Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
The two items from Johnson's past which would have killed any other politician's career are the financial issues surrounding Ms Arcuri and most importantly the Darius Guppy affair which is pretty much consigned to history.
If I had conspired with a friend to assault a Sun journalist I would have likely as not been charged and convicted of 'conspiracy'. It hasn't hindered Johnson's ascent of the greasy pole one iota.
Running away from his responsibilities as a father and cheating on his wife as she underwent treatment for cancer would usually be dealbreakers, too.
True.
A further irony surrounding Johnson is his negative analysis of young working class (his terminology, I believe) men and their casual attitude towards procreation. If ever there was a candidate for the Jeremy Kyle Show it is Johnson. Perhaps Johnson, rather than being grilled by Neil could be skewered instead by Kyle, the mothers of his iligitimate children and a lie detector.
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
A Prime Minister happy to act unlawfully when things don't go well for him, let's not forget that either.
I can understand your anger and frustration as you see remain slipping away but have you ever thought that if labour had had a sensible leader who was pro remain and a sensible lib dem leader who did not commit the biggest mistake of the election in revoke that Boris may not have been the end result
You read me so very wrong. I really don't care about Remain. I care about the damage your man will do. He is not a safe pair of hands and unfit to be PM.
Yet you would be ok with Corbyn?
Go figure
I have said nothing about Corbyn, come back to be in 7days and 90 minutes.
I'd love if Boris went on and was just utterly dismissive of Neil's abilities. 'I'm surprised someone as supposedly terrifying as you would ask such an inane question Andrew'
So am I miles behind here? I'm confused why Grimsby is so thought to be a Tory success when the fishing rights are not covered in Boris's deal. Any reason for this?
Cos their just to thick to think
Whilst others are just too thick to spot their typos......
Today's news: Jeremy Corbyn leads a party of virulent antisemites.
Also: Boris can't be bothered to do an interview.
Big frickin' deal!
Neil will expose him as a lying cheating racist. Your continuous arse kissing smears are like listening to Jim Davidson after he's had 8 pints down the Charlton Townhouse.
I can see you feel the election's going very well for you!
Yep.. Watching through the exit polls last night someone posted made me realise elections often have this effect on me. I just really cannot believe people actually believe Bojo. YouGov forget the key question: would you buy a used car off this man? Surely nobody would yet they believe the bullshit he comes out with. Astonishing
Astonishing, but given Trump, not surprising. It amazes me that anyone would ever have bought anything, let alone real estate, from Trump.
Has anyone here actually spent a few days without seeking any political news? I mean avoiding the tv news, this website and twitter? Whenever I do so, it amazes me how little you hear of it, and how these supposedly pivotal events are actually just hooks for anoraks to hang their narratives on afterward
Yep, I agree. It will make no difference at all to the election result. But it will help to shape longer-term perceptions of Johnson that he will find very difficult to combat if he fails to deliver on the promises he has made. The silly thing is he would have won easily without the lies and the cowardice. They have not been necessary. That does indicate they are a big part of what he is.
I agree the direct effect of this will be negligible (or at least easily containable). Not enough people will share and see it, and few would be converted if they did.
But I think the secondhand corrosion of BJ’s reputation can’t be written off as “longer term”. If this is prominently covered and commented on in the big papers and TV bulletins, or discussion of it (as opposed to actual views) goes viral, it will at least move the narrative away from Corbyn’s flakiness and on to his.
Probably not a game changer, but the sort of thing which could have a bearing if the wind blows the right way.
Out of interest, how do PBers feel about the legitimacy of Neil’s monologue? I’m a bit surprised the BBC went that far given its normal timidity in calling out politicians (especially at election time). But I’m glad they did given the weaponisation of these appearances (or lack thereof).
perhaps next move to put out a show on Monday with Neil asking questions to a virtual Johnson using answers hes previously given?
I reckon most of the people who take any notice are so entrenched in their view, thanks to the relentless name calling and accusations of isms etc from their opponents, that the politicans they favour can pretty much so what they like now.
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
A Prime Minister happy to act unlawfully when things don't go well for him, let's not forget that either.
I can understand your anger and frustration as you see remain slipping away but have you ever thought that if labour had had a sensible leader who was pro remain and a sensible lib dem leader who did not commit the biggest mistake of the election in revoke that Boris may not have been the end result
You read me so very wrong. I really don't care about Remain. I care about the damage your man will do. He is not a safe pair of hands and unfit to be PM.
But who is
If you don't think either of them is fit, then the solution is to limit their power. Since one will have to be PM, you can vote to deny them a majority.
Not with Corbyn around. Anyway I have already voted for Boris
This is unutterably absurd, verging on the surreal. I have followed the last four or five elections at least, moderately closely. I have never watched Andrew Neil interview a party leader, or even been that aware it was a thing that happened. When did this ritual become such an integral part of the campaign?
If the BBC only allowed interviews with Corbyn/Swinson, the Conservatives could rightly complain this was allowing unequal airtime, and demand their own segment. Ie, exposure is meant to be a positive for your electoral chances. That people are outraged that Johnson and the Tories will be receiving less airtime than their rivals is a clear indication that something has gone horribly wrong somewhere in terms of how these interviews are being conducted. And/or those people have totally lost perspective.
Effectively the argument boils down to, "it isn't fair that Johnson won't walk blindfolded down a banana peel strewn corridor, like the rest of us agreed to".
If you follow Neil on twitter you will see people repeatedly tweeting to him how he is the man to take down politicians, he's the best interviewer etc etc.
Neil unfortunately has read too much of this, and retweeted too much of it, and now believes it. He thinks he is more important than he is and so any politician worth the salt MUST get the Andrew Neil treatment. I agree it is absurd.
Neil's thing is irrelevant. Just like Brexit, the vast majority just want the election done. The whole political class isn't much liked, another week of them is just boring.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Posted this too late on previous thread I hope anyone who hasn’t had their children vaccinated against MMR is taking bot of the news from Samoa.
My son's school currently has quite a serious outbreak of mumps. I was worried for my son momentarily before I remembered that one of the 'M's in MMR stood for mumps so, having his had shots as planned, I believe he should be fine.
But my next thought was then one of some horror at the implications of these other kids getting mumps which I assume means they never had the MMR.
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
I don’t care too much that he’s an adulterer, lots of our most successful leaders have been. I do have a strong dislike of the man though and I’m not sure, if he wins a full 5 years, we’ll enjoy the ride that much.
Boris is very lucky he’s facing Corbyn’s Labour. If we had a decent opposition he really wouldn’t be getting my vote.
And the problem with the AN appeal is that Boris has been in front of the media all week with the terrorist attack, NATO and today at a factory in Derbyshire. Furthermore he is doing the final debate v Corbyn on the BBC tomorrow.
I’m a news junkie like you and the one thing I have noticed this week how little engagement Johnson has had with anybody let alone the public. The only stand out image is him trying to be one of the lads with fellow late PMs, everything else has been staged.
That AN clip is utterly damning, who in their right mind can give that man the keys to no 10.
People here may hate Corbyn, but clearly any Tory majority is not a risk worth taking and those that can't stomach either have to find a way to force a hung parliament.
Only in your dreams.
p.s. Only 6 full campaigning days remain until polling day.
I can understand your anger and frustration as you see remain slipping away but have you ever thought that if labour had had a sensible leader who was pro remain and a sensible lib dem leader who did not commit the biggest mistake of the election in revoke that Boris may not have been the end result
I'd love if Boris went on and was just utterly dismissive of Neil's abilities. 'I'm surprised someone as supposedly terrifying as you would ask such an inane question Andrew'
Aw our resident little Trumpy is irritated!
Not at all, it would amuse me greatly. You however are still a creepy weirdo who talks about monitoring people. Disturbing and unpleasant and a keen fan of a racist. You have very little to recommend you.
This is unutterably absurd, verging on the surreal. I have followed the last four or five elections at least, moderately closely. I have never watched Andrew Neil interview a party leader, or even been that aware it was a thing that happened. When did this ritual become such an integral part of the campaign?
If the BBC only allowed interviews with Corbyn/Swinson, the Conservatives could rightly complain this was allowing unequal airtime, and demand their own segment. Ie, exposure is meant to be a positive for your electoral chances. That people are outraged that Johnson and the Tories will be receiving less airtime than their rivals is a clear indication that something has gone horribly wrong somewhere in terms of how these interviews are being conducted. And/or those people have totally lost perspective.
Effectively the argument boils down to, "it isn't fair that Johnson won't walk blindfolded down a banana peel strewn corridor, like the rest of us agreed to".
If you follow Neil on twitter you will see people repeatedly tweeting to him how he is the man to take down politicians, he's the best interviewer etc etc.
Neil unfortunately has read too much of this, and retweeted too much of it, and now believes it. He thinks he is more important than he is and so any politician worth the salt MUST get the Andrew Neil treatment. I agree it is absurd.
Brillo being pompous? Shocker.
I did used to enjoy that long running photo caption competition in Private Eye, I assume it must have really pissed him off, hence they kept it going.
Good to see the usual suspects weeping tears of impotent rage. S'not fair, he must do it etc, etc. Andrew Neil is not the final arbiter of what a candidate does or doesn't do. He's good, not God and needs to remember that
I can understand your anger and frustration as you see remain slipping away but have you ever thought that if labour had had a sensible leader who was pro remain and a sensible lib dem leader who did not commit the biggest mistake of the election in revoke that Boris may not have been the end result
Victim blaming.
Is it "victim blaming" when Jo Swinson is a victim of her own stupidity?
Not at all, it would amuse me greatly. You however are still a creepy weirdo who talks about monitoring people. Disturbing and unpleasant and a keen fan of a racist. You have very little to recommend you.
I think the BBC / AN have probably left it too late. Boris is going to be on the tellybox tomorrow and then he can probably reasonably claim, hey look I'm here and that he now doesn't have time and look at all the other interviews he has done.
I won't be surprised if Boris has a very rough time tomorrow night as the BBC doesn't like people taking the piss and they will see it as their responsibility to make sure he is tested.
Posted this too late on previous thread I hope anyone who hasn’t had their children vaccinated against MMR is taking bot of the news from Samoa.
My son's school currently has quite a serious outbreak of mumps. I was worried for my son momentarily before I remembered that one of the 'M's in MMR stood for mumps so, having his had shots as planned, I believe he should be fine.
But my next thought was then one of some horror at the implications of these other kids getting mumps which I assume means they never had the MMR.
It's a shocking thing. My son had MMR and broke into a terrible rash and temperature that day. He had Chicken Pox by coincidence that day. Poor thing. You know what his 'overloaded' immune system seemed to cope just fine. His parents, well that's another story.
Not at all, it would amuse me greatly. You however are still a creepy weirdo who talks about monitoring people. Disturbing and unpleasant and a keen fan of a racist. You have very little to recommend you.
Mmm, all these loftily "amused" people.
I have a pretty tough life, so I take my amusement where I can get it. I deserve a bit of loft occasionally
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
I don’t care too much that he’s an adulterer, lots of our most successful leaders have been. I do have a strong dislike of the man though and I’m not sure, if he wins a full 5 years, we’ll enjoy the ride that much.
Boris is very lucky he’s facing Corbyn’s Labour. If we had a decent opposition he really wouldn’t be getting my vote.
And the problem with the AN appeal is that Boris has been in front of the media all week with the terrorist attack, NATO and today at a factory in Derbyshire. Furthermore he is doing the final debate v Corbyn on the BBC tomorrow.
I’m a news junkie like you and the one thing I have noticed this week how little engagement Johnson has had with anybody let alone the public. The only stand out image is him trying to be one of the lads with fellow late PMs, everything else has been staged.
So you didn't see him interacting with the factory workers and answering their direct questions this afternoon live on Sky
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Andrew Neil interview has been built into as if he is like the world best interviewer ever. Now he is much better than the likes of Marr, but Swinson got through ok. It was the fact that Corbyn crashed the clown car, but then he did the same with Julie Etchingham and she isn't anywhere near as tough.
I do think in the future that the media should get together, and rather than trying to outdo each other, agree a joint strategy. I think all leaders and chancellor / shadow chancellors at the very least should have to do interviews and debates. I think 3-4 debates with different ministers / shadow ministers of major offices is ideal.
Good to see the usual suspects weeping tears of impotent rage. S'not fair, he must do it etc, etc. Andrew Neil is not the final arbiter of what a candidate does or doesn't do. He's good, not God and needs to remember that
That's pretty much what I feel. Boris should do the interview. But the puffed up importance of the media types, and the arrogance of it's not democracy without the Beeb interviews, pisses me off more, even if I generally like AN.
I can understand your anger and frustration as you see remain slipping away but have you ever thought that if labour had had a sensible leader who was pro remain and a sensible lib dem leader who did not commit the biggest mistake of the election in revoke that Boris may not have been the end result
Lee Rowley as safe a 1-8 shot as you'll get judging by the posters and mood in Killamarsh
The thing that surprised me about that post is that Killamarsh is in Derbyshire, rather than Sheffield. For some reason I thought that it was part of Sheffield.
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
I don’t care too much that he’s an adulterer, lots of our most successful leaders have been. I do have a strong dislike of the man though and I’m not sure, if he wins a full 5 years, we’ll enjoy the ride that much.
Boris is very lucky he’s facing Corbyn’s Labour. If we had a decent opposition he really wouldn’t be getting my vote.
And the problem with the AN appeal is that Boris has been in front of the media all week with the terrorist attack, NATO and today at a factory in Derbyshire. Furthermore he is doing the final debate v Corbyn on the BBC tomorrow.
I’m a news junkie like you and the one thing I have noticed this week how little engagement Johnson has had with anybody let alone the public. The only stand out image is him trying to be one of the lads with fellow late PMs, everything else has been staged.
So you didn't see him interacting with the factory workers and answering their direct questions this afternoon live on Sky
Ah yes, the old trick of taking questions from people in their workplace where they feel inhibited from saying what they really think.
Posted this too late on previous thread I hope anyone who hasn’t had their children vaccinated against MMR is taking bot of the news from Samoa.
My son's school currently has quite a serious outbreak of mumps. I was worried for my son momentarily before I remembered that one of the 'M's in MMR stood for mumps so, having his had shots as planned, I believe he should be fine.
But my next thought was then one of some horror at the implications of these other kids getting mumps which I assume means they never had the MMR.
Children are a reservoir of disease as it is. Quite why it is that the presence of unvaccinated kids in schools is still tolerated I don't know.
Johnson is a liar and he is a coward. The election campaign has demonstrated that. No-one can say they have not been warned.
He's also arrogant, don't forget that.
Yes, a liar, a coward, arrogant AND an adulterer....don't forget that.
I don’t care too much that he’s an adulterer, lots of our most successful leaders have been. I do have a strong dislike of the man though and I’m not sure, if he wins a full 5 years, we’ll enjoy the ride that much.
Boris is very lucky he’s facing Corbyn’s Labour. If we had a decent opposition he really wouldn’t be getting my vote.
And the problem with the AN appeal is that Boris has been in front of the media all week with the terrorist attack, NATO and today at a factory in Derbyshire. Furthermore he is doing the final debate v Corbyn on the BBC tomorrow.
I’m a news junkie like you and the one thing I have noticed this week how little engagement Johnson has had with anybody let alone the public. The only stand out image is him trying to be one of the lads with fellow late PMs, everything else has been staged.
So you didn't see him interacting with the factory workers and answering their direct questions this afternoon live on Sky
Ah yes, the old trick of taking questions from people in their workplace where they feel inhibited from saying what they really think.
And he took press questions while Corbyn has avoided the media all day
Posted this too late on previous thread I hope anyone who hasn’t had their children vaccinated against MMR is taking bot of the news from Samoa.
My son's school currently has quite a serious outbreak of mumps. I was worried for my son momentarily before I remembered that one of the 'M's in MMR stood for mumps so, having his had shots as planned, I believe he should be fine.
But my next thought was then one of some horror at the implications of these other kids getting mumps which I assume means they never had the MMR.
It's a shocking thing. My son had MMR and broke into a terrible rash and temperature that day. He had Chicken Pox by coincidence that day. Poor thing. You know what his 'overloaded' immune system seemed to cope just fine. His parents, well that's another story.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
Doesn’t help Labour much that whenever Andrew Neil is brought up it brings up memories of the Corbyn car crash. The 2 men will now be forever associated.
So am I miles behind here? I'm confused why Grimsby is so thought to be a Tory success when the fishing rights are not covered in Boris's deal. Any reason for this?
Yes, voter ignorance.
In 1970 around 400 trawlers were based in the port, by 2013 only 5 trawlers remain based there.
Jeremy Corbyn today admitted he might not be able to make good on his plan to let homeless people live in the PM's Chequers country residence.
The Labour leader floated the idea in an ITV interview yesterday, after shadow chancellor John McDonnell said he would do the same at the 11 Downing Street flat.
But Mr Corbyn conceded this morning that he had no clue who owns the grand Buckinghamshire property and was trying to find out.
The now Labour leader is seen shaking hands with Sheikh Raed Salah after a 2012 talk in which he referred to him as an 'honoured citizen' and invited him to tea in the House of Commons.
Another point: how great is trust in the BBC amongst the Labour Leavers Boris is targeting? One of the main features linking Trump and Corbyn (less so Boris) has been their outright hostility to the mainstream media. For Leavers, the BBC is seen as a resolutely Pro-Remain propaganda organ.
Ergo, picking a fight with the BBC in the final week does nothing to harm Boris' appeal to his key electoral demographic...
Andrew Neil interview has been built into as if he is like the world best interviewer ever. Now he is much better than the likes of Marr, but Swinson got through ok. It was the fact that Corbyn crashed the clown car, but then he did the same with Julie Etchingham and she isn't anywhere near as tough.
I do think in the future that the media should get together, and rather than trying to outdo each other, agree a joint strategy. I think all leaders and chancellor / shadow chancellors at the very least should have to do interviews and debates. I think 3-4 debates with different ministers / shadow ministers of major offices is ideal.
I'm not sure it should be the media, getting together to decide who in their cosy cabal gets to do what interviews. Ground rules need to be agreed well in advance with a special body. The audiences should be silent and respectful, like they are in US debates. And I would have no debates within 10 days of polling.
These debates should not descend into ego trips and a desire to satisfy the news broadcaster's need for 24/7 bread and circuses. I want forensic examination of our leaders/potential leaders. I don't want gotcha telly. That they are still fighting over who attends what when, after most of the postals have already gone in is pathetic, on all sides. Nobody comes out of it with credit.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
Jeremy Corbyn today admitted he might not be able to make good on his plan to let homeless people live in the PM's Chequers country residence.
The Labour leader floated the idea in an ITV interview yesterday, after shadow chancellor John McDonnell said he would do the same at the 11 Downing Street flat.
But Mr Corbyn conceded this morning that he had no clue who owns the grand Buckinghamshire property and was trying to find out.
I've long thought this election was never going to be a contest and I confidently expect the Conservatives to win a decent majority next week.
There'll be plenty of epitaphs, obituaries and blame to throw around but in truth there was very little to stop a Conservative majority once May resigned and the ComRes poll on June 11th showed Johnson alone of her potential successors winning a majority. Indeed, it may be the final figures don't vary far from the second ComRes poll during the leadership campaign. [snip for brevity]
Good post stodge all of it. Does anyone have a link to that poll? I remember @HYUFD posting it what feels like a hundred times at the time lol - but it would be interesting afterwards to compare it to the actual results.
Lee Rowley as safe a 1-8 shot as you'll get judging by the posters and mood in Killamarsh
Dronfield also a sea of blue.
He will win but Toby Perins at 1/3 will get a similar majority next door
Dronfield has always been a split town though whereas Killamarsh was rock solid Labour - elected unopposed in 2007 and in 2015 they had more than double the Conservative vote.
Jeremy Corbyn today admitted he might not be able to make good on his plan to let homeless people live in the PM's Chequers country residence.
The Labour leader floated the idea in an ITV interview yesterday, after shadow chancellor John McDonnell said he would do the same at the 11 Downing Street flat.
But Mr Corbyn conceded this morning that he had no clue who owns the grand Buckinghamshire property and was trying to find out.
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
They might not vote Tory but I can definitely see them staying away and the Labour vote being well down. Are people really going to turn up and essentially say I was wrong about Brexit and I’m voting for the Labour MP who thinks I was wrong and wants to overturn the result? I doubt it. I think these voters are particularly men and women of conviction who do not like the concept of being told that they don’t know best.
So am I miles behind here? I'm confused why Grimsby is so thought to be a Tory success when the fishing rights are not covered in Boris's deal. Any reason for this?
Yes, voter ignorance.
In 1970 around 400 trawlers were based in the port, by 2013 only 5 trawlers remain based there.
That people are outraged that Johnson and the Tories will be receiving less airtime than their rivals is a clear indication that something has gone horribly wrong somewhere in terms of how these interviews are being conducted. And/or those people have totally lost perspective.
Effectively the argument boils down to, "it isn't fair that Johnson won't walk blindfolded down a banana peel strewn corridor, like the rest of us agreed to".
Yes I agree with that.
As someone quite actively following political debate, I now go out of my way to avoid set piece political interviews whether on the radio or tv. They evolved into a contrived gladitorial set piece to satisfy the ego of the interviewer, who invariably talks far more than the interviewee is allowed to.
The format I find informative is the one in which the leaders debate between themselves, that is where there is no interviewer as such. They work well only when the moderator's interventions are limited to acting as a referee to ensure that the agreed rules are kept to, so that the people who do the talking are those who are asking us to judge them.
Andrew Neil interview has been built into as if he is like the world best interviewer ever. Now he is much better than the likes of Marr, but Swinson got through ok. It was the fact that Corbyn crashed the clown car, but then he did the same with Julie Etchingham and she isn't anywhere near as tough.
I do think in the future that the media should get together, and rather than trying to outdo each other, agree a joint strategy. I think all leaders and chancellor / shadow chancellors at the very least should have to do interviews and debates. I think 3-4 debates with different ministers / shadow ministers of major offices is ideal.
I'm not sure it should be the media, getting together to decide who in their cosy cabal gets to do what interviews. Ground rules need to be agreed well in advance with a special body. The audiences should be silent and respectful, like they are in US debates. And I would have no debates within 10 days of polling.
These debates should not descend into ego trips and a desire to satisfy the news broadcaster's need for 24/7 bread and circuses. I want forensic examination of our leaders/potential leaders. I don't want gotcha telly. That they are still fighting over who attends what when, after most of the postals have already gone in is pathetic, on all sides. Nobody comes out of it with credit.
Better still, if you're going to have these debates then ditch the studio audience and leave it (at least in the case of the straightforward head-to-head between the big two; a five or seven way debate would need a bit more control) to the politicians actually to discuss the issues with one another. There is no enlightenment whatsoever to be gained from a series of short memorized speeches and soundbites.
So am I miles behind here? I'm confused why Grimsby is so thought to be a Tory success when the fishing rights are not covered in Boris's deal. Any reason for this?
Yes, voter ignorance.
In 1970 around 400 trawlers were based in the port, by 2013 only 5 trawlers remain based there.
It is Dennis and Richard N who exhibiting ignorance on this.
If we stay in the EU then there is 100% no chance that there will be any change to the current fishing arrangements.
If we leave then there is a reasonable chance that the arrangements will change to the benefit of the local fishermen. By no means certain but certainly better than no chance at all which is what we get if Boris loses.
Jeremy Corbyn today admitted he might not be able to make good on his plan to let homeless people live in the PM's Chequers country residence.
The Labour leader floated the idea in an ITV interview yesterday, after shadow chancellor John McDonnell said he would do the same at the 11 Downing Street flat.
But Mr Corbyn conceded this morning that he had no clue who owns the grand Buckinghamshire property and was trying to find out.
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
Since he’s the one who raised it, he can hardly complain if others pull him up over his basic ignorance.
What it definitely shows is he makes things up as he goes along and has no clue what he’s doing.
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
He was the one who brought this up in the first place (unlike the Queen's speech). If you are going to announced a policy, it is normally a reasonable idea to know at least the most basic thing about it.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
Andrew Neil interview has been built into as if he is like the world best interviewer ever. Now he is much better than the likes of Marr, but Swinson got through ok. It was the fact that Corbyn crashed the clown car, but then he did the same with Julie Etchingham and she isn't anywhere near as tough.
I do think in the future that the media should get together, and rather than trying to outdo each other, agree a joint strategy. I think all leaders and chancellor / shadow chancellors at the very least should have to do interviews and debates. I think 3-4 debates with different ministers / shadow ministers of major offices is ideal.
I'm not sure it should be the media, getting together to decide who in their cosy cabal gets to do what interviews. Ground rules need to be agreed well in advance with a special body. The audiences should be silent and respectful, like they are in US debates. And I would have no debates within 10 days of polling.
These debates should not descend into ego trips and a desire to satisfy the news broadcaster's need for 24/7 bread and circuses. I want forensic examination of our leaders/potential leaders. I don't want gotcha telly. That they are still fighting over who attends what when, after most of the postals have already gone in is pathetic, on all sides. Nobody comes out of it with credit.
Better still, if you're going to have these debates then ditch the studio audience and leave it (at least in the case of the straightforward head-to-head between the big two; a five or seven way debate would need a bit more control) to the politicians actually to discuss the issues with one another. There is no enlightenment whatsoever to be gained from a series of short memorized speeches and soundbites.
I wouldn't have a studio audience either. It ends up with party bods.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
They might not vote Tory but I can definitely see them staying away and the Labour vote being well down. Are people really going to turn up and essentially say I was wrong about Brexit and I’m voting for the Labour MP who thinks I was wrong and wants to overturn the result? I doubt it. I think these voters are particularly men and women of conviction who do not like the concept of being told that they don’t know best.
And in a way they’re not voting for the Labour Party of their “ancestors”.
Labour is now effectively the Communist Party. So their “ancestors” may not be that disapproving in them voting Tory to ensure the Labour Party reverts to what it was.
Lee Rowley as safe a 1-8 shot as you'll get judging by the posters and mood in Killamarsh
Dronfield also a sea of blue.
He will win but Toby Perins at 1/3 will get a similar majority next door
Dronfield has always been a split town though whereas Killamarsh was rock solid Labour - elected unopposed in 2007 and in 2015 they had more than double the Conservative vote.
A Neil may be a Tory but is also good at his job unlike the other Tories Peston Robinson Maitless Marr and the Minister for Tory Propoganda @bbclaurak
LOL, Peston and Marr being Tories...you are bonkers. Marr by his own admission used to be so far left he made Jezza look right wing.
Marr became avowedly centrist by the time of his editorship of the independent. Peston is the one of the few current prominent, ex or serving BBC staff to be essentially of the centre-left compared to the 1980s and 90's, and hence was one of the few to raise the excessive daily influence of the Telegraph and Mail on the BBC's daily news output, where others were silent on this. The figures of a centre-right background in the more recent Tony Hall BBC of current times are many and varied, including Robinson, Neil, Sissons, Davis, Humphrys and many others.
It looks bad, but the Tories have only themselves to blame. They went into full overdrive with Jezza's disaster. That's fine, but now their man has chickened out it leaves them looking faintly ridiculous. Indeed, it comes across as a tacit admission that Boris is as crap - or even more crap - than Jezza. Bit of a cock up really.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
You may very well be proved right.
Funny. I was thinking the same yesterday and today whilst out and about. A sense that there are shy Labour supporters around.
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
Indeed. 10 pm next Thursday. I think a medium to large Con win is baked in but nevertheless I will be wracked with tension as for every GE except for 2001.
No-one's mentioned how Farage got on in his Brillo interview before Brillo went for the empty chair. In my opinion Farage handled Brillo better than any other interviewee. In fact he got the better of him, but of course Farage is now a side-show. Obviously Brillo had planned his attack on Boris, so finished the interview with Farage early enough to get it done. He's burnt his boats and will be persona non grata at CCHQ, but maybe he won't care as he retires in the lavender fields of Grasse.
The EU was one of the most spectacular mistakes in world history.
Oh come on, Richard. Truly. I often respect you but that's absolutely ridiculous. Think of your history man and the rubble of Europe in 1945 after two horrendous World Wars.
The EU along with NATO have been triumps in terms of peace. Not perfect, I grant you. Nothing is on this earth.
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
He was the one who brought this up in the first place (unlike the Queen's speech). If you are going to announced a policy, it is normally a reasonable idea to know at least the most basic thing about it.
Well exactly. Even if just something he was floating half seriously, for example, I get baffled when people talk about journalistic non stories when it arises from things the candidate has said themselves.
I think Andrew Neil has done Boris a favour there: he’s laid out exactly what questions and challenge he wants to put to Boris, so he has time to consider, prepare and rehearse his answers.
No other leader had such a forewarning.
I want Boris to do the interview and to hear the answers too, but I’m not holding my breath.
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
He was the one who brought this up in the first place (unlike the Queen's speech). If you are going to announced a policy, it is normally a reasonable idea to know at least the most basic thing about it.
Well exactly. Even if just something he was floating half seriously, for example, I get baffled when people talk about journalistic non stories when it arises from things the candidate has said themselves.
He was virtue signalling. Facts are irrelevant under such circumstances.
He looks like an idiot. But that’s not hard, because he is an idiot.
I think Andrew Neil has done Boris a favour there: he’s laid out exactly what questions and challenge he wants to put to Boris, so he has time to consider, prepare and rehearse his answers.
No other leader had such a forewarning.
I want Boris to do the interview and to hear the answers too, but I’m not holding my breath.
I think less of him as a result.
I do not think less of Johnson for this.
Mind you, it would be bloody hard work for me to think less of him.
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
They might not vote Tory but I can definitely see them staying away and the Labour vote being well down. Are people really going to turn up and essentially say I was wrong about Brexit and I’m voting for the Labour MP who thinks I was wrong and wants to overturn the result? I doubt it. I think these voters are particularly men and women of conviction who do not like the concept of being told that they don’t know best.
And in a way they’re not voting for the Labour Party of their “ancestors”.
Labour is now effectively the Communist Party. So their “ancestors” may not be that disapproving in them voting Tory to ensure the Labour Party reverts to what it was.
I expect that to be one of the messages pushed in the last 48 hours.
"By voting Conservative, you are not turning your back on the party your fathers and grandfathers voted for. That party no longer exists. Today's Labour Party would be unrecognisable to them. It has left them and left you, in its determined march to Marxism..."
Tusk talks plenty of sense a lot of the time, I have a lot of time for him, but I simply find the argument, that he indulges in, that in essence people should never have been allowed to vote on the matter just plain wrong. There was nothing inevitable about the Leave victory, as the following years have shown the Remain cause could have inspired people, the EU itself could have done a far far better job at selling itself rather than as an inevitability everyone must accept.
If he thinks the vote could never have been won, and therefore not allowed, that's an admission the EU had failed and that in future it will continue to fail because it won't confront problems, it will avoid them as though that solves them. Given he rightly points out that Brexiting won't solve our divisions, its pretty remarkable that he thinks that avoiding a vote would mean no problems.
It looks bad, but the Tories have only themselves to blame. They went into full overdrive with Jezza's disaster. That's fine, but now their man has chickened out it leaves them looking faintly ridiculous. Indeed, it comes across as a tacit admission that Boris is as crap - or even more crap - than Jezza. Bit of a cock up really.
Their move is entirely logical. No one is forcing them to go to be interviewed by Neil in order to get savaged and publicly humiliated, Corbyn and the others voluntarily castrated themselves.
If you where a party leader would you have voluntarily gone to Neil after what happened to everyone else who did ?
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
Yes, the polls could be wrong. Or not. Beware of a simplistic assumption that because the polls overstated the Con lead by about 5% in 2017, they are bound to be wrong again in 2019 and in the same direction of overstating the Conservatives.
This from Anthony Wells should give pause for thought:
"For individual polling companies the errors of 2017 are far more straightforward to address than in 2015. For most polling companies it has been a simple matter of dropping the adjustments that went wrong. All the causes of error I listed above have simply been reversed – for example, ICM have dropped their demographic turnout model and gone back to asking people how likely they are to vote, ComRes have done the same. MORI have stopped factoring demographics into their turnout, YouGov aren’t reallocating don’t knows, BMG aren’t currently weighting down groups with lower registration. If you are worried that the specific type of polling error we saw in 2017 could be happening now you shouldn’t be – all the methods that caused the error have been removed. A simplistic view that the polls understated Labour in 2017 and, therefore, Labour are actually doing better than the polls suggest is obviously fallacious. However, that is obviously not a guarantee that polls couldn’t be wrong in other ways.
But what about the polling error of 2015? This is a much more pertinent question. The methodology changes that were introduced in 2017 were intended to correct the problems of 2015. So if the changes are reversed, does that mean the errors of 2015 will re-emerge? Will polls risk *overstating* Labour support again?"
No-one's mentioned how Farage got on in his Brillo interview before Brillo went for the empty chair. In my opinion Farage handled Brillo better than any other interviewee. In fact he got the better of him, but of course Farage is now a side-show. Obviously Brillo had planned his attack on Boris, so finished the interview with Farage early enough to get it done. He's burnt his boats and will be persona non grata at CCHQ, but maybe he won't care as he retires in the lavender fields of Grasse.
Unless Neil is the factor which swings this election, which seems improbable, why would he be persona non grata? Is this yet another sign of the pettiness and vindictiveness of Boris?
*IF* (and it's a big "if" at this stage, of course,) the polls stay where they are and turn out to be broadly predictive of the final vote shares, then it will become apparent that the election campaign effectively ended after about three weeks. The voters made their minds up and moved on to other things.
Whither the robots? Did their batteries fall out?
We're not going to know the answer to that until the results come in. The polls could narrow (though they're not showing much sign of doing so at the moment,) or they could turn out to have been wrong.
I think there may be a shy Labour effect this time around. To say you're voting Labour if you voted Leave seems inconsistent so I suspect many people will put themselves down as don't knows. But I expect don't knows to largely break for Labour in the Brexity northern heartlands.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
You may very well be proved right.
Funny. I was thinking the same yesterday and today whilst out and about. A sense that there are shy Labour supporters around.
May be wrong.
Lots of shy FORMER Labour voters. Not telling anyone - family, friends, pollsters - that they have abandoned Labour, just in case it turns out they need to distance themselves from it if their faith in Boris was misplaced.....
I actually thought Corbyn's response to this journalist-fabricated non-story quite good:
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
He was the one who brought this up in the first place (unlike the Queen's speech). If you are going to announced a policy, it is normally a reasonable idea to know at least the most basic thing about it.
Well exactly. Even if just something he was floating half seriously, for example, I get baffled when people talk about journalistic non stories when it arises from things the candidate has said themselves.
My understanding was that he did not initiate it, but was asked by a previous journalist if he would, like McDonnell, open up Chequers to the homeless. So it was not something he floated, but something a journalist floated.
Comments
A further irony surrounding Johnson is his negative analysis of young working class (his terminology, I believe) men and their casual attitude towards procreation. If ever there was a candidate for the Jeremy Kyle Show it is Johnson. Perhaps Johnson, rather than being grilled by Neil could be skewered instead by Kyle, the mothers of his iligitimate children and a lie detector.
Neil unfortunately has read too much of this, and retweeted too much of it, and now believes it. He thinks he is more important than he is and so any politician worth the salt MUST get the Andrew Neil treatment. I agree it is absurd.
But my next thought was then one of some horror at the implications of these other kids getting mumps which I assume means they never had the MMR.
You however are still a creepy weirdo who talks about monitoring people. Disturbing and unpleasant and a keen fan of a racist. You have very little to recommend you.
I did used to enjoy that long running photo caption competition in Private Eye, I assume it must have really pissed him off, hence they kept it going.
Andrew Neil is not the final arbiter of what a candidate does or doesn't do. He's good, not God and needs to remember that
I won't be surprised if Boris has a very rough time tomorrow night as the BBC doesn't like people taking the piss and they will see it as their responsibility to make sure he is tested.
I do think in the future that the media should get together, and rather than trying to outdo each other, agree a joint strategy. I think all leaders and chancellor / shadow chancellors at the very least should have to do interviews and debates. I think 3-4 debates with different ministers / shadow ministers of major offices is ideal.
Are there any local reasons or just the trending rightwards in Midland mining areas ?
He will win but Toby Perins at 1/3 will get a similar majority next door
It's only words and words are all I have to ...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimsby
The Labour leader floated the idea in an ITV interview yesterday, after shadow chancellor John McDonnell said he would do the same at the 11 Downing Street flat.
But Mr Corbyn conceded this morning that he had no clue who owns the grand Buckinghamshire property and was trying to find out.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7760103/Jeremy-Corbyn-admits-NOT-able-let-homeless-live-Chequers.html
Thick as mince....and clearly never reads PB.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7760625/New-video-shows-Jeremy-Corbyn-embracing-blood-libel-preacher-later-jailed-Hamas-fundraising.html
No politician has gained votes by doing interviews on TV, it's how many you stand to lose if you get savaged.
You do interviews if it's for damage limitation only, with the risk that it could make things worse.
Former Lab MP defied Lab line and was pro.
Then when she lost became paid consultant at ineos and story Fracking Tsar.
Also NEDDC when it was Lab. put forward plans to build on green belt to meet Tory housing targets
Ergo, picking a fight with the BBC in the final week does nothing to harm Boris' appeal to his key electoral demographic...
These debates should not descend into ego trips and a desire to satisfy the news broadcaster's need for 24/7 bread and circuses. I want forensic examination of our leaders/potential leaders. I don't want gotcha telly. That they are still fighting over who attends what when, after most of the postals have already gone in is pathetic, on all sides. Nobody comes out of it with credit.
And of course the pull of ancestral memories and tribal identity may be too hard to resist once people get to the ballot box. I think quite a few people quite like the Conservatives but worry their dead granddad or whoever would die of shame if he knew their family was voting for the hated Tories. On polling day this will be worth a % or two for Labour.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/05/brexit-one-of-most-spectacular-mistakes-in-eu-history-donald-tusk
That's the Tory PPB for Northern voters....
I charge very reasonable rates for telling third rate morons what should be obvious to anyone with access to Google.
Incidentally fun fact - it is said one of the reasons Heath hated Thatcher so much is she never invited him to Chequers.
https://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2015/169/
'I'm campaigning to win the election to become prime minister, that's quite enough and I just want to do the job of prime minister, I'm not really very interested in country houses.'
I want Corbyn's version of Labour to go down so badly it is wiped from this history books. But this type of tripe really is a distraction at best.
As someone quite actively following political debate, I now go out of my way to avoid set piece political interviews whether on the radio or tv. They evolved into a contrived gladitorial set piece to satisfy the ego of the interviewer, who invariably talks far more than the interviewee is allowed to.
The format I find informative is the one in which the leaders debate between themselves, that is where there is no interviewer as such. They work well only when the moderator's interventions are limited to acting as a referee to ensure that the agreed rules are kept to, so that the people who do the talking are those who are asking us to judge them.
If we stay in the EU then there is 100% no chance that there will be any change to the current fishing arrangements.
If we leave then there is a reasonable chance that the arrangements will change to the benefit of the local fishermen. By no means certain but certainly better than no chance at all which is what we get if Boris loses.
https://www.change.org/l/uk/the-people-power-index-how-did-your-mp-score
What it definitely shows is he makes things up as he goes along and has no clue what he’s doing.
Your boy is an equally repugnant animal but he gets a free pass for all his crimes and misdemeanors.
Anyway, time to move on tonight, too many rumbunctious young Tories doing their victory lap a week early.
Labour is now effectively the Communist Party. So their “ancestors” may not be that disapproving in them voting Tory to ensure the Labour Party reverts to what it was.
Dronfield has equally quickly gone full on tory. Lab lost north ward and unstone used to be lab part of dronfield
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jun/06/bbc-obsessed-agenda-daily-mail-robert-peston-charles-wheeler
May be wrong.
Better to return to the old format of deeper but narrower focused discussions on individual issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekend_World
The EU along with NATO have been triumps in terms of peace. Not perfect, I grant you. Nothing is on this earth.
No other leader had such a forewarning.
I want Boris to do the interview and to hear the answers too, but I’m not holding my breath.
I think less of him as a result.
He looks like an idiot. But that’s not hard, because he is an idiot.
Mind you, it would be bloody hard work for me to think less of him.
"By voting Conservative, you are not turning your back on the party your fathers and grandfathers voted for. That party no longer exists. Today's Labour Party would be unrecognisable to them. It has left them and left you, in its determined march to Marxism..."
If he thinks the vote could never have been won, and therefore not allowed, that's an admission the EU had failed and that in future it will continue to fail because it won't confront problems, it will avoid them as though that solves them. Given he rightly points out that Brexiting won't solve our divisions, its pretty remarkable that he thinks that avoiding a vote would mean no problems.
No one is forcing them to go to be interviewed by Neil in order to get savaged and publicly humiliated, Corbyn and the others voluntarily castrated themselves.
If you where a party leader would you have voluntarily gone to Neil after what happened to everyone else who did ?
This from Anthony Wells should give pause for thought:
"For individual polling companies the errors of 2017 are far more straightforward to address than in 2015. For most polling companies it has been a simple matter of dropping the adjustments that went wrong. All the causes of error I listed above have simply been reversed – for example, ICM have dropped their demographic turnout model and gone back to asking people how likely they are to vote, ComRes have done the same. MORI have stopped factoring demographics into their turnout, YouGov aren’t reallocating don’t knows, BMG aren’t currently weighting down groups with lower registration. If you are worried that the specific type of polling error we saw in 2017 could be happening now you shouldn’t be – all the methods that caused the error have been removed. A simplistic view that the polls understated Labour in 2017 and, therefore, Labour are actually doing better than the polls suggest is obviously fallacious. However, that is obviously not a guarantee that polls couldn’t be wrong in other ways.
But what about the polling error of 2015? This is a much more pertinent question. The methodology changes that were introduced in 2017 were intended to correct the problems of 2015. So if the changes are reversed, does that mean the errors of 2015 will re-emerge? Will polls risk *overstating* Labour support again?"
https://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/10002