 9.9% (-1.4)

    10 polls = Survation, BMG, ComRes, Deltapoll, Opinium, Panelbase, ICM, 3 YouGovs
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    In a Labour leave constituency which say had 55% voted leave. A large majority of that 55% voted conservative in 2015 and 2017, and some others did not vote in the GEs. There are not many Labour voters complaining that their MP is not leave enough.
  • Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:


    It's hard to separate out the person from the appearance though. So this kind of exercise is probably doomed to a double-subjectivity. I tried to add the Lib Dems in, but I figured I'm be lynched by the Brexiters for saying that Nick Clegg is a properly beautiful man, and gets his own category.
    Plus, it's really hard to find pictures of Vince Cable looking young. He seems to have been the same age for the past forty years.

    Oh, screw it, here's the Lib Dems too:

    Beautiful:
    Nick Clegg

    Possibly attractive in the right light:
    William Hague
    Ming Campbell
    Tony Blair
    Paddy Ashdown
    David Cameron
    Michael Howard

    Goofy but still got "something":
    John Major
    Charles Kennedy
    Gordon Brown
    David Steel
    Ed Miliband
    Vince Cable

    Gurning lunatics but not totally disgusting:
    Jo Swinson
    Jeremy Corbyn
    Margaret Thatcher
    Theresa May

    Skin crawling:
    Tim Farron
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Neil Kinnock
    James Callaghan

    Hippocrocodogomoose:
    Michael Foot
    Boris Johnson

    Come at me, PB, this is the hill I choose to die on.
    Were you involved in one of Clegg's bed post scratchings?
    I plead the fifth
    The fifth? Pretty early on then.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    A piece of local knowledge. The local labour party has become particularly unpopular. Last year they lost control of the council with both the mayor and leader of the labour group both losing their seats. they lost more seats this year. I live in the other Derby seat but it wouldn't take much to tar him with that same brush.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234

    rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing to suburbanites will do better in swing state Iowa than some of the other candidates.

    I think Buttigieg does better than Biden in Iowa and Arizona. And Wisconsin was won - by a massive margin - by an openly lesbian woman last year, so hard to conclude that gayness is going to be a big negative there. Indeed, the only states where his homosexuality is likely to be a big issue (like North Carolina), were probably out of reach to any Democratic nominee in 2020.
    Only 76% of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay President, but in turn only 63% of Americans say they would vote for a candidate over 70.

    Given his likely opponents are nearly all over 70 the voters will have to choose one characteristic or other that might not be their first preference.
    Buttigieg represents a completely fresh start just by looking at him thanks to his youth.

    His main pitch has been a new generation plus his experience as a city boss and stuff like serving military.

    Will exhausted Dem primary vote turn away from the oldsters (warren/biden) and throw the dice on a fresh start?

    I have bet they will.

    You and I both.

    I had no special insight, mind. I just start from the assumption that PB's new Rogerdamus is wrong and bet accordingly.

    Somehow he seems to have a blindspot about good looking, young-ish, centrist candidates.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898



    Well the people we need are a mix of high skilled and low skilled, not so much medium skilled. For high skilled points criteria works pretty well. For low skilled it doesnt.

    EU immigrants from the EU14 are prominent in education, science and professional jobs, whereas they are underrepresented in retail, transport, construction, manufacturing and support services where the newer EU countries provide more of the people.

    We conflate the two and pretend we don't need the low skilled so can pick the best immigrants available and have high financial barriers. We cant as we do need low skilled immigration.

    I agree the "I" word is complex and multi-layered. I see the impact of the Single Market and open door migration on a daily basis in my part of the world and it's not pretty. Too many migrants end up being exploited in terms of housing and work (often by their own country men regrettably).

    To house the influx of new workers we have a new generation of slums (20 people living in a 3-bedroom semi) and existing public services which are creaking under the strain of unprecedented population growth soon to be augmented by a new generation of box dwellers in new flats which will further stretch transport, health and school provision.

    I realise to say such things is borderline heretical but when you talk to law enforcement they will tell you the degree to which anti-social and illegal activities are controlled by gangs from Eastern Europe and the victims are the migrants themselves.

    Taking about "points systems" is fine and may even work but the problems are far more immediate.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234

    rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing to suburbanites will do better in swing state Iowa than some of the other candidates.

    I think Buttigieg does better than Biden in Iowa and Arizona. And Wisconsin was won - by a massive margin - by an openly lesbian woman last year, so hard to conclude that gayness is going to be a big negative there. Indeed, the only states where his homosexuality is likely to be a big issue (like North Carolina), were probably out of reach to any Democratic nominee in 2020.
    Only 76% of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay President, but in turn only 63% of Americans say they would vote for a candidate over 70.

    Given his likely opponents are nearly all over 70 the voters will have to choose one characteristic or other that might not be their first preference.
    Buttigieg represents a completely fresh start just by looking at him thanks to his youth.

    His main pitch has been a new generation plus his experience as a city boss and stuff like serving military.

    Will exhausted Dem primary vote turn away from the oldsters (warren/biden) and throw the dice on a fresh start?

    I have bet they will.



    I think voters tend to choose an opposite when ejecting a leader. Trump is so weird pretty much any candidate could be an opposite, but in particular Sanders might be too similar and Warren and Buttigieg meet the opposite criteria strongly.
    Yep. But Warren is McGovern. She will lose is my hunch.

    How will Trump deal with Buttigieg? The "weird name kid"?
    He'll describe him as gauche and self-made, and point out that he buys his own furniture.
  • https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1194357814996672512?s=19

    My view is that if you are a Tory remainer voting Lib Dem it's because your priority is to stop Brexit. I'm entirely unconvinced you'd reconsider that vote as a result of standing aside to give a non-Corbynista Labour remainer a shit at holding the seat against a hard Brexit Tory.

    I think Swinson's limitations have been totally exposed already in this campaign. Lightweight, and self-interested added he complete idiocy of the revoke policy which even repels many remainers. As an attempt to move the window on Brexit it was stupidity.

    For a party who claim their priority is to stop Brexit, they have funny way of showing it.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    spudgfsh said:

    BigRich said:

    Derby North is the Lab seat with the 21st smallest lead over Con, (2015 Votes) and only a modest Lib Dem votes to squeeze (2262 votes) and votes for Brexit 54%

    Will he split the lab vote?? I suspect only a few hundred at most? but no local knowledge.
    I suspect that he will get enough votes to allow the Tories to win the seat.
    What about TBP splitting the leave vote?

    It is interesting how many people's opinions on this site are biassed by their own political wishes. The predictions on ths site are supposed to be based around betting tips, which should of course be politically neutral.


  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    edited November 2019
    Freedom of movement has been portrayed as something the UK was subjected to , as if it was a punishment .

    The benefits to Brits to enjoy that freedom has never been properly sold . It seems also that some in the UK think that FOM stopping only applies to other EU nationals , that Brits will be able to do what they like still .
  • stodge said:



    Well the people we need are a mix of high skilled and low skilled, not so much medium skilled. For high skilled points criteria works pretty well. For low skilled it doesnt.

    EU immigrants from the EU14 are prominent in education, science and professional jobs, whereas they are underrepresented in retail, transport, construction, manufacturing and support services where the newer EU countries provide more of the people.

    We conflate the two and pretend we don't need the low skilled so can pick the best immigrants available and have high financial barriers. We cant as we do need low skilled immigration.

    I agree the "I" word is complex and multi-layered. I see the impact of the Single Market and open door migration on a daily basis in my part of the world and it's not pretty. Too many migrants end up being exploited in terms of housing and work (often by their own country men regrettably).

    To house the influx of new workers we have a new generation of slums (20 people living in a 3-bedroom semi) and existing public services which are creaking under the strain of unprecedented population growth soon to be augmented by a new generation of box dwellers in new flats which will further stretch transport, health and school provision.

    I realise to say such things is borderline heretical but when you talk to law enforcement they will tell you the degree to which anti-social and illegal activities are controlled by gangs from Eastern Europe and the victims are the migrants themselves.

    Taking about "points systems" is fine and may even work but the problems are far more immediate.
    I definitely think we should talk openly about the problems of immigration. It has always been an opportunity and moneyspinner for criminal gangs and probably always will be. It obviously can put strain on local resources.

    People need to be able to point out real local issues without fear. But we do need immigration, and will have immigration so the question is how do we manage it best?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1194357814996672512?s=19

    My view is that if you are a Tory remainer voting Lib Dem it's because your priority is to stop Brexit. I'm entirely unconvinced you'd reconsider that vote as a result of standing aside to give a non-Corbynista Labour remainer a shit at holding the seat against a hard Brexit Tory.

    I think Swinson's limitations have been totally exposed already in this campaign. Lightweight, and self-interested added he complete idiocy of the revoke policy which even repels many remainers. As an attempt to move the window on Brexit it was stupidity.

    For a party who claim their priority is to stop Brexit, they have funny way of showing it.

    Thats not me btw!!
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    eristdoof said:

    spudgfsh said:

    BigRich said:

    Derby North is the Lab seat with the 21st smallest lead over Con, (2015 Votes) and only a modest Lib Dem votes to squeeze (2262 votes) and votes for Brexit 54%

    Will he split the lab vote?? I suspect only a few hundred at most? but no local knowledge.
    I suspect that he will get enough votes to allow the Tories to win the seat.
    What about TBP splitting the leave vote?

    It is interesting how many people's opinions on this site are biassed by their own political wishes. The predictions on ths site are supposed to be based around betting tips, which should of course be politically neutral.
    I live in the area, if not the seat, and he has an amount of personal popularity in the labour supporting voters. Given the unpopularity of the local labour party in the council I could see people voting for him as a 'non-labour labour' candidate. I could also see Margaret Beckett lose votes in derby south but not enough to lose the seat.
  • CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    eristdoof said:

    spudgfsh said:

    BigRich said:

    Derby North is the Lab seat with the 21st smallest lead over Con, (2015 Votes) and only a modest Lib Dem votes to squeeze (2262 votes) and votes for Brexit 54%

    Will he split the lab vote?? I suspect only a few hundred at most? but no local knowledge.
    I suspect that he will get enough votes to allow the Tories to win the seat.
    What about TBP splitting the leave vote?

    It is interesting how many people's opinions on this site are biassed by their own political wishes. The predictions on ths site are supposed to be based around betting tips, which should of course be politically neutral.


    Wholly in the spirit of political neutrality, and based entirely on betting tips, and influenced by the 2/7 odds, Con gain nailed on.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,156

    CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
    Might require us asking several times - I doubt they'd want us back in too soon, before it was clear it was for keeps.
  • stodge said:



    Well the people we need are a mix of high skilled and low skilled, not so much medium skilled. For high skilled points criteria works pretty well. For low skilled it doesnt.

    EU immigrants from the EU14 are prominent in education, science and professional jobs, whereas they are underrepresented in retail, transport, construction, manufacturing and support services where the newer EU countries provide more of the people.

    We conflate the two and pretend we don't need the low skilled so can pick the best immigrants available and have high financial barriers. We cant as we do need low skilled immigration.

    I agree the "I" word is complex and multi-layered. I see the impact of the Single Market and open door migration on a daily basis in my part of the world and it's not pretty. Too many migrants end up being exploited in terms of housing and work (often by their own country men regrettably).

    To house the influx of new workers we have a new generation of slums (20 people living in a 3-bedroom semi) and existing public services which are creaking under the strain of unprecedented population growth soon to be augmented by a new generation of box dwellers in new flats which will further stretch transport, health and school provision.

    I realise to say such things is borderline heretical but when you talk to law enforcement they will tell you the degree to which anti-social and illegal activities are controlled by gangs from Eastern Europe and the victims are the migrants themselves.

    Taking about "points systems" is fine and may even work but the problems are far more immediate.
    You think that making it illegal is going to *reduce* the opportunities for criminal gangs?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
    well start in 2030 and then leavers can block it for the next 3 years like a bunch of spoilt brats not getting their own way.
  • kle4 said:

    CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
    Might require us asking several times - I doubt they'd want us back in too soon, before it was clear it was for keeps.
    Yeah, Macron as the new De Gaulle. I wouldn't have us, we're a fucking joke.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149

    HYUFD said:

    CatMan said:
    What a stupid poll question, even the points system Boris wants would still enable EU citizens to live and work in the UK if they have the skills we need
    We have a points based system of immigration already.......

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/points-based-system-tier-2
    Not for EU nations we don't despite most voters wanting it

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/708162/Theresa-May-migration-Brexit-Nigel-Farage-Ukip
  • nico67 said:

    Freedom of movement has been portrayed as something the UK was subjected to , as if it was a punishment .

    The benefits to Brits to enjoy that freedom has never been properly sold .

    The Brits who want to work abroad are already comfortable with low skilled immigration.
    The Brits who are uncomfortable with low skilled immigration tend not to want to work abroad, so that is not an easy sell.

    The sell should always have been being honest about the aging population, and the related completely unaffordable costs of health and elderly care without immigration. Even with high immigration that change is going to be extremely costly for the UK.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    kle4 said:

    CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
    Might require us asking several times - I doubt they'd want us back in too soon, before it was clear it was for keeps.
    going back in would be a process. start with EFTA then move to full membership. If we asked to rejoin they'd bite our hands off to get us closer and it'd be EFTA which satisfied both sides initially
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    CatMan said:
    What a stupid poll question, even the points system Boris wants would still enable EU citizens to live and work in the UK if they have the skills we need
    We have a points based system of immigration already.......

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/points-based-system-tier-2
    Not for EU nations we don't despite most voters wanting it

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/708162/Theresa-May-migration-Brexit-Nigel-Farage-Ukip
    Really? Thanks for the informed commentary.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,213
    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    Rubbish - they are enabling Corbyn not constraining him
  • Floater said:

    CatMan said:
    Ha ha, you are shitting me. The public really are a funny bunch aren't they.
    We are rejoining the EU by 2030.
    well start in 2030 and then leavers can block it for the next 3 years like a bunch of spoilt brats not getting their own way.
    They wouldn't be able to because we'd know what we were doing.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited November 2019
    Quincel said:

    State Filing Deadlines which have passed: 2 (Alabama, Arkansas)

    Primaries Andrew Yang will be in: 2
    Primaries Hillary Clinton will be in: 0

    Candidate considered more likely by Betfair punters to win: Hillary Clinton

    (Also, Deval Patrick hasn't filed in either.)

    Presumably Andrew Yang sure loves his ma and pa.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149

    Noo said:

    Noo said:


    It's hard to separate out the person from the appearance though. So this kind of exercise is probably doomed to a double-subjectivity. I tried to add the Lib Dems in, but I figured I'm be lynched by the Brexiters for saying that Nick Clegg is a properly beautiful man, and gets his own category.
    Plus, it's really hard to find pictures of Vince Cable looking young. He seems to have been the same age for the past forty years.

    Oh, screw it, here's the Lib Dems too:

    Beautiful:
    Nick Clegg

    Possibly attractive in the right light:
    William Hague
    Ming Campbell
    Tony Blair
    Paddy Ashdown
    David Cameron
    Michael Howard

    Goofy but still got "something":
    John Major
    Charles Kennedy
    Gordon Brown
    David Steel
    Ed Miliband
    Vince Cable

    Gurning lunatics but not totally disgusting:
    Jo Swinson
    Jeremy Corbyn
    Margaret Thatcher
    Theresa May

    Skin crawling:
    Tim Farron
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Neil Kinnock
    James Callaghan

    Hippocrocodogomoose:
    Michael Foot
    Boris Johnson

    Come at me, PB, this is the hill I choose to die on.
    Luciana Berger and Gloria de Piero are pretty hot.
    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1194346821042294785?s=20
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
  • ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
  • HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:


    It's hard to separate out the person from the appearance though. So this kind of exercise is probably doomed to a double-subjectivity. I tried to add the Lib Dems in, but I figured I'm be lynched by the Brexiters for saying that Nick Clegg is a properly beautiful man, and gets his own category.
    Plus, it's really hard to find pictures of Vince Cable looking young. He seems to have been the same age for the past forty years.

    Oh, screw it, here's the Lib Dems too:

    Beautiful:
    Nick Clegg

    Possibly attractive in the right light:
    William Hague
    Ming Campbell
    Tony Blair
    Paddy Ashdown
    David Cameron
    Michael Howard

    Goofy but still got "something":
    John Major
    Charles Kennedy
    Gordon Brown
    David Steel
    Ed Miliband
    Vince Cable

    Gurning lunatics but not totally disgusting:
    Jo Swinson
    Jeremy Corbyn
    Margaret Thatcher
    Theresa May

    Skin crawling:
    Tim Farron
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Neil Kinnock
    James Callaghan

    Hippocrocodogomoose:
    Michael Foot
    Boris Johnson

    Come at me, PB, this is the hill I choose to die on.
    Luciana Berger and Gloria de Piero are pretty hot.
    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1194346821042294785?s=20
    Um. Ok.

    I'm straight mate.
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    nico67 said:

    Freedom of movement has been portrayed as something the UK was subjected to , as if it was a punishment .

    The benefits to Brits to enjoy that freedom has never been properly sold . It seems also that some in the UK think that FOM stopping only applies to other EU nationals , that Brits will be able to do what they like still .

    We've had a referendum campaign and three and a half years of remainiac squealing, if it hasn't been "properly sold" by now it never will be.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1194357814996672512?s=19

    My view is that if you are a Tory remainer voting Lib Dem it's because your priority is to stop Brexit. I'm entirely unconvinced you'd reconsider that vote as a result of standing aside to give a non-Corbynista Labour remainer a shit at holding the seat against a hard Brexit Tory...

    But that is precisely the objection several on here have expressed, since they place an equal or higher priority on not getting Corbyn.

    Nice typo, btw.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234
    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    I last bet on him at 8.7. (And previously in double digits. Some in high double digits.)

    The thing is, if he wins Iowa (40% chance) and New Hampshire (60% chance if he wins Iowa), then he's probably a 90% chance for the nomination. So, 6.2 might be short, but only marginally.

    If only a PBer had written a thread on him. (HT to Ms Cyclefree.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    They would be replaced by their husbands, so there would still be a gay presence. That’s why I said ‘women and gays.’
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Let’s be blunt if Labour become the biggest party is Jo Swinson really going to say no I refuse to support you for enough time to get a second EU vote .

    Talk about betrayal then, given the Lib Dems sole mission is to stop Brexit will she really refuse to support them and end up having another election .

    The big problem for the Lib Dems is many of their candidates will feel sick if they allow the Tories to come through because they stood in seats which they had no hope of winning but split enough of the Remain vote .

    Labour should also be criticized for not coming to some sort of arrangement.

    Desperate times call for desperate measures . I’m pretty sure if Keir Starmer was Leader that would have happened .
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234
    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    Gay sex pest HARDCORE REMAINER MPs, surely?
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the . There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    They would be replaced by their husbands, so there would still be a gay presence. That’s why I said ‘women and gays.’
    In these more enlightened times I would hope that sex pest MPs would be replaced by their ex-wives and ex-husbands.
  • No doubt we will be getting a thread header on this shocking story soon:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/12/revealed-conservative-councillors-islamophobic-social-media
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing to suburbanites will do better in swing state Iowa than some of the other candidates.
    I think Buttigieg does better than Biden in Iowa and Arizona. And Wisconsin was won - by a massive margin - by an openly lesbian woman last year, so hard to conclude that gayness is going to be a big negative there. Indeed, the only states where his homosexuality is likely to be a big issue (like North Carolina), were probably out of reach to any Democratic nominee in 2020.
    Only 76% of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay President, but in turn only 63% of Americans say they would vote for a candidate over 70.
    Given his likely opponents are nearly all over 70 the voters will have to choose one characteristic or other that might not be their first preference.
    Buttigieg represents a completely fresh start just by looking at him thanks to his youth.
    His main pitch has been a new generation plus his experience as a city boss and stuff like serving military.
    Will exhausted Dem primary vote turn away from the oldsters (warren/biden) and throw the dice on a fresh start? I have bet they will.
    I think voters tend to choose an opposite when ejecting a leader. Trump is so weird pretty much any candidate could be an opposite, but in particular Sanders might be too similar and Warren and Buttigieg meet the opposite criteria strongly.
    Yep. But Warren is McGovern. She will lose is my hunch.
    How will Trump deal with Buttigieg? The "weird name kid"?
    He'll describe him as gauche and self-made, and point out that he buys his own furniture.
    That sounds much more like Trump himself than Buttigieg. From what I have seen of him, he seems sensible, socially competent and highly intelligent.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    camel said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the . There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    They would be replaced by their husbands, so there would still be a gay presence. That’s why I said ‘women and gays.’
    In these more enlightened times I would hope that sex pest MPs would be replaced by their ex-wives and ex-husbands.
    Doesn’t appear to be the case in Dover and Burton.
  • rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    Gay sex pest HARDCORE REMAINER MPs, surely?
    Be careful which search engines you type that into.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Buttigieg is 4th in the latest New Hampshire polls behind Warren, Biden and Sanders.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Hampshire_Democratic_primary

    Buttigieg is 6th in the latest SC polls behind Biden, Warren, Sanders, Harris and Steyer

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_South_Carolina_Democratic_primary

    Obama won Iowa but lost New Hampshire in 2008 as did Hillary in 2016 as did Cruz and Santorum and Huckabee on the GOP side in 2016, 2012 and 2008
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    Another death of a veteran public servant:

    Ex-Armed Forces head Lord Bramall dies aged 95
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50397069
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited November 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Doesn’t the new system make that much less certain? With delegates awarded proportionately, the convention is likely to be determinative. Pete Buttigieg might be good at horse-trading. Or he might not. We don’t know yet.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Buttigieg is 4th in the latest New Hampshire polls behind Warren, Biden and Sanders.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Hampshire_Democratic_primary
    Wikipedia is out of date. See: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/new-hampshire/
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,489
    There’s a poll out tonight showing 67% of Britons support freedom of movement across the UK and EU. Which makes me again wonder why we bothered with this pointless Brexit lark in the first place.
  • ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    That’s roughly what I’ve been saying for months. But here I don’t even have that choice to make as the Oranges have run away, endorsing the Greens who we all know are Corbyn with extra environmentalism.

    So I do not know what do to now.
    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?
    as a brexiteer in a seat held by a remainer tory I now have a choice of three variants of remain and no leave candidate. Spoilt ballot will get my vote.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Only my Girl the Biggy Lizzee can stop him.

    From a betting returns point of view best if he wins it though.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
    You could say the same about the Tories, moderate MPs/ candidates may take a more mainstream view on Brexit but every vote for a moderate Tory MP is a vote to make BJ PM and take us to No Deal....
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1194357814996672512?s=19

    My view is that if you are a Tory remainer voting Lib Dem it's because your priority is to stop Brexit. I'm entirely unconvinced you'd reconsider that vote as a result of standing aside to give a non-Corbynista Labour remainer a shit at holding the seat against a hard Brexit Tory...

    But that is precisely the objection several on here have expressed, since they place an equal or higher priority on not getting Corbyn.

    Nice typo, btw.
    Oh absolutely - and the Conservatives would do well to have another tilt at discrediting Corbyn during this campaign, because it is quite possible that the result will hinge on whether the soft Remain Tory vote will stay loyal out of fear of enabling him. There's even a theory that Johnson has only agreed to head-to-head debates with Corbyn in order to remind his own wavering supporters of how much they detest the Labour leader.

    I would even go so far as to say that a non-negligible percentage of Leave voters will back the Lib Dems in straight LD-Lab fights, again because they place so much value on keeping Corbyn as far away from power as possible that they are prepared to endorse a Revocation-supporting candidate. I know that I would.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,721

    ydoethur said:

    dr_spyn said:
    If every sex pest MP resigned and was replaced by his wife, it would do wonders for the gender balance in the Commons. There’d pretty much only be women and gays left.
    What about the gay sex pest MPs?
    Replaced with their husbands? :)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234
    PClipp said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:



    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.

    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing to suburbanites will do better in swing state Iowa than some of the other candidates.
    I think Buttigieg does better than Biden in Iowa and Arizona. And Wisconsin was won - by a massive margin - by an openly lesbian woman last year, so hard to conclude that gayness is going to be a big negative there. Indeed, the only states where his homosexuality is likely to be a big issue (like North Carolina), were probably out of reach to any Democratic nominee in 2020.
    Only 76% of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay President, but in turn only 63% of Americans say they would vote for a candidate over 70.
    Given his likely opponents are nearly all over 70 the voters will have to choose one characteristic or other that might not be their first preference.
    Buttigieg represents a completely fresh start just by looking at him thanks to his youth.
    His main pitch has been a new generation plus his experience as a city boss and stuff like serving military.
    Will exhausted Dem primary vote turn away from the oldsters (warren/biden) and throw the dice on a fresh start? I have bet they will.
    I think voters tend to choose an opposite when ejecting a leader. Trump is so weird pretty much any candidate could be an opposite, but in particular Sanders might be too similar and Warren and Buttigieg meet the opposite criteria strongly.
    Yep. But Warren is McGovern. She will lose is my hunch.
    How will Trump deal with Buttigieg? The "weird name kid"?
    He'll describe him as gauche and self-made, and point out that he buys his own furniture.
    That sounds much more like Trump himself than Buttigieg. From what I have seen of him, he seems sensible, socially competent and highly intelligent.
    I know, and that's why he'll trounce the gay guy with the funny name.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    dr_spyn said:
    @BrexitStewart, aka Stewart Jackson, also tried to get Sevenoaks. Clearly eager to become an MP again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    ydoethur said:

    Another death of a veteran public servant:

    Ex-Armed Forces head Lord Bramall dies aged 95
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50397069

    RIP We shared the same birthday, glad the allegations were proved rubbish given his contribution as a soldier
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    A gay presidential candidate and the Dems really will have handed the election to Trump , you’re not going to win the key swing states .

    Sorry to be blunt and not politically correct but seriously there’s no chance the USA will vote for a gay President . The Dems need to get out of their bubble and put forward Biden who is the only one who can win those swing states .

    Running up big totals in California and NY means zip with the Electoral College system .
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    edited November 2019

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
    You could say the same about the Tories, moderate MPs/ candidates may take a more mainstream view on Brexit but every vote for a moderate Tory MP is a vote to make BJ PM and take us to No Deal....
    You could. However, there is a tried and tested mechanism for rapid disposal of Tory leaders who mess up.

    Remind me what happened when Labour tried that with Corbyn?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Buttigieg is 4th in the latest New Hampshire polls behind Warren, Biden and Sanders.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Hampshire_Democratic_primary
    Wikipedia is out of date. See: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/new-hampshire/
    He is still 3rd in the latest NH poll there behind Biden and Warren
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,213
    So, how likely do we think Ross Thomson is to retain his seat, and will Nigel Evans be happy with Johnson's brexit policies in a year's time ?
  • There’s a poll out tonight showing 67% of Britons support freedom of movement across the UK and EU. Which makes me again wonder why we bothered with this pointless Brexit lark in the first place.

    To solve certain internal problems within the Conservative Party.
  • My best WH2020 bet is Amy Klobuchar. In October I got odds of 760 on her on Betfair -My stake £8 my potential winnings £6,072.00.

    She's still in the race
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
    You could say the same about the Tories, moderate MPs/ candidates may take a more mainstream view on Brexit but every vote for a moderate Tory MP is a vote to make BJ PM and take us to No Deal....
    Boris has a Deal which will lead to a FTA, only Farage is a vote for No Deal
  • Floater said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    Rubbish - they are enabling Corbyn not constraining him
    Enabling him to do what? It is the existence of Remainer MPs like Rosie Duffield which has forced Corbyn to shift Labour's Brexit position to Renegotiate and Final Say.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?

    as a brexiteer in a seat held by a remainer tory I now have a choice of three variants of remain and no leave candidate. Spoilt ballot will get my vote.
    Under those circumstances you surely want to go for the Tory? The fact that said candidate might, personally, have preferred that we never leave the EU is neither here nor there. They will endorse the Withdrawal Agreement regardless.

    All of the Conservative MPs who were so implacably opposed to Brexit that they wanted to force either Norway + CU, a confirmatory referendum or both have already gone. Any candidate returned or elected for the first time under the 2019 manifesto is fully signed up to Johnson's programme.

    Even if you suspect that your local Tory might get up to funny business during the negotiations on the future relationship, at least they will give Brexit the chance to get that far. If given the opportunity, the other alternatives either may not or will not do so.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,721
    PClipp said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Mayor Pete takes the lead in Iowa.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/home

    He was up to 15% in New Hampshire as well, within 5% of first place.
    How seriously do you rate this meme that African-American Democrats won’t vote (and aren’t ready for) an openly gay man?
    As seriously as I rated the meme that "Evangelicals won't vote for a proven liar and fornicator who paid for abortions for women he had extra-marital affairs with".
    The problem will manifest itself in turnout rather than vote share.
    Sure, but it's swings and roundabouts. A pleasant, clean, sensible, young, Christian ex-veteran who's appealing
    Only 76% of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay President, but in turn only 63% of Americans say they would vote for a candidate over 70.
    Given his likely opponents are nearly all over 70 the voters will have to choose one characteristic or other that might not be their first preference.
    Buttigieg represents a completely fresh start just by looking at him thanks to his youth.
    His main pitch has been a new generation plus his experience as a city boss and stuff like serving military.
    Will exhausted Dem primary vote turn away from the oldsters (warren/biden) and throw the dice on a fresh start? I have bet they will.
    I think voters tend to choose an opposite when ejecting a leader. Trump is so weird pretty much any candidate could be an opposite, but in particular Sanders might be too similar and Warren and Buttigieg meet the opposite criteria strongly.
    Yep. But Warren is McGovern. She will lose is my hunch.
    How will Trump deal with Buttigieg? The "weird name kid"?
    He'll describe him as gauche and self-made, and point out that he buys his own furniture.
    That sounds much more like Trump himself than Buttigieg. From what I have seen of him, he seems sensible, socially competent and highly intelligent.
    Just a bit of a policy vacuum. Certainly a lack of belief and ideology is not a bar to a political career, likely to be exposed though.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    There’s a poll out tonight showing 67% of Britons support freedom of movement across the UK and EU. Which makes me again wonder why we bothered with this pointless Brexit lark in the first place.

    To solve certain internal problems within the Conservative Party.
    Its like saying people want higher taxes, as long as they are for someone else.

    They don't mind immigration , till they cant find somewhere to live.

    These polling questions are just simplistic bullshit.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019

    There’s a poll out tonight showing 67% of Britons support freedom of movement across the UK and EU. Which makes me again wonder why we bothered with this pointless Brexit lark in the first place.

    No it is a crap poll which basically asks whether EU migration should be banned or not.

    As Survation has found 59% of voters back Boris' points based system to replace free movement

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/708162/Theresa-May-migration-Brexit-Nigel-Farage-Ukip
  • There’s a poll out tonight showing 67% of Britons support freedom of movement across the UK and EU. Which makes me again wonder why we bothered with this pointless Brexit lark in the first place.

    Because for many of us it had sweet FA to do with immigration.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Pulpstar said:

    So, how likely do we think Ross Thomson is to retain his seat, and will Nigel Evans be happy with Johnson's brexit policies in a year's time ?

    I thought he wasn’t standing after the grope affair . He does have good taste in men though his alleged victim is very handsome .
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
    You could say the same about the Tories, moderate MPs/ candidates may take a more mainstream view on Brexit but every vote for a moderate Tory MP is a vote to make BJ PM and take us to No Deal....
    You could. However, there is a tried and tested mechanism for rapid disposal of Tory leaders who mess up.

    Remind me what happened when Labour tried that with Corbyn?
    The Tories did not get rid of TM on the first attempt, she was VONC last year (Dec2018?) IIRC. Indeed several attempts were made before they got the VONC, it was a protracted affair. BJ might be as hard to ditch as TM! :wink: BJ is more of a problem as well because he takes big chances/gambles. Not the sort of person you want in the nations driving seat....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,234

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Doesn’t the new system make that much less certain? With delegates awarded proportionately, the convention is likely to be determinative. Pete Buttigieg might be good at horse-trading. Or he might not. We don’t know yet.
    I thought that.

    But then I remembered the 15% threshold (albeit at the precinct level). This means we're likely to see four candidates (at most).

    Take Iowa. Imagine the players are Warren, Buttigieg, Biden, Sanders in that order. Well, it'll probably be 40-30-20-10 for delegate share. In New Hampshire, it'll be the same four. And the fourth placed player - unless there's a big reshuffling of the deck - will likely be forced out.

    I think it's likely that come Super Tuesday there will only be three players in the game. Which three? Who knows.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    But bear in mind that Labour candidates like Rosie Duffield are not Corbynistas (in fact a section of her local party are against her for this reason). They would seek to drag Labour to the Remain side and would not give him carte blanche for everything else.
    That’s as maybe. These “moderates” have so far achieved the square root of fuck all in tempering or controlling Corbyn.

    But the key point is this: a vote for a Labour MP while Corbyn is leader is a vote for Corbyn to become PM. And the more votes Labour gets the more likely that he will become PM and, even if not, remain as Labour leader? Those Labour MPs who go on about how moderate and anti-Corbyn they are are fooling themselves, as well as the voters.
    I am not sure if that's the whole story @Cyclefree...

    If Boris is not PM after the election the mix of Labour MPs will be important in shaping the future, either in moderating PM Corbyn or in helping ensure someone other than Corbyn leads a non-Tory administration.

    I think the world where party loyalties hold firm has passed and thus the more moderate MPs we have (Lab or Con) the more chance we have of moderating the extremes of whichever party leads the government.
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited November 2019

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If the Lib Dems go into any sort of informal alliance with Labour I am going to have to take the Meeks option - abstain in person. NFW am I going to vote Lib Dem if there is even the slightest chance they will prop up Corbyn.

    Understood. You prefer The Clown to The Cold Warrior.
    Many do not want to choose between them, but outside of a few areas, that is not really viable - either, or none, still makes a choice which helps one of them.
    I am in a Labour seat with an 11,000 majority. The Lib Dems may take it - though it is unlikely.

    I don’t want Corbyn anywhere near power. I feel about him - and have felt this since before he became leader - much as Ian Austin does. Corbyn, IMO, is not fit to be a Labour MP and very definitely not leader or PM. His default assumptions and instincts and judgment are, IMO, wrong and misguided. His political moral compass is pointing in the wrong direction.

    I could say much the same about Johnson. I do not want the Tories in power - let alone with a large majority. They have lost any chance of getting my vote. They have been taken over by the Brexit party.

    I hope both Corbyn and Johnson can lose and never be heard of again.

    I had intended to vote Lib Dems in the vain hope that they are vaguely sensible and neither batshit insane nor malicious.
    That’s roughly what I’ve been saying for months. But here I don’t even have that choice to make as the Oranges have run away, endorsing the Greens who we all know are Corbyn with extra environmentalism.

    So I do not know what do to now.
    If all the remaining available choices are utterly repellent, then abstention could be considered honourable?
    as a brexiteer in a seat held by a remainer tory I now have a choice of three variants of remain and no leave candidate. Spoilt ballot will get my vote.
    Same, though I doubt i'll bother to go and spoil the ballot. This election will be the first time I will not be voting.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,236

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Buttigieg a touch short at 6.2 right now on Betfair. I've laid back a smidgen, he'll probably shorten further after Iowa anyway.

    Buttigieg is spending a fortune in Iowa but beyond there he is not making much impact
    Laughable.

    He's on 15%, only five points behind Biden in New Hampshire, and up about seven points in the last month.

    If he wins Iowa, the he's odds on to win New Hamphire.

    If he's won Iowa and New Hampshire then... oh yes... he's probably the Democratic nominee.
    Doesn’t the new system make that much less certain? With delegates awarded proportionately, the convention is likely to be determinative. Pete Buttigieg might be good at horse-trading. Or he might not. We don’t know yet.
    Yes, I think there is a touch of a Robert being influenced by his own book there.

    Of course it’s possible that Biden’s strength in S.Carolina melts away in those circumstances, but it’s equally possible it doesn’t.
    (And also quite likely that Buttigieg doesn’t win New Hampshire after Iowa.)

    Odds on, just possibly - but 90%, no way.
This discussion has been closed.