Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » At the start of lockdown Johnson’s Tories had poll leads of up
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » At the start of lockdown Johnson’s Tories had poll leads of upto 26% – now the latest two surveys have that down at 6%
On the face of it the polling trends look worrying for the Conservatives and good for LAB which is seeing a lot of progress in getting the gap smaller.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The bonking scientist thought he was immune!
I was laughed at here by many people for accepting the Durham trip as legal but I was right, they were wrong, and I have been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?
Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
A big jump in the betting following the Durham statement.
PP/Betfair: 4/1 go, 1/7 stay
Ladbrokes: 5/2 go, 1/4 stay
Starsports: 7/2 go, 1/6 stay
Game, set, and match to the non-frothers.
On topic: a smaller polling lead should hopefully give recalcitrant Tory MPs the kick up the backside they need to finally pass the boundary changes to correct any accumulated electoral unfairness.
And I don't then understyand why the same plod were/are fining folk for driving up to Co Durham.
PP/Betfair: 5/1 go, 1/10 stay
Ladbrokes: 3/1 go, 1/5 stay
Starsports: 11/2 go, 1/10 stay
*sarcasm
I don't admire Cummings action but I do think Boris has been astute in accepting short term polling pain for long term gain. If Dom had gone there is no suggesting the polling would have changed direction and then the government would have been considerably weaker at least until he is reappointed.
This saga has weakened Boris slightly but perhaps it has weakened his enemies in the media a little bit more. As I suggested Pippa Crear and co just lacked a little bit more evidence and overplayed their hand slightly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZU9Ovtktgg
Will you and @Philip_Thompson please stop implying that a police force “not considering” something is not the same as clearing them of it. It is disingenuous rubbish from partisan hacks with no legal knowledge whatsoever. An apology for getting this so badly wrong from the two of you would be in order.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/bedfordshire/articles/bedfordshire-englands-most-underrated-county/
The police are saying there may have been a minor breach of the regulations regarding the day trip to Barnard Castle, but they don't consider there was regarding the journey from London to Durham.
Of course the police have jurisidiction only over the regulations about leaving home, not over the guidance on self-isolation.
Does anyone have a serious opinion on why the police would have decided the trip to Durham didn't infringe the regulations? The "risk of harm" provision?
Because if that is what they decided, then that implies that provision covers an extremely wide range of circumstances, in which the risk of harm can be extremely hypothetical. I think that interpretation, if shared by other authorities, would make a dead letter of the regulations.
Can someone show me where this clears him? Eyesight not what it was.
I mean, this is all REALLY obvious, right?
That other admirer of Lenin, John McDonnell, must be quite envious.
Where does @Dura_Ace stand on this ?
If the Police consider someone innocent then they are innocent under the law since it won't reach the court. If they consider someone guilty then they may pass it to the CPS, then they may pass it to the Courts but the Courts are the final arbiter not the first one.
I mistakenly admitted I was wrong in the last thread when journalists lied and said that the Barnhard Castle was a breach I put my hands up and admitted I'd called that one wrong. Then the truth came out and it was "might". Nevermind.
So I have more humility and grace than you. Oh well.
Do you think jumping up and down is going to change the reality of the police statement, which is that Cummings did nothing wrong and no further action is going to be taken against him? Because it won't.
We could all become traffic wardens. Just think of the fun!
What mystifies me is what in the past two months makes Cummings' supporters believe he is an asset. What exactly is it that Britain has done better than any other country? It seems to me some PB Tories are so caught up in cheering for their side against Remoaners and the MSM that they've forgotten to ask themselves if Cummings is actually any good.
My default assumption is not to say everyone is lying just because its politically convenient to call them liars.
Should I post a copy of it?
A court can convict but it has to get there to be a conviction. The Police and CPS can decide someone is innocent by not passing it on, they can't convict (though the Police can issue Fixed Penalty Notices).
Hence the Tories still on 44% with Yougov, the Labour vote up to 38% but the LD vote down to just 6%
Your attitude would mean anyone who was ever accused of anything would be regarded as potentially having done it unless they had actually been in court and got a not guilty verdict.
Edit: missing ) inserted.
I can believe they're wrong on something but that's totally different. I don't assume the other side are lying, I believe they're mistaken as they're ignorant about economics primarily.
If Secret Barrister wants to launch a private prosecution then go ahead, he/she should put their name to it and get on with it. Lets see how far it gets, that would be amusing.
Lenin would have dispensed with him without mercy. Johnson is no V.I. Ulyanov and I mean that as damning criticism.
Two; I don't think there is case law on what is a 'reasonable excuse' in this particular regulation. By and large they may not have thought this is the best place to start making it.
Three; (an oddity) in the trip from London to Durham allegation any offence actually was committed in London (Met jurisdiction), the place where he left his home, not Durham. Has anyone noticed this?
Four, around this time millions of people, including most students were 'moving house' ie from one residence at college/uni back home. This was medically questionable but no-one questioned it much legally at the time, and IIRC the advice was that this was OK. DC was 'moving house' - specifically allowed for 'where reasonably necessary' in Section 6.
Not more Cummings chat.
Somebody make it stop.
Boris and Cummings together along with Sunak,Raab and Gove will in my opinion be good for delivering on election promises and reshaping the country to reflect the wants of 2019 Conservative voters and many others. Some opposition voters may not want that but surely no one on either side who cares about their country wants another Theresa May style premiership - a government without purpose, direction, decisiveness, leadership, a backbone and the ability to get anything through parliament.
Hi Philip
Do you believe Cummings story about the Castle expedition? I mean do you, personally, actually believe he was telling the truth?
Technical point: had the election been in Jan 2020 (v unlikely given the difficulties of campaigning over Xmas), the next GE would still have been May 2024 under the FTPA.
There's a provision that if an election is in Jan-Apr, then the following election is in the May *four* years hence. Presumably, this is to avoid a parliament running longer than five years.
This is what they really said about Barnard Castle:
"Had a Durham Constabulary police officer stopped Mr Cummings driving to or from Barnard Castle, the officer would have spoken to him, and, having established the facts, likely advised Mr Cummings to return to the address in Durham, providing advice on the dangers of travelling during the pandemic crisis. Had this advice been accepted by Mr Cummings, no enforcement action would have been taken.
"In line with Durham Constabulary’s general approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would amount to treating Mr Cummings differently from other members of the public. Durham Constabulary has not taken retrospective action against any other person.
The assassins have failed.
There will be concern now in the BBC. The wider media. And especially in the Civil Service. After all, Cummings had the temerity to unravel the nice little stitch-up of a two year Brexit extension with Brussels, done whilst Boris was out the loop in hospital.
There's going to be quite a reckoning for that. Because Cummings is now bomb-proof.
Yes we have seen various normals shown up for doing stupid and all have the same legal penalties potentially applicable to them. The *only* person stuck politically for hypocrisy is the man who wrote the "instructions" he then chose to ignore then cover up.
Whatever. I know that BluestBlue is probably on his 5th bout of onanism today and thats great, but out there in the real world where people don't follow every last nuance and nitpick to death, the clear sense is one rule for us one rule for them. Hence the polls collapse and the daily kickings by the Tory press. And no amount of desperate spinning on hear will change that.
EDIT: This isn't even a Tory MP, so it's even more irrelevant than the other tweets, FFS!