Labour is upticking in all polls since the election was actually called (which is actually better than 2017 I think, since the uptick then only happened when the manifesto leaked).
The Tories have gone up a bit in the last week - but I think the average is a 10 point gap.
What is not consistent, is the strength of the Tory vote. It goes from 36 to 43. Labour is quite consistently around 30.
It wasn't like this last time, not this early on.
The Tories didn't go up at all during the last election campaign. They only went down or stayed the same. This time they are up.
They went up after the election was called. That famous 50 point poll for instance.
Right at the start, but during they flatlined or went down afterwards. You can see that clearly in the wiki graph linked above.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
Labour is upticking in all polls since the election was actually called (which is actually better than 2017 I think, since the uptick then only happened when the manifesto leaked).
The Tories have gone up a bit in the last week - but I think the average is a 10 point gap.
What is not consistent, is the strength of the Tory vote. It goes from 36 to 43. Labour is quite consistently around 30.
It wasn't like this last time, not this early on.
The Tories didn't go up at all during the last election campaign. They only went down or stayed the same. This time they are up.
They went up after the election was called. That famous 50 point poll for instance.
Right at the start, but during they flatlined or went down afterwards. You can see that clearly in the wiki graph linked above.
They rise for a bit, you can see the peak after the election is called.
It's fairly similar trajectory, the average gap is this time much smaller.
If the gap increases further, then fine yes Labour are in trouble.
But the best comparison will be post the manifesto launch, so this time next week.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
I am not fighting any battles. Just commenting on what I see.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
Rejoin? If the Tories win a solid majority we'll be out of the EU and there won't be another GE for five years. Will everyone want to re-start the Brexit debate again in 2024? Only if the trade negotiations have gone badly and are still going on by then.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I agree with you about concentrating power in the hands of individuals -- that is why I am a liberal at heart. There must be checks and balances. I don't think of extending free broadband to every address does that. Having something run by the state doesn't mean that the executive would have the power to meddle in operational issues. Most state-run services are not under the control of the PM.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
While we're on the fascinating subject of 1983 music videos, I think the Human League nailed the concept of fake news a long time before anyone else with the following lyrics:
"Well the truth may need some rearranging, Stories to be told, And, plain to see, the facts are changing No meaning left to hold"
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now and big tech are already using it.
On topic, If a majority of people not only think Brexit is wrong but wish to stop it, the power is in their hands, particularly those in marginal seats. They know what choice will stop Brexit (or at least might) and what choice definitely will not, and it's up to the public to be smart about it.
Late to the game, but clearly, whilst a majority may think its wrong to leave, they either put it as a low priority issue (and therefore are sticking with Labour/Conservative) or they think its wrong, but believe democracy must be upheld.
If Brexit was as all pervasive as some on this site believed, the Lib Dems would be on 40 percent, not 16.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now.
Yes. But they know you have a choice. If you can't acccess Tor through them (for example) then you lose customers.
The government as monopoly supplier would not have that constraint.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now and big tech are already using it.
No they don't because you can just move elsewhere. They certainly try and they can certainly make life difficult but because they do not have the powers that are being suggested by Labour it is in effect impossible.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall make no idols. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. Keep the Sabbath day holy. Honor your father and your mother. You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. You shall not covet.
Name two Johnson hasn’t broken.
Although that said, naming one Corbyn hasn’t broken is hard work...
Moses was brought up in the Egyptian Court. Here are the 42 "negative confessions" of Ani:
I have not committed sin. I have not committed robbery with violence I have not stolen. I have not slain men and women. I have not stolen grain. I have not purloined offerings. I have not stolen the property of God. I have not uttered lies. I have not carried away food. I have not uttered curses. I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men. I have made none to weep. I have not eaten the heart. I have not attacked any man. I am not a man of deceit. I have not stolen cultivated land. I have not been an eavesdropper. I have not slandered [no man]. I have not been angry without just cause. I have not debauched the wife of any man. I have not debauched the wife of [any] man. I have not polluted myself. I have terrorized none. I have not transgressed [the law]. I have not been wroth. I have not shut my ears to the words of truth. I have not blasphemed. I am not a man of violence. I have not been a stirrer up of strife. I have not acted with undue haste. I have not pried into matters. I have not multiplied my words in speaking. I have wronged none, I have done no evil. I have not worked witchcraft against the king. I have never stopped [the flow of] water. I have never raised my voice. I have not cursed God. I have not acted with arrogance. I have not stolen the bread of the gods. I have not carried away the khenfu cakes from the Spirits of the dead. I have not snatched away the bread of the child, nor treated with contempt the god of my city. I have not slain the cattle belonging to the god.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
Yes. And it's clear Corbyn is getting far more scrutiny for his policies this time compared to 2017.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I agree with you about concentrating power in the hands of individuals -- that is why I am a liberal at heart. There must be checks and balances. I don't think of extending free broadband to every address does that. Having something run by the state doesn't mean that the executive would have the power to meddle in operational issues. Most state-run services are not under the control of the PM.
You are ignoring the other half of the equation. The proposal is to nationalise the infrastructure and the service providers. And unfortunately history shows us that indeed having something run by the state does very much mean they meddle in operational issues.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
I am not fighting any battles. Just commenting on what I see.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
Of course not. As I pointed out before you have already run away.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now and big tech are already using it.
Private companies do not have the power of a State. They can’t detain you, imprison you, tax you. Private companies do not make laws or enforce them. Private companies do not command a police force or army. Private companies do what is commercially beneficial to them and their shareholders - which is satisfying the requirements of their customers.
Governments can abuse power, and hide that abuse much more effectively than any private company.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
I am not fighting any battles. Just commenting on what I see.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
Of course not. As I pointed out before you have already run away.
You are wrong again. I am still in the UK.
Unlike many Leavers on here who opine from the safety of foreign residences (and I am not including you in that)
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, rather more than the principle of public ownership, there's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now and big tech are already using it.
Private companies do not have the power of a State. They can’t detain you, imprison you, tax you. Private companies do not make laws or enforce them. Private companies do not command a police force or army. Private companies do what is commercially beneficial to them and their shareholders - which is satisfying the requirements of their customers.
Governments can abuse power, and hide that abuse much more effectively than any private company.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the UK government also doesn't have the power to detain, imprison or tax you. (I have a nagging feeling there might be an exception to the last one?) The state has those powers, and will always have those powers. What matters is what checks and balances there are on those powers. Clearly the government shouldn't have arbitrary powers, but in point of fact it has few because our constitution is actually decent.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks )
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
No I am not a communist. You don't like my comments because it awakes a realisation in yourself that BJ may have made a huge mistake in pressing for a GE. I know he pretended not to want one but he wanted it alright.
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
Yes. And it's clear Corbyn is getting far more scrutiny for his policies this time compared to 2017.
Well in 2017, Hammond locked himself/was locked under the stairs - and sulked. The Chancellor played no part in pointing out Labour's offer was a steaming pile of poo.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
No I am not a communist. You don't like my comments because it awakes a realisation in yourself that BJ may have made a huge mistake in pressing for a GE. I know he pretended not to want one but he wanted it alright.
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
I fully understand the idea of voting Labour to spite the Tory robots (I went through the same feeling a few weeks ago), but ask yourself whether you prefer the policies Labour is coming up with versus the ones the Lib Dems are. You'll feel better for voting with your head than with your fist. And maybe your head tells you Labour anyway, but I've got a hunch it doesn't.
My sense is Labour is probably heading for an 83 style result. But, I could be wrong, and it might be 2017. Any ideas?
I think it will definitely fall somewhere between the 1918 and 1997 results for Labour. You heard it here first. People come to this site for that sort of betting tip.
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel tusly mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or rnet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Well yes, e's the fact that the government can now silence the voices of its critics. Don't like a website? They can disconnect it. Or throttle it. Or whatever.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
Private companies have that power now and big tech are already using it.
Private companies do not have the power of a State. They can’t detain you, imprison youcompanies do not command a police force or army. Private companies do what is commercially beneficial to them and their shareholders - which is satisfying the requirements of their customers.
Governments can abuse power, and hide that abuse much more effectively than any private company.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the UK government also doesn't have the power to detain, imprison or tax you. (I have a nagging feeling there might be an exception to the last one?) The state has those powers, and will always have those powers. What matters is what checks and balances there are on those powers. Clearly the government shouldn't have arbitrary powers, but in point of fact it has few because our constitution is actually decent.
In ordinary circumstances I would agree with you.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks )
Your joking? The Tories under BoJo are making an audacious attempt to convert Labour voters in safe Labour seats to the Tories whilst simultaneously repelling people who voted Tory and Remain in 2016! It will be interesting to see the result of this strategy in just under a months time. It is so cunning even Baldrick would be proud of it!
I like the premise of free nationwide broadband, as a way to boost the economy. I pay for the best of the best - Virgin 500 - presumably such premium options would be like Bupa or private schools?
I like the premise of free nationwide broadband, as a way to boost the economy. I pay for the best of the best - Virgin 500 - presumably such premium options would be like Bupa or private schools?
To be honest if I was going to do a variant of this policy I’d do it around access to mobile phone frequencies and 5G roll-out. Use Gvt regulatory power, and frequency ownership to drive cheap (or free) data provision at lower speeds, within a given data cap.
I like the premise of free nationwide broadband, as a way to boost the economy. I pay for the best of the best - Virgin 500 - presumably such premium options would be like Bupa or private schools?
Just when most people are trying to cut down on their internet usage Labour decides to offer it for free to everyone, lol.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
Let me stop you there. I am a liberal, not a libertarian*. I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control. Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
Let me stop you there. I am a liberal, not a libertarian*. I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control. Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
*not everyone agrees with my distinction, but in my mind, libertarians are pushing towards anarchism, stripping the state of power as an end in itself. Liberals, on the other hand, seek to maximise liberty by equipping the state to protect us from each other and encouraging them to leave us alone in most instances.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
Let me stop you there. I am a liberal, not a libertarian*. I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control. Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
That's the difference between you and me. I am a Libertarian and I don't want the government to be able to execute people - with or without a trial.
I'm not OK with "checks and balances" to prevent the latter, I don't want the government executing people full stop.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
Let me stop you there. I am a liberal, not a libertarian*. I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control. Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
That's the difference between you and me. I am a Libertarian and I don't want the government to be able to execute people - with or without a trial.
I'm not OK with "checks and balances" to prevent the latter, I don't want the government executing people full stop.
I totally agree with you on that point. That's why I said prevent.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks )
Your joking? The Tories under BoJo are making an audacious attempt to convert Labour voters in safe Labour seats to the Tories whilst simultaneously repelling people who voted Tory and Remain in 2016! It will be interesting to see the result of this strategy in just under a months time. It is so cunning even Baldrick would be proud of it!
82% of 2017 Tories are still voting Tory, just 2% are voting Labour and 9% voting LD.
Only 65% of 2017 Labour voters are still voting Labour, 14% are voting LD and 9% are voting Tory
Labour: business and the tories want to stop us giving you free stuff.
It does feel to me one promise a bit too far beyond plausible but I doubt it will horrify that many. - we know people are generally in favour or neutral on most such plans in theory at least. Though as I noted previously it's the first GE story I've had spontaneously mentioned to me , so its grabbed attention for better and worse.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
You post a lot on something about which you do not care in the slightest
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
Let me stop you there. I am a liberal, not a libertarian*. I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control. Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
That's the difference between you and me. I am a Libertarian and I don't want the government to be able to execute people - with or without a trial.
I'm not OK with "checks and balances" to prevent the latter, I don't want the government executing people full stop.
I totally agree with you on that point. That's why I said prevent.
Sorry, I take it back. I did write "without trial". I originally wrote "imprison", but decided to up the drama and forgot to delete the the trial bit. Strike out the words "without trial", you were right @Philip_Thompson.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
No I am not a communist. You don't like my comments because it awakes a realisation in yourself that BJ may have made a huge mistake in pressing for a GE. I know he pretended not to want one but he wanted it alright.
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
There wasn't any real choice about having an election later - the political situation was only going to get worse for the Tories, perhaps rapidly so, so it was best to go as soon as possible. It was still a risk, but the right political decision and I stand by that, win or lose.
As for voting Labour out of spite - I can't actually fathom voting for any party purely to spite another, but hey-ho.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks )
Your joking? The Tories under BoJo are making an audacious attempt to convert Labour voters in safe Labour seats to the Tories whilst simultaneously repelling people who voted Tory and Remain in 2016! It will be interesting to see the result of this strategy in just under a months time. It is so cunning even Baldrick would be proud of it!
82% of 2017 Tories are still voting Tory, just 2% are voting Labour and 9% voting LD.
Only 65% of 2017 Labour voters are still voting Labour, 14% are voting LD and 9% are voting Tory
Exactly - people who voted Remain and Tory in 2016/2017 are still likely to be well-off, own assets, and despise the far left. Corbyn threatens all of that, and immediately - he'll push quite a few of them back into the fold, ironically more and more if the election gets closer with other demographics.
It’s particularly amusing to see Tories claiming that Labour’s latest broadband proposals would breach EU state aid rules when the whole point of Brexit is not to comply with such rules.
It’s not as if they were not warned that Brexit would enable Corbyn - both by making his victory more likely and removing any restraints on his government.
Hopefully the fact it was a Friday evening means not many were in there and those that were got out.
If it had broken out at 2am tomorrow...
Hopefully, everyone was out but if they have had a skin full and come back to that, it is going to create problems in its self!
Possibly, but if it’s uni accommodation that should be easy enough to deal with on a temporary basis.
But you have to wonder how we have yet another fire spreading like this. If it is indeed the cladding than somebody deserves prosecution.
Hopefully just for HS breaches, not manslaughter.
As I worked previously as a building Surveyor may I point out that this may not require prosecution. The designer may have used the correct material and the builder has installed it properly. It may be something wrong with the approval process, and the difference between product approval and requirement for fire engineer design.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
No I am not a communist. You don't like my comments because it awakes a realisation in yourself that BJ may have made a huge mistake in pressing for a GE. I know he pretended not to want one but he wanted it alright.
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
There wasn't any real choice about having an election later - the political situation was only going to get worse for the Tories, perhaps rapidly so, so it was best to go as soon as possible. It was still a risk, but the right political decision and I stand by that, win or lose.
As for voting Labour out of spite - I can't actually fathom voting for any party purely to spite another, but hey-ho.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
Inherited wealth is also received free, and those who acquire lots of it seem to like it. Then they think it will be an outrage against natural order if those who are not so rich get free internet worth a couple of hundred pounds a year.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
The gigantic Tory leads during the 2017 campaign turned out to be extremely unhelpful to the Tories because they created the impression that a Labour victory was impossible and therefore every tool could vote for them without having to think through the consequences. Far better that every voter has to weigh the real possibilty of Corbyn gaining power this time around.
The 'tools' as you put it might feel it is in their interest to turnout for a non-Conservative party (I don't mean BJ's Tories!). What's not to like about free Broadband or anything else if you are in the less well off half of the population. Those on higher incomes might embrace the change due to a social conscience!
What's not to like about free anything else? Are you actually a communist or do you just play one on the internet?
No I am not a communist. You don't like my comments because it awakes a realisation in yourself that BJ may have made a huge mistake in pressing for a GE. I know he pretended not to want one but he wanted it alright.
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
I fully understand the idea of voting Labour to spite the Tory robots (I went through the same feeling a few weeks ago), but ask yourself whether you prefer the policies Labour is coming up with versus the ones the Lib Dems are. You'll feel better for voting with your head than with your fist.
Then ask which of the two major parties the LibDems might go into coalition with or support (because they're not going to get a majority even together with Plaid Cymru and the Green), and which of their policies might get implemented.
If there aren't clear answers to both questions, then it's not clear what on earth you'd be voting FOR if you vote LibDem, other than registering a protest, in which case you might as well draw a c*** and b**** on the ballot paper. (Although it might be clear that you can vote for the LibDem candidate tactically to keep a Tory or Labour candidate OUT in the hope of a Labour or Tory majority, as the case may be.)
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks )
Your joking? The Tories under BoJo are making an audacious attempt to convert Labour voters in safe Labour seats to the Tories whilst simultaneously repelling people who voted Tory and Remain in 2016! It will be interesting to see the result of this strategy in just under a months time. It is so cunning even Baldrick would be proud of it!
82% of 2017 Tories are still voting Tory, just 2% are voting Labour and 9% voting LD.
Only 65% of 2017 Labour voters are still voting Labour, 14% are voting LD and 9% are voting Tory
Exactly - people who voted Remain and Tory in 2016/2017 are still likely to be well-off, own assets, and despise the far left. Corbyn threatens all of that, and immediately - he'll push quite a few of them back into the fold, ironically more and more if the election gets closer with other demographics.
Nah, they will vote Lib dem, and millions are, particularly in the former Tory heartlands of Remania. People who don't like Corbyn's wilder ideas have other safe options.
Free broadband. Bloody brilliant as a headline grabber/dead cat.
Total cut through imho.
Doubt the majority of voters will focus on detail or worry about the idea that the state under Corbyn, Pidcock and Seamus could control access to the Internet.
They will when the other side emphasises that other countries with that sort of control use it to cut off Social Media.
Are you worried that when the revolution comes, your broadband line will be the first against the wire-cutters?
Nope I am worried that lunatics like Corbyn would happily follow the example of China and shut down any platforms that opposed him.
And you should be worried that there are similar lunatics on the right who might get into power and do the same thing.
It works both ways. If you want to understand whether a policy is a really bad idea, imagine it in the hands of the worst political opponent you can imagine.
I know it works both ways - back in 2016 I was saying that one benefit of the EU was that it acted as a brake on the madder type of politician, and I was not the only person pointing that out. I was repeatedly told that it showed all that was wrong with the EU.
Well, the lunatics are nearly in charge of the asylum now, and they would like all the keys handed over please...
The Brexit dividend continues. I can see why Elon Musk chose a stable democracy for his new EU business.
We are no longer a stable democracy.
I am afraid you are one of those driven mad by Brexit. Those of us who are still sane are simply looking for a reasonable deal rather than fighting yesterday's battles.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
You post a lot on something about which you do not care in the slightest
These days, I do it for the entertainment value as Brexit is a lost cause and the country seems hell-bent on destruction of its reputation and international capital.
Watching Leavers defend the indefensible is the only Brexit benefit I have
I've had a long sleep since the crazy free broadband bollocks was announced and this morning (Saigon time) it's even worse. Genuinely I'm amazed that even a single non troll type person on here thinks this is even remotely deliverable. Even nationalising Openreach would be a disaster, but nationalising the whole sector is legitimately insane, eventually they would have to nationalise all of the other utilities. If broadband is a right, then surely gas, water and electricity are even more so and they would need to be nationalised and given away for free. Where does the money for all of that come from, where do the billions required for capital investment in water, energy, broadband, mobile networks etc... come from.
Honestly, we need to go in hard and start asking them to answer these questions. Show how utterly ridiculous it is.
I've had a long sleep since the crazy free broadband bollocks was announced and this morning (Saigon time) it's even worse. Genuinely I'm amazed that even a single non troll type person on here thinks this is even remotely deliverable. Even nationalising Openreach would be a disaster, but nationalising the whole sector is legitimately insane, eventually they would have to nationalise all of the other utilities. If broadband is a right, then surely gas, water and electricity are even more so and they would need to be nationalised and given away for free. Where does the money for all of that come from, where do the billions required for capital investment in water, energy, broadband, mobile networks etc... come from.
Honestly, we need to go in hard and start asking them to answer these questions. Show how utterly ridiculous it is.
The problem is the Conservative policy is "blow up much of the economy then still have loads of free money to spend, and also have tax cuts", so everyone is talking unmitigated bollocks except the LibDems, and they can't really talk about the deficit for fear of giving people Nick Clegg flashbacks.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
What does Francis have against trees? Seems an odd target for expletive laden political anger. I can recommend finding a nice tree to sit under, it’s quite calming.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
What does Francis have against trees? Seems an odd target for expletive laden political anger. I can recommend finding a nice tree to sit under, it’s quite calming.
Nothing against trees - just the apparent lack of ambition in the Tory proposals so far....
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
What does Francis have against trees? Seems an odd target for expletive laden political anger. I can recommend finding a nice tree to sit under, it’s quite calming.
Nothing against trees - just the apparent lack of ambition in the Tory proposals so far....
Plant 100m trees in a year, say the Tories.
We laugh in the face of that, says Ethiopia: 350m. IN HALF A DAY!
Despite its religious divisions, NI has an almost perfect Remainer alliance in close seats between SF and SDLP, mainly Catholic; Alliance, mainly Protestant; and the Greens, who are on the left. Only in Belfast North will SF and Alliance contest a close, winnable seat, and only in Fermanagh and South Tyrone will SF and SDLP face off while risking a victory from no-deal sympathiser Tom Elliott of the Ulster Unionists. (Belfast South will not be competitive.)
If the point of a remainer alliance is to send the most remainer mps to Westminster, then SF should stand down or actually send mps to Westminster.
Despite its religious divisions, NI has an almost perfect Remainer alliance in close seats between SF and SDLP, mainly Catholic; Alliance, mainly Protestant; and the Greens, who are on the left. Only in Belfast North will SF and Alliance contest a close, winnable seat, and only in Fermanagh and South Tyrone will SF and SDLP face off while risking a victory from no-deal sympathiser Tom Elliott of the Ulster Unionists. (Belfast South will not be competitive.)
If the point of a remainer alliance is to send the most remainer mps to Westminster, then SF should stand down or actually send mps to Westminster.
The first point of a Remainer alliance is to undermine the Leaver alliance between the Johnson clique, the ruling Labour junta, the Farageistes and the Ulster Unionists.
Electing a Sinn Fein candidate is sub-optimal. But, if it reduces the number of Ulster Unionists, it reduces the number of Leavers Johnson can call on. So it's better than the alternative.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
You would think so, wouldn't you? When I was at university, I read an academic paper that explained that the National Forest in Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Stafforshire was a really bad idea. I can't remember what the reason was, but I think it was because it was done by the Tories.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
What does Francis have against trees? Seems an odd target for expletive laden political anger. I can recommend finding a nice tree to sit under, it’s quite calming.
Nothing against trees - just the apparent lack of ambition in the Tory proposals so far....
I have to agree.
You may think some, or even all, of Labour's ideas are bonkers ... but at least they are brimming with them.
Surely this nails the answer to the question of who appears in the National TV debates. It should be those Parties fielding enough candidates to form a National government - so Tory,Lab,LD, Green.
The Conservative Party has said it will plant 30 million trees a year by 2025 if it wins the general election - as the Liberal Democrats pledged to plant twice as many trees in the same period.
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
Reforestation is a great idea.
You would think so, wouldn't you? When I was at university, I read an academic paper that explained that the National Forest in Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Stafforshire was a really bad idea. I can't remember what the reason was, but I think it was because it was done by the Tories.
Living in the National Forest, it has helped contribute to the highest economic growth rates in the UK for the districts within it and some of the highest life satisfaction rates according to the ONS. The National Forest was conceived by a Conservative Government of course, would love to have a look at that academic paper.
It's quite possible this is one of those elections where the campaign will make absolutely no difference and it will turn out everyone had made up their mind even before the election was called.
You're likely right. After all, 2017 was the exception rather than the norm - polls don't tend to move much in a campaign.
We've had three dramatic election campaigns (2010, 2015 and 2017) with two shock results (2015 and 2017. 2010 ended up pretty much as expected but did so via the Cleggasm) but before that election campaigns and results tended to be much more predictable/dull.
Comments
See here, you can see the Tories did go up when the election was called.
It's fairly similar trajectory, the average gap is this time much smaller.
If the gap increases further, then fine yes Labour are in trouble.
But the best comparison will be post the manifesto launch, so this time next week.
Brexit if you want. I do not care in the slightest.
I don't think of extending free broadband to every address does that. Having something run by the state doesn't mean that the executive would have the power to meddle in operational issues. Most state-run services are not under the control of the PM.
Handing that degree of control to the government is seriously scary.
In the period between the vote for the early election and the dissolution:
Conservative: 38.1%
Labour: 27.6%
LD: 15.6%
Brexit: 10.0%
Con lead over Lab: 10.5%
Since the dissolution of Parliament:
Conservative: 39.3% (+1.2%)
Labour: 28.9% (+1.3%)
LD: 15.9% (+0.3%)
Brexit: 7.6% (-2.4%)
Con lead over Lab: 10.4% (-0.1%)
They can try and maintain that, I do not think they will.
"Well the truth may need some rearranging,
Stories to be told,
And, plain to see, the facts are changing
No meaning left to hold"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OD-GGUIsXSs
This is Corbyn's big chance, remember Cleggmania?
The British voters know Jeremy. And they don’t seem to like him.
If Brexit was as all pervasive as some on this site believed, the Lib Dems would be on 40 percent, not 16.
The government as monopoly supplier would not have that constraint.
I think his numbers will improve if he doesn't cock up the debate.
I have not committed sin.
I have not committed robbery with violence
I have not stolen.
I have not slain men and women.
I have not stolen grain.
I have not purloined offerings.
I have not stolen the property of God.
I have not uttered lies.
I have not carried away food.
I have not uttered curses.
I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men.
I have made none to weep.
I have not eaten the heart.
I have not attacked any man.
I am not a man of deceit.
I have not stolen cultivated land.
I have not been an eavesdropper.
I have not slandered [no man].
I have not been angry without just cause.
I have not debauched the wife of any man.
I have not debauched the wife of [any] man.
I have not polluted myself.
I have terrorized none.
I have not transgressed [the law].
I have not been wroth.
I have not shut my ears to the words of truth.
I have not blasphemed.
I am not a man of violence.
I have not been a stirrer up of strife.
I have not acted with undue haste.
I have not pried into matters.
I have not multiplied my words in speaking.
I have wronged none, I have done no evil.
I have not worked witchcraft against the king.
I have never stopped [the flow of] water.
I have never raised my voice.
I have not cursed God.
I have not acted with arrogance.
I have not stolen the bread of the gods.
I have not carried away the khenfu cakes from the Spirits of the dead.
I have not snatched away the bread of the child, nor treated with contempt the god of my city.
I have not slain the cattle belonging to the god.
https://houseoftruth.education/en/library/sacred-writings/egyptian-book-of-the-dead-42-negative-confessions
What is the public unhappy with? How long this has dragged on for ...
How about a clean and simple proposal to Get Brexit Done ? 😉
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1195472961081360391
Governments can abuse power, and hide that abuse much more effectively than any private company.
Unlike many Leavers on here who opine from the safety of foreign residences (and I am not including you in that)
The state has those powers, and will always have those powers. What matters is what checks and balances there are on those powers. Clearly the government shouldn't have arbitrary powers, but in point of fact it has few because our constitution is actually decent.
I'm just wondering if after all the madness of 2014 to 2017 whether this election is actually going to be a return to being much more predictable (or boring for us politics geeks
I used to work for CCHQ but I find Brexit has turned me against the Tories, I voted for them in 2017 but no more. Bad news is all the other people I know who used to vote Tory are going to the LD. I might vote Labour out of spite - something you are encouraging.
Brown nationalised several banks and we survived it - I could not care less if Broadband or anything else is nationalised and paradoxically returning it to public ownership might be an improvement on the situation with some of the utilities.
My concern is that Corbyn’s , and more specifically McDonnell’s view of how the State should operate and what power it has over the individual is quite unlike anything this country has seen before. Their ideology is, I’m afraid, more GDR than cuddly Scandinavian socialism.
As a libertarian you should surely agree the best defence against possible State control over such things is having as many independent private companies as possible all competing with each other to run such services. That way no one has complete control and there is always an alternative if one operator does something you don t personally like.
I inherently distrust all governments. Of any colour. But some are better than others. The less a government does the better. And the least they interfere in my life the better.
I believe in the private sector taking control where competition is both possible and beneficial. I strongly believe that certain things should be under state control, where competition is impossible. E.g. infrastructure. You can't choose an alternative train route from Cardiff to Swansea, so those rails should be managed by the government. Natural monopolies are shielded from market forces, so they need to be under democratic control.
Because I accept the inevitability of state-run sectors (although I'm undecided about telecoms), I have a keen interest in how good governance is maintained. This means separation of powers, a strong parliament and judiciary, clear constitutional guidelines for who exercises what power, and rigorous public scrutiny of the inner workings of government.
Like any liberal, I don't want the government to cut me off from the internet. But I also don't want the government to execute me without trial. There are checks and balances in place to prevent the latter, so we ought to be able to trust the state with the former if similar checks and balances are applied.
I'm not OK with "checks and balances" to prevent the latter, I don't want the government executing people full stop.
Only 65% of 2017 Labour voters are still voting Labour, 14% are voting LD and 9% are voting Tory
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/w3ohbvr6zt/Sky_TheTimes_VI_191112_w.pdf
As for voting Labour out of spite - I can't actually fathom voting for any party purely to spite another, but hey-ho.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1195504250832539648?s=20
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50440867
FFS, is this level of thinking of the Tories. Plant some trees. Is that it.
If there aren't clear answers to both questions, then it's not clear what on earth you'd be voting FOR if you vote LibDem, other than registering a protest, in which case you might as well draw a c*** and b**** on the ballot paper. (Although it might be clear that you can vote for the LibDem candidate tactically to keep a Tory or Labour candidate OUT in the hope of a Labour or Tory majority, as the case may be.)
Watching Leavers defend the indefensible is the only Brexit benefit I have
Honestly, we need to go in hard and start asking them to answer these questions. Show how utterly ridiculous it is.
We laugh in the face of that, says Ethiopia: 350m. IN HALF A DAY!
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/29/africa/ethiopia-plants-350-million-trees-intl-hnk/index.html
Electing a Sinn Fein candidate is sub-optimal. But, if it reduces the number of Ulster Unionists, it reduces the number of Leavers Johnson can call on. So it's better than the alternative.
https://twitter.com/UKGenElect/status/1195593894710386688?s=20
Lab: 53
Grn: 41
SNP: 34
LiD: 31
Con: 30
PC: 25
UKIP: 22
BX: 20
Ind: 18
You may think some, or even all, of Labour's ideas are bonkers ... but at least they are brimming with them.
The tories? They want to plant a lot of trees.
Erm.
That's it.
Surely this nails the answer to the question of who appears in the National TV debates. It should be those Parties fielding enough candidates to form a National government - so Tory,Lab,LD, Green.
Simples, no?
https://twitter.com/jabberwock951/status/1195492380666998784?s=19
The only thing wrong with the policy is the lack of ambition 300 or 400 million a year would be better