I finally sent in my postal vote. If anyone cares, I voted Lib Dem in the end. I really didn't like their Revoke policy but they have rowed back from it and I just couldn't vote Tory in the end. Part of that was instinctive but part of it was from the behaviour of Boris over the years. The "bum boys" quote was nasty and stuck with me. Despite his later progress on gay rights, he didn't apologise for it. Prorogation also showed he was just as bad as the always Remainers in his disrespect for democracy. In the end I have demanded Labour voters consult their consciences and I had to hold myself to the same standard. Neither the Conservatives or Labour deserve the vote of those of liberal principle.
I am in a swing seat too so I wonder how many will end up doing the same.
I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again. It’s a black dog sitting on the shoulder of the nation, draining the optimism out of you, trying to twist how you think every day from when your radio alarm goes off to when you drift off on the sofa at night to some shitty comedy panel.
Life really is sweeter when you don’t have a license and you instead consume media entirely actively rather than passively.
Then why don't you follow your own advice and stop watching the BBC?
Personally, I think it is by far the best broadcaster in the country, and probably the world.
Another crumb should the buffoon make it next week is that presumably Owen Jones will cease to be a Labour activist but return to his secret undercover role as a respected journalist?
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.
Were I PM, MMR vaccination would be compulsory for kids to go to school, Andrew Wakefield would be extradited from the US and put in prison for all the harm he has done and people who believe in homeopathy and all this anti-vaccination rubbish should have the vote taken away (and given remedial science classes) as they are clearly too stupid to be allowed out on their own.
This is a rather silly post. Why are we driven to make everything a battle and demonise our opponents? Would it not be simpler to work to develop vaccines that do not use mercury? Whether harmful or safe in miniscule quantities, it can hardly be called a desirable ingredient can it?
If it is safe then why would it be undesirable? What would it matter?
Because our knowledge about the interaction between chemicals and the human body over time has not yet reached its zenith, hopefully you agree? Therefore, it would seem to be sensible to remove an ingredient that we know to be deadly in large amounts, from an immunisation injection. I find it odd that medical science cannot solve this issue, and all the medical establishment can do is shout at people even louder.
Water is deadly in large amounts. So is oxygen. We can't base medicine around people that can't get over such silly illogicalities.
Besides, the MMR vaccine has never had mercury in it anyway.
Another crumb should the buffoon make it next week is that presumably Owen Jones will cease to be a Labour activist but return to his secret undercover role as a respected journalist?
Posted by the Times on Twitter. Hard to read at this resolution.
Tories on course for 8 seats says the subtitle. They'd take that, I am sure. If Scottish seats are the key then it is only a small majority expected though.
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.
Were I PM, MMR vaccination would be compulsory for kids to go to school, Andrew Wakefield would be extradited from the US and put in prison for all the harm he has done and people who believe in homeopathy and all this anti-vaccination rubbish should have the vote taken away (and given remedial science classes) as they are clearly too stupid to be allowed out on their own.
This is a rather silly post. Why are we driven to make everything a battle and demonise our opponents? Would it not be simpler to work to develop vaccines that do not use mercury? Whether harmful or safe in miniscule quantities, it can hardly be called a desirable ingredient can it?
If it is safe then why would it be undesirable? What would it matter?
Because our knowledge about the interaction between chemicals and the human body over time has not yet reached its zenith, hopefully you agree? .
But your question was phrased in a way stating it was safe, yet still calling it undesirable. If you think we cannot be certain it is safe in such quantities, that's an entirely different point and the desirability becomes relevant in that circumstance. But it is not a 'whether harmful or safe' it is undesirable situation.
Wow lifelong Labour voters queuing up on Newnight to say they have voted for Boris.
Notice they say they have voted for Boris not for the Tories.
Boris has a Trump like appeal to the white working class
No .
He has Boris appeal and I am very surprised how he is winning so many over
I am not calling it a majority yet but if it is a good majority I will be the first to congratulate you on predicting it, especially as my previous doubts
Thank you.
Trump appealed to the white working class in a way no Republican had since Reagan and won states like Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania too not won by the GOP since the 1980s.
I think Boris is going to win seats that have not gone Tory since Thatcher if ever
So you’re emulating Trump. Not something to be hugely proud of really. Winning, but at a cost. Someone has a picture of the true Tory party in the attic. It’s not pretty.
Hang on a moment, I don't quite follow this. If Bors wins enough of those voters he wins the election, and that is at a shameful cost. But if he does not win enough of those voters then those voters, whose votes are shameful to win due to what it takes to win their vote(?), will have voted for other parties, making their win shameful too?
I'm worried about a Boris government, especially one with a big majority, but I'm not understanding that his winning by winning seats the party never has before (or not for along time) is a terrible cost.
Eh? Winning additional seats isn’t the cost, it’s the selling out to a populist Trumpian agenda to do it that incurs the cost.
Yes, that was my exact point - you think that the votes he is getting to win, selling out to a populist agenda, incurs a cost. But if he doesn't win those enough of those voters who would be swayed by a terrible populist agenda then someone else is winning them over, and you seem to think those voters are bad because they are the sort won who would be won over by a populist trumpian agenda. Was another populist agenda more popular?
If the problem is a trumpian populist agenda is popular the problem is with the voters more than the agenda. Hence my confusion - its bad for him to receive their votes but ok for others to receive their votes?
If you make a promise to someone you can’t keep it is bad for both of you.
Wow lifelong Labour voters queuing up on Newnight to say they have voted for Boris.
Notice they say they have voted for Boris not for the Tories.
Boris has a Trump like appeal to the white working class
No .
He has Boris appeal and I am very surprised how he is winning so many over
I am not calling it a majority yet but if it is a good majority I will be the first to congratulate you on predicting it, especially as my previous doubts
Thank you.
Trump appealed to the white working class in a way no Republican had since Reagan and won states like Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania too not won by the GOP since the 1980s.
I think Boris is going to win seats that have not gone Tory since Thatcher if ever
I hope you are right but if Boris wins well we need humility and to become one nation conservatives as said by Boris today. No triumphalism please
Not even a little bit?
Harrumph.
To be honest so many will be hurting it will be enough for me to see a good working majority and start the slow task of healing with understanding
One of the buffoon's first acts if he does fluke a win is he should get Ken Clarke in the Lords asap and back within the tory whip (if he'll take it)...
It would be a potential signal of intent. But he seems a vindictive sort, and Clarke has not endorsed him. Boris remembers that sort of thing.
If I were Swinson I would put Clarke forward for a peerage if Boris fails to do so. The embarrassment factor for him would be huge (and Clarke agrees with the LDs on many matters).
Another crumb should the buffoon make it next week is that presumably Owen Jones will cease to be a Labour activist but return to his secret undercover role as a respected journalist?
Respected? wtf?????
Precisely..... the self-delusion is strong in this one
Wow lifelong Labour voters queuing up on Newnight to say they have voted for Boris.
Notice they say they have voted for Boris not for the Tories.
Boris has a Trump like appeal to the white working class
No .
He has Boris appeal and I am very surprised how he is winning so many over
I am not calling it a majority yet but if it is a good majority I will be the first to congratulate you on predicting it, especially as my previous doubts
Thank you.
Trump appealed to the white working class in a way no Republican had since Reagan and won states like Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania too not won by the GOP since the 1980s.
I think Boris is going to win seats that have not gone Tory since Thatcher if ever
So you’re emulating Trump. Not something to be hugely proud of really. Winning, but at a cost. Someone has a picture of the true Tory party in the attic. It’s not pretty.
Hang on a moment, I don't quite follow this. If Bors wins enough of those voters he wins the election, and that is at a shameful cost. But if he does not win enough of those voters then those voters, whose votes are shameful to win due to what it takes to win their vote(?), will have voted for other parties, making their win shameful too?
I'm worried about a Boris government, especially one with a big majority, but I'm not understanding that his winning by winning seats the party never has before (or not for along time) is a terrible cost.
Eh? Winning additional seats isn’t the cost, it’s the selling out to a populist Trumpian agenda to do it that incurs the cost.
Yes, that was my exact point - you think that the votes he is getting to win, selling out to a populist agenda, incurs a cost. But if he doesn't win those enough of those voters who would be swayed by a terrible populist agenda then someone else is winning them over, and you seem to think those voters are bad because they are the sort won who would be won over by a populist trumpian agenda. Was another populist agenda more popular?
If the problem is a trumpian populist agenda is popular the problem is with the voters more than the agenda. Hence my confusion - its bad for him to receive their votes but ok for others to receive their votes?
If you make a promise to someone you can’t keep it is bad for both of you.
Does that apply to everyone in Labour saying Corbyn will be the next Prime Minister?
I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again. It’s a black dog sitting on the shoulder of the nation, draining the optimism out of you, trying to twist how you think every day from when your radio alarm goes off to when you drift off on the sofa at night to some shitty comedy panel.
Life really is sweeter when you don’t have a license and you instead consume media entirely actively rather than passively.
Then why don't you follow your own advice and stop watching the BBC?
Personally, I think it is by far the best broadcaster in the country, and probably the world.
I don’t watch the BBC. I do not have a license, I have no means to. I saw some of that Mcmafia thing on Prime, didn’t make the end. Love a bit of Luther on Netflix. My Only Fools Boxset gets an airing still. And I watched a clip from Marr this week for the first time in years. If you think that counts as “watching the bbc” then you miss my point.
Regarding 8 MPs, that’s down for the Tories is it? Not surprised to see Labour collapse.
Oh it's well down. But considering how bad it could be, given no seats in Scotland are safe, and the more they hold there the fewer they need to win in those flirtatious norther and welsh Labour heartlands, it would be decent enough even though the SNP are an unstoppable juggernaut.
I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again. It’s a black dog sitting on the shoulder of the nation, draining the optimism out of you, trying to twist how you think every day from when your radio alarm goes off to when you drift off on the sofa at night to some shitty comedy panel.
Life really is sweeter when you don’t have a license and you instead consume media entirely actively rather than passively.
Then why don't you follow your own advice and stop watching the BBC?
Personally, I think it is by far the best broadcaster in the country, and probably the world.
I don’t watch the BBC. I do not have a license, I have no means to. I saw some of that Mcmafia thing on Prime, didn’t make the end. Love a bit of Luther on Netflix. My Only Fools Boxset gets an airing still. And I watched a clip from Marr this week for the first time in years. If you think that counts as “watching the bbc” then you miss my point.
I was misled by your post: "I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again."
Water is deadly in large amounts. So is oxygen. We can't base medicine around people that can't get over such silly illogicalities.
It is not an illogicality, it is a logicality. If mercury operates as a deadly toxin in large amounts, it is hardly illogical to suppose that it may have unexpected and potentially negative side effects if consumed by susceptible people, in small amounts. As for water and oxygen, both are consumed in vast quantities over the lifetime of all mammals and are essential to life. That comparison is silly. And it's silly not to develop vaccines that can exclude the contentious ingredient, even if the only reason is to assuage fears. But no, patronise, demonise and screech at people more it is...
Another crumb should the buffoon make it next week is that presumably Owen Jones will cease to be a Labour activist but return to his secret undercover role as a respected journalist?
No, Owen Jones will join the Laura Pidcock leadership campaign within a week of a Labour defeat and Corbyn resignation
Are the people in the thumbnail laughing at that suggestion being a reality?
I presume if they do not win they will that accept the Tories offered hope to more millions than they offered hope to? Or that they did not offer as much hope to people as they thought they had?
Actually I look forward to change in government almost as much to find out what will not change as what will. I remember vividly one of the first things Cameron said in the first leadership debate in 2010, which was that not everything Labour had done was bad, and they'd keep the good stuff.
Are the people in the thumbnail laughing at that suggestion being a reality?
I presume if they do not win they will that accept the Tories offered hope to more millions than they offered hope to? Or that they did not offer as much hope to people as they thought they had?
Actually I look forward to change in government almost as much to find out what will not change as what will. I remember vividly one of the first things Cameron said in the first leadership debate in 2010, which was that not everything Labour had done was bad, and they'd keep the good stuff.
And Labour in 1997 basically continued Tories budgeting....oh those where the days when it wasn't mentalists in charge that wanted to break the system.
One of the areas that flattered to deceive last time IIRC. Do you believe that poll?
The Labour vote in Wrexham is down over 40% in two and a half years......
That's a blood-bath in a blood-bank.
True, and due to shift in the nature and geography of the Labour membership, working class Labour should become weaker and weaker in exchange for it becoming stronger among "limousine liberals" and "champagne socialists" like in America. But there are far fewer ultra rich people in Europe and the UK in order to form an electoral base.
Also neoliberalism based on a coalition of poor immigrants and the rich is unstable because the immigrants might ask for a raise in pay.
Immigration has become a significant factor in Wrexham, but because no-one is allowed to talk about it the effects have been hidden until now.
What other town have a similar untalked-about immigration issue? Wales? England? Are they also going to see two in five of Labour's 2017 voters go walkabout?
Immigration is a huge factor in Guildford. We rely on the Polish community for competent plumbers and electricians.
..... in order that we can avoid paying self employed traders a rate for the job that's more than a small fraction of our own salaries.
Well said.
If you believe that £50-£60 per hour for labour is poor pay you must be doing pretty well yourself.
Yes, it is true.
I am on a Nick Clegg like salary, as a professional liar for Facebook.
Posted by the Times on Twitter. Hard to read at this resolution. Looks like 42/33 GB wide and Tories on 28 in Scotland.
Looks like another piece based around Thursday's YouGov, having been written to generate a Scottish slant for a Scottish edition. Don't think it's a new poll as such.
Are we sure it is a new YouGov and not the one from the other day? I don't think there is any mention of it on the English version of the Times front page.
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
Are we sure it is a new YouGov and not the one from the other day? I don't think there is any mention of it on the English version of the Times front page.
We're like a bunch of addicts desperately searching for our next fix, aren't we?
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
You are counting your chickens there that places like Uxbridge will go.
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
You are counting your chickens there that places like Uxbridge will go.
Are we sure it is a new YouGov and not the one from the other day? I don't think there is any mention of it on the English version of the Times front page.
We're like a bunch of addicts desperately searching for our next fix, aren't we?
"BORIS Johnson last night demanded Jeremy Corbyn scrap his underhand plan to allow two million EU migrants vote in a second Brexit referendum as the pair prepare for their final TV clash.
New analysis by the Tories shows Labour’s plan to extend the franchise to “all UK residents” would mean allowing two million EU nationals to vote in a second referendum and General Elections for the first time.
In his letter to the Labour leader last night, Mr Johnson wrote: “You want to give two million EU nationals the vote in your referendum. This is a sly attempt to undermine the result of the 2016 referendum, and is profoundly undemocratic."
It would alienate millions who already feel disenfranchised and ignored by our political system."
Are we sure it is a new YouGov and not the one from the other day? I don't think there is any mention of it on the English version of the Times front page.
We're like a bunch of addicts desperately searching for our next fix, aren't we?
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
Tories wont be down 10 in London. I would guess they will gain Kensington, lose Richmond
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
Tories wont be down 10 in London. I would guess they will gain Kensington, lose Richmond
Are we sure it is a new YouGov and not the one from the other day? I don't think there is any mention of it on the English version of the Times front page.
So if they’re five down in Scotland and five down in London, they’re 10 down so they need 10 gains to stand still.
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
Tories wont be down 10 in London. I would guess they will gain Kensington, lose Richmond
Another crumb should the buffoon make it next week is that presumably Owen Jones will cease to be a Labour activist but return to his secret undercover role as a respected journalist?
No, Owen Jones will join the Laura Pidcock leadership campaign within a week of a Labour defeat and Corbyn resignation
They are very much alike.
I can’t believe posters on here reckon she is leadership material. Even if Boris gets a majority, brexit is far from done, a very tricky negotiation all next year, and any surrenders losing support could make it difficult in the commons, so another GE can’t be ruled out in next couple of years. Tories will welcome that with Pidcock labour leader. Before HY posts but they have all signed up to Get brexit done, that may account for the WA and entering transition, no one given Boris blank cheque in the negotiation on new relationship. No ones that daft are they?
Wow lifelong Labour voters queuing up on Newnight to say they have voted for Boris.
Notice they say they have voted for Boris not for the Tories.
Boris has a Trump like appeal to the white working class
All this stuff about constituency MPs, local factors, tactical voting, it does all occur, but it is overwhelmingly the case people vote for that leader bloke / woman.
I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again. It’s a black dog sitting on the shoulder of the nation, draining the optimism out of you, trying to twist how you think every day from when your radio alarm goes off to when you drift off on the sofa at night to some shitty comedy panel.
Life really is sweeter when you don’t have a license and you instead consume media entirely actively rather than passively.
Then why don't you follow your own advice and stop watching the BBC?
Personally, I think it is by far the best broadcaster in the country, and probably the world.
I don’t watch the BBC. I do not have a license, I have no means to. I saw some of that Mcmafia thing on Prime, didn’t make the end. Love a bit of Luther on Netflix. My Only Fools Boxset gets an airing still. And I watched a clip from Marr this week for the first time in years. If you think that counts as “watching the bbc” then you miss my point.
I was misled by your post: "I see the bbc are being their usual yawn inducing egotistical self again."
I am still au fait with the Beeb‘s output because a couple of weeks a year I stay with people who still (passively) consume it. It tends to brings into even sharper focus how jumped up with it’s own importance it is and how richer your thought processes are without it.
I did watch too some clips from Jezza’s “car crash” interview. As much as I despise what Jezza stands for, I thought at the time the interview’s relevance was being inflated beyond anything sensible. This latest Neil outburst is the same.
"BORIS Johnson last night demanded Jeremy Corbyn scrap his underhand plan to allow two million EU migrants vote in a second Brexit referendum as the pair prepare for their final TV clash.
New analysis by the Tories shows Labour’s plan to extend the franchise to “all UK residents” would mean allowing two million EU nationals to vote in a second referendum and General Elections for the first time.
In his letter to the Labour leader last night, Mr Johnson wrote: “You want to give two million EU nationals the vote in your referendum. This is a sly attempt to undermine the result of the 2016 referendum, and is profoundly undemocratic."
It would alienate millions who already feel disenfranchised and ignored by our political system."
Cummings and Boris are onto big winner with this attack line, because Labour arent rebutting they are agreeing with him.
Comments
Less than a week now
Have a good nights rest folks
Good night
I am in a swing seat too so I wonder how many will end up doing the same.
Personally, I think it is by far the best broadcaster in the country, and probably the world.
Con: 42
Lab: 33
Ah, I see what you mean...
https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1202704448457306112
Besides, the MMR vaccine has never had mercury in it anyway.
Can I touch the Klaxon?
Regarding 8 MPs, that’s down for the Tories is it? Not surprised to see Labour collapse.
Though there was the Anthony Calvert thing (which had been dealt with in 2008 iirc).
Edit: 13, not 12.
Interesting that’s Tories down in another poll though and I think Labour as well. All MOE stuff, the polls have got stuck.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1202626183822823424
Means fuck all but it’s an election
I am in a safe seat so....
Actually I look forward to change in government almost as much to find out what will not change as what will. I remember vividly one of the first things Cameron said in the first leadership debate in 2010, which was that not everything Labour had done was bad, and they'd keep the good stuff.
Now, before everyone else rushes for their sick bags...
I am on a Nick Clegg like salary, as a professional liar for Facebook.
(Though the exit polls did predict they would).
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/snp
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1202726921550872576?s=19
It is Labour voters going SNP that will produce all the gains bar Stirling
Right now that looks nailed on, they’ll easily do that. But I can see - and call me a straw clasper I don’t mind anymore - how somehow if things narrow, these seats may end up being the difference between a slim majority and a HP.
A few LD upsets May make thinks harder still.
It’s the hope that kills you
Because of the Labour collapse in the "red wall", the Tories will win a majority of 120 seats.
Brave prediction, I know.....but there you go.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10492603/boris-johnson-jeremy-corbyn-tv-clash-brexit-referedum-elections/
"BORIS Johnson last night demanded Jeremy Corbyn scrap his underhand plan to allow two million EU migrants vote in a second Brexit referendum as the pair prepare for their final TV clash.
New analysis by the Tories shows Labour’s plan to extend the franchise to “all UK residents” would mean allowing two million EU nationals to vote in a second referendum and General Elections for the first time.
In his letter to the Labour leader last night, Mr Johnson wrote: “You want to give two million EU nationals the vote in your referendum. This is a sly attempt to undermine the result of the 2016 referendum, and is profoundly undemocratic."
It would alienate millions who already feel disenfranchised and ignored by our political system."
I can’t believe posters on here reckon she is leadership material. Even if Boris gets a majority, brexit is far from done, a very tricky negotiation all next year, and any surrenders losing support could make it difficult in the commons, so another GE can’t be ruled out in next couple of years. Tories will welcome that with Pidcock labour leader.
Before HY posts but they have all signed up to Get brexit done, that may account for the WA and entering transition, no one given Boris blank cheque in the negotiation on new relationship. No ones that daft are they?
Uxbridge, Cities of London and Westminster and Wimbledon are longer shots in the top 100 Labour target seats
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Somewhat.
I'm thinking more in the 20-40 range.
I did watch too some clips from Jezza’s “car crash” interview. As much as I despise what Jezza stands for, I thought at the time the interview’s relevance was being inflated beyond anything sensible. This latest Neil outburst is the same.