The Transport Secretary says he is "very hopeful" a new testing regime for travellers to the UK can be in place by 1 December, reducing the amount of time people need to spend in quarantine.
Apparently now it's a great British triumph that the EU are refusing to play silly games and haven't walked out in a huff, but are patiently repeating what they've said all along.
Any hope of the Brexiteers falling for this?
Yes as long as they get fish, and they will, they will be happy and triumphalist for a few months. Then someone from the brexit harder camp will find a new issue to rail against.
You've discovered the ratchet effect. It worked against Eurosceptics for over 40 years, so turnabout is fair play.
No it didn't. The UK became ever more detached from the EU starting from the opt outs negotiated in the Maastricht Treaty. If there was a ratchet effect, it worked in the opposite direction.
We may have been more detached from the EU but we were still more integrated into the EU than we were in the past. So we were still ratcheting only in one direction, just at a different pace, hence the phrase "two speed Europe". There were two speeds but only one direction.
Since 1992 we negotiated an opt-out from the Euro, negotiated and ratified a mechanism to leave the EU, negotiated a new deal based on never joining the Euro, held a referendum on leaving altogether and then left altogether. That is not a narrative of a one-way ratchet working against Eurosceptics.
Another month and it will be just Cornwall and Devon not in Tier 2 / Tier 3....I think its been pretty clear this is the direction of travel all along.
At least they haven't re-introduced the 1 hour of leaving your house a day in Wales. That was the one thing I found difficult to cope with in March to May.
I think I'm the only Revolutionary Leninist, Steiner/Vallentyne Left-Libertarian, Leeds Utd Fan.
Democracy = Social Fascism
WACCOE
I'm getting increasingly concerned at some posters on here playing fast and loose with democracy.
We have this post, which I can't say entirely surprises me coming from you, and we had @IanB2 ostensibly a centrist and ex-LD flirting with benign dictatorship as being the best form of government the other day.
I think you both need to go back to the history books and read about what life in non-democratic societies is like.
Unfortunately I fear that the peoples of what increasingly looks like "the former" UK are not going to enjoy finding out a whole lot more about "the lessons of history" than they can really cope with.
At every point since the historic wrong turn of Brexit, the far right has doubled down, so now the "impossible" "failure" of a "no deal" is now an odds on outcome. The consequences for our nouveau pauvre PM may include finding that the Eton College where he wants to send his son has been burned down by an army of furious and unemployed farmers, fisherfolk and even financiers.
Certainly, having won the referendum by a whisker under extremely dubious circumstances, the winners could have reached out to the losers and created a compromise- EEA, EFTA, whatever- but they chose four years of uncertainty, rejecting any kind of compromise deal whatsoever as a BINO (not withstanding that these compromises were actually the only solution that people could be said to have "voted for") and then grabbing the tiller and steering us straight towards an economically half witted no deal, while lying all the way.
If the break up of the UK is indeed the result of "no deal", then the successor republics will probably prosecute the ****s responsible.
"Crucifixion is too good for them"
I do study history and the future of what is currently "the UK", both economically and politically, will not be fixed in my lifetime if no deal goes through. Not sure how many UK citizens have taken citizenship elsewhere, but a trickle may well become a flood and I`m contemplating joining them. We know how this story ends...
Top post, Cicero. Possibly hyperbolic; possibly not.
For all the comments about brexiteers should have reached out to remainers and compromised....where was this reaching out by the pro eu people in the 40 years of membership? You called them fruitcakes and closet loons for most of that time and told to suck it up so I can understand why they feel no need to reach out.
As you sow you shall reap seem apposite
There is plenty of blame to go round on both sides.
The depressing part is the discussion never seem to move on.
We just seem to fall back in telling each other to go fuck ourselves.
The conversation is shaped by events. At present, we have a large number of "experts" (I know) saying that things could be difficult in January if we don't have a deal.
Many people (shout out to our Phil) say: "bring it on".
Is it any wonder that sensible people despair.
And oh from FPT when I pointed out how a large number of people was motivated to vote Brexit because of a dislike of foreigners? They were.
Very reasonable until your last paragraph.
You can both like and admire foreigners and want controls on immigration at the same time.
Indeed, it might be to ensure safe continuation and consent for acceptance of the former that you see it as so important to ensure the latter.
I think it is uncontentious to say that a dislike of foreigners was one of the main, if not the main motivating factor for a large number of people who voted Leave.
Not "all" as @Philip_Thompson has confirmed, but for a large number.
That wasn’t my experience from knocking on doors, although I certainly found some (10-15%) who put it like that.
Bear in mind that not all the working class use the flowery, nuanced and carefully caveated language that the professional middle classes do. Many use the unambiguous language of the shop floor and don’t call a spade a shovel when they’re feeling frustrated.
It doesn’t make them all bigots, and an experienced canvasser can tell the difference. It’s the difference between a Gillian Duffy to a Nick Griffin, for example.
It may not be all, but it was enough.
No it wasn't.
I think 10-15% is definately more than 3.5%
3.5% was not enough. 50%+1 was enough.
Are you saying that 50%+1 were motivated by the anti foreignor vote?
No. I'm saying 50%+1 was the threshold for winning and the anti foreigner vote was nowhere close to that.
Remain won over 48% and lost. If Leave was just an anti foreigner vote then it would have lost massively. The anti foreigner vote was not enough to win the referendum.
As long as people mischaracterise a dislike of competing for low wages and state resources with an influx of immigrants as "a dislike of foreigners", I doubt the debate will get anywhere. It makes Remain voters feel like they lost because they are more pure than Leave, so let them think it, everyone needs consolation
Indeed I've read several posts on this thread who basically want to characterise people who have concerns about immigration as automatically racists and effectively seek to cancel them and their views as, of course , no further argument is necessary. I was a remain voter myself but can so easily understand why the argument was lost when so many on the left throw out the word bigot or racist to any who dare to question the left liberal view of the world. Four years on from the vote and they simply do not get it.
There absolutely were people hurling the racism word around and they still are. And yes, every racist voted for Brexit. But as I keep pointing out the majority of people who voted leave because of migration weren't against any given race - just bigoted against anyone who isn't them. Whether the other is Asians, Blacks, Poles, people from the next county, people from the next village it doesn't matter, they were given the opportunity to STOP whatever it is they personally wanted to stop.
So they voted to leave the EU. To stop people not from the EU from coming here. Or to stop people not from their town coming here. Its nonsensical, but whoever said reasons for voting had to be.
That seems an ungenerous interpretation. Is it not equally credible that they thought their town overcrowded (which being in the UK it inevitably is) and rightly thought that stopping immigration is the only practical method of reducing the inflow?
Is there a correlation between leave vote and population density? I'll let you leave Gibraltar out of your analysis if you like.
The test would be excess of actual over optimum density, not the raw number. And I don't know, but as you point out at least the hypothesis is testable, as wellas being less ungenerous and snobbish than the rival one.
I'll be honest and say that I don't know what you mean by excess and optimum density.
I also think that leave vote is probably INVERSELY correlated with population density. I haven't checked done a rigorous analysis, but eyeballing the list ranking list of areas available here (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028), gives me confidence my hunch is probably right.
High density is not the same as overdensity because some environments can accomodate a higher density than others can. So your "hunch" is irrelevant. Try comparing votes with length of council housing waiting lists, or average class sizes, or patient to GP ratios.
Another month and it will be just Cornwall and Devon not in Tier 2 / Tier 3....I think its been pretty clear this is the direction of travel all along.
The cases are dropping in Nottingham. The 7 day average is already falling significantly.
This is madness. When is sense going to prevail? Leading ministers have now totally lost the plot I'm afraid.
No doubt they will claim success after several weeks or months of Tier 3 insanity when the cases were already dropping.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
Did RCS's excellent article on Trafalgar completely pass you by?
What didn't pass me by is how accurate Trafalgar were last time around. Meanwhile many of the pollsters most people on here cling to were a mile out.
Yes, and my Aunt Agatha once picked out the Grand National winner with a pin, and she may do the same again one day. Come on mate, this is a serious Site - some of the time anyway.
I think I'm the only Revolutionary Leninist, Steiner/Vallentyne Left-Libertarian, Leeds Utd Fan.
Democracy = Social Fascism
WACCOE
I'm getting increasingly concerned at some posters on here playing fast and loose with democracy.
We have this post, which I can't say entirely surprises me coming from you, and we had @IanB2 ostensibly a centrist and ex-LD flirting with benign dictatorship as being the best form of government the other day.
I think you both need to go back to the history books and read about what life in non-democratic societies is like.
Unfortunately I fear that the peoples of what increasingly looks like "the former" UK are not going to enjoy finding out a whole lot more about "the lessons of history" than they can really cope with.
At every point since the historic wrong turn of Brexit, the far right has doubled down, so now the "impossible" "failure" of a "no deal" is now an odds on outcome. The consequences for our nouveau pauvre PM may include finding that the Eton College where he wants to send his son has been burned down by an army of furious and unemployed farmers, fisherfolk and even financiers.
Certainly, having won the referendum by a whisker under extremely dubious circumstances, the winners could have reached out to the losers and created a compromise- EEA, EFTA, whatever- but they chose four years of uncertainty, rejecting any kind of compromise deal whatsoever as a BINO (not withstanding that these compromises were actually the only solution that people could be said to have "voted for") and then grabbing the tiller and steering us straight towards an economically half witted no deal, while lying all the way.
If the break up of the UK is indeed the result of "no deal", then the successor republics will probably prosecute the ****s responsible.
"Crucifixion is too good for them"
I do study history and the future of what is currently "the UK", both economically and politically, will not be fixed in my lifetime if no deal goes through. Not sure how many UK citizens have taken citizenship elsewhere, but a trickle may well become a flood and I`m contemplating joining them. We know how this story ends...
Top post, Cicero. Possibly hyperbolic; possibly not.
For all the comments about brexiteers should have reached out to remainers and compromised....where was this reaching out by the pro eu people in the 40 years of membership? You called them fruitcakes and closet loons for most of that time and told to suck it up so I can understand why they feel no need to reach out.
As you sow you shall reap seem apposite
There is plenty of blame to go round on both sides.
The depressing part is the discussion never seem to move on.
We just seem to fall back in telling each other to go fuck ourselves.
The conversation is shaped by events. At present, we have a large number of "experts" (I know) saying that things could be difficult in January if we don't have a deal.
Many people (shout out to our Phil) say: "bring it on".
Is it any wonder that sensible people despair.
And oh from FPT when I pointed out how a large number of people was motivated to vote Brexit because of a dislike of foreigners? They were.
Very reasonable until your last paragraph.
You can both like and admire foreigners and want controls on immigration at the same time.
Indeed, it might be to ensure safe continuation and consent for acceptance of the former that you see it as so important to ensure the latter.
I think it is uncontentious to say that a dislike of foreigners was one of the main, if not the main motivating factor for a large number of people who voted Leave.
Not "all" as @Philip_Thompson has confirmed, but for a large number.
That wasn’t my experience from knocking on doors, although I certainly found some (10-15%) who put it like that.
Bear in mind that not all the working class use the flowery, nuanced and carefully caveated language that the professional middle classes do. Many use the unambiguous language of the shop floor and don’t call a spade a shovel when they’re feeling frustrated.
It doesn’t make them all bigots, and an experienced canvasser can tell the difference. It’s the difference between a Gillian Duffy to a Nick Griffin, for example.
It may not be all, but it was enough.
No it wasn't.
I think 10-15% is definately more than 3.5%
3.5% was not enough. 50%+1 was enough.
Are you saying that 50%+1 were motivated by the anti foreignor vote?
No. I'm saying 50%+1 was the threshold for winning and the anti foreigner vote was nowhere close to that.
Remain won over 48% and lost. If Leave was just an anti foreigner vote then it would have lost massively. The anti foreigner vote was not enough to win the referendum.
As long as people mischaracterise a dislike of competing for low wages and state resources with an influx of immigrants as "a dislike of foreigners", I doubt the debate will get anywhere. It makes Remain voters feel like they lost because they are more pure than Leave, so let them think it, everyone needs consolation
Indeed I've read several posts on this thread who basically want to characterise people who have concerns about immigration as automatically racists and effectively seek to cancel them and their views as, of course , no further argument is necessary. I was a remain voter myself but can so easily understand why the argument was lost when so many on the left throw out the word bigot or racist to any who dare to question the left liberal view of the world. Four years on from the vote and they simply do not get it.
Couple of points here Felix -
The main source - Topping - is not on the left. Worse than that, he's a true blue Tory!
And the assertion is not that concerns about immigration are automatically racist or xenophobic. They are clearly not. The (precise) assertion is that if you take a properly randomized sample from the large group of people who not only have concerns about immigration but are SO concerned about it that it caused them to vote Leave in 2016, you will find in that sample a considerably higher proportion of racists and xenophobes than you will in the control sample drawn similarly from the rest of the population.
Everyone knows this. Including all Leavers with faculties.
I never claimed or thought they were. My point is those views exist everywhere and are not addressed by label followed by cancel. Which is what you did with your rather cheap and entirely predictable last sentence.
Your assertion was as follows - "I've read several posts on this thread who basically want to characterise people who have concerns about immigration as automatically racists."
That was false and I corrected it. That's all.
As for this point here - "racist views exist everywhere and are not addressed by label followed by cancel." - that is fair enough. So long as "address" does not mean "pander".
Do wish folk would drop the war analogies with Covid. (Too late for Brexit sadly). "The virus is on the offensive' says Hancock. No it isn't. It is a non-sentient being without an objective other than to spread itself. If it is increasing it is because of our behaviours, not its.
Given that large parts of the US are shutting down again due to Coronavirus cases spiking (yes, including places with essentially no restrictions), it is inconceivable US GDP growth could be positive for 2020.
I'll be honest and say that I don't know what you mean by excess and optimum density.
I also think that leave vote is probably INVERSELY correlated with population density. I haven't checked done a rigorous analysis, but eyeballing the list ranking list of areas available here (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028), gives me confidence my hunch is probably right.
High density is not the same as overdensity because some environments can accomodate a higher density than others can. So your "hunch" is irrelevant. Try comparing votes with length of council housing waiting lists, or average class sizes, or patient to GP ratios.
You were talking about overcrowding, indeed, you said that the all towns in the UK are overcrowded ("they thought their town overcrowded (which being in the UK it inevitably is)") Now you're saying some areas "can accom[m]odate a higher density than others can." So which areas are those? Not towns, it seems. You seem to be saying that saying that leave voting was driven by high influxes of people. So are we talking about large numbers of people moving into an area, and is there anything we can say about the type of people? For example, you mention patient to GP ratios. I'm not sure folk really know much about those numbers but they will know about having to wait a long time for an appointment. That's likely to happen in places where there's a large influx of old people, I would guess. Are these old people immigrants? Also you mention class sizes. Well again, that implies people in the sort of 25-50 range and their children moving into the area. Again, are these families immigrants?
And if you think this problem is in ALL towns, that would imply that all those towns are receiving influxes of people. That doesn't strike me as credible, so perhaps I've misunderstood, or perhaps you've overstated the case. I would certainly be interested in seeing what happened in places that are experiencing net outflows of population. Do you think they tended to vote remain?
Apparently now it's a great British triumph that the EU are refusing to play silly games and haven't walked out in a huff, but are patiently repeating what they've said all along.
Any hope of the Brexiteers falling for this?
Yes as long as they get fish, and they will, they will be happy and triumphalist for a few months. Then someone from the brexit harder camp will find a new issue to rail against.
You've discovered the ratchet effect. It worked against Eurosceptics for over 40 years, so turnabout is fair play.
No it didn't. The UK became ever more detached from the EU starting from the opt outs negotiated in the Maastricht Treaty. If there was a ratchet effect, it worked in the opposite direction.
We may have been more detached from the EU but we were still more integrated into the EU than we were in the past. So we were still ratcheting only in one direction, just at a different pace, hence the phrase "two speed Europe". There were two speeds but only one direction.
Since 1992 we negotiated an opt-out from the Euro, negotiated and ratified a mechanism to leave the EU, negotiated a new deal based on never joining the Euro, held a referendum on leaving altogether and then left altogether. That is not a narrative of a one-way ratchet working against Eurosceptics.
An opt out from the Euro is not reversing integration, it just means other nations have integrated more. The baseline is not what other nations have done it is the UK in the past and since we always had the pound having an opt out from some integration is utterly meaningless. Reversing the ratchet would be reversing integration that had already happened.
Of course leaving the EU reversed the ratchet. It was the first thing to do so.
Very interesting and a tad worrying. He says that his sample sizes are always more than 1000. So more than a one-man operation obviously.
He says: “conservatives are less likely to participate in polls in general” ... “We see a five-to-one refusal rate among conservatives” ... “you’ve got to work very hard to get a fair representation of conservatives, when you do any kind of a survey.”
I`ve often wondered about polls in general for this very reason. Conservatives and libertarians are less likely to be bothered to participate than liberals and the left. But I`ve assumed that polls routinely correct for this?
I have a theory.
My theory is that Trafalgar is not a real polling organisation at all.
Here's my evidence:
(1) Trafalgar is not an incorporated entity. (As in, it's not a company.) (2) Trafalgar doesn't seem to have any way of making money. It's not commissioned by companies or by newspapers to produce polls. (3) The guy who runs it is a well know Republican operative
Full quote: Trump told attendees in Carson City that supporters of his opponent would surrender their “future to the virus,” saying: “He’s gonna want to lockdown.”
“He’ll listen to the scientists,” Trump added in a mocking tone before saying, “If I listened totally to the scientists, we would right now have a country that would be in a massive depression instead — we’re like a rocket ship. Take a look at the numbers.”
If he had listened to the scientists, the USA would have had a three month period of lockdown followed by a gradual relaxing of restrictions. It would have been one of the most successful countries in the world in dealing with the pandemic, like it's near-neighbour Canada. Trump would have been hailed as a hero and would now be storming to a landslide victory.
For those who regard Trump as a threat to democracy in the USA if not the whole world, it was a near miss.
Yes, I was worried he'd go with a halfway sensible Covid strategy, look a bit presidential, and therefore win another term. Thankfully, it was not in his DNA.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
Do wish folk would drop the war analogies with Covid. (Too late for Brexit sadly). "The virus is on the offensive' says Hancock. No it isn't. It is a non-sentient being without an objective other than to spread itself. If it is increasing it is because of our behaviours, not its.
Some military metaphors are very illuminating when discussing evolution - camouflage, arms races
I'll be honest and say that I don't know what you mean by excess and optimum density.
I also think that leave vote is probably INVERSELY correlated with population density. I haven't checked done a rigorous analysis, but eyeballing the list ranking list of areas available here (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028), gives me confidence my hunch is probably right.
High density is not the same as overdensity because some environments can accomodate a higher density than others can. So your "hunch" is irrelevant. Try comparing votes with length of council housing waiting lists, or average class sizes, or patient to GP ratios.
You were talking about overcrowding, indeed, you said that the all towns in the UK are overcrowded ("they thought their town overcrowded (which being in the UK it inevitably is)") Now you're saying some areas "can accom[m]odate a higher density than others can." So which areas are those? Not towns, it seems. You seem to be saying that saying that leave voting was driven by high influxes of people. So are we talking about large numbers of people moving into an area, and is there anything we can say about the type of people? For example, you mention patient to GP ratios. I'm not sure folk really know much about those numbers but they will know about having to wait a long time for an appointment. That's likely to happen in places where there's a large influx of old people, I would guess. Are these old people immigrants? Also you mention class sizes. Well again, that implies people in the sort of 25-50 range and their children moving into the area. Again, are these families immigrants?
And if you think this problem is in ALL towns, that would imply that all those towns are receiving influxes of people. That doesn't strike me as credible, so perhaps I've misunderstood, or perhaps you've overstated the case. I would certainly be interested in seeing what happened in places that are experiencing net outflows of population. Do you think they tended to vote remain?
Just leave it. I am not now saying anything different from what I was saying in the first place. If an analogy helps, I have said "excessive speed is responsible for a high number of car accidents" and you have said "that's dead wrong, because surveys show the highest speeds on motorways, which are actually very safe."
Young is a living example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Eloquently and Stone cold certain that he’s right and knows loads in multiple areas where he’s repeatedly and painfully ignorant.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
Did RCS's excellent article on Trafalgar completely pass you by?
What didn't pass me by is how accurate Trafalgar were last time around. Meanwhile many of the pollsters most people on here cling to were a mile out.
Yes, and my Aunt Agatha once picked out the Grand National winner with a pin, and she may do the same again one day. Come on mate, this is a serious Site - some of the time anyway.
I would have thought a serious site would allow two side to every argument.
Clearly not. Trafalgar are not the only pollster to have Trump doing better than the completely objective mainstream media sponsored pollsters.
My Dad does the gardening for the father of the person in charge of our local hospital's Covid ward - Small increase, but not much different to how it's been in the last few months they say.
There is something truly sick bring bred in this country. It is either being spread deliberately at private schools, or it is being incubated there. This level of contempt and class hatred is destroying lives, it's utterly disgusting and it needs to end right now.
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
I think I'm the only Revolutionary Leninist, Steiner/Vallentyne Left-Libertarian, Leeds Utd Fan.
Democracy = Social Fascism
WACCOE
I'm getting increasingly concerned at some posters on here playing fast and loose with democracy.
We have this post, which I can't say entirely surprises me coming from you, and we had @IanB2 ostensibly a centrist and ex-LD flirting with benign dictatorship as being the best form of government the other day.
I think you both need to go back to the history books and read about what life in non-democratic societies is like.
Unfortunately I fear that the peoples of what increasingly looks like "the former" UK are not going to enjoy finding out a whole lot more about "the lessons of history" than they can really cope with.
At every point since the historic wrong turn of Brexit, the far right has doubled down, so now the "impossible" "failure" of a "no deal" is now an odds on outcome. The consequences for our nouveau pauvre PM may include finding that the Eton College where he wants to send his son has been burned down by an army of furious and unemployed farmers, fisherfolk and even financiers.
Certainly, having won the referendum by a whisker under extremely dubious circumstances, the winners could have reached out to the losers and created a compromise- EEA, EFTA, whatever- but they chose four years of uncertainty, rejecting any kind of compromise deal whatsoever as a BINO (not withstanding that these compromises were actually the only solution that people could be said to have "voted for") and then grabbing the tiller and steering us straight towards an economically half witted no deal, while lying all the way.
If the break up of the UK is indeed the result of "no deal", then the successor republics will probably prosecute the ****s responsible.
"Crucifixion is too good for them"
I do study history and the future of what is currently "the UK", both economically and politically, will not be fixed in my lifetime if no deal goes through. Not sure how many UK citizens have taken citizenship elsewhere, but a trickle may well become a flood and I`m contemplating joining them. We know how this story ends...
Top post, Cicero. Possibly hyperbolic; possibly not.
For all the comments about brexiteers should have reached out to remainers and compromised....where was this reaching out by the pro eu people in the 40 years of membership? You called them fruitcakes and closet loons for most of that time and told to suck it up so I can understand why they feel no need to reach out.
As you sow you shall reap seem apposite
There is plenty of blame to go round on both sides.
The depressing part is the discussion never seem to move on.
We just seem to fall back in telling each other to go fuck ourselves.
The conversation is shaped by events. At present, we have a large number of "experts" (I know) saying that things could be difficult in January if we don't have a deal.
Many people (shout out to our Phil) say: "bring it on".
Is it any wonder that sensible people despair.
And oh from FPT when I pointed out how a large number of people was motivated to vote Brexit because of a dislike of foreigners? They were.
Very reasonable until your last paragraph.
You can both like and admire foreigners and want controls on immigration at the same time.
Indeed, it might be to ensure safe continuation and consent for acceptance of the former that you see it as so important to ensure the latter.
I think it is uncontentious to say that a dislike of foreigners was one of the main, if not the main motivating factor for a large number of people who voted Leave.
Not "all" as @Philip_Thompson has confirmed, but for a large number.
That wasn’t my experience from knocking on doors, although I certainly found some (10-15%) who put it like that.
Bear in mind that not all the working class use the flowery, nuanced and carefully caveated language that the professional middle classes do. Many use the unambiguous language of the shop floor and don’t call a spade a shovel when they’re feeling frustrated.
It doesn’t make them all bigots, and an experienced canvasser can tell the difference. It’s the difference between a Gillian Duffy to a Nick Griffin, for example.
It may not be all, but it was enough.
No it wasn't.
I think 10-15% is definately more than 3.5%
3.5% was not enough. 50%+1 was enough.
Are you saying that 50%+1 were motivated by the anti foreignor vote?
No. I'm saying 50%+1 was the threshold for winning and the anti foreigner vote was nowhere close to that.
Remain won over 48% and lost. If Leave was just an anti foreigner vote then it would have lost massively. The anti foreigner vote was not enough to win the referendum.
As long as people mischaracterise a dislike of competing for low wages and state resources with an influx of immigrants as "a dislike of foreigners", I doubt the debate will get anywhere. It makes Remain voters feel like they lost because they are more pure than Leave, so let them think it, everyone needs consolation
Indeed I've read several posts on this thread who basically want to characterise people who have concerns about immigration as automatically racists and effectively seek to cancel them and their views as, of course , no further argument is necessary. I was a remain voter myself but can so easily understand why the argument was lost when so many on the left throw out the word bigot or racist to any who dare to question the left liberal view of the world. Four years on from the vote and they simply do not get it.
Couple of points here Felix -
The main source - Topping - is not on the left. Worse than that, he's a true blue Tory!
And the assertion is not that concerns about immigration are automatically racist or xenophobic. They are clearly not. The (precise) assertion is that if you take a properly randomized sample from the large group of people who not only have concerns about immigration but are SO concerned about it that it caused them to vote Leave in 2016, you will find in that sample a considerably higher proportion of racists and xenophobes than you will in the control sample drawn similarly from the rest of the population.
Everyone knows this. Including all Leavers with faculties.
Its also completely irrelevant gibberish.
It is as pathetic as suggesting that if sample a large proportion of Muslims concerned with western decadence who are SO concerned about it that they have gone to Mosques with their concerns, you will find in that sample a considerably higher proportion of Jihadists and Islamic terrorists than you will in the control sample drawn similarly from the rest of the population.
That may be true but it says absolutely nothing meaningful and anyone who tries to tarnish the whole group of all Muslims/Leavers by insinuation is a closed-minded bigot.
You're lunging at thin air. The point at issue is elsewhere. You show me somebody who assumes all Leavers are racists purely because (as all with faculties agree) a considerably higher proportion of them are than Remainers and I'll show you a person who needs a jolly good talking to. Fact, I'll even do that talking.
Do wish folk would drop the war analogies with Covid. (Too late for Brexit sadly). "The virus is on the offensive' says Hancock. No it isn't. It is a non-sentient being without an objective other than to spread itself. If it is increasing it is because of our behaviours, not its.
Some military metaphors are very illuminating when discussing evolution - camouflage, arms races
I'll be honest and say that I don't know what you mean by excess and optimum density.
I also think that leave vote is probably INVERSELY correlated with population density. I haven't checked done a rigorous analysis, but eyeballing the list ranking list of areas available here (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028), gives me confidence my hunch is probably right.
High density is not the same as overdensity because some environments can accomodate a higher density than others can. So your "hunch" is irrelevant. Try comparing votes with length of council housing waiting lists, or average class sizes, or patient to GP ratios.
You were talking about overcrowding, indeed, you said that the all towns in the UK are overcrowded ("they thought their town overcrowded (which being in the UK it inevitably is)") Now you're saying some areas "can accom[m]odate a higher density than others can." So which areas are those? Not towns, it seems. You seem to be saying that saying that leave voting was driven by high influxes of people. So are we talking about large numbers of people moving into an area, and is there anything we can say about the type of people? For example, you mention patient to GP ratios. I'm not sure folk really know much about those numbers but they will know about having to wait a long time for an appointment. That's likely to happen in places where there's a large influx of old people, I would guess. Are these old people immigrants? Also you mention class sizes. Well again, that implies people in the sort of 25-50 range and their children moving into the area. Again, are these families immigrants?
And if you think this problem is in ALL towns, that would imply that all those towns are receiving influxes of people. That doesn't strike me as credible, so perhaps I've misunderstood, or perhaps you've overstated the case. I would certainly be interested in seeing what happened in places that are experiencing net outflows of population. Do you think they tended to vote remain?
Just leave it. I am not now saying anything different from what I was saying in the first place. If an analogy helps, I have said "excessive speed is responsible for a high number of car accidents" and you have said "that's dead wrong, because surveys show the highest speeds on motorways, which are actually very safe."
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Presumably you would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as an indication of the success of our policy of reversing the ratchet of EU integration.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
Did RCS's excellent article on Trafalgar completely pass you by?
What didn't pass me by is how accurate Trafalgar were last time around. Meanwhile many of the pollsters most people on here cling to were a mile out.
Yes, and my Aunt Agatha once picked out the Grand National winner with a pin, and she may do the same again one day. Come on mate, this is a serious Site - some of the time anyway.
I would have thought a serious site would allow two side to every argument.
Clearly not. Trafalgar are not the only pollster to have Trump doing better than the completely objective mainstream media sponsored pollsters.
There's a lot of mythologising about how wrong NATIONAL polls were last time. Clinton in fact outpolled Trump by 2.1%. Among final, election-eve polls, YouGov and Fox said 4%, ABC and Bloomberg said 3%, IBD said 1%. Poll aggregators were in the range 3-5%.
In the end, of course, the error was crucial. But if Biden maintains the sort of lead he's had for a while then he'll win - it's simply a lot more than Clinton was enjoying in the final days (although equivalent to what she had at her peak).
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Butr if they did start campaigning now they'd be howled down. Vide reaction to video the other day. Despite Messrs Johnson and Ross doing nothing much but campaigning on indyref2.
The state prices and national prices are getting so heavily decoupled we must be close to being able to arb them.
I sense there are some good arbs given enough time and a working calculator. Yesterday I was able to back Trump wins Michigan at an effective 4.16 on SPIN's 100/0 binary and simultaneously lay the same at 3.25 on Betfair. Mega smug city.
If you browse down the individual States on Betfair they imply a very big Biden win. You could back Trump in all of the swing States and then Biden to win in their National market. It works but it takes time, capital and the returns though certain are small.
Yes, I think you're right. What I'm doing is a bit different. I'm regularly cross checking SPIN against Betfair on individual states. SPIN are batch update whereas Betfair is real time. So if you're lucky you'll drop on a case where Betfair has seen a big move on a state and SPIN are still as they were. All of this being for people who are very unbusy with flesh & blood matters of course.
Prices on SPIN are definitely stickier than on Betfair, and if you have the patience this can be exploited. SPIN prices are a bit like a brick on a long piece of elastic. The elastic gets stretched and nothing happens until ping! The brick shoots forward, and hits you in the goolies if you are not careful.
Btw, one problem with what you are doing is that SPIN overrounds tend to be large, and difficult to calculate. This is compensated by Betfair where the opposite applies, but you need to be aware. (Sorry if I'm teaching Granny etc...)
Yep, so the exercise I mean is binary 100/0 state markets (Trump = 0, Biden = 100) cf Betfair state markets. If you can (say) sell Trump for a certain state at 75, that's like backing him at 4 in Betfair parlance. So if you can at the same time lay him for that same state on Betfair at 3.25, you have yourself a juicy arb. Found 3 so far. Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin. Michigan the best.
Very interesting and a tad worrying. He says that his sample sizes are always more than 1000. So more than a one-man operation obviously.
He says: “conservatives are less likely to participate in polls in general” ... “We see a five-to-one refusal rate among conservatives” ... “you’ve got to work very hard to get a fair representation of conservatives, when you do any kind of a survey.”
I`ve often wondered about polls in general for this very reason. Conservatives and libertarians are less likely to be bothered to participate than liberals and the left. But I`ve assumed that polls routinely correct for this?
I have a theory.
My theory is that Trafalgar is not a real polling organisation at all.
Here's my evidence:
(1) Trafalgar is not an incorporated entity. (As in, it's not a company.) (2) Trafalgar doesn't seem to have any way of making money. It's not commissioned by companies or by newspapers to produce polls. (3) The guy who runs it is a well know Republican operative
Young is a living example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Eloquently and Stone cold certain that he’s right and knows loads in multiple areas where he’s repeatedly and painfully ignorant.
To be fair to Young there that graph was created by Ed Conway, who admittedly has form for this kind of thing
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Butr if they did start campaigning now they'd be howled down. Vide reaction to video the other day. Despite Messrs Johnson and Ross doing nothing much but campaigning on indyref2.
Better to get howled down now than during the referendum.
After years of getting howled down people will be sick of the issue and it won't carry weight anymore.
Oh and the reaction the other day was not to the video it was to the bizarre claim that the campaigning was on hold.
Very interesting and a tad worrying. He says that his sample sizes are always more than 1000. So more than a one-man operation obviously.
He says: “conservatives are less likely to participate in polls in general” ... “We see a five-to-one refusal rate among conservatives” ... “you’ve got to work very hard to get a fair representation of conservatives, when you do any kind of a survey.”
I`ve often wondered about polls in general for this very reason. Conservatives and libertarians are less likely to be bothered to participate than liberals and the left. But I`ve assumed that polls routinely correct for this?
I have a theory.
My theory is that Trafalgar is not a real polling organisation at all.
Here's my evidence:
(1) Trafalgar is not an incorporated entity. (As in, it's not a company.) (2) Trafalgar doesn't seem to have any way of making money. It's not commissioned by companies or by newspapers to produce polls. (3) The guy who runs it is a well know Republican operative
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Presumably you would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as an indication of the success of our policy of reversing the ratchet of EU integration.
I would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as their choice if they vote for it.
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Presumably you would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as an indication of the success of our policy of reversing the ratchet of EU integration.
I would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as their choice if they vote for it.
There is something truly sick bring bred in this country. It is either being spread deliberately at private schools, or it is being incubated there. This level of contempt and class hatred is destroying lives, it's utterly disgusting and it needs to end right now.
That's a grim read. We know the only way to stop it, don't we?
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Presumably you would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as an indication of the success of our policy of reversing the ratchet of EU integration.
I would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as their choice if they vote for it.
As opposed to Brexit?
No.
Brexit was Britain's choice. Scotland chose to remain a part of Britain knowing a Brexit referendum was on the way.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
Young is a living example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Eloquently and Stone cold certain that he’s right and knows loads in multiple areas where he’s repeatedly and painfully ignorant.
No Ed Conway is the living example, Toby Young is just an idiot.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
Did RCS's excellent article on Trafalgar completely pass you by?
What didn't pass me by is how accurate Trafalgar were last time around. Meanwhile many of the pollsters most people on here cling to were a mile out.
Yes, and my Aunt Agatha once picked out the Grand National winner with a pin, and she may do the same again one day. Come on mate, this is a serious Site - some of the time anyway.
I would have thought a serious site would allow two side to every argument.
Clearly not. Trafalgar are not the only pollster to have Trump doing better than the completely objective mainstream media sponsored pollsters.
There's a lot of mythologising about how wrong NATIONAL polls were last time. Clinton in fact outpolled Trump by 2.1%. Among final, election-eve polls, YouGov and Fox said 4%, ABC and Bloomberg said 3%, IBD said 1%. Poll aggregators were in the range 3-5%.
In the end, of course, the error was crucial. But if Biden maintains the sort of lead he's had for a while then he'll win - it's simply a lot more than Clinton was enjoying in the final days (although equivalent to what she had at her peak).
Apparently RCP have Trump slightly ahead of where he was in 2016, in the states that matter ie the battlegrounds
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
So Trafalgar at the moment has Biden picking up Pennsylvania, where he was born, more narrowly picking up Wisconsin and Trump narrowly holding Michigan.
On that basis Trump would win the EC by the narrowest of margins most likely if you believe Trafalgar.
The SNP need to be making the currency argument now, get on the front foot and start winning people over to supporting another currency.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Presumably you would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as an indication of the success of our policy of reversing the ratchet of EU integration.
I would regard Scotland adopting the Euro as their choice if they vote for it.
As opposed to Brexit?
No.
Brexit was Britain's choice. Scotland chose to remain a part of Britain knowing a Brexit referendum was on the way.
Not that again. We were repeatyedly toldf that voting No was the only way to remain in the EU.
Biden just 1.5% ahead in Wisconsin with almost 3% undecided!
Did RCS's excellent article on Trafalgar completely pass you by?
What didn't pass me by is how accurate Trafalgar were last time around. Meanwhile many of the pollsters most people on here cling to were a mile out.
Yes, and my Aunt Agatha once picked out the Grand National winner with a pin, and she may do the same again one day. Come on mate, this is a serious Site - some of the time anyway.
I would have thought a serious site would allow two side to every argument.
Clearly not. Trafalgar are not the only pollster to have Trump doing better than the completely objective mainstream media sponsored pollsters.
Trafalgar is telling those on the right what they want to hear. It is no surprise to find those on that side of the argument liking Trafalgar. Obviously the opposite argument applies to those on the left.
I have no dog in the fight. I could not care less about Trafalgar, but I would enjoy seeing Trump lose because I detest him.
Re Trumpsters being confident and Dems being scared, it suits both sides' GOTV efforts to talk up Trump's chances at this point.
- Republicans need their voters to think Trump is still in with a chance to ensure their supporters believe voting is worthwhile and so do - Dems are genuinely jittery after 2016, but also don't want this election to be even close, so that Trump has no path to challenge either its legitimacy or to seek to invalidate certain ballot papers in order to steal the election or to refer it to the Supreme Court. Also, the Dems want to use the top of the ticket to win many very important state-level elections.
Your final line is critical.
The Dems goal is not just to win but to win big. Win very big.
They don't just want the Oval Office, they want the Senators and they want to win the House votes and the State Representatives who will be determining Redistricting issues next year. If for instance Texas can be flipped then the Democrats redistricting Texas could make the map look very different to the GOP doing so.
Yet ironically even if the Democrats win a landslide this year and the Presidency, the House and the Senate they will almost certainly lose Congress again in the 2022 midterms when the usual midterm protest vote sees a swing back to the post Trump GOP, as 2 years after Obama was elected by a landslide in 2008 the Democrats lost the House in 2010 and 2 years after Trump won in 2016 the GOP lost the House in 2018.
However if Trump is re elected the Democrats will likely win a huge majority in Congress in 2022 and be very likely to win back the Presidency in 2024
Winning in 2022 will be too late for redistricting.
In order to win for redistricting they need to win this year. This is the redistricting election and this year's winner will control gerrymandering for a decade to come.
Also Obama held the Senate for six years not two. Ditto Trump has held it for four. From memory Dubya also held it for six.
The Senate only really has influence over foreign treaties and executive appointments, once your party loses control of the House of Representatives so does your ability to set the US domestic agenda
Nonsense. The senate can legislate too - and more to the point can block legislation. Without control of both houses, and with a deeply obstructionist opposition, any agenda is considerably blunted.
You only need control of 1 chamber of congress to block the President's agenda, 2 is just a bonus
It really isn't the case that as soon as you lose one chamber as President, you lose control.
Since you can veto bills as President, the reality is you move into a compromise phase where your team discuss with the leadership of the Senate and House what items on your agenda you might be able to progress (with some tweaks) and what of their agenda you might be willing to sign.
You are in a much, much stronger position as President if you hold one of the two chambers in your party as you have more to bargain with. For example, if you still have the Senate, you have strong appointment powers (as you say) so you can trade that against legislative concessions from the House leadership. And if you still have the House and the other side only has a slim Senate majority, you may well only need to buy off one or two blue state Republicans or blue dog Democrats with a nice (and not wildly expensive) little side benefit for their state to get a key piece of legislation through.
You also only need to satisfy one group of people - remember that the House GOP (or Dems) don't necessarily have the same aims at all as their Senate colleagues. They don't map that well onto each other geographically and, rather crucially, the House has a two year cycle and the Senate six - so they are playing very different games in terms of what they want to achieve and when and you get the much longer term, grey bearded strategic thinkers in the Senate and the "what am I going to say to my constituents in the elections in a few months?" folk at the start of their careers in the House. So it's a hell of a lot harder if you control neither chamber, whereas it's not ideal but not the end of the world by any means if you have one of two.
The point is though you still have to compromise your agenda, you can no longer set the agenda as you could when you controlled both chambers
You've moved your position from saying if you lose one chamber you lose your ability to set the domestic agenda to saying you need to make some compromises... which just isn't the same at all.
Yes it is, most of the biggest changes in US domestic policy in terms of a President implementing their agenda, eg FDR's new Deal, LBJ's Great Society and civil rights laws, Obamacare, George W Bush's tax cuts came when that President's party controlled both chambers of Congress.
You can't be as radical as you might like, for sure. But are you claiming Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Snr were insignificant in domestic policy agenda terms? Because none of them ever had control of both chambers of Congress at any point. If so, it's a big (and incorrect) claim.
Relatively yes, Nixon and Bush Snr were far more significant in foreign policy terms than domestic policy terms.
Reagan was an exception because he built a good personal relationship with Speaker O'Neill and there were more conservative southern Democrats at that time and fewer liberal Northern and West Coast Democrats but even he could not prevent the Democrats expanding government spending.
That wasn't my question. My question was whether they were insignificant domestically. It's clear that they weren't.
Look - nobody is arguing against the case that you have more control if you control both chambers of the legislature plus the Presidency, and can be more radical. Obviously that's true. The problem is the radical assertion that you started with (and seem to have stepped back from a bit) that you lose control of the agenda the second you only have one chamber of Congress. It's just demonstrably incorrect as a position.
In my (not so) humble opinion, think SNP (the PBer not the Party) is correct.
While it is true partisan divide in Congress has hardened and polarized, the powers of the presidency are immense and thus ANY president has enormous governating & legislative potential EVEN if congressional lineup is unfavorable or even downright hostile.
Re: Nixon and Bush the Elder, it's a fact that both were WAY more interested and engaged in foreign as opposed to domestic policy. Both tended to do what the polling suggested, and to leave details beyond the soundbites to the entourage.
Note that one thing frequently that liberals and lefties (esp academics and foreign observers) give Nixon good marks for is establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency during his presidency.
Further note that this and other domestic initiatives (such as opposition to school busing to achieve integration) were in the wheelhouse of his chief domestic advisor John Ehrlichman, a Seattle lawyer and GOP activist who ended up wearing his pinstripes horizontally post-Watergate.
Fast-forwarding to 2020, one reason I'm hopeful at prospect of a Biden presidency, is based on his resume and track record during his decades in and hanging around Congress as a Senator and Vice President.
Uncle Joe's position in this regard is reminiscent of LBJ in 1964 after JFK's assassination. Which resulted in one of the greatest legislative outpouring in US history, including Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act and host of other laws, policies and programs.
OF course LBJ and the Great Society came unstuck over Vietnam, so am NOT predicting sainthood for Uncle Joe just yet.
However, his potential to work and play well with Congress, even under less-than-perfect conditions, is obvious.
Ideally, what Biden wants is
> clear, convincing win over Trumpsky; doesn't need landslide (historically 10% margin in US) but solid victory like Obama in 2008.
> Democratic majority in US Senate but does NOT need to be either veto-proof OR a supermajority (60 or more) to be effective (enough)
> increased Democratic majority in US House but NOT on large enough to give OCS & left wing too much leverage.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54599302
By the time they eventually get this up and running properly, we will have probably all been vaccinated.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8856059/Ireland-considering-six-week-lockdown-stopping-travelling-3-miles-home.html
Michael Gove on earlier delivering a Niagara of Brexit-related shite
This is madness. When is sense going to prevail? Leading ministers have now totally lost the plot I'm afraid.
No doubt they will claim success after several weeks or months of Tier 3 insanity when the cases were already dropping.
https://blogs.gov.scot/statistics/2020/10/19/new-headline-measure-of-covid-19-test-positivity-rate/
So tomorrow you are going to see the positivity rate plummet in Scotland
That was false and I corrected it. That's all.
As for this point here - "racist views exist everywhere and are not addressed by label followed by cancel." - that is fair enough. So long as "address" does not mean "pander".
"The virus is on the offensive' says Hancock.
No it isn't. It is a non-sentient being without an objective other than to spread itself.
If it is increasing it is because of our behaviours, not its.
England will come shortly, Johnson is going to be shown as a follower yet again
https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1316723467916587008
1Q GDP down 5% (annualised)
2Q down 31.4%
Then see that unemployment is rising again in the US.
Given that large parts of the US are shutting down again due to Coronavirus cases spiking (yes, including places with essentially no restrictions), it is inconceivable US GDP growth could be positive for 2020.
If it was inevitable it would have been more intelligent to have done it two weeks ago when the public health advisers first recommended it.
If it was not inevitable then the question is what are the intelligent things that ought to have been done to avoid it.
Now you're saying some areas "can accom[m]odate a higher density than others can." So which areas are those? Not towns, it seems.
You seem to be saying that saying that leave voting was driven by high influxes of people. So are we talking about large numbers of people moving into an area, and is there anything we can say about the type of people?
For example, you mention patient to GP ratios. I'm not sure folk really know much about those numbers but they will know about having to wait a long time for an appointment. That's likely to happen in places where there's a large influx of old people, I would guess. Are these old people immigrants?
Also you mention class sizes. Well again, that implies people in the sort of 25-50 range and their children moving into the area. Again, are these families immigrants?
And if you think this problem is in ALL towns, that would imply that all those towns are receiving influxes of people. That doesn't strike me as credible, so perhaps I've misunderstood, or perhaps you've overstated the case. I would certainly be interested in seeing what happened in places that are experiencing net outflows of population. Do you think they tended to vote remain?
Of course leaving the EU reversed the ratchet. It was the first thing to do so.
My theory is that Trafalgar is not a real polling organisation at all.
Here's my evidence:
(1) Trafalgar is not an incorporated entity. (As in, it's not a company.)
(2) Trafalgar doesn't seem to have any way of making money. It's not commissioned by companies or by newspapers to produce polls.
(3) The guy who runs it is a well know Republican operative
But yes. Take prodigous care everyone.
The correlation between habitual bow tie wearing and self-regarding reactionary bombast is well nigh perfect.
Plus: https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-shifts-away-no-lockdown-strategy-amid-growing-case-numbers-2020-10
Eloquently and Stone cold certain that he’s right and knows loads in multiple areas where he’s repeatedly and painfully ignorant.
Clearly not. Trafalgar are not the only pollster to have Trump doing better than the completely objective mainstream media sponsored pollsters.
There is something truly sick bring bred in this country. It is either being spread deliberately at private schools, or it is being incubated there. This level of contempt and class hatred is destroying lives, it's utterly disgusting and it needs to end right now.
Can't just put head in the sand and hope the issue goes away. Plus with ~50% of the population supporting the SNP right now making the argument now will move the Overton Window and get people used to the idea and more accepting of it.
Note Miami Dade and about 14 smaller GOP counties not reporting.
In the end, of course, the error was crucial. But if Biden maintains the sort of lead he's had for a while then he'll win - it's simply a lot more than Clinton was enjoying in the final days (although equivalent to what she had at her peak).
At the end of his 2020 'polls' he puts out a per-congressional district sample percentage. Here is the one from the September Michigan poll
And here is the October Poll
Aye fucking right to use the statistical terminology for that.
After years of getting howled down people will be sick of the issue and it won't carry weight anymore.
Oh and the reaction the other day was not to the video it was to the bizarre claim that the campaigning was on hold.
One day.
And so unfair too.
https://twitter.com/colvinj/status/1318234708136767488
Brexit was Britain's choice. Scotland chose to remain a part of Britain knowing a Brexit referendum was on the way.
Flirting doesn't work online.
Let's get back to me correcting your sundry nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDlQOUL1BJQ
I have no dog in the fight. I could not care less about Trafalgar, but I would enjoy seeing Trump lose because I detest him.
While it is true partisan divide in Congress has hardened and polarized, the powers of the presidency are immense and thus ANY president has enormous governating & legislative potential EVEN if congressional lineup is unfavorable or even downright hostile.
Re: Nixon and Bush the Elder, it's a fact that both were WAY more interested and engaged in foreign as opposed to domestic policy. Both tended to do what the polling suggested, and to leave details beyond the soundbites to the entourage.
Note that one thing frequently that liberals and lefties (esp academics and foreign observers) give Nixon good marks for is establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency during his presidency.
Further note that this and other domestic initiatives (such as opposition to school busing to achieve integration) were in the wheelhouse of his chief domestic advisor John Ehrlichman, a Seattle lawyer and GOP activist who ended up wearing his pinstripes horizontally post-Watergate.
Fast-forwarding to 2020, one reason I'm hopeful at prospect of a Biden presidency, is based on his resume and track record during his decades in and hanging around Congress as a Senator and Vice President.
Uncle Joe's position in this regard is reminiscent of LBJ in 1964 after JFK's assassination. Which resulted in one of the greatest legislative outpouring in US history, including Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act and host of other laws, policies and programs.
OF course LBJ and the Great Society came unstuck over Vietnam, so am NOT predicting sainthood for Uncle Joe just yet.
However, his potential to work and play well with Congress, even under less-than-perfect conditions, is obvious.
Ideally, what Biden wants is
> clear, convincing win over Trumpsky; doesn't need landslide (historically 10% margin in US) but solid victory like Obama in 2008.
> Democratic majority in US Senate but does NOT need to be either veto-proof OR a supermajority (60 or more) to be effective (enough)
> increased Democratic majority in US House but NOT on large enough to give OCS & left wing too much leverage.