Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The extraordinary change in Johnson/Starmer leader ratings in just two weeks – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,158
edited May 2021 in General
imageThe extraordinary change in Johnson/Starmer leader ratings in just two weeks – politicalbetting.com

I find it very difficult to explain such a huge change within 2-weeks even though that period did include the May 6th local elections.

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,397
    Second. I second that.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    Third
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Perhaps try looking at Gross numbers rather than Net numbers and that might provide more clarity and consistency.

    Taking the lead from several leading political commentators who track this, my main focus is on the "satisfaction" figure and I'm less concerned about the negatives. In terms of predicting electoral outcomes it's the proportion saying they are satisfied that is key. Whether they "don't know" or are not satisfied is irrelevant - they are not ready to be positive.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    Have there been similarly large changes in short periods previously for Lotos, eg for Corbyn and Miliband?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,479
    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454
    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,949

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454
    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    Sort of. He was a local. But at the end of the day I don't think a candidate would have made much difference.

    I'm of the opinion Labour could have ran Nigel Farage as their candidate and still lost.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
    Can you sense Boris in his office, wavering, as we speak?

    You put your body on the line for that f8cker? you took two experimental vaccines for freedom on his say so?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,720

    Perhaps try looking at Gross numbers rather than Net numbers and that might provide more clarity and consistency.

    Taking the lead from several leading political commentators who track this, my main focus is on the "satisfaction" figure and I'm less concerned about the negatives. In terms of predicting electoral outcomes it's the proportion saying they are satisfied that is key. Whether they "don't know" or are not satisfied is irrelevant - they are not ready to be positive.

    Being too lazy to actually check the numbers, is it that Johnson had only a few don't knows before whereas Starmer had a lot and the DKs have (following the news in the last couple of weeks making most normal people notice politics for the first time in ages) broken decisively for "lol, loser!"
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited May 2021
    It's simple enough: before the local elections, the media (plus Labour) were running the kind of saturation coverage of Wallpapergate that would be excessive even if Boris were some kind of interior-decorator-turned-serial-killer.

    Then the voters let the media & Sir Keir know what they thought about that petty rubbish - the worst local election results for a new Leader of the Opposition in 40 years plus the humiliating loss of a seat to a Government beginning its 12th year in power - and the smear campaign could be maintained no longer.

    Essentially, Sir Keir has been weighed in the balance, and found ... unwanted.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,949
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip - persuaded the sitting MP to resign. It would have made sense to have simply withdrawn the Whip effectively allowing him to sit as an Independent - like Corbyn - until the next election.Pity that he did not ignore them in that they lacked the power to force him out.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    The mirror image of the dumber end of woke virtue signalling

    https://twitter.com/jasebyjason/status/1394397090466439168?s=21
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,601

    Have there been similarly large changes in short periods previously for Lotos, eg for Corbyn and Miliband?

    Without looking at the precise figures my hunch is Dave’s ratings went into the toilet during the summer of 2007 and ditto Corbyn after his response to the Salisbury poisonings.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Selebian said:

    Perhaps try looking at Gross numbers rather than Net numbers and that might provide more clarity and consistency.

    Taking the lead from several leading political commentators who track this, my main focus is on the "satisfaction" figure and I'm less concerned about the negatives. In terms of predicting electoral outcomes it's the proportion saying they are satisfied that is key. Whether they "don't know" or are not satisfied is irrelevant - they are not ready to be positive.

    Being too lazy to actually check the numbers, is it that Johnson had only a few don't knows before whereas Starmer had a lot and the DKs have (following the news in the last couple of weeks making most normal people notice politics for the first time in ages) broken decisively for "lol, loser!"
    Precisely. The numbers backing Starmer for the past year have been quite derisory, but its been packaged as a great net number because nobody bothered to say the opposed him.

    Which is why leading political commentators say that you should look at those who are satisfied as key, not the dissatisfied. Starmer got the support that the polls always said he would - but all those not saying they were dissatisfied with Starmer turned out to vote for those they were satisfied with, which wasn't Starmer.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip - persuaded the sitting MP to resign. It would have made sense to have simply withdrawn the Whip effectively allowing him to sit as an Independent - like Corbyn - until the next election.Pity that he did not ignore them in that they lacked the power to force him out.
    I don't think that would be very fair on the citizens of Hartlepool
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,949
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,874
    Looks like the South will now be a better prospect for Starmer Labour (and the LDs) than the North and Midlands then on the new Opinium approval ratings and that would reflect the local election results too.

    Given London voted Remain and the South East only narrowly voted Leave in comparison to the much bigger Leave votes in the North and Midlands that would confirm the post Brexit realignment of our politics, with the once safe Tory South now moving more towards Labour and the Labour heartlands of London and Wales, while the once marginal Midlands becomes a Tory safe region and the once safe Labour region of the North becomes marginal.

    Interesting too that Boris now has a net lead over Starmer in Scotland, confirmation of the fact the Tories retained their place as the main opposition to the SNP in the Holyrood elections
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,414

    It's simple enough: before the local elections, the media (plus Labour) were running the kind of saturation coverage of Wallpapergate that would be excessive even if Boris were some kind of interior-decorator-turned-serial-killer.

    Then the voters let the media & Sir Keir know what they thought about that petty rubbish - the worst local election results for a new Leader of the Opposition in 40 years plus the humiliating loss of a seat to a Government beginning its 12th year in power - and the smear campaign could be maintained no longer.

    Essentially, Sir Keir has been weighed in the balance, and found ... unwanted.

    Is what you are saying is that it's accepted by the voters that truth and honesty are not virtues associated with our current PM?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Labour would have been less emabarrassed by whatever flows from that tribunal than it was by the Onasanya trial in early 2019. Despite the latter, Labour went on to retain Peterborough at the subsequent by election in June 2019.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291
    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    The mirror image of the dumber end of woke virtue signalling

    https://twitter.com/jasebyjason/status/1394397090466439168?s=21

    As a guess, just as much as from Isreal... nothing.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.

    Pollsters were not wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool. Pollsters predicted a large Tory victory and we got a large Tory victory.
    The polls pre Hartlepool had Starmer within touching distance of Johnson because of wallpaper gate. Something we were assured at the time was cutting through with the electorate.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,874
    edited May 2021

    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.

    Indeed, the Tories core vote, as with the GOP, is now the skilled white working class in small and medium towns and rural areas.

    The profesional upper middle class in wealthy suburbia is increasingly moving left liberal, it was gains in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Detroit, Phoenix and Atlanta which won Biden the electoral college, Trump still won small town and rural America comfortably
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    edited May 2021

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,479

    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
    Can you sense Boris in his office, wavering, as we speak?

    You put your body on the line for that f8cker? you took two experimental vaccines for freedom on his say so?
    No, I took a tried and tested vaccine which is efficacious and which is safe. Nothing to do with Boris. You completely undermine any argument you might have with your superstitious antivaxism.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
    Can you sense Boris in his office, wavering, as we speak?

    You put your body on the line for that f8cker? you took two experimental vaccines for freedom on his say so?
    Experimental vaccines? really? Thats your point? How many experiments would it take to convince you? Are you waiting 20 years to see if the AZ vaccine mutates you 20 years later? You make very foolish statements.
    It's quite something, isn't it? They vaccines are highly effective at preventing death and serious illness, yet here he is smearing them every chance he gets.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
    A prominent Tory MP was arrested last year on the basis of very serious sexual allegations. He ceased to attend Westminster - but there has been no by election.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454

    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.

    Pollsters were not wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool. Pollsters predicted a large Tory victory and we got a large Tory victory.
    The polls pre Hartlepool had Starmer within touching distance of Johnson because of wallpaper gate. Something we were assured at the time was cutting through with the electorate.
    And? The polls also predicted a large Tory victory in Hartlepool. And guess what? They were right.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,795
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291
    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    Thank you. Very typical behaviour I must say. He can't engage with the argument so resorts to first abuse and then an attempt to mislead. He certainly personifies my view of lying Scottish Nationalists
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    justin124 said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
    A prominent Tory MP was arrested last year on the basis of very serious sexual allegations. He ceased to attend Westminster - but there has been no by election.
    And those charges have been dropped. In this case the tribunal is going ahead.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,399
    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,720
    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,307
    If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.

    Enough.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    HYUFD said:

    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.

    Indeed, the Tories core vote, as with the GOP, is now the skilled white working class in small and medium towns and rural areas.

    The profesional upper middle class in wealthy suburbia is increasingly moving left liberal
    Big Data Poll's Rich Baris, who called some of these US states much better than other pollsters, says that even for him (he is undoubtedly republican), republican voters are tough to reach in rust belt states.

    They are very wary of pollsters, wary of the prevailing narrative about Trumpism and, because they need to be, often out working.

    But they are there. And they are there in England, too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,399
    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    Did he come out for Brexit?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    Selebian said:

    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
    Even the best of us have succumbed to the brexiteer's apostrophe at some point in our lives.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    justin124 said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
    A prominent Tory MP was arrested last year on the basis of very serious sexual allegations. He ceased to attend Westminster - but there has been no by election.
    Quite right too as the charges were dropped weren't they?

    Breaking: Boris: Does not see anything conclusive that we need to deviate from 21 June.

    No shit, Sherlock. The dying banshee scream of Indy SAGE and the like will be loud and provide media clickbaits but we'll proceed with unlocking on schedule.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,795
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    The evidence from that has been...interesting. Yes I did want to have an affair with her. Yes I did rub myself up against her. Yes I did purport to sack her by text. Yes, I did try to have her put out of the house she was renting from me. But she is vindictive and this is all so unfair.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,173
    Laura Pidcock is a supporter of zero COVID.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    tlg86 said:

    Laura Pidcock is a supporter of zero COVID.

    That will never happen.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    justin124 said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
    A prominent Tory MP was arrested last year on the basis of very serious sexual allegations. He ceased to attend Westminster - but there has been no by election.
    Quite right too as the charges were dropped weren't they?

    Breaking: Boris: Does not see anything conclusive that we need to deviate from 21 June.

    No shit, Sherlock. The dying banshee scream of Indy SAGE and the like will be loud and provide media clickbaits but we'll proceed with unlocking on schedule.
    Fair enough.

    And for the record, I believe all the vaccines are completely safe and very effective.

    I should not have used the word 'experimental'. Apols to all and to Mike.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I agree, it’s scummy behaviour, but does it matter?

    Nobody can edit your original post.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    Ultimately, it was his decision as an MP to resign or not.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    ping said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I agree, it’s scummy behaviour, but does it matter?

    Nobody can edit your original post.
    Don't tempt @rcs1000
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,874
    Cyclefree said:

    If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.

    Enough.

    He would also lose Tory voters to ReformUK if a full reopening does not occur next month and he restricts indoor opening again
  • RobinWiggsRobinWiggs Posts: 621

    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
    Led by the data not the dates - if there is no evidence of much increase in hospitalisation/death arising from an uptick in cases/VOC cases, then the government proceed as planned. Evidence is starting to come in about the effectiveness of AZ and Pfz against the Indian variant too. Early signals are encouraging.

    Hardly outfoxed.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited May 2021
    justin124 said:



    Labour would have been less emabarrassed by whatever flows from that tribunal than it was by the Onasanya trial in early 2019. Despite the latter, Labour went on to retain Peterborough at the subsequent by election in June 2019.

    I think SKS behaved correctly in forcing Hill out and creating the by-election in Hartlepool (though I expect he thought Labour had a reasonable chance of retaining it).

    Batley & Spen looks like a misstep though.

    It is a completely unnecessary by-election, because Tracy Brabin did not have to put herself forward for the Mayoralty. She should have not stood in GE 2019 if she felt she wanted to stand for the Mayor

    Brabin has left SKS in an awkward position, as Batley & Spen looks like a crapshoot.

    And SKS probably can't recover from a 4th by-election defeat on the trot.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,767
    Who knows what data we will see over the next few weeks? We may see a distinct uptick in positive tests, hospitalisations or deaths. In which case there is a good chance that reopening will be postponed - particularly if it is the latter two.

    Personally (and I am not an epidemiologist, but then nor are most politicians and nor are most scientists) I do not expect to see an uptick in hospitalisations or deaths. We may see an uptick in positive tests, though I am expecting not.

    However, we may still not reopen, because doing so will ultimately be a political decision. And there are powerful people - sage, politicians of all stripes, the media, and importantly, voters - who will consider it too risky, regardless of the numbers.

    I'm not particularly worried about variants. But I am worried about the reaction of people to variants and to hysteria about variants.

    The only crumb of optimism I cling to is that there are still people whose opinions I respect who think that we will reopen.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291
    Selebian said:

    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
    It was a instinctive apostrophe as an indication of abbreviation, which in pedant's hindsight might be regarded as a "normal" abbreviation, so therefore unnecessary. There should also have been a comma after CAPS. Good spot though!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:



    Labour would have been less emabarrassed by whatever flows from that tribunal than it was by the Onasanya trial in early 2019. Despite the latter, Labour went on to retain Peterborough at the subsequent by election in June 2019.

    I think SKS behaved correctly in forcing Hill out and creating the by-election in Hartlepool (though I expect he thought Labour had a reasonable chance of retaining it).

    Batley & Spen looks like a misstep though.

    It is a completely unnecessary by-election, because Tracy Brabin did not have to put herself forward for the Mayoralty. She should have not stood in GE 2019 if she felt she wanted to stand for the Mayor

    Brabin has left SKS in an awkward position, as Batley & Spen looks like a crapshoot.

    And SKS probably can't recover from a 4th by-election defeat on the trot.

    justin124 said:



    Labour would have been less emabarrassed by whatever flows from that tribunal than it was by the Onasanya trial in early 2019. Despite the latter, Labour went on to retain Peterborough at the subsequent by election in June 2019.

    I think SKS behaved correctly in forcing Hill out and creating the by-election in Hartlepool (though I expect he thought Labour had a reasonable chance of retaining it).

    Batley & Spen looks like a misstep though.

    It is a completely unnecessary by-election, because Tracy Brabin did not have to put herself forward for the Mayoralty. She should have not stood in GE 2019 if she felt she wanted to stand for the Mayor

    Brabin has left SKS in an awkward position, as Batley & Spen looks like a crapshoot.

    And SKS probably can't recover from a 4th by-election defeat on the trot.
    Hill should have ignored Starmer and invited him to 'go forth and multiply'.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,173
    Jo Coburn asking an SNP what they’d do about illegal immigration if Scotland were independent.

    I think there are many potential problems facing an independent Scotland. Illegal immigration won’t be one of them.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.

    Enough.

    I get the feeling the government are just letting the zero COVID idiots have their day in the sun (well rain, actually) and will let the data do the talking. There are already tentative signs that some of the areas that have the Indian variant present aren't having any issues or any real rise in cases. Places like Ealing, Harrow, Brent, Leicester etc... all had masses of people coming back from India and there's been no explosion in cases let alone any signs of hospitalisations going up.

    The hotspot areas are all associated with vaccine refusal and there's simply no way the government should or even could continue lockdown to protect stupid people from their stupid decisions. The Tory party won't have it, Steve Baker and his group will threaten Boris with removal if he hints at giving into the zero COVID types who seem to think that the whole country should live with the consequences of a few c***s refusing the vaccine.
    Yes. Ultimately all this is conjecture and the data will talk. As I said yesterday, those opposed to the current government should wait until the data more strongly supports their case in terms of overall cases and hospitalisations before making hay with the Red List decision. Otherwise it’s crying wolf.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    Harry seems rather lost.

    Poor chap.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    HYUFD said:

    The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.

    Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.

    And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

    We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.

    Indeed, the Tories core vote, as with the GOP, is now the skilled white working class in small and medium towns and rural areas.

    The profesional upper middle class in wealthy suburbia is increasingly moving left liberal, it was gains in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Detroit, Phoenix and Atlanta which won Biden the electoral college, Trump still won small town and rural America comfortably
    I also sense that Johnson's magnificent error-free victory over Covid (confirmed by opening the nation for business in the last ten days) mirrors Mrs Thatcher's victory over General Galtieri. His desired reputation as the Churchillian war leader is looking good for the moment. Not shared by me, but then I haven't backed a winner since 2005.

    That said, Starmer's spat with Rayner, and subsequent capitulation made him look very weak.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    Selebian said:

    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
    It was a instinctive apostrophe as an indication of abbreviation, which in pedant's hindsight might be regarded as a "normal" abbreviation, so therefore unnecessary. There should also have been a comma after CAPS. Good spot though!
    I retract my allegation that you used a leaver's apostrophe. A disgusting smear on my part. ;)
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,009

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I have had a similar experience and it is just not correct that anyone's comments can be altered by another poster and change the meaning
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,767
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
    If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
    He's an embarrassingly stupid man who has no real understanding of just how stupid he is.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,577
    DougSeal said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Insults the Queen in the U.K. and the Constitution in the US. Next up - a trip to the Vatican to punch the Pope.
    Perhaps it's a strategy to gaffe his way back into the nation's heart.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291
    ping said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I agree, it’s scummy behaviour, but does it matter?

    Nobody can edit your original post.
    In the big scheme of things, probably not, but I am sure most people on here don't want slimy scumbags like "uniondivvie" attempting to misrepresent us because he can't engage with argument. I guess he has crawled back into his lying little hole.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,795
    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777

    Cookie said:

    The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.

    Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles

    The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.

    Its quite remarkable stuff.

    So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?

    Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
    No, I think there's a subtle distinction here.
    It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed.
    We are in thrall to media bullshit.
    Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
    Nah, I think the government is giving these idiots enough rope to hang themselves. The data simply won't support any kind of lockdown or any restrictions by the time we get to June 21st.

    The vaccine programme this week and next week will get most over 30s vaccinated which is another huge reduction in spreading of the virus. The cumulative reduction in hospitalisations will be absolutely massive by then because we're going to be at over 90% for over 40s and over 75% for over 30s at single dose efficacy along with almost all of groups 1-9 with two dose efficacy.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    RobD said:

    ping said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I agree, it’s scummy behaviour, but does it matter?

    Nobody can edit your original post.
    Don't tempt @rcs1000
    If ogh / rcs / the mods want to fk with the integrity of the site, that’s their call.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,542

    Selebian said:

    Perhaps try looking at Gross numbers rather than Net numbers and that might provide more clarity and consistency.

    Taking the lead from several leading political commentators who track this, my main focus is on the "satisfaction" figure and I'm less concerned about the negatives. In terms of predicting electoral outcomes it's the proportion saying they are satisfied that is key. Whether they "don't know" or are not satisfied is irrelevant - they are not ready to be positive.

    Being too lazy to actually check the numbers, is it that Johnson had only a few don't knows before whereas Starmer had a lot and the DKs have (following the news in the last couple of weeks making most normal people notice politics for the first time in ages) broken decisively for "lol, loser!"
    Precisely. The numbers backing Starmer for the past year have been quite derisory, but its been packaged as a great net number because nobody bothered to say the opposed him.

    Which is why leading political commentators say that you should look at those who are satisfied as key, not the dissatisfied. Starmer got the support that the polls always said he would - but all those not saying they were dissatisfied with Starmer turned out to vote for those they were satisfied with, which wasn't Starmer.
    OK, we get it - you're "a leading political commentator"! 😂
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,949
    edited May 2021
    Ascot going ahead max 4,000/day. No one who didn't buy tickets last year at this stage.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,795
    tlg86 said:

    Laura Pidcock is a supporter of zero COVID.

    I'm a supporter of Dundee United. They really should be European Champions. Beyond a doubt.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS ALSO!
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
    Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291
    RobD said:

    Selebian said:

    RobD said:

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
    I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
    It was a instinctive apostrophe as an indication of abbreviation, which in pedant's hindsight might be regarded as a "normal" abbreviation, so therefore unnecessary. There should also have been a comma after CAPS. Good spot though!
    I retract my allegation that you used a leaver's apostrophe. A disgusting smear on my part. ;)
    hehe, "You have a leaver's apostrophe" sounds like something from Blackadder.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
    The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Where did he say that lol? What an idiot.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,173
    In a way, it’s a shame Laura Pidcock isn’t leader of the Labour Party. Sure, she might have talked a load of nonsense, but she might not have been scared to state the obvious with regards to things like closing the borders.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,542
    Cyclefree said:

    If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.

    Enough.

    A scalding hot cappuccino - with chocolate sprinkles - dropped in his lap?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
    "Sorry" understated Hill's disreputable unpleasantness.

    Starmer (even if it costs him his job) was right to throw Hill to the wolves.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,291

    FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    I have had a similar experience and it is just not correct that anyone's comments can be altered by another poster and change the meaning
    Thank you, it really is a scummy thing to do. In this case "Uniondivvie" didn't just change what I wrote, he wrote a completely new post that looked as though I had written it. He really is a lying little git.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Selebian said:

    Perhaps try looking at Gross numbers rather than Net numbers and that might provide more clarity and consistency.

    Taking the lead from several leading political commentators who track this, my main focus is on the "satisfaction" figure and I'm less concerned about the negatives. In terms of predicting electoral outcomes it's the proportion saying they are satisfied that is key. Whether they "don't know" or are not satisfied is irrelevant - they are not ready to be positive.

    Being too lazy to actually check the numbers, is it that Johnson had only a few don't knows before whereas Starmer had a lot and the DKs have (following the news in the last couple of weeks making most normal people notice politics for the first time in ages) broken decisively for "lol, loser!"
    Precisely. The numbers backing Starmer for the past year have been quite derisory, but its been packaged as a great net number because nobody bothered to say the opposed him.

    Which is why leading political commentators say that you should look at those who are satisfied as key, not the dissatisfied. Starmer got the support that the polls always said he would - but all those not saying they were dissatisfied with Starmer turned out to vote for those they were satisfied with, which wasn't Starmer.
    OK, we get it - you're "a leading political commentator"! 😂
    LOL!

    Or maybe OGH is one?

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,977
    Full story on Dominic Cummings's extraordinary stream of tweets today

    When he talks about "The Manhattan Project", you may suspect its because he has put a thermonuclear device under the PM's chair


    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/dominic-cummings-release-crucial-covid-document-boris-johnson-b935777.html
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,577
    MaxPB said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Where did he say that lol? What an idiot.
    "Prince Harry faces backlash in the US after calling First Amendment 'bonkers'"

    https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-faces-backlash-in-the-us-after-calling-first-amendment-bonkers-12309014
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,795
    DougSeal said:

    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
    Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
    That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,542
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
    If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
    Ms Cyclefree - she only acted as a lawyer you know.....
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,284
    Cookie said:

    Who knows what data we will see over the next few weeks? We may see a distinct uptick in positive tests, hospitalisations or deaths. In which case there is a good chance that reopening will be postponed - particularly if it is the latter two.

    Personally (and I am not an epidemiologist, but then nor are most politicians and nor are most scientists) I do not expect to see an uptick in hospitalisations or deaths. We may see an uptick in positive tests, though I am expecting not.

    However, we may still not reopen, because doing so will ultimately be a political decision. And there are powerful people - sage, politicians of all stripes, the media, and importantly, voters - who will consider it too risky, regardless of the numbers.

    I'm not particularly worried about variants. But I am worried about the reaction of people to variants and to hysteria about variants.

    The only crumb of optimism I cling to is that there are still people whose opinions I respect who think that we will reopen.

    Uptick in cases is very likely IMO. More transmissible variant + easing restrictions makes that inevitable.

    I think small uptick in hospitalizations also quite likely, given there will simply be more COVID around and some young people do get it bad enough to be hospitalized. But I don't expect to see much of an uptick in deaths because the vaccination rates will hopefully prevent that.

    Time will tell!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454
    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.

    This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
    With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
    He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
    The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
    Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,542

    MaxPB said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Where did he say that lol? What an idiot.
    "Prince Harry faces backlash in the US after calling First Amendment 'bonkers'"

    https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-faces-backlash-in-the-us-after-calling-first-amendment-bonkers-12309014
    Let's just hope for his security he doesn't start making his views known on the Second Amendment....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    MaxPB said:

    Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?

    Because he's not very bright?

    Where did he say that lol? What an idiot.
    "Prince Harry faces backlash in the US after calling First Amendment 'bonkers'"

    https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-faces-backlash-in-the-us-after-calling-first-amendment-bonkers-12309014
    I suspect that they'll tire of him quick enough.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,113
    edited May 2021
    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    justin124 said:

    Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.

    Was it? How could it have been avoided?
    Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
    No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
    Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
    An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-56416603
    Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.

    Gotit.
    I do not think that that Tory MP was charged. Just investigated. Open to correction.

    It's a tricky one. I think MPs lose their seat if sentenced to one year or more in prison, or is it perhaps guilty of a crime which *can* carry that sentence.

    On general criminal charges this does not see to be such an issue, which is strange.

    Fiona Onasanya did not resign her seat; she was ejected by a Recall petition. Claudia Webbe, who has a date in Court already scheduled for charges around an alleged course of harassment - ie the CPS think it is a strong case - is suspended from the whip but has not resigned as an MP.

    There have been a significant number of sexual harassment claims against MPs which have been anything from delusions / fictions to 'not standing up when investigated' to 'lead to guilty verdicts'. Milroy-Sloan, the complainant against Neil and Christine Hamilton for rape, even ended up in prison for perjury for 3 years.

    Where does the balance lie?

    I think suspension of the whip during investigation is reasonable, and defensible, then for parties to reconsider what they can do at charge and court stage.

    I do not know why Mike Hill stood down as an MP, though I would punt at the likelihood that the reporting of his trial would poison the news flow in the lead up to the Local Election being a factor.
This discussion has been closed.