Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ready for President Chuck Grassley?

1356713

Comments

  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.

    When I first commuted the trains were awful

    The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.

    Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
    I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.
    I travel from North Essex on generally a good service.

    Different service provider - yet you want a one (shit) size fits all approach so we can all enjoy bad service

    Well, that's how you Socialists think whether its education or anything else really.
  • Options
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.

    When I first commuted the trains were awful

    The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.

    Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
    I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.
    I travel from North Essex on generally a good service.

    Different service provider - yet you want a one (shit) size fits all approach so we can all enjoy bad service

    Well, that's how you Socialists think whether its education or anything else really.
    I'm telling you what my experience is, I'm glad you have a better experience than me. But unfortunatly I can't travel on whoever the TOC is for Essex. It's SWR or nothing.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    TimT said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    Trains that crash and kill lots of people?
    What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?
    You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.

    Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,289
    I'm not sure that the Labour Communications Officer who asked Corbyn about another Brexit referendum would have liked the headlines which followed about being neutral.

    https://order-order.com/2019/11/23/labour-comms-staffer-question-time-liar/
  • Options

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.

    When I first commuted the trains were awful

    The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.

    Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
    I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.
    Do you know how many catastrophes have occurred throughout human history by frustrated men who declare we should try *this* radical option because 'it couldn't be any worse'?
  • Options
    TimT said:

    TimT said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    Trains that crash and kill lots of people?
    What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?
    You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.

    Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
    I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.

    Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.
  • Options

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.

    When I first commuted the trains were awful

    The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.

    Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
    I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.
    Do you know how many catastrophes have occurred throughout human history by frustrated men who declare we should try *this* radical option because 'it couldn't be any worse'?
    Then don't answer the question
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.
    If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.

    I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.

    This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
    "as a consumer I have no choice"

    Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.

    Wonderful stuff
    I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.
    You want your cake and you want to eat it

    You decry lack of choice by advocating removal of competition

    Super stuff

  • Options
    alb1onalb1on Posts: 698
    HYUFD said:

    alb1on said:

    HYUFD said:

    Out canvassing in Chingford this afternoon and had Momentum canvassing on the other side of the street at the same time. They even appeared when one of our canvassers was chatting with a resident and were politely told it was a Tory household. Good number of IDS window posters appearing though a few for Labour candidate Faiza Shaheen too

    Canvassing for IDS as a Conservative must be the equivalent of canvassing for Diane Abbott for Labour; a battle to suppress the embarrassment of association with the candidate. It is a mystery why parties do not gently consign the useless to pastures new when they start being a drain on the reputation of the party.
    IDS is quite a popular and hard-working local MP, saw more IDS window posters this afternoon than I have for most candidates I have canvassed for
    I can only assume it must be the comedy value, as with Diane.
  • Options

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    Presumably also

    Railways initially designed for larger rolling stock
    Better employee relations
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    TimT said:

    TimT said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    Trains that crash and kill lots of people?
    What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?
    You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.

    Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
    I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.

    Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.
    And regardless of context, your question was silly. Of course it can get worse.
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    ***BETTING POST***

    For a better return on the Tories take a look at the Conservative Vote percentage market on Betfair exchange.

    Given the polling over the last few weeks, and how Brexit Party voters have moved, it's very unlikely the Tory vote will now drop below 40%. This didn't happen even in GE2017 with the clusterf*ck, and the stakes for the Tories are even higher now and the narrative far better.

    Right now, you can back the Tories to clock 40.00-44.99% at 2.2. If you're really nervous, you can also back 45.00-49.99% as a saver too at 6.2 giving a 1.78 return on the combo (after Betfair commission).

    That seems very generous to me.

    DYOR.

    That seems a pretty good bet even though I’d love them not to get over 40% !

    I would be shocked if they don’t get over that though . Labour really need to poll at least 35% to make life difficult for the Tories because the BP standing down in over 350 seats might be skewing what they need for a decent majority .
  • Options
    TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,662
    IanB2 said:

    RobD said:

    On the topic of strategy games, once I started playing Europa Universalis I lost all interest in Civ.

    Let’s wait and see how you feel when you eventually finish it.
    I've Kickstarted the new boardgame version of it; I don't expect I'll see it much before Christmas 2020.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    No chart updates for three hours, sorry folks. :D
  • Options
    19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075
    Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?
  • Options

    Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?

    Just under £500
  • Options

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?

    You could have fewer, older, less reliable trains at far more irregular intervals that are even more dirty and awful, with more regular strikes, leading to people giving up commuting to work and changing their jobs entirely, and the economy changing in ways that affect you badly - think your home losing its value and putting you in negative equity.

    The rail network has two problems: (1) its popularity, meaning it's hit capacity and (2) its age, which is difficult to renew due to it being a capacity.

    There's a third factor too which is the very high cost of running it, due in no small apart to endemic unionisation, and over-the-top multilayered safety regulation, which is in need of rationalisation which could be done without impacting safety at all.

    You know what wouldn't fix any of those problems?

    Yup, that's right. Nationalisation.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    OPINIUM!!!!!!
  • Options

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Probably because enough of us remember how absolutely crap they were when they were in public ownership. And we see how crap Network Rail is.
    My train is always late, dirty, incredibly crowded (good luck getting a seat) and is £500 a month. How on Earth could it be any worse?
    And yet I use the East Coast Main line around 50 times a year and whilst it was in private ownership I did not have recourse to use the delay repay system once in 4 years. In the 10 months after it was taken back into public ownership I got my fare back because it was more than an hour delayed 7 times.

    My recent experience of public vs private is completely the reverse of yours.
  • Options

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Well, it could have not been on time at all...

    It’s at times like this that I’m glad I can walk to work.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    Ave_it said:

    OPINIUM!!!!!!

    I’m not sure there is a metal precious enough...
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,926
    nunu2 said:

    Now this is interesting. "Reject identity politics". Are the tories going for a culture war?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/andrealeadsom/status/1198292018302275584

    Is that a genuine question? It's been flipping obvious they intend to do that for some time now. They've given up on fiscal rectitude, the only things they have left are screaming at the Europeans and finding some groups and issues to torment. Although - to be fair - I am surprised it was Labour who made abortion an election issue, as I genuinely thought it would be Cons.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075

    Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?

    Just under £500
    Wow, that's a lot, you should have mentioned it ;)
  • Options
    TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,662

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    The train not running at all?
  • Options
    Be interesting to see if that Opinium result is shared by others. An absolute disaster for Labour.
  • Options
    A 19 point lead sounds literally incredible.
  • Options
    TudorRose said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    The train not running at all?
    Ah yes, I had that twice last week as well. You're right, I apologise.
  • Options

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Yes, so the boundaries of your limited imagination will lead you to make ignorant decisions.

    I don't mean to insult you there, by the way. I mean ignorant in its primary meaning - lacking knowledge or awareness.

    I'm just as pissed off with SWR and my train service as you. And I also know enough about the industry, and the history, to know that nationalisation would make it worse.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,408

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Probably because enough of us remember how absolutely crap they were when they were in public ownership. And we see how crap Network Rail is.
    My train is always late, dirty, incredibly crowded (good luck getting a seat) and is £500 a month. How on Earth could it be any worse?
    And yet I use the East Coast Main line around 50 times a year and whilst it was in private ownership I did not have recourse to use the delay repay system once in 4 years. In the 10 months after it was taken back into public ownership I got my fare back because it was more than an hour delayed 7 times.

    My recent experience of public vs private is completely the reverse of yours.
    My recollection is that the first time the East Coast Mainline franchise was given up the directly operated railway was an improvement, so I don't think we can draw a consistent conclusion either way.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    There's a valid argument to be made for progressive renationalisation along the TfL model, bringing the existing franchises back under public sector control as they expire. My main concern is that what would happen in practice is not the creation of arms-length operators running a not-for-profit service funded mainly by fares, but a reconstituted, monolithic BR kept on a short lead by the Transport Secretary and funded primarily by the Treasury. It would start out well enough, from the point of view of passengers: Government spending would be diverted into the system to subsidise and to cap fares, which would be hugely popular. The fact that this expenditure would be disproportionately concentrated - yet again - on people earning above average incomes in London and the South East, because that is who most of the rail commuters are, would presumably be pointed out by someone, but the complaint would be drowned out by the cheering.

    Of course, in the long run the bribery would prove counterproductive. It would, as you suggest, be a blueprint for decay. The railways would be a lower priority for investment than the NHS and pensions so they would be starved of it. The shortfall couldn't be made up from hiking fares because the Government would be afraid of reversing the bribes and making all those commuters (many of whom live in valuable marginals) angry again. The trains would age and become dirty, old and knackered. Reliability and punctuality would steadily decline, accidents and overcrowding would steadily increase. The underfunding situation would also be exacerbated by the rail unions holding passengers to ransom every year to squeeze large pay settlements out of panicked ministers.

    Being a monopoly provider of an important public service, a forward journey towards a publicly-owned railway system is not necessarily to be feared - if it is done properly. It's the journey backward to the bad old days that we want to make sure we avoid.
  • Options
    TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,662

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.
    If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.

    I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.

    This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
    "as a consumer I have no choice"

    Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.

    Wonderful stuff
    I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.
    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    About that closing gap narrative.....

  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,771
    36 on Chelsea and 28 for Leicester are way to long on these two teams to win the league with Man City on 4. Betfair exch.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    I don't believe it. This is still going to go down to the wire.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    TudorRose said:

    Floater said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.
    If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.

    I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.

    This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
    "as a consumer I have no choice"

    Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.

    Wonderful stuff
    I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.
    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
    It’s yet more massive bungs for the middle class, as with their policy on tuition fees.
  • Options

    TimT said:

    TimT said:

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    Trains that crash and kill lots of people?
    What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?
    You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.

    Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
    I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.

    Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.
    Gaslighting?

    Something I'm sure we'll see the return of if we go back to nationalisation.

    Perhaps oil lamps as well.
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Game over . That Opinium is a shocker for Labour . And also terrible for the Lib Dems .

    Looks like the Remainer Tories are bailing out for fear of Corbyn and some Labour Leavers are off to the Tories aswell .

    I said we’d know this weekend if Labours manifesto was going to crash and burn , unless other polls show a marked difference then really this looks like a huge majority for the Tories.
  • Options
    TudorRose said:


    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?

    Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.

    We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453

    19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.

    Head. In. Sand.
  • Options
    nico67 said:

    Game over . That Opinium is a shocker for Labour . And also terrible for the Lib Dems .

    Looks like the Remainer Tories are bailing out for fear of Corbyn and some Labour Leavers are off to the Tories aswell .

    I said we’d know this weekend if Labours manifesto was going to crash and burn , unless other polls show a marked difference then really this looks like a huge majority for the Tories.

    Yup don't disagree.
  • Options
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,908

    A 19 point lead sounds literally incredible.

    It's looking like 1987, over again.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    Perhaps that Bootle constituency poll will actually be useful after all....
  • Options

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.
    Presumably if Network Rail were more competent more of them would be able to snap up advance train fares
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,886
    Opinium!!!!!! :open_mouth:
  • Options
    nunu2 said:

    19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.

    Head. In. Sand.
    If other polls show the same thing, yup time to concede it's going spectactularly wrong. I bloody hope it's not a massive lead like that.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    Re Railways: most of the Beeching closures were implemented by LAB 1964 to 1970.

    CON is pro railway although I wish we would scrap HS2 as it's a waste of money.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075
    Opinium on flavible has the following tasty morsels dropping
    Sunderland central, newcastle north, redcar, leigh, both warringtons, Hemsworth, eccles, ellesmere port, all of the Wirral
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,176
    but . .
    "The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
    move on please, nothing to see here.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Last Oppy was 44 28, so it's +3 and unchanged. Usually MoE 2%
  • Options

    TudorRose said:


    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?

    Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.

    We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
    Then, you should vote Conservative.

    Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.

    We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    I'm assuming these are new?

    The latest constituency-level polling by Deltapoll, published by the Observer, suggests that Lib Dems are making inroads in specific constituencies, but struggling to take a lead. In the Cities of London and Westminster constituency, for example, Chuka Umunna is up 22 points but trails the Tories by six points. In Chelsea and Fulham, the Lib Dems are up 14 points but trail the Tories by 23 points. In Hendon, the party is up eight points but is still a distant third.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    It's an outlier.
  • Options
    geoffw said:

    but . .
    "The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
    move on please, nothing to see here.
    Fieldwork is presumably during and after the debates, is it post the Labour manifesto launch as well?

    An absolute disaster.
  • Options
    Christ, that Opinium.

    #Corbynmanifestobounce
  • Options
    nunu2 said:

    Ave_it said:

    Still tight! No room for complacency!! We might see the 10% CORBYNISTA swing later!!!

    Imagine if we see the tory lead growing tonight!
    IMAGINE

    just imagine
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Opinium!!!!!! :open_mouth:

    19 point lead. Is that a real poll and not fake news ?

    And when was it done
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075
    Constituency polls are London again, Chuka within 6 but LDs a mile behind in Chelsea and in Hendon (3rd place)
  • Options

    TudorRose said:


    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?

    Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.

    We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
    Then, you should vote Conservative.

    Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.

    We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.
    I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    MaxPB said:

    It's an outlier.

    Definitely, but at least it wasn’t showing a contraction, then it’d be less clear if it was a contraction or an outlier.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    geoffw said:

    but . .
    "The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
    move on please, nothing to see here.
    If Labour couldn't make a dent after their manifesto and the debate then when?
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Hahahahaha

    Pause

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  • Options
    ArtistArtist Posts: 1,882
    edited November 2019
    I'm assuming Chuka could squeeze some Labour votes if he's a clear 2nd. Surprised the Lib Dems are so far behind in Chelsea and Fulham. Hendon was always Tories versus Labour.
  • Options
    We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    RobD said:

    Perhaps that Bootle constituency poll will actually be useful after all....

    😭😭😭
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075
    Come on Boris, get to 50 so the 'not a real majority' lot can sod off
  • Options
    nunu2 said:

    geoffw said:

    but . .
    "The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
    move on please, nothing to see here.
    If Labour couldn't make a dent after their manifesto and the debate then when?
    Exactly. Curtains.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,301
    Note: Opinium lead would be 16% if all parties stood in every seat - ie same lead as last week.

    So underlying result is no change, Con just gain 3% overall due to BXP not standing.

    Still a great result for Con, but not a "home run" moment.
  • Options
    Con maj 1.53 with Betfair.

    Labour running out of runway for takeoff.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Byronic said:

    Hahahahaha

    Pause

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You really remind me of someone.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    edited November 2019
    Dr. Foxy, already backed (little bit longer, on Ladbrokes a few days ago).

    Hope Chelsea can beat Manchester City.

    Edited extra bit: I think some are getting carried away with a single poll three weeks before the vote.
  • Options

    TudorRose said:


    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?

    Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.

    We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
    Then, you should vote Conservative.

    Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.

    We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.
    I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.
    Are you sure ?
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,365
    I do hope that poll is correct, I want to see Corbyn comprehensively trounced. There is no place for his kind of politics (at least I blooming well hope so) in the UK.
  • Options

    We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.

    3 already today ?
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,075
    The news has reached the twitterverse and they are losing their shit
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    MaxPB said:

    It's an outlier.

    Even if it isn't, it's too early.

    Have we figured out the new Labour position on abortion yet?
  • Options

    TudorRose said:


    But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?

    Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.

    We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
    Then, you should vote Conservative.

    Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.

    We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.
    I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.
    Are you sure ?
    100%.
  • Options
    Love an outlier...

    :)
  • Options
    Flashy5 said:

    We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.

    3 already today ?
    Which?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    Artist said:

    I'm assuming Chuka could squeeze some Labour votes if he's a clear 2nd. Surprised the Lib Dems are so far behind in Chelsea and Fulham.

    Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the Lib Dems even manage to take Richmond Park now. Jo Swinson is extremely unpopular among all of my social circles and those who may vote Lib Dem are now so worried about Jez and his crazy Marxist policies they are falling back in line with the Tories.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    Andy_JS said:
    Not yet. Give it about 5 mins they will be unskewing the polls.
  • Options

    DeClare said:

    eristdoof said:

    Novo said:

    Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.

    How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?

    100% elec trains
    No Beeching closures
    Lower subsidy
    Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
    Extreme punctuality.

    State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
    The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.

    Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
    Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.
    They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!
    A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.
    Believe me it can and was under BR
    Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?
    being 16 minutes late and all of the above? being cancelled so the next one is even more overcrowded? being charged 5p more for the same level of service? a smell of urine or vomit? lots of dogs? headphones that bleed? self-important people talking loudly on phones about how they are 16 minutes late?
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    MikeL said:

    Note: Opinium lead would be 16% if all parties stood in every seat - ie same lead as last week.

    So underlying result is no change, Con just gain 3% overall due to BXP not standing.

    Still a great result for Con, but not a "home run" moment.

    It means Tories will hold all their seats in the south against the libdems
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,395
    I like the way the Graun says the 19-pt gap shows the debates didn't have an effect. Er, I think it shows they had a very substantial effect!!!
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,838
    nunu2 said:

    19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.

    Head. In. Sand.
    This is how Tory supporters felt in 1997 and 2001.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    TOPPING said:

    I like the way the Graun says the 19-pt gap shows the debates didn't have an effect. Er, I think it shows they had a very substantial effect!!!

    Well not the effect they wanted!
  • Options
    Need to see the data tables
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,838

    19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.

    It won't be, because some soft Tories will peel off to other parties, the same as happened in 1983. They probably won't get more than 42% on the day.
  • Options
    nunu2 said:

    Andy_JS said:
    Not yet. Give it about 5 mins they will be unskewing the polls.
    Dan Hodges has tweeted it, so I expect a timeline half full of 'polling is a Blairite plot' in about 10 minutes or so.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,886

    GIN1138 said:

    Opinium!!!!!! :open_mouth:

    19 point lead. Is that a real poll and not fake news ?

    And when was it done
    Here you go BigG

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/23/tories-renewed-poll-boost-brexit-party-candidates-pull-out-opinium-observer
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    No point in spinning this . Opinium is diabolical for Labour . My only solace is this election hasn’t turned into a no deal Tory platform . They put the deal through which gives those of us more time to escape the Thatcherism on steroids bloodbath .

    One year to escape during the transition .
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    TOPPING said:

    I like the way the Graun says the 19-pt gap shows the debates didn't have an effect. Er, I think it shows they had a very substantial effect!!!

    The only reason why there's a change from the last poll is adjusting for TBP standing down.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,176
    Tories peak too soon. All is lost.
This discussion has been closed.