I posted last night about how BBC always report on the night before GE how the result is uncertain, nobody really knows what's going on, there are reports of strange movements in marginals.
Well the other thing that always happens is that on the final day of campaigning they always just report about where the leaders are going and follow them around - they never do much if anything on specific individual policies.
So if there is a late bribe, I think it really needs to be announced now - at the latest this evening to get into tomorrow morning's papers.
You would have thought it would have come Sat / Sun.
It would look soooooo desperate now... but of course it's still possible.
On the other hand, such a public acknowledgement that they're about to be creamed could break the back of their campaign entirely.
I have to say I have found the Labour advent calendar campaign choices slightly confusing. If you are going radical, why not go really populist, with legalize drugs, cancel student debt, overhaul tv sports rights. Planting 2bn trees ain't going to shift a vote.
Strange, isn't it? I feel like I could have written a better manifesto for them, despite not wanting 99% of the things they want.
I’ve wondered whether stuff like legalisation of drugs was vetoed by those wanting to hold the more socially conservative north. They just then forgot to put something appealing in instead.
Overhauling tv sports rights I am sure would have been popular in the North and cost the government nothing. Now it would screw the sports themselves, but bugger that they are all multi-millionaires anyway, right?
I'm not sure it would be that popular. Tell Liverpool fans their club could no longer be able to afford Salah, Firmino, Mane and Van Dijk and see how truly popular that is. Liverpool will vote Labour this election but not because Liverpool fans aren't happy with LFC and the way the Premier League is going at the moment!
Liverpool will vote Labour as it's sees what The Sun says and does the exact opposite as it has done since Hillsborough.
I posted last night about how BBC always report on the night before GE how the result is uncertain, nobody really knows what's going on, there are reports of strange movements in marginals.
Well the other thing that always happens is that on the final day of campaigning they always just report about where the leaders are going and follow them around - they never do much if anything on specific individual policies.
So if there is a late bribe, I think it really needs to be announced now - at the latest this evening to get into tomorrow morning's papers.
You would have thought it would have come Sat / Sun.
It would look soooooo desperate now... but of course it's still possible.
On the other hand, such a public acknowledgement that they're about to be creamed could break the back of their campaign entirely.
I have to say I have found the Labour advent calendar campaign choices slightly confusing. If you are going radical, why not go really populist, with legalize drugs, cancel student debt, overhaul tv sports rights. Planting 2bn trees ain't going to shift a vote.
Strange, isn't it? I feel like I could have written a better manifesto for them, despite not wanting 99% of the things they want.
I’ve wondered whether stuff like legalisation of drugs was vetoed by those wanting to hold the more socially conservative north. They just then forgot to put something appealing in instead.
Overhauling tv sports rights I am sure would have been popular in the North and cost the government nothing. Now it would screw the sports themselves, but bugger that they are all multi-millionaires anyway, right?
Risks the players/managers coming out against you?
I don't think a load of players managers / players claiming it would be horrific if BBC had to be given the rights to the EPL would cut much mustard. I think a lot of people who think, but you get £100k a week you greedy bugger.
Speaking as that rare beast, a Tory originally from Merseyside do you think driving Klopp and his players out of the country will be a popular policy? You think Liverpool fans are desperate to see Klopp gone and domestic Managers like Alan Pardew to take his place?
Screwing with football would be toxic. To paraphrase Bill Shankly football isn't a matter of life and death up here, its more important than that.
A number of us have suggested intelligent ways of addressing immigration on this forum over the years.
There is nothing new however in insulting people who live here, work here and have made this country their home by saying or implying that they are freeloaders or have no right to be here. That is a technique which is as old as the hills and utterly nasty. It shows a lack of common human decency.
Mr Johnson said: “I think people want to see democratic control. I don’t think people in this country are hostile to immigration at all, let alone being hostile to immigrants, but they want it democratically controlled and that’s what Brexit allows us to do.”
Migration from the EU could already be controlled even under FoM. The British government chose not to use the tools it had.
And it also ignores the fact that a very large part of the migration to this country comes from outside the EU and has always been under democratic control
People who have come here from other countries do feel that the atmosphere towards them has changed for the worse and is becoming more hostile. And that is in large part down to politicians like Boris and others. And I am afraid that after years of fuelling such an atmosphere in order to win a referendum and improve his career prospects, it is not enough to point to one interview and say “oh we like immigrants really - it’s just about democratic control”.
If he has not said the words suggested, good. As far as I am concerned anyone coming here to live and contribute makes this their home and is entitled to see it as “their” country. I don’t think the current Tories view this in the same way as me and it is one reason why they will not be getting my vote.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
That is exactly how we feel in Spain - as guests. I would feel very differently if I applied for citizenship - which I could possibly do. There is nio stigma in being seen as a guest or hostility on either side. The fact you cannot see that is your problem. And there is no need to be so rude just because you have a different view.
I posted last night about how BBC always report on the night before GE how the result is uncertain, nobody really knows what's going on, there are reports of strange movements in marginals.
Well the other thing that always happens is that on the final day of campaigning they always just report about where the leaders are going and follow them around - they never do much if anything on specific individual policies.
So if there is a late bribe, I think it really needs to be announced now - at the latest this evening to get into tomorrow morning's papers.
You would have thought it would have come Sat / Sun.
It would look soooooo desperate now... but of course it's still possible.
On the other hand, such a public acknowledgement that they're about to be creamed could break the back of their campaign entirely.
I have to say I have found the Labour advent calendar campaign choices slightly confusing. If you are going radical, why not go really populist, with legalize drugs, cancel student debt, overhaul tv sports rights. Planting 2bn trees ain't going to shift a vote.
Strange, isn't it? I feel like I could have written a better manifesto for them, despite not wanting 99% of the things they want.
I’ve wondered whether stuff like legalisation of drugs was vetoed by those wanting to hold the more socially conservative north. They just then forgot to put something appealing in instead.
Overhauling tv sports rights I am sure would have been popular in the North and cost the government nothing. Now it would screw the sports themselves, but bugger that they are all multi-millionaires anyway, right?
I'm not sure it would be that popular. Tell Liverpool fans their club could no longer be able to afford Salah, Firmino, Mane and Van Dijk and see how truly popular that is. Liverpool will vote Labour this election but not because Liverpool fans aren't happy with LFC and the way the Premier League is going at the moment!
Liverpool will vote Labour as it's sees what The Sun says and does the exact opposite as it has done since Hillsborough.
Speaking personally I don't see what The Sun says, never have done and I'm happy with that. Never read The Sun in my life and never will.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
Yeah it really is a revolting mindset, sadly quite common. And usually held by people whose own claim to having made a positive contribution to the country is rather questionable.
Have we had any more info on actual size of electorate in each seat? We have had all the boosting of big vote registration applications, but I have only seen one tweet about the actual electorate and that was 4-5 seats and basically it wasn't up in all but 1.
I'm also trying to get hold of the latest electorate data.
Andy_JS: what`s your current prediction on the number of SNP seats? I`m tempted to go Under 44.5 @ 5/6.
At the moment I'd say 40 seats.
Thanks, I`ve gone Under 44.5. This tops up my bet of a couple of weeks ago when I went Under at 48.5 - also at 5/6.
We ought to get all PBers to list their top three GE bets or something - maybe on Wednesday?
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
The problem is that any evidence of Islamophobia here is ignored.
Johnson said Muslim women look like bank robbers and letter boxes. That’s Islamophobic, whether he was protecting their right to wear these items of clothing or not. Imagine if Corbyn had argued against Jewish clothing, we know what the reaction would be.
I’m sure this candidate knows nothing about Islamophobia either:
Are you so Islamophobic that you think Muslim = niqab?
Or do you accept and understand that there are over a billion Muslims who don't wear it? And that it isn't Islam?
It's a typically British liberal position. You look stupid wearing it, but there is no justification in stopping you making a fool of yourself.
Precisely! And the ability to ridicule the extreme and make it a joke is typically British too. The niqab is extremist and misogynistic, it is not racist to say that. Those who wear it do look like ridiculous, it is not racist to say that. And there is no race that demand it be worn, it is not racist to say that.
To equate it with a race is racist.
"do look like ridiculous" Were you going to say 'letterboxes'?
No. That wouldn't be my personal language and I wouldn't copy someone else's for the sake of it, though it is apt. Could you answer some questions for me?
Do you think the niqab is required by Islam? Do you accept that there's over a billion Muslims worldwide who don't wear it? Do you think it is misogynistic? Do you think misogyny is wrong? Do you think criticising misogyny is appropriate?
My answers for what its worth are no, yes, yes, yes and yes.
And what about:
Do you think mocking victims of misogyny about it is appropriate?
Can be. If it helps them escape or end the misogyny then yes.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I wonder if my +20/25 assessmemt for what is going on now might not be worth discarding so soon after all.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I think you're right. But, then, as you also hint that may be because I want them to be.
I think this is going to be another really bad night for pollsters.
The problem is that any evidence of Islamophobia here is ignored.
Johnson said Muslim women look like bank robbers and letter boxes. That’s Islamophobic, whether he was protecting their right to wear these items of clothing or not. Imagine if Corbyn had argued against Jewish clothing, we know what the reaction would be.
I’m sure this candidate knows nothing about Islamophobia either:
Are you so Islamophobic that you think Muslim = niqab?
Or do you accept and understand that there are over a billion Muslims who don't wear it? And that it isn't Islam?
It's a typically British liberal position. You look stupid wearing it, but there is no justification in stopping you making a fool of yourself.
Precisely! And the ability to ridicule the extreme and make it a joke is typically British too. The niqab is extremist and misogynistic, it is not racist to say that. Those who wear it do look like ridiculous, it is not racist to say that. And there is no race that demand it be worn, it is not racist to say that.
To equate it with a race is racist.
"do look like ridiculous" Were you going to say 'letterboxes'?
No. That wouldn't be my personal language and I wouldn't copy someone else's for the sake of it, though it is apt. Could you answer some questions for me?
Do you think the niqab is required by Islam? Do you accept that there's over a billion Muslims worldwide who don't wear it? Do you think it is misogynistic? Do you think misogyny is wrong? Do you think criticising misogyny is appropriate?
My answers for what its worth are no, yes, yes, yes and yes.
And what about:
Do you think mocking victims of misogyny about it is appropriate?
Can be. If it helps them escape or end the misogyny then yes.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I think you're right. But, then, as you also hint that may be because I want them to be.
I think this is going to be another really bad night for pollsters.
My feeling is they’re going to be out - but either a massive Tory lead is the result of a HP.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I think you're right. But, then, as you also hint that may be because I want them to be.
I think this is going to be another really bad night for pollsters.
You think this because Tories will do worse than expected?
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
I don't know if Boris has genuine ambitions to win any of the Tyne and Wear seats or if he's just visiting as part of a broader attempt to win round Northern working class voters. But given the smallest majority is 10k in Sunderland Central it seems bizarre that the government who have been in power for almost 10 years are even considering winning here is a possibility.
He might just be doing it to terrify and confuse Labour. Which is always a good plan.
A number of us have suggested intelligent ways of addressing immigration on this forum over the years.
There is nothing new however in insulting people who live here, work here and have made this country their home by saying or implying that they are freeloaders or have no right to be here. That is a technique which is as old as the hills and utterly nasty. It shows a lack of common human decency.
Mr Johnson said: “I think people want to see democratic control. I don’t think people in this country are hostile to immigration at all, let alone being hostile to immigrants, but they want it democratically controlled and that’s what Brexit allows us to do.”
Migration from the EU could already be controlled even under FoM. The British government chose not to use the tools it had.
And it also ignores the fact that a very large part of the migration to this country comes from outside the EU and has always been under democratic control
People who have come here from other countries do feel that the atmosphere towards them has changed for the worse and is becoming more hostile. And that is in large part down to politicians like Boris and others. And I am afraid that after years of fuelling such an atmosphere in order to win a referendum and improve his career prospects, it is not enough to point to one interview and say “oh we like immigrants really - it’s just about democratic control”.
If he has not said the words suggested, good. As far as I am concerned anyone coming here to live and contribute makes this their home and is entitled to see it as “their” country. I don’t think the current Tories view this in the same way as me and it is one reason why they will not be getting my vote.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
That is exactly how we feel in Spain - as guests. I would feel very differently if I applied for citizenship - which I could possibly do. There is nio stigma in being seen as a guest or hostility on either side. The fact you cannot see that is your problem. And there is no need to be so rude just because you have a different view.
You may feel like guests. My parents did not. And I find it revolting that people now claim that they were and should be thought of as “guests” in the country in which they chose to live the majority of their lives.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
Sure, that was a product of the times, when the UK population was far lower, people didn't move country so much and consequentially no-one thought about whether someone was a citizen or not, as long as they were contributing to society.
It seems clear that the situation has changed. We are moving more towards a state where society requires formal citizenship to be sought for newly arrived immigrants to be considered as part of this country. It isn't a particular high hurdle to jump, but it shows willingness to tie yourself more formally to this country and its future success. Do you think that's inherently unreasonable?
BXP - One hand delivered, two by post. Labour - One by post. Conservative - One hand delivered.
There is a Labour poster outside a house up the road, other than that I'd barely know they were standing.
There are lots of Brexit adverts around. They had the full page advert on the front of the Chronicle that I posted last week, and there are quite a few (paid) posters scattered around. I have heard rumours that Farage will be in town somewhere today, but don't know if that is true,
The problem is that any evidence of Islamophobia here is ignored.
Johnson said Muslim women look like bank robbers and letter boxes. That’s Islamophobic, whether he was protecting their right to wear these items of clothing or not. Imagine if Corbyn had argued against Jewish clothing, we know what the reaction would be.
I’m sure this candidate knows nothing about Islamophobia either:
Are you so Islamophobic that you think Muslim = niqab?
Or do you accept and understand that there are over a billion Muslims who don't wear it? And that it isn't Islam?
It's a typically British liberal position. You look stupid wearing it, but there is no justification in stopping you making a fool of yourself.
Precisely! And the ability to ridicule the extreme and make it a joke is typically British too. The niqab is extremist and misogynistic, it is not racist to say that. Those who wear it do look like ridiculous, it is not racist to say that. And there is no race that demand it be worn, it is not racist to say that.
To equate it with a race is racist.
"do look like ridiculous" Were you going to say 'letterboxes'?
No. That wouldn't be my personal language and I wouldn't copy someone else's for the sake of it, though it is apt. Could you answer some questions for me?
Do you think the niqab is required by Islam? Do you accept that there's over a billion Muslims worldwide who don't wear it? Do you think it is misogynistic? Do you think misogyny is wrong? Do you think criticising misogyny is appropriate?
My answers for what its worth are no, yes, yes, yes and yes.
And what about:
Do you think mocking victims of misogyny about it is appropriate?
Can be. If it helps them escape or end the misogyny then yes.
This is vile.
No. Standing by and refusing to condemn misogyny is vile.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
Exactly, both my grandfathers fought for the country, one had a British passport at the time, the other did not. There are also adults here who are born in this country, have lived here all their lives, do not speak the language of their nationality yet are considered guests by many because they do not have a British passport. Disgraceful.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
A bit like a premature ejaculation, I imagine. No crescendo.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
The same was said in 2017 and there was no "youth-quake". From this latest data, it appears that even if all these extra voters are more likely to be Labour supporters, they aren't concentrated in these "red wall" seats.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
The same was said in 2017 and there was no "youth-quake". From this latest data, it appears that even if all these extra voters are more likely to be Labour supporters, they aren't concentrated in these "red wall" seats.
Has the size of the electorate in each seat been published yet. I want a plot of net change vs majority please.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
The same was said in 2017 and there was no "youth-quake". From this latest data, it appears that even if all these extra voters are more likely to be Labour supporters, they aren't concentrated in these "red wall" seats.
Has the size of the electorate in each seat been published yet. I want a plot of net change vs majority please.
You may feel like guests. My parents did not. And I find it revolting that people now claim that they were and should be thought of as “guests” in the country in which they chose to live the majority of their lives.
Why should "guest" be an insult or derogatory? If you're treating guests with hostility then you're treating them wrong, I've always thought guests should be honoured.
I don't know your circumstances but from what you wrote if your mum chose to consider herself Italian and not British then I don't see why she shouldn't be treated as an honoured guest who'd made her home here. That respects her own choice to choose to be considered Italian rather than British. If she wanted to be British she'd have been more than welcome to acquire citizenship.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
.
The problem this time, for everyone, is that we're going to see more tactical voting than ever before. In the absence of exit polls at all constituencies TV is not going to be covered. It also won't necessarily pick up the various regional nuances this time around.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
The same was said in 2017 and there was no "youth-quake". From this latest data, it appears that even if all these extra voters are more likely to be Labour supporters, they aren't concentrated in these "red wall" seats.
Has the size of the electorate in each seat been published yet. I want a plot of net change vs majority please.
Not every seat, but many...This is I believe has been created by politics.co.uk,
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
The auto enroll is a fair point but they wouldn’t be enrolling them now surely. It would have been at least a month ago when they all started?
Not a month ago no. There were 4 distinct spikes in registrations. I am presuming in part due to the automated systems.
There was a massive spike on the last day. Are you saying this was auto enrolment? Seems a bit coincidental no?
No, that is totally normal.
But what I mean is that I don’t think that spike - which apparently was higher than usual - can be explained by autoenrol.
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
The same was said in 2017 and there was no "youth-quake". From this latest data, it appears that even if all these extra voters are more likely to be Labour supporters, they aren't concentrated in these "red wall" seats.
Has the size of the electorate in each seat been published yet. I want a plot of net change vs majority please.
Not every seat, but many...This is I believe has been created by politics.co.uk,
Lots of London seats near the top. If there is a nice list of majorities (with consistent names), I’ll see if I can throw a chart together after work.
Just to clarify, it isn't my spreadsheet. It was linked in an article on politics.co.uk. I will be importing it into mine though. Annoyingly they haven't used included the ons_id code for each seat, makes life a lot easier.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
I still don't think 'Flat Cap Fred' will vote in droves for Johnson. A lot will not vote at all, especially with foul weather in the north on Thursday afternoon and evening.
There are a lot of undecideds still, which means a low turnout.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
2015 was out by a fair amount. Had 2017 been out - in either direction - by a similar amount the outcome would have been very different.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
Don't MI5 just fill it in after re-marking all the ballot papers that were pencil?
You may feel like guests. My parents did not. And I find it revolting that people now claim that they were and should be thought of as “guests” in the country in which they chose to live the majority of their lives.
Why should "guest" be an insult or derogatory? If you're treating guests with hostility then you're treating them wrong, I've always thought guests should be honoured.
I don't know your circumstances but from what you wrote if your mum chose to consider herself Italian and not British then I don't see why she shouldn't be treated as an honoured guest who'd made her home here. That respects her own choice to choose to be considered Italian rather than British. If she wanted to be British she'd have been more than welcome to acquire citizenship.
In case you havent noticed the PM is not treating people like honoured guests but like scapegoats. If he hadnt done so we wouldnt be having this conversation and your post would have been fine.
A number of us have suggested intelligent ways of addressing immigration on this forum over the years.
There is nothing new however in insulting people who live here, work here and have made this country their home by saying or implying that they are freeloaders or have no right to be here. That is a technique which is as old as the hills and utterly nasty. It shows a lack of common human decency.
Mr Johnson said: “I think people want to see democratic control. I don’t think people in this country are hostile to immigration at all, let alone being hostile to immigrants, but they want it democratically controlled and that’s what Brexit allows us to do.”
Migration from the EU could already be controlled even under FoM. The British government chose not to use the tools it had.
If he has not said the words suggested, good. As far as I am concerned anyone coming here to live and contribute makes this their home and is entitled to see it as “their” country. I don’t think the current Tories view this in the same way as me and it is one reason why they will not be getting my vote.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
That is exactly how we feel in Spain - as guests. I would feel very differently if I applied for citizenship - which I could possibly do. There is nio stigma in being seen as a guest or hostility on either side. The fact you cannot see that is your problem. And there is no need to be so rude just because you have a different view.
You may feel like guests. My parents did not. And I find it revolting that people now claim that they were and should be thought of as “guests” in the country in which they chose to live the majority of their lives.
Revolt away. In the real world unless you become a citizen you are a guest. Simple and the same the world over.
It seems clear that the situation has changed. We are moving more towards a state where society requires formal citizenship to be sought for newly arrived immigrants to be considered as part of this country. It isn't a particular high hurdle to jump, but it shows willingness to tie yourself more formally to this country and its future success. Do you think that's inherently unreasonable?
What's changed in Britain is that Labour made a ludicrous citizenship test so they could get votes from people who didn't like foreigners or wanted to feel like they were part of some kind of exclusive club, without actually reducing numbers, which would have damaged the economy.
Yes, it's unreasonable, and also stupid and a huge waste of time.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
I know that wasn't to me but I've just given you a very good reason why it may not be that accurate this time. The TV issue is going to be very hard for an exit poll to pick up. IIRC it's about 10,000 voters? That's large but nowhere near large enough to spot the variations and nuances. And they also (I believe) always return to the same seats as before, which if you stop and think about it presents an enormous problem this time around. We have whole demographic shifts e.g. Remain south from Cons to LD, Flat Cap Fred going Lab/UKIP to Cons.
A number of us have suggested intelligent ways of addressing immigration on this forum over the years.
There is nothing new however in insulting people who live here, work here and have made this country their home by saying or implying that they are freeloaders or have no right to be here. That is a technique which is as old as the hills and utterly nasty. It shows a lack of common human decency.
Mr Johnson said: “I think people want to see democratic control. I don’t think people in this country are hostile to immigration at all, let alone being hostile to immigrants, but they want it democratically controlled and that’s what Brexit allows us to do.”
Migrame and is entitled to see it as “their” country. I don’t think the current Tories view this in the same way as me and it is one reason why they will not be getting my vote.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
That is exactly how we feel in Spain - as guests. I would feel very differently if I applied for citizenship - which I could possibly do. There is nio stigma in being seen as a guest or hostility on either side. The fact you cannot see that is your problem. And there is no need to be so rude just because you have a different view.
You may feel like guests. My parents did not. And I find it revolting that people now claim that they were and should be thought of as “guests” in the country in which they chose to live the majority of their lives.
I presume you are discussing Boris' remarks?
They were clumsy, mean and misguided. He should apologise and clarify. TUT
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they never claim citizenship? If not, why not if you don't mind me asking?
I lived overseas for 7 years. I always felt like a guest of the country I was in.
Speaking personally I welcome to this country anyone who wants to come here, whether it be temporarily as a guest like I was overseas, or permanently in which case I think they should easily be able to attain citizenship.
My father did not need to, being Irish. My mother did not want or need to either. She loved living here but she was proud of being Italian (and a mix of other nationalities) and could never envisage describing herself as English or British. They were both proud of who they were and proud of their mixed British/Italian/Irish family.
They worked and paid taxes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
We should make applying for citizenship easier and cheaper though. A French colleague of mine has lived here for over 20 years, paid taxes, speaks English, has a British family, and indeed is a Crown Servant. But for some reason we want to charge her £1000 for the privilege. To my mind she has earned it, and should be awarded it on payment of a small administrative fee.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
Don't MI5 just fill it in after re-marking all the ballot papers that were pencil?
Don't they simply burn the real votes and wheel out their prepared fake votes?
Anyway if exit polls are no good then we might as well give up with polls altogether, because we really can't do any better than asking people who have just voted who they have voted for.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
.
The problem this time, for everyone, is that we're going to see more tactical voting than ever before. In the absence of exit polls at all constituencies TV is not going to be covered. It also won't necessarily pick up the various regional nuances this time around.
I don't believe that for a second. Every election is supposed to be the product of more tactical voting than ever before.
This election could have fewer tactical votes than ever before. Corbyn is toxic. The idea that Labour and the other parties are interchangeable is just not born out by reality.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
.
The problem this time, for everyone, is that we're going to see more tactical voting than ever before. In the absence of exit polls at all constituencies TV is not going to be covered. It also won't necessarily pick up the various regional nuances this time around.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
We should make applying for citizenship easier and cheaper though. A French colleague of mine has lived here for over 20 years, paid taxes, speaks English, has a British family, and indeed is a Crown Servant. But for some reason we want to charge her £1000 for the privilege. To my mind she has earned it, and should be awarded it on payment of a small administrative fee.
Completely agreed. Should be no different to acquiring a passport IMO.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
.
The problem this time, for everyone, is that we're going to see more tactical voting than ever before. In the absence of exit polls at all constituencies TV is not going to be covered. It also won't necessarily pick up the various regional nuances this time around.
I don't believe that for a second. Every election is supposed to be the product of more tactical voting than ever before.
This election could have fewer tactical votes than ever before. Corbyn is toxic. The idea that Labour and the other parties are interchangeable is just not born out by reality.
Voting for whichever party will keep Corbyn out, of course, is tactical voting, it's not the preserve of the anti-Tory left.
Is McDonnell planning to nationalise all of the water and energy companies in the UK within his first 100 days, by "swapping shares for government bonds (that don't count as borrowing)"?
Just as a random example, being the first I happened to click on from here, Northumbrian Water appears to be owned by CK Hutchison Holdings and the Li Ka Shing Foundation, a Cayman Islands–registered multinational conglomerate headquartered in Hong Kong and a Hong Kong-based charitable organization respectively.
How many government bonds (which still definitely aren't borrowing) is he planning to swap their shares for, and what interest will they pay? Sounds like a particularly lousy deal for these HK institutions. Will the owners just have to acquiesce? Won't they have some recourse to the law somewhere?
The Labour plan is for parliament to set the price....
Yeah right - bye bye investment into UK
Without wanting to come across as really boring, the economics of utilities companies is now so closely regulated that their valuation is not particularly difficult.
In short, the regulatory regime is based on an asset value for the business, plus a regulated return (on a costs plus profit basis). The allowable return on utilities is higher than the gilt rate, but not much. If I recall correctly it is 2-3%.
I suspect the only argument will therefore be whether the shareholdings are converted into the same capital value of bonds (as Labour would no doubt contend) or make some allowance for the lower yield on bonds compared to the utility shares they are replacing.
That is not a huge argument, but it does prevent any immediate windfall for the government, as the assets and liabilities would cancel out.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they nevero attain citizenship.
My father did noes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
We should make applying for citizenship easier and cheaper though. A French colleague of mine has lived here for over 20 years, paid taxes, speaks English, has a British family, and indeed is a Crown Servant. But for some reason we want to charge her £1000 for the privilege. To my mind she has earned it, and should be awarded it on payment of a small administrative fee.
Yes, that's bollocks. Hopefully once we get Brexit, and everyone calms down about immigration, then some of the more absurd, punitive laws, which were only put there to reassure voters, can be repealed. A Brexit upside.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I wonder if my +20/25 assessmemt for what is going on now might not be worth discarding so soon after all.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
Sadly, for those who do like the reveal to be slow and exciting, exit polls seem to be getting better.
.
The problem this time, for everyone, is that we're going to see more tactical voting than ever before. In the absence of exit polls at all constituencies TV is not going to be covered. It also won't necessarily pick up the various regional nuances this time around.
I don't believe that for a second. Every election is supposed to be the product of more tactical voting than ever before.
This election could have fewer tactical votes than ever before. Corbyn is toxic. The idea that Labour and the other parties are interchangeable is just not born out by reality.
I am glad someone else is saying this.
Yes, some people will vote tactically. Some won’t. I don’t see any reason to believe that tactical voting should be much more prevalent this time around. It may increase a little, it could make the difference in a few more seats at a stretch, but the idea that vast swathes of the country are only voting for who they are because of a bar chart I think is an over exaggeration.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
Don't MI5 just fill it in after re-marking all the ballot papers that were pencil?
This year I believe they’ve also invested in tipp-ex.
Is McDonnell planning to nationalise all of the water and energy companies in the UK within his first 100 days, by "swapping shares for government bonds (that don't count as borrowing)"?
Just as a random example, being the first I happened to click on from here, Northumbrian Water appears to be owned by CK Hutchison Holdings and the Li Ka Shing Foundation, a Cayman Islands–registered multinational conglomerate headquartered in Hong Kong and a Hong Kong-based charitable organization respectively.
How many government bonds (which still definitely aren't borrowing) is he planning to swap their shares for, and what interest will they pay? Sounds like a particularly lousy deal for these HK institutions. Will the owners just have to acquiesce? Won't they have some recourse to the law somewhere?
The Labour plan is for parliament to set the price....
Yeah right - bye bye investment into UK
Without wanting to come across as really boring, the economics of utilities companies is now so closely regulated that their valuation is not particularly difficult.
In short, the regulatory regime is based on an asset value for the business, plus a regulated return (on a costs plus profit basis). The allowable return on utilities is higher than the gilt rate, but not much. If I recall correctly it is 2-3%.
I suspect the only argument will therefore be whether the shareholdings are converted into the same capital value of bonds (as Labour would no doubt contend) or make some allowance for the lower yield on bonds compared to the utility shares they are replacing.
That is not a huge argument, but it does prevent any immediate windfall for the government, as the assets and liabilities would cancel out.
Yes but why are they going to stop at utilities? Once you get a taste for this price setting lark it looks easy.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they nevero attain citizenship.
My father did noes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
We should make applying for citizenship easier and cheaper though. A French colleague of mine has lived here for over 20 years, paid taxes, speaks English, has a British family, and indeed is a Crown Servant. But for some reason we want to charge her £1000 for the privilege. To my mind she has earned it, and should be awarded it on payment of a small administrative fee.
Yes, that's bollocks. Hopefully once we get Brexit, and everyone calms down about immigration, then some of the more absurd, punitive laws, which were only put there to reassure voters, can be repealed. A Brexit upside.
Oh that's alright then! I have been waiting for someone to explain an upside to this whole Brexit farce for some time. No one has been able to before you came up with this possibility. Makes it all worthwhile.
Speaking as that rare beast, a Tory originally from Merseyside do you think driving Klopp and his players out of the country will be a popular policy? You think Liverpool fans are desperate to see Klopp gone and domestic Managers like Alan Pardew to take his place?
Screwing with football would be toxic. To paraphrase Bill Shankly football isn't a matter of life and death up here, its more important than that.
Brexit is replacing Klopp with Pardew across the entire country. Then announcing you'll win every game ever, by hoofing it.
And shit, I've descended into Brexit Analogy Syndrome. Shame on me.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
But he has feelings that the exit poll — which are usually very accurate as the methodolgy is about as good as you can get short of rifling through the ballot boxes — is wrong. What a surprise.
Don't MI5 just fill it in after re-marking all the ballot papers that were pencil?
This year I believe they’ve also invested in tipp-ex.
Of the above just 17 seats have an increase of more than 5%.
Given increasing population that suggests no surge at all in voter registration - it's basically consistent with 2017.
What an indictment of the national press that one independent journalist has done all this work - nobody could be bothered or had even thought of trying to get the data.
Yet we had numerous articles with people getting excited about X00,000 applications on one day etc - which nobody could be bothered to follow up.
It is only their country when they are granted citizenship, you are a guest and will remain so until then.
Oh really, just eff off. My father who fought for this country and lived here for 40 years was not a “guest”. Nor was my mother who lived here for 52 years. “Guests” indeed.
Did they nevero attain citizenship.
My father did noes and contributed in myriad ways and brought up a family here. And in my father’s case volunteered to fight for it. How dare anyone consider such people to be “guests”.
They are guests simply because were they to commit a crime - they would have been deported at the end of their sentence.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Not all convictions permit deportation. Also the ECHR.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
Its not one or the other its both. If you're not British you can still be an honoured guest who makes their home here, there's no shame or harm in that.
We should make applying for citizenship easier and cheaper though. A French colleague of mine has lived here for over 20 years, paid taxes, speaks English, has a British family, and indeed is a Crown Servant. But for some reason we want to charge her £1000 for the privilege. To my mind she has earned it, and should be awarded it on payment of a small administrative fee.
Yes, that's bollocks. Hopefully once we get Brexit, and everyone calms down about immigration, then some of the more absurd, punitive laws, which were only put there to reassure voters, can be repealed. A Brexit upside.
Oh that's alright then! I have been waiting for someone to explain an upside to this whole Brexit farce for some time. No one has been able to before you came up with this possibility. Makes it all worthwhile.
And the 32% Corbyn is on is roughly what Labour are polling now
The 39% for the Tories seems vaguely plausible - although perhaps because I want it to be.
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
The 39% doesn't seem plausible for the Cons. It stood out like a sore thumb on the last BMG poll before Con ticked upwards over the weekend (BMG are the only pollster in the past 40 polls with Cons in the 30s).With BXP standing down I still expect the leave vote to be anywhere between 44 and 50% so I really struggle to see the Tories polling any less than 41% now.
I thought I gave quite a balanced answer on the exit poll. It’s quite possible it’s even worse for Labour than the polls say!
Well all things being well, we will also have a live spreadsheet showing how well YouGov MRP is doing. I think by 2-3am, we should have a fairly good idea of that and can take it from there.
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how the stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
I also have feelings that the exit poll might be wrong in either direction - and we might have to stay up late to see surprise losses or defences. Glad I’m taking the next day off
In recent history, the exit poll has been incredibly accurate all bar one famous occasion. In 2017, lots of Tories were saying on the last, no no its got to be wrong, but it wasn't.
2015 was out by a fair amount. Had 2017 been out - in either direction - by a similar amount the outcome would have been very different.
2015 got the Con number wrong, down by 14 and the Lab number up by 7.
However, I distinctly remember the guy presenting it, somewhat flustered and increasingly so during the night, saying "the numbers we have at this stage are consistent with a Tory majority".
But yes, a change of 10 odd seats could change things quite considerably.
> However, in the likely event that these are primarily students, it is possible that come election day they will vote in their non-term addresses around the country rather than in Southampton Itchen itself, which is thought to have voted 60% for Leave in 2016.
Isn’t this the case for all the seats? What am I missing?
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
I think this is telling a different story to the one that the journalist at politics.co.uk is trying to peddle. The comparison is not about new registrations, but about total numbers registered to vote in Dec 2019 compared to June 2017, for a minority of seats only. The numbers have gone up but in a quite patchy way, save for a pattern of big increases in some university areas (e.g. Southampton Test, Birmingham Selly Oak) and areas with lots of private rented accommodation (e.g. Hackney, Kensington).
Timing in the annual registration cycle is everything. Bear in mind that there is usually an annual "purge" of registers to eliminate non-respondents to the annual household census after what are usually pretty patchy attempts to follow these up over the winter. This election as we are still mid cycle I think that EROs will be erring on the side of caution and just adding on anyone who registers without for now purging the non-respondents in order to ensure they don't inadvertently deny someone the vote. If so numbers will if so be bound to rise. Individual registration makes this problem for the ERO much worse if the household form was not returned - if a student has just gone online and registered themselves at a new address, it doesn't give the ERO a reason to delete all of last years students at the same address. I think EROs will be erring on the side of caution for now.
For those betting on turnout, this would give a reason to expect a lower % turnout, if a lot of old names registered turn out to be redundant so the divisor is overstated.
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
Well live automated scraping the BBC website is working* (and much better scheduled to only look for likely announcements) plus building and publishing the spreadsheet to google docs is as well. So fingers crossed I can hit the button and sit back.
Although I capture all the seats / party %'s etc, I won't be putting those in the spreadsheet. At the moment, I plan to just concentrate on Tory / Lab fights, show swing and comparison to MRP (and 2017 result).
* Just hope they don't change the holding pages too much on the night.
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
Well live scraping the BBC website is working* (and much better scheduled to only look for likely announcements), live building and publishing the spreadsheet to google docs is as well.
Although I capture all the seats / party %'s etc, I won't be putting those in the spreadsheet. At the moment, I plan to just concentrate on Tory / Lab fights, show swing and comparison to MRP (and 2017 result).
* Just hope they don't change the holding pages too much on the night.
How about doing all the seats where the result is expected before (say) 1.30?
Of the above just 17 seats have an increase of more than 5%.
Given increasing population that suggests no surge at all in voter registration - it's basically consistent with 2017.
What an indictment of the national press that one independent journalist has done all this work - nobody could be bothered or had even thought of trying to get the data.
Yet we had numerous articles with people getting excited about X00,000 applications on one day etc - which nobody could be bothered to follow up.
I think you’re right. Also don’t forget that the electoral roll will include dead people for a while, won’t it? The “shape“ of the electorate may have changed (and that’s what pollsters are for) but it’s size looks quite consistent.
Not that that tells us how many will vote, but to my way of thinking it’s hard to see why someone who didn’t vote last time will vote now; but easy to see why some of those who did vote last time won’t bother.
It seems clear that the situation has changed. We are moving more towards a state where society requires formal citizenship to be sought for newly arrived immigrants to be considered as part of this country. It isn't a particular high hurdle to jump, but it shows willingness to tie yourself more formally to this country and its future success. Do you think that's inherently unreasonable?
What's changed in Britain is that Labour made a ludicrous citizenship test so they could get votes from people who didn't like foreigners or wanted to feel like they were part of some kind of exclusive club, without actually reducing numbers, which would have damaged the economy.
Yes, it's unreasonable, and also stupid and a huge waste of time.
I'm not talking about the citizenship test. Prior to its introduction you still had to apply for citizenship to become a citizen. It's the change in societal viewpoint I asked about, not the specifics as to how the process currently works.
Although since you brought it up, I agree that the current test is a colossal waste of time, but would support a revised version that focused on British history and culture rather than what time Eastenders is on (or whatever).
Sample question: "What time is the Queen's speech, on Christmas Day?"
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
Well live automated scraping the BBC website is working* (and much better scheduled to only look for likely announcements) plus building and publishing the spreadsheet to google docs is as well. So fingers crossed I can hit the button and sit back.
Although I capture all the seats / party %'s etc, I won't be putting those in the spreadsheet. At the moment, I plan to just concentrate on Tory / Lab fights, show swing and comparison to MRP (and 2017 result).
* Just hope they don't change the holding pages too much on the night.
The exit poll is conducted at representative constituencies in every region of the country for a reason
I think they concentrate not on representative constituencies in every region, but on representative marginals, and that the key thing they track is how stated vote on exit compares with the corresponding figures for the exit polls they ran in the same constituencies in previous elections. If my memory is correct on that, there could be a problem this time because the constituencies of greatest interest aren't necessarily the ones where they have built up a history to compare with.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
Well live scraping the BBC website is working* (and much better scheduled to only look for likely announcements), live building and publishing the spreadsheet to google docs is as well.
Although I capture all the seats / party %'s etc, I won't be putting those in the spreadsheet. At the moment, I plan to just concentrate on Tory / Lab fights, show swing and comparison to MRP (and 2017 result).
* Just hope they don't change the holding pages too much on the night.
How about doing all the seats where the result is expected before (say) 1.30?
I will see. The problem if I start trying to include everything is I have to then have loads of extra columns for all the parties (and not all parties stand in all seats).
At the moment, the spreadsheet is quite concise, you will see the result, the swing, the YouGov prediction...that is what we want to see. Are the Tories winning vs Labour, by how much and is it in line with YouGov MRP.
Comments
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1204013334674202627?s=20
Screwing with football would be toxic. To paraphrase Bill Shankly football isn't a matter of life and death up here, its more important than that.
We ought to get all PBers to list their top three GE bets or something - maybe on Wednesday?
But is it a coincidence that the Tories are now massively going defensively (as per data last night) and this is happening? It’s the hope that does it - there are all these tiny signs that things are different to how they appear. But that’s because I want to see them.
Not long to wait now.
I think this is going to be another really bad night for pollsters.
A citizen has a right to remain in the country, if you are not a citizen then there is a risk (albeit a small one in most cases) that you could be asked / ordered to leave.
Surely if you are not a citizen and the country has the ability to deport you to the place you are a citizen off then you are a guest - there thanks to the willingness of the country.
Everton fans as well?
I’m not doubting there is auto enrolment. But even the BBC has concluded there are higher youth registrations than normal - whether they come out to vote is another question. And also where they vote.
It seems clear that the situation has changed. We are moving more towards a state where society requires formal citizenship to be sought for newly arrived immigrants to be considered as part of this country. It isn't a particular high hurdle to jump, but it shows willingness to tie yourself more formally to this country and its future success. Do you think that's inherently unreasonable?
BXP - One hand delivered, two by post.
Labour - One by post.
Conservative - One hand delivered.
There is a Labour poster outside a house up the road, other than that I'd barely know they were standing.
There are lots of Brexit adverts around. They had the full page advert on the front of the Chronicle that I posted last week, and there are quite a few (paid) posters scattered around. I have heard rumours that Farage will be in town somewhere today, but don't know if that is true,
A bit like a premature ejaculation, I imagine. No crescendo.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wnYrHMj4gk8QqFCQkR22wHysd-K_jAMXkmhKagarnu4/
I don't know your circumstances but from what you wrote if your mum chose to consider herself Italian and not British then I don't see why she shouldn't be treated as an honoured guest who'd made her home here. That respects her own choice to choose to be considered Italian rather than British. If she wanted to be British she'd have been more than welcome to acquire citizenship.
But I am surprised to see a mentality which thinks that possession of a British passport and not the reality of how a life is lived is the measure of whether someone thinks of a place as a home. It feels to me unpleasant.
Anyway stuff to do.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1204000236546473984?s=20
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1204019110616547330?s=20
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/john-curtice-on-boris-johnson-majority-1-6415181
Lots of London seats near the top. If there is a nice list of majorities (with consistent names), I’ll see if I can throw a chart together after work.
There are a lot of undecideds still, which means a low turnout.
Yes, it's unreasonable, and also stupid and a huge waste of time.
They were clumsy, mean and misguided. He should apologise and clarify. TUT
Anyway if exit polls are no good then we might as well give up with polls altogether, because we really can't do any better than asking people who have just voted who they have voted for.
This election could have fewer tactical votes than ever before. Corbyn is toxic. The idea that Labour and the other parties are interchangeable is just not born out by reality.
In short, the regulatory regime is based on an asset value for the business, plus a regulated return (on a costs plus profit basis). The allowable return on utilities is higher than the gilt rate, but not much. If I recall correctly it is 2-3%.
I suspect the only argument will therefore be whether the shareholdings are converted into the same capital value of bonds (as Labour would no doubt contend) or make some allowance for the lower yield on bonds compared to the utility shares they are replacing.
That is not a huge argument, but it does prevent any immediate windfall for the government, as the assets and liabilities would cancel out.
Yes, some people will vote tactically. Some won’t. I don’t see any reason to believe that tactical voting should be much more prevalent this time around. It may increase a little, it could make the difference in a few more seats at a stretch, but the idea that vast swathes of the country are only voting for who they are because of a bar chart I think is an over exaggeration.
And shit, I've descended into Brexit Analogy Syndrome. Shame on me.
77 seats have an increase of more than 2%.
Of the above just 17 seats have an increase of more than 5%.
Given increasing population that suggests no surge at all in voter registration - it's basically consistent with 2017.
What an indictment of the national press that one independent journalist has done all this work - nobody could be bothered or had even thought of trying to get the data.
Yet we had numerous articles with people getting excited about X00,000 applications on one day etc - which nobody could be bothered to follow up.
For this reason, I won't be surprised if the exit poll is out by a larger margin this time than we're used to - so I'll be watching the live results as they come in* and comparing with the YouGov MRP projections to try to get an early indication.
* Hopefully with the help of @FrancisUrquhart
However, I distinctly remember the guy presenting it, somewhat flustered and increasingly so during the night, saying "the numbers we have at this stage are consistent with a Tory majority".
But yes, a change of 10 odd seats could change things quite considerably.
> However, in the likely event that these are primarily students, it is possible that come election day they will vote in their non-term addresses around the country rather than in Southampton Itchen itself, which is thought to have voted 60% for Leave in 2016.
Isn’t this the case for all the seats? What am I missing?
I think this is telling a different story to the one that the journalist at politics.co.uk is trying to peddle. The comparison is not about new registrations, but about total numbers registered to vote in Dec 2019 compared to June 2017, for a minority of seats only. The numbers have gone up but in a quite patchy way, save for a pattern of big increases in some university areas (e.g. Southampton Test, Birmingham Selly Oak) and areas with lots of private rented accommodation (e.g. Hackney, Kensington).
Timing in the annual registration cycle is everything. Bear in mind that there is usually an annual "purge" of registers to eliminate non-respondents to the annual household census after what are usually pretty patchy attempts to follow these up over the winter. This election as we are still mid cycle I think that EROs will be erring on the side of caution and just adding on anyone who registers without for now purging the non-respondents in order to ensure they don't inadvertently deny someone the vote. If so numbers will if so be bound to rise. Individual registration makes this problem for the ERO much worse if the household form was not returned - if a student has just gone online and registered themselves at a new address, it doesn't give the ERO a reason to delete all of last years students at the same address. I think EROs will be erring on the side of caution for now.
For those betting on turnout, this would give a reason to expect a lower % turnout, if a lot of old names registered turn out to be redundant so the divisor is overstated.
Although I capture all the seats / party %'s etc, I won't be putting those in the spreadsheet. At the moment, I plan to just concentrate on Tory / Lab fights, show swing and comparison to MRP (and 2017 result).
* Just hope they don't change the holding pages too much on the night.
I am admittedly easily amused.
Not that that tells us how many will vote, but to my way of thinking it’s hard to see why someone who didn’t vote last time will vote now; but easy to see why some of those who did vote last time won’t bother.
I’m moving toward assuming a dip in turnout.
Although since you brought it up, I agree that the current test is a colossal waste of time, but would support a revised version that focused on British history and culture rather than what time Eastenders is on (or whatever).
Sample question: "What time is the Queen's speech, on Christmas Day?"
At the moment, the spreadsheet is quite concise, you will see the result, the swing, the YouGov prediction...that is what we want to see. Are the Tories winning vs Labour, by how much and is it in line with YouGov MRP.