Howdy, Stranger!

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

How the PM’s leader ratings are moving – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,291
    edited July 2021
    Sounds like Cummings is planning to launch a new political party to try and destroy the Conservatives? Wonder who he'd put up to lead it though?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,988
    Sheesh, either I fear Douglas Stuart is having a difficult second album or Waterstones should sack their blurb writer.

    https://twitter.com/waterstones/status/1417514637256388611?s=21

    ‘As they find themselves falling in love, they dream of escaping the grey city, and Mungo works especially hard to hide his true self from all those around him, especially from his elder brother Hamish, a local gang leader with a brutal reputation to uphold.

    But the threat of discovery is constant and the punishment unspeakable. When Mungo's mother sends him on a fishing trip to a loch in Western Scotland with two strange men whose drunken banter belies murky pasts, he will need to summon all his inner strength and courage to get back to a place of safety, a place where he and James might still have a future.’
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,237
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    Realistically, little boats may not matter- it may not even be the main unofficial route into the UK.

    But the size of the Conservative voting block depends on keeping people who think it does matter (and can be solved with minimal cost and pain) onside. Johnson's triumph was to add the Farageist score to his column. If they drift off, the government's score can start to look pretty sickly pretty rapidly.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    However while the tories can't answer it I doubt very much labour can either
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    2.3m

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/outofworkbenefits/timeseries/bcjd/unem
    Thanks. The data I was looking at apparently did not include new style JSA as part of UC
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761
    GIN1138 said:

    Sounds like Cummings is planning to launch a new political party to try and destroy the Conservatives? Wonder who he'd put up to lead it though?

    Farage? Then get rid of him the moment they are elected?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    edited July 2021
    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Push the boats out to sea
    Make Space

    ?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    It peaked around 100K about 20 years ago. It’s declined since then
    Up recently though by sea.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    That isn't just full employment. That's a labour shortage.
    758k vacancies (Mar to May).
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,291

    GIN1138 said:

    Sounds like Cummings is planning to launch a new political party to try and destroy the Conservatives? Wonder who he'd put up to lead it though?

    Farage? Then get rid of him the moment they are elected?
    LOL! I think Farage is too smart to fall for that. ;)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    2.3m

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/outofworkbenefits/timeseries/bcjd/unem
    Thanks. The data I was looking at apparently did not include new style JSA as part of UC
    Yeah the definition has changed a fair bit, even this isn't perfect as it includes a lot of UC recipients who would previously have been considered inactive, that change came in 2018 iirc and is why the claimant count was gradually rising despite unemployment falling.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,312
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politics
    Sorry, but are you fecking radge?

    Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
    Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.
    He won't gain other seats. People are prepared to do the right thing for genuine refugees. But they don't like those who take the piss, jump the queue etc. Such a policy would lose him seats everywhere.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865
    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    That isn't just full employment. That's a labour shortage.
    758k vacancies (Mar to May).
    It's not, it's 2.3m plus another 1.8m on furlough.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428

    Israel COVID update: Nearly 1,500 new cases, biggest one-day increase since March

    - New cases: 1,491
    - Average: 987 (+42)
    - In hospital: 129 (+2)
    - In ICU: 16 (-1)
    - New deaths: 2

    Population vaccinated:
    - 1st dose: 61.83% (+0.03)
    - 2nd dose: 56.53% (+0.13)

    That's not good
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    That isn't just full employment. That's a labour shortage.
    758k vacancies (Mar to May).
    It's not, it's 2.3m plus another 1.8m on furlough.
    I think its mad that 1.8m people are still on furlough. That must be costing a bomb still
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Push the boats out to sea
    Make Space

    ?
    The problem is for the last 30 years or so lib dems, labour and conservatives have agreed on certain stances such as the eu and not taken the electorate with them. When voting I havent had the opportunity to vote for a cede no more to the eu party for example, same with a lot of topics such as immigration.

    It comes down largely to politicians are not usually of the people but now a professional clique more and more and don't understand the life of the average person or relate to it and yes I include corbyn in that. Or at least if they do understand they give little intimation of it when they stand on manifesto's
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Push the boats out to sea
    Make Space

    ?
    Collect underpants.
    ?
    Profit.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    Leon said:

    Israel COVID update: Nearly 1,500 new cases, biggest one-day increase since March

    - New cases: 1,491
    - Average: 987 (+42)
    - In hospital: 129 (+2)
    - In ICU: 16 (-1)
    - New deaths: 2

    Population vaccinated:
    - 1st dose: 61.83% (+0.03)
    - 2nd dose: 56.53% (+0.13)

    That's not good
    Eh? 129 people in hospital out of a population of nearly 10m. It’s nowt.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428

    I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.

    But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?

    Yes. Completely self sabotaged. Really odd
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,080
    Leon said:

    I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.

    But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?

    Yes. Completely self sabotaged. Really odd
    But but but he is the smartest man in the universe, always playing 5d chess....
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865
    Cyclefree said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politics
    Sorry, but are you fecking radge?

    Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
    Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.
    He won't gain other seats. People are prepared to do the right thing for genuine refugees. But they don't like those who take the piss, jump the queue etc. Such a policy would lose him seats everywhere.
    Most people don't even mind economic migration as long as it's done legally. The issue we've got is that the arrivals at Dover are economic migrants calling themselves asylum seekers. It's no more or less and they enter into a system of asylum lawyers exploiting legal aid and HRA loopholes to make unending appeals against deportation.

    The whole thing is broken.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761
    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930
    edited July 2021
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    It would certainly stop people fleeing France.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428

    Leon said:

    Israel COVID update: Nearly 1,500 new cases, biggest one-day increase since March

    - New cases: 1,491
    - Average: 987 (+42)
    - In hospital: 129 (+2)
    - In ICU: 16 (-1)
    - New deaths: 2

    Population vaccinated:
    - 1st dose: 61.83% (+0.03)
    - 2nd dose: 56.53% (+0.13)

    That's not good
    Eh? 129 people in hospital out of a population of nearly 10m. It’s nowt.
    True. I might have over-reacted to the headline figure of cases

    Actual ICU admits are down, and so on

    Keep Calm, Carry On, Don't Drive Across Vineyards
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .

    We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.
    Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal credit
    That isn't just full employment. That's a labour shortage.
    758k vacancies (Mar to May).
    It's not, it's 2.3m plus another 1.8m on furlough.
    That figure includes ESA. (sickness), Incapacity benefits. Income support (usually single mothers with tiny babies) and pension credit.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/outofworkbenefits
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    moonshine said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    If India has truly suffered 5 million dead, with more to come - relentlessly, it comes - then it looks like Covid will probably kill 25-30 million humans in its first two or three years, maybe a lot more

    That makes it likely the third worst pandemic in history, in sheer numbers, behind only the Flu of 1918 and the Black Death

    We are, unfortunately, living through interesting times

    Yes but in 1918 they had just come off millions of dead in WW1 too and the Black Death was the same time as the Hundred Years War
    It is indeed reassuring to know that the Black Death was, in fact, statistically worse than what we are experiencing now
    Black Death led to such overwhelming mortality that even now, you can visit home counties villages and surmise why that field and that field next to the old church were never built on. In some cases the village lies a couple of miles from the ancient church, as the inhabitants scrambled to move away from the pits. And this is largely from the less severe 17th century plague, not the almost completely devastating plague of the 14th century. I often sit in my very old house and wonder what I’d hear if the walls could talk.
    The Great Plague of 1665-66 was shortly after the English civil war of course
    Or the War of the Three Kingdoms as the less Anglo-centric Britons call them.
    The war was primarily the King and then his son v the English Parliament and Cromwell.

    The Scots changed sides, first supporting Parliament against King Charles 1st, then Prince Charles v Cromwell.

    Ireland was primarily Catholics ultimately supportive of the King against Protestant settlers Cromwell ultimately invaded to support
    FPT - but HYUFD, you really are Anglocentric. It was the Scots who began, and who ended, the Wars of the Covenant. From 1639 to 1746. The Scots didn't change sides. The Stuarts did.
    Don’t upset the sensitive wee petal. He’ll be sending his tanks.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    edited July 2021

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    It’s all bollocks. I know countless people who have just told their boss that they’ve been “pinged” to have time off work.

    Everyone is on the take
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,667
    edited July 2021
    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    No, I am arguing to revive the triangular trade. Keep up.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    And who is going to pick up the slack? Labour? The Lib Dems?

    The Tory government's greatest failure in two years has been not closing the door on the Delta variant. But who is best placed to capitalise in Tory failure to curtail immigration? If the electorate think this has been mishandled, they aren't going to turn to any of the parties who have been advocating more immigration for the past twenty years.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,679

    Sheesh, either I fear Douglas Stuart is having a difficult second album or Waterstones should sack their blurb writer.

    https://twitter.com/waterstones/status/1417514637256388611?s=21

    ‘As they find themselves falling in love, they dream of escaping the grey city, and Mungo works especially hard to hide his true self from all those around him, especially from his elder brother Hamish, a local gang leader with a brutal reputation to uphold.

    But the threat of discovery is constant and the punishment unspeakable. When Mungo's mother sends him on a fishing trip to a loch in Western Scotland with two strange men whose drunken banter belies murky pasts, he will need to summon all his inner strength and courage to get back to a place of safety, a place where he and James might still have a future.’

    From what he was saying it sounds like his initial attempt at a 'first album' - perhaps we're talking unearthed dodgy demo tape on a C90 cassette.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,080

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    It’s all bollocks. I know countless people who have just told their boss that they’ve been “pinged” to have time off work.

    Everyone is on the take
    Given how widespread the plague is in your part of the country, surely all these need to do is go and stand outside for 20 mins....
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761

    Leon said:

    I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.

    But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?

    Yes. Completely self sabotaged. Really odd
    But but but he is the smartest man in the universe, always playing 5d chess....
    Honestly I have got to the point that I don't know whose judgment is worse: Cummings for working his nuts off to elect Johnson even though he thinks he is the greatest clown that ever lived or Johnson believing Cummings was the right person to be his chief of staff/aide.

    Maybe we should conclude that neither should have been within a million miles of power and authority.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    It's shutting down any discussion of the matter by immediately claiming racism.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    And who is going to pick up the slack? Labour? The Lib Dems?

    The Tory government's greatest failure in two years has been not closing the door on the Delta variant. But who is best placed to capitalise in Tory failure to curtail immigration? If the electorate think this has been mishandled, they aren't going to turn to any of the parties who have been advocating more immigration for the past twenty years.
    No but if 5% of the vote goes to far right parties like UKIP, that vote comes from the blue pile.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    It's shutting down any discussion of the matter by immediately claiming racism.
    To be fair he said xenophobic not racist.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Pagan2 said:

    Cookie said:

    Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.

    Cookie said:

    Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.

    Am I lovely?
    You are, my little Cornish treasure.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,612

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    It’s all bollocks. I know countless people who have just told their boss that they’ve been “pinged” to have time off work.

    Everyone is on the take
    Well that shows how innocent I am.

    I was certain people had the app in the hope of having a week off during the nice weather.

    But I never realised that some would claim they had to isolate when they didn't.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Pagan2 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    However while the tories can't answer it I doubt very much labour can either
    Indeed not. Can't disagree at all.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Leon said:

    Actually, a TV series or a high concept thriller based on a Hunger Games style sieving of migration could be a cracking drama, weaving together leftwing "care" with right wing pragmatics, plus lots of climate change drama

    Right wing pragmatics? Why can’t it be right wing loonballs barely able to sublimate their racism?
    How about a Hunger Games with Sean’s endless supply of unpleasant characters ripping his chakra to pieces.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,202
    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politics
    Have you considered how a proud maritime nation like France is unable to spot groups of people massed on the beaches at night fall by human traffickers, leaving the coastline unaccosted? Have you wondered what might happen to the business fortunes of those human traffickers if you induced demand in their services? Macron’s immorality disgusts me for his tacit approval of trafficking, plenty will be drowning as a result just so he doesn’t have to work harder to control his land borders or integrate immigrants.
    He does it because it is popular with French voters.
    He looks the other way. No doubt the coast guard and port authorities are directly on the take from the trafficking gangs, and quite possible regional politicians too. Would be great to see a UK organised crime investigation issue international arrest warrants for these people.
    I don't think that's correct.

    It is the policy of the French government to put all their migrant camps on the border of their Northern neighbours - whether Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg or (via the Channel) us.

    They then make things unpleasant (my understanding is that the conditions in the camps are dreadful) for asylum seekers, while leaving the gates open, and encouraging people to self deport.

    Most of the migrants go to Germany, Denmark, Sweden or the Netherlands - the UK perhaps ends up with 10% of them, because that Channel crossing is difficult and expensive. But it is absolutely French government policy to allow people they don't want to go.

    There's no need for harbour masters to work with trafficking gangs, as far as the the French government is concerned, if asylum seekers wish to leave, they're all in favour. Why would they stop them?

    An analogy for a second: if we had a camp in Northern Ireland and people were trekking across the border to the Republic, would we really police it to stop them leaving?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    It's shutting down any discussion of the matter by immediately claiming racism.
    To be fair he said xenophobic not racist.
    The intention is the same. If people are suggesting unworkable ideas, then they should be dismissed as such, rather than claiming that they must be xenophobes or racists.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    It’s all bollocks. I know countless people who have just told their boss that they’ve been “pinged” to have time off work.

    Everyone is on the take
    Given how widespread the plague is in your part of the country, surely all these need to do is go and stand outside for 20 mins....
    Is it not beyond the wit of man for a line manager to ask to see the ping on a screenshot?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    Cookie said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Cookie said:

    Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.

    Cookie said:

    Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.

    Am I lovely?
    You are, my little Cornish treasure.
    Oh dear that was a sobriety test I now know you need immediate medical attention including a stomach pump as you have obviously drunk enough for alcohol poisoning to be a probability
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    edited July 2021
    Leon said:

    I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.

    But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?

    Yes. Completely self sabotaged. Really odd
    Who exactly does he think "I failed to get rid of Boris" is going to appeal to ?

    Though it does partly explain his earlier admission that he wasn't up to the job.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Jesus fucking Christ. "Sift them via Hunger Games" was a jocular parody - AS I EXPLICITLY SAID IN THAT COMMENT - of the libertarian "let them come" ideology of Taz

    Really. I don't mind being temporarily banned for off colour jokes gone wrong, but when I say THIS IS SATIRE in the actual comment, but you decide to take it seriously then RobD is right, there is no point in arguing with you leftwing dimwits. You bring it down to racisssssst!!!! within a few minutes, rendering debate utterly, utterly pointless

    It's depressing
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politics
    Have you considered how a proud maritime nation like France is unable to spot groups of people massed on the beaches at night fall by human traffickers, leaving the coastline unaccosted? Have you wondered what might happen to the business fortunes of those human traffickers if you induced demand in their services? Macron’s immorality disgusts me for his tacit approval of trafficking, plenty will be drowning as a result just so he doesn’t have to work harder to control his land borders or integrate immigrants.
    He does it because it is popular with French voters.
    He looks the other way. No doubt the coast guard and port authorities are directly on the take from the trafficking gangs, and quite possible regional politicians too. Would be great to see a UK organised crime investigation issue international arrest warrants for these people.
    I don't think that's correct.

    It is the policy of the French government to put all their migrant camps on the border of their Northern neighbours - whether Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg or (via the Channel) us.

    They then make things unpleasant (my understanding is that the conditions in the camps are dreadful) for asylum seekers, while leaving the gates open, and encouraging people to self deport.

    Most of the migrants go to Germany, Denmark, Sweden or the Netherlands - the UK perhaps ends up with 10% of them, because that Channel crossing is difficult and expensive. But it is absolutely French government policy to allow people they don't want to go.

    There's no need for harbour masters to work with trafficking gangs, as far as the the French government is concerned, if asylum seekers wish to leave, they're all in favour. Why would they stop them?

    An analogy for a second: if we had a camp in Northern Ireland and people were trekking across the border to the Republic, would we really police it to stop them leaving?
    Perhaps a model to follow if scotland goes independent...they are always saying they want more immigration
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    It’s all bollocks. I know countless people who have just told their boss that they’ve been “pinged” to have time off work.

    Everyone is on the take
    Given how widespread the plague is in your part of the country, surely all these need to do is go and stand outside for 20 mins....
    Is it not beyond the wit of man for a line manager to ask to see the ping on a screenshot?
    Easy to forge
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,080
    edited July 2021

    Leon said:

    I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.

    But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?

    Yes. Completely self sabotaged. Really odd
    But but but he is the smartest man in the universe, always playing 5d chess....
    Honestly I have got to the point that I don't know whose judgment is worse: Cummings for working his nuts off to elect Johnson even though he thinks he is the greatest clown that ever lived or Johnson believing Cummings was the right person to be his chief of staff/aide.

    Maybe we should conclude that neither should have been within a million miles of power and authority.

    Remember also how big dom first said he didn't actually want to continue after the GE, then he was going to leave after a few months, something about needing serious operation....and even when caught out testing his eyesight, when the easy route out was to quickly resign and then done a Laura K interview about scared, made the wrong decision, just trying to protect his kids....but no he tried to lie his way out, to stay working for the most unsuitable man for PM ever to live.

    But obviously we aren't smart enough to work out all the 5d chess moves.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,098
    edited July 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Foxy said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    And who is going to pick up the slack? Labour? The Lib Dems?

    The Tory government's greatest failure in two years has been not closing the door on the Delta variant. But who is best placed to capitalise in Tory failure to curtail immigration? If the electorate think this has been mishandled, they aren't going to turn to any of the parties who have been advocating more immigration for the past twenty years.
    No but if 5% of the vote goes to far right parties like UKIP, that vote comes from the blue pile.
    Probably true. Albeit with some nuances over which we will not quibble.

    It's worth reflecting though that the last time the Conservatives started leaching votes to their right it didn't necessarily work out to the advantage of the parties of the left.

    Also, have I mentioned how drunk I am?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
    I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,312
    edited July 2021
    dixiedean said:

    Blimey it's testy on here tonight again.
    As for refugees, there isn't a simple answer, otherwise it would have been done .
    Not funding warlords, and selling weapons to all and sundry might be a start?



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    The problem is this:

    - It arises from the International Conventions Britain has signed - in the wake of WW2 when international travel was much harder - which place an obligation to grant asylum to anyone fulfilling the necessary requirements.
    - There is no numerical limit.
    - So this creates an incentive to get here - and if this can't be done legally, gangs will get involved.

    One answer would be to redefine who qualifies for asylum and/or also impose an annual numerical limit. Any such solution would require international agreement.

    Another answer would be for Britain to withdraw from the relevant international treaties.

    Not advocating these necessarily just pointing out how the problem arises.

    The issue is that an asylum seeker's claim is decided on his / her individual basis. Does he have a valid legal claim? But a government needs to look at the overall numbers and impact: 1 asylum seeker is fine; 1 million is not. Where between the two do you draw the line, who draws it and what do you do with those who are on the wrong side of it?

    Those who say - let them all come - are not being honest about the numbers or the likely impact. Those who say - stop them all or send them back - are equally not being honest about either the practical difficulties or that this will mean turning away genuine refugees.

    It's a mess.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    Don’t give them ideas.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    It does. But Australia is the arse end of nowhere, and has a long, long sea voyage to get to it.
    Starting from the arse end of nowhere.
    You can put folk on a remote island, if.
    Firstly, you have a remote island.
    Secondly, if the numbers are small enough that said remote island doesn't sink.
    The current system is unworkable, yes. Which is why it needs more honest debate.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    Cyclefree said:

    dixiedean said:

    Blimey it's testy on here tonight again.
    As for refugees, there isn't a simple answer, otherwise it would have been done .
    Not funding warlords, and selling weapons to all and sundry might be a start?



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    The problem is this:

    - It arises from the International Conventions Britain has signed - in the wake of WW2 when international travel was much harder - which place an obligation to grant asylum to anyone fulfilling the necessary requirements.
    - There is no numerical limit.
    - So this creates an incentive to get here - and if this can't be done legally, gangs will get involved.

    One answer would be to redefine who qualifies for asylum and/or also impose an annual numerical limit. Any such solution would require international agreement.

    Another answer would be for Britain to withdraw from the relevant international treaties.

    Not advocating these necessarily just pointing out how the problem arises.

    The issue is that an asylum seeker's claim is decided on his / her individual basis. Does he have a valid legal claim? But a government needs to look at the overall numbers and impact: 1 asylum seeker is fine; 1 million is not. Where between the two do you draw the line, who draws it and what do you do with those who are on the wrong side of it?

    Those who say - let them all come - are not being honest about the numbers or the likely impact. Those who say - stop them all or send them back - are equally not being honest about either the practical difficulties or that this will mean turning away genuine refugees.

    It's a mess.
    To be fair I havent seen anyone argue for let none as yet. Merely that we dont want the boat crossers and should take from country adjacent refugee camps.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,585
    The LDs are averaging 10% in the polls for the first time in ages.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,667
    Pagan2 said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
    Well, partly I think it's a problem more in the perception than reality. I'd largely continue with the current approach, which is what HMG will do because there are far bigger problems to address than this one. 100,000 migrants a year is sustainable imo.

    But if action must be seen to be done... Off the top of my head: maybe a route where people can work for full citizenship over a number (10+) of years, through taking employment, paying taxes, good conduct, etc.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,467
    Andy_JS said:

    The LDs are averaging 10% in the polls for the first time in ages.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Lib
    Dem
    Surge
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876
    dixiedean said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    It does. But Australia is the arse end of nowhere, and has a long, long sea voyage to get to it.
    Starting from the arse end of nowhere.
    You can put folk on a remote island, if.
    Firstly, you have a remote island.
    Secondly, if the numbers are small enough that said remote island doesn't sink.
    The current system is unworkable, yes. Which is why it needs more honest debate.
    dixiedean said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    It does. But Australia is the arse end of nowhere, and has a long, long sea voyage to get to it.
    Starting from the arse end of nowhere.
    You can put folk on a remote island, if.
    Firstly, you have a remote island.
    Secondly, if the numbers are small enough that said remote island doesn't sink.
    The current system is unworkable, yes. Which is why it needs more honest debate.
    So your solution is...did you miss answering that?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    COVID-19: Key areas of economy at 'breaking point' thanks to 'pingdemic', business leaders say
    Ports are experiencing significant levels of staff absence, creating a knock-on effect for supply chains. Meanwhile, high street giants like Marks and Spencer are also suffering with warnings that stores may have to close early.

    Sky news

    Ports and shipping is a huge area of concern. It’s not simply a short-term pandemic problem, like the staff absence you mention. There are immense, long-term structural problems caused by Brexit. The general public have not even begun to understand to serious consequences.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876

    Pagan2 said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
    Well, partly I think it's a problem more in the perception than reality. I'd largely continue with the current approach, which is what HMG will do because there are far bigger problems to address than this one. 100,000 migrants a year is sustainable imo.

    But if action must be seen to be done... Off the top of my head: maybe a route where people can work for full citizenship over a number (10+) of years, through taking employment, paying taxes, good conduct, etc.
    You do know these refugee groups have the lowest levels of employment? What if after 2 years they still don't have a job or 4 years or 7 years etc?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,667
    edited July 2021
    Leon said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Jesus fucking Christ. "Sift them via Hunger Games" was a jocular parody - AS I EXPLICITLY SAID IN THAT COMMENT - of the libertarian "let them come" ideology of Taz

    Really. I don't mind being temporarily banned for off colour jokes gone wrong, but when I say THIS IS SATIRE in the actual comment, but you decide to take it seriously then RobD is right, there is no point in arguing with you leftwing dimwits. You bring it down to racisssssst!!!! within a few minutes, rendering debate utterly, utterly pointless

    It's depressing
    No, honestly, I got your satire - it was impossible to miss. I was just pointing out to @RobD that we weren't really having a sensible debate.

    Fun, yes. Venting steam, yes. Debate with workable solutions, not so much.

    Now, I *really* am off to bed. Goodnight!
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    And who is going to pick up the slack? Labour? The Lib Dems?

    The Tory government's greatest failure in two years has been not closing the door on the Delta variant. But who is best placed to capitalise in Tory failure to curtail immigration? If the electorate think this has been mishandled, they aren't going to turn to any of the parties who have been advocating more immigration for the past twenty years.
    No but if 5% of the vote goes to far right parties like UKIP, that vote comes from the blue pile.
    Probably true. Albeit with some nuances over which we will not quibble.

    It's worth reflecting though that the last time the Conservatives started leaching votes to their right it didn't necessarily work out to the advantage of the parties of the left.

    Also, have I mentioned how drunk I am?
    You have

    I enjoyed the atmos of the match. It's been a summer of great sport, weirdly

    Have all England fans at any sport now adopted "Sweet Caroline" as the unofficial anthem? If so, that's good, it's an excellent upbeat song. We should keep it

    It's better than "Three Lions" or indeed "Swing Low", which are both quite mournful
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,080
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.
    I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.
    And who is going to pick up the slack? Labour? The Lib Dems?

    The Tory government's greatest failure in two years has been not closing the door on the Delta variant. But who is best placed to capitalise in Tory failure to curtail immigration? If the electorate think this has been mishandled, they aren't going to turn to any of the parties who have been advocating more immigration for the past twenty years.
    No but if 5% of the vote goes to far right parties like UKIP, that vote comes from the blue pile.
    Probably true. Albeit with some nuances over which we will not quibble.

    It's worth reflecting though that the last time the Conservatives started leaching votes to their right it didn't necessarily work out to the advantage of the parties of the left.

    Also, have I mentioned how drunk I am?
    You have

    I enjoyed the atmos of the match. It's been a summer of great sport, weirdly

    Have all England fans at any sport now adopted "Sweet Caroline" as the unofficial anthem? If so, that's good, it's an excellent upbeat song. We should keep it

    It's better than "Three Lions" or indeed "Swing Low", which are both quite mournful
    I think we have to credit Mr Eddie Hearn for it, they have been doing it in the boxing for a number of years to really get the crowd going between fights.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    I would intern all arrivals in camps in the UK, with legal and related services to assess their claims, and onsite courts. I would settle cases within months by investing in the legal system, and even with appeals it should be possible to decide all cases in six months.

    Successful cases would get Leave to Remain for a set time, perhaps five years, followed by a review. Their LTR could be withdrawn early for criminal activity or inciting violence etc. After 5 years they would need to prove that their home country remained unsafe before being renewed.

    Unsuccessful cases would remain in the internment camps until deported. Countries that refused to take back deported would face withdrawal of aid, or economic sanctions.

    I would balance the stick with the carrot of aid programmes to assist countries with large numbers of local refugees such as Lebanon, and an active policy to promote peace and reduce the civil conflict that drives refugees, again via the aid budget.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,667
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
    Well, partly I think it's a problem more in the perception than reality. I'd largely continue with the current approach, which is what HMG will do because there are far bigger problems to address than this one. 100,000 migrants a year is sustainable imo.

    But if action must be seen to be done... Off the top of my head: maybe a route where people can work for full citizenship over a number (10+) of years, through taking employment, paying taxes, good conduct, etc.
    You do know these refugee groups have the lowest levels of employment? What if after 2 years they still don't have a job or 4 years or 7 years etc?
    Sigh. You know how hard it is for a refugee to get a job because of the restrictions currently placed on them right? I'm saying, let them work, make them work if they want to stay.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Pagan2 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    It does. But Australia is the arse end of nowhere, and has a long, long sea voyage to get to it.
    Starting from the arse end of nowhere.
    You can put folk on a remote island, if.
    Firstly, you have a remote island.
    Secondly, if the numbers are small enough that said remote island doesn't sink.
    The current system is unworkable, yes. Which is why it needs more honest debate.
    dixiedean said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Tonight we are seeing a little of the possible vulnerability of Boris' Tory Party.
    There are certain problems not soluble by three word slogans, nor by expelling everyone who takes a different view, nor by simply declaring the issue solved.
    Some take nuance, balance, long-term planning and compromise. The electorate needs to be prepared for that with blunt explanation of why this must be, not simply telling them what they want to hear.

    Rip up the HRA
    Shoot the Immigrants
    Make Space
    I have a better plan. As no country seems willing to be our offshore centre, we need to seize control of some islands, thousands of miles from these shores. The asylum seekers could be shipped there by boat, perhaps from Bristol. In order to keep them busy while incarcerated we could get them to grow and harvest sugar and other commodities, which could be shipped here on the return voyage.

    We could name this the the Royal African Company, and erect statues of those who came up with the scheme.
    You are arguing we should reward those that break the law?
    The trouble with people like you foxy is you are quick to say we should not do that. Not so quick to actually come up with what do we do apart from the common lefty chant "Let them all in"
    I haven't argued to let them all in, and I challenge you to find a post in my 25 000 that advocated that. You won't find one.

    Do you agree the current situation is unworkable? If so how would you propose to solve it. Bearing in mind the only rl solution that seems to work is the australian one of placing boat people on a remote island
    It does. But Australia is the arse end of nowhere, and has a long, long sea voyage to get to it.
    Starting from the arse end of nowhere.
    You can put folk on a remote island, if.
    Firstly, you have a remote island.
    Secondly, if the numbers are small enough that said remote island doesn't sink.
    The current system is unworkable, yes. Which is why it needs more honest debate.
    So your solution is...did you miss answering that?
    I don't have a solution. I'm not a politician.
    It is complex and nuanced.
    Those claiming to have a solution are engaging in magical thinking.
    My very first comment was maybe we should stop funding warlords and selling weapons to all and sundry?
    It starts there.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
    Well, partly I think it's a problem more in the perception than reality. I'd largely continue with the current approach, which is what HMG will do because there are far bigger problems to address than this one. 100,000 migrants a year is sustainable imo.

    But if action must be seen to be done... Off the top of my head: maybe a route where people can work for full citizenship over a number (10+) of years, through taking employment, paying taxes, good conduct, etc.
    You do know these refugee groups have the lowest levels of employment? What if after 2 years they still don't have a job or 4 years or 7 years etc?
    Sigh. You know how hard it is for a refugee to get a job because of the restrictions currently placed on them right? I'm saying, let them work, make them work if they want to stay.
    I worked with radiologists, computer science professors and even someone off the Soviet space programme. All accepted as refugees. All directed by DWP to cleaning and care work.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,202
    Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politics
    Have you considered how a proud maritime nation like France is unable to spot groups of people massed on the beaches at night fall by human traffickers, leaving the coastline unaccosted? Have you wondered what might happen to the business fortunes of those human traffickers if you induced demand in their services? Macron’s immorality disgusts me for his tacit approval of trafficking, plenty will be drowning as a result just so he doesn’t have to work harder to control his land borders or integrate immigrants.
    He does it because it is popular with French voters.
    He looks the other way. No doubt the coast guard and port authorities are directly on the take from the trafficking gangs, and quite possible regional politicians too. Would be great to see a UK organised crime investigation issue international arrest warrants for these people.
    I don't think that's correct.

    It is the policy of the French government to put all their migrant camps on the border of their Northern neighbours - whether Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg or (via the Channel) us.

    They then make things unpleasant (my understanding is that the conditions in the camps are dreadful) for asylum seekers, while leaving the gates open, and encouraging people to self deport.

    Most of the migrants go to Germany, Denmark, Sweden or the Netherlands - the UK perhaps ends up with 10% of them, because that Channel crossing is difficult and expensive. But it is absolutely French government policy to allow people they don't want to go.

    There's no need for harbour masters to work with trafficking gangs, as far as the the French government is concerned, if asylum seekers wish to leave, they're all in favour. Why would they stop them?

    An analogy for a second: if we had a camp in Northern Ireland and people were trekking across the border to the Republic, would we really police it to stop them leaving?
    Perhaps a model to follow if scotland goes independent...they are always saying they want more immigration
    I must admit that, while the French behaviour pisses me off, all the French are doing is exactly what their voters want - i.e. making it easy for asylum seekers to leave the country.

    They are under no obligation to stop people trying to get in little boats and sail across the Channel. We may hate it, but they are acting perfectly rationally.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930

    Leon said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Jesus fucking Christ. "Sift them via Hunger Games" was a jocular parody - AS I EXPLICITLY SAID IN THAT COMMENT - of the libertarian "let them come" ideology of Taz

    Really. I don't mind being temporarily banned for off colour jokes gone wrong, but when I say THIS IS SATIRE in the actual comment, but you decide to take it seriously then RobD is right, there is no point in arguing with you leftwing dimwits. You bring it down to racisssssst!!!! within a few minutes, rendering debate utterly, utterly pointless

    It's depressing
    No, honestly, I got your satire - it was impossible to miss. I was just pointing out to @RobD that we weren't really having a sensible debate.

    Fun, yes. Venting steam, yes. Debate with workable solutions, not so much.

    Now, I *really* am off to bed. Goodnight!
    If you thought it wasn't sensible or the ideas not practical why didn't you just say so, instead of just claiming people were xenophobes for suggesting them in the first place?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    I was about to say Tory ineptitude in the Channel might threaten many of their seats in Kent

    Then I went and checked the seats in Kent. Jesus they are so Tory

    eg Sittingbourne and Sheppey, which to me "sounds" like it must be a marginal.
    I know the area, it is not rich at all. It was Labour as recently as 2005

    The Conservative majority in 2019 was.... 24,000

    How do Labour go about winning a place like Sittingbourne & Sheppey, as Blair managed to do? With a deficit of 24,000 votes?

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,876

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:



    RobD said:

    Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.

    Night all!

    Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.
    A debate?!

    This is not a debate, it's a few people trying to pretend that any of a number of totally unworkable 'solutions' could be deployed to solve a very complex problem.

    "Send them to St.Helena" or "sift them via Hunger Games" does not strike me as 'debate'.
    Come on then Ben give us a solution that isnt "let them all in"
    Well, partly I think it's a problem more in the perception than reality. I'd largely continue with the current approach, which is what HMG will do because there are far bigger problems to address than this one. 100,000 migrants a year is sustainable imo.

    But if action must be seen to be done... Off the top of my head: maybe a route where people can work for full citizenship over a number (10+) of years, through taking employment, paying taxes, good conduct, etc.
    You do know these refugee groups have the lowest levels of employment? What if after 2 years they still don't have a job or 4 years or 7 years etc?
    Sigh. You know how hard it is for a refugee to get a job because of the restrictions currently placed on them right? I'm saying, let them work, make them work if they want to stay.
    Which I agree which is why I argued they should be processed quicker
  • GnudGnud Posts: 298
    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Leon said:

    moonshine said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Asia is quite concerning now


    Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, all heading into big new waves. Indonesia reporting 1,200 dead today. Feck


    Meanwhile the Guardian reports that the real death toll in India is 4 MILLION - ie ten times the official death toll, which confirms the most appalling estimates, which were sometimes dismissed as scare-mongering

    If India alone has actually suffered 4 million dead so far, then what is the true global total? 15 million? 20 million? And how high might it go?

    Covid is already one of the worst pandemics in all human history

    The Telegraph says up to 5 million.
    Bloody hell

    I recall reading the claim, weeks back, that the Indian death toll was understated "ten to fifteen times" judging by the amount of cremations taking place compared with normality

    Something in me rebelled against this, and pigeon holed it as "alarmism"

    Now it seems it is true. Grim

    I wonder if we will ever know the true death toll in China. It beggars belief that 1.4 billion Indians can suffer 5 million dead, with more to come, and neighbouring China, with a similarly vast population, has just.... 4,600 dead?

    A thousand times fewer. Really? How?
    It’s the great mystery of our age how covid didn’t ravage every corner of China, given the millions of people that travelled from or passed through Wuhan the week before their Chinese New Year lockdown.

    No one serious seems to want to talk about it because it raises quite uncomfortable possibilities. Better to just ignore it.
    Tish tish. They're just REALLY good at stapling people inside houses. Don't worry yourself about this. Next question
    You see the thing is, this is what they did in Wuhan after the horse had long since bolted. But I haven’t heard of them doing it anywhere else. It’s hard to comprehend the sheer mass of humanity that moves in Chinese golden week unless you’ve seen it.

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1090007/china-confirmed-and-suspected-wuhan-coronavirus-cases-region/

    Now sure we can look at these stats and note the implausibility of them. But it is very interesting how we never saw visible signs of stress anywhere else outside of Wuhan itself. The Communist Party in inland China is not known for its competence.

    There is something decidedly odd about this story that does not hang together. My personal pet theory is that sarscov2 ravaged through most of east Asia in 2019 under the radar but perhaps with a less severe strain. And this had the effect of taking out the vulnerable before we even realised there was a pandemic, and allowed the build up of background immunity without anyone realising. Take a look at the 2019 mortality stats in Japan and Singapore, two countries with high rates of travel from China and reliable stats. You’ll see why I lean this way. Also note the evidence of infections in Europe as early as October 2019.

    Doubtless someone will have the evidence to prove why this is wrong. Fair enough if so. But what is the answer then?
    1. They still have some pretty severe restrictons across China, plus lots of travel quarantining
    2. They do still have local flare ups
    3. And they do sometimes go full lockdown at a City level
    4. Local governors in China know that they need to tell the world they are Covid free, whatever thereality is
    I don't think there were major flare ups outside Wuhan. When things get really out of control, there is no hiding it.

    They may struggle with Delta though. Other Asian countries have.
    When I said “millions” travelled from or through Wuhan the week before Chinese New Year, I wasn’t being hyperbolic of course. These were the communist party’s own figures before being taken offline shortly after publication by China Railways. Those trains were the perfect super spreading event, given by that point it’s clear there was aerosolised transmission. Peculiar…
    Your information about gatherings and people movements in China that one would indeed have thought would be super-spreading vectors, just as you say, has been instructive, but when you write that the Chinese CP isn't known for being "competent"...well surely it is!
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
    OK FUDHY, we get it, you don’t want to tell us where the figures came from. That’s fine. I’ll just ask you again tomorrow.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673
    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.
    Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.
    Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.
    I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.

    People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
    On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.

    It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
    The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.
    Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?
    Herein lies the issue.
    Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomely

    That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
    Even if they did.
    What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.
    Interesting how they would be something "dumped" on the people of Cape Verde but they are "adding to our economy" when they come here.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
    I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
    FUDHY’s problem is that his Tank & Gunboat Unionism is designed to keep the Union together for a couple of years… before spectacularly imploding. I’m sure smarter Unionists see the problem with that tactic.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673
    Leon said:

    I was about to say Tory ineptitude in the Channel might threaten many of their seats in Kent

    Then I went and checked the seats in Kent. Jesus they are so Tory

    eg Sittingbourne and Sheppey, which to me "sounds" like it must be a marginal.
    I know the area, it is not rich at all. It was Labour as recently as 2005

    The Conservative majority in 2019 was.... 24,000

    How do Labour go about winning a place like Sittingbourne & Sheppey, as Blair managed to do? With a deficit of 24,000 votes?

    Labour aren't going to be winning these seats again. As you can see from tonight's thread, they regard views that are fairly standard for swing voters in places like Sheppey as being obscene and bigoted. They have contempt for the electorate on social issues and they can't rely on legacy anti-Toryism any more.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,202
    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.
    Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.
    Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.
    I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.

    People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
    On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.

    It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
    The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.
    Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?
    Herein lies the issue.
    Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomely

    That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
    Even if they did.
    What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.
    Interesting how they would be something "dumped" on the people of Cape Verde but they are "adding to our economy" when they come here.
    To be fair, there is a bit of a difference of scale. Cape Verde has around 500,000 people, so if you added 250,000 asylum seekers they would be a third of the population.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
    I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
    FUDHY’s problem is that his Tank & Gunboat Unionism is designed to keep the Union together for a couple of years… before spectacularly imploding. I’m sure smarter Unionists see the problem with that tactic.
    Where are the tanks and gunboats involved?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Andy_JS said:

    The LDs are averaging 10% in the polls for the first time in ages.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    First indication of the blue wall’s foundations trembling?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.
    Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.
    Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.
    I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.

    People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
    On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.

    It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
    The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.
    Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?
    Herein lies the issue.
    Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomely

    That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
    Even if they did.
    What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.
    Interesting how they would be something "dumped" on the people of Cape Verde but they are "adding to our economy" when they come here.
    Did I say that? Must have missed that.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673
    rcs1000 said:

    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.
    Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.
    Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.
    I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.

    People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
    On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.

    It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
    The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.
    Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?
    Herein lies the issue.
    Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomely

    That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
    Even if they did.
    What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.
    Interesting how they would be something "dumped" on the people of Cape Verde but they are "adding to our economy" when they come here.
    To be fair, there is a bit of a difference of scale. Cape Verde has around 500,000 people, so if you added 250,000 asylum seekers they would be a third of the population.
    Do a reverse auction for Ethiopia, Nigeria and DRC then.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673
    Aslan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories

    TAKE BACK CONTROL?!

    If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked

    The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.
    Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.
    Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.
    I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.

    People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
    On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.

    It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
    The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.
    Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?
    Herein lies the issue.
    Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomely

    That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
    Even if they did.
    What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.
    Interesting how they would be something "dumped" on the people of Cape Verde but they are "adding to our economy" when they come here.
    To be fair, there is a bit of a difference of scale. Cape Verde has around 500,000 people, so if you added 250,000 asylum seekers they would be a third of the population.
    Do a reverse auction for Ethiopia, Nigeria and DRC then.
    Though surely if they are assets to the economy that would be even more of a boon for Cape Verde?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    Aslan said:

    Leon said:

    I was about to say Tory ineptitude in the Channel might threaten many of their seats in Kent

    Then I went and checked the seats in Kent. Jesus they are so Tory

    eg Sittingbourne and Sheppey, which to me "sounds" like it must be a marginal.
    I know the area, it is not rich at all. It was Labour as recently as 2005

    The Conservative majority in 2019 was.... 24,000

    How do Labour go about winning a place like Sittingbourne & Sheppey, as Blair managed to do? With a deficit of 24,000 votes?

    Labour aren't going to be winning these seats again. As you can see from tonight's thread, they regard views that are fairly standard for swing voters in places like Sheppey as being obscene and bigoted. They have contempt for the electorate on social issues and they can't rely on legacy anti-Toryism any more.
    It must be quite depressing, being a Labour strategist. It’s so hard to plot a route back to power. Especially with Scotland gone and no signs of it returning. That means they DO need to win seats like Sheppey. I reckon Starmer understands the necessity of this, but has no real sense of the method

    Gareth Southgate as leader?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Aslan said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Closer with Survation tonight

    Tories 39%
    Labour 35%
    LDs 11%

    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20

    Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.
    Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.

    So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.

    IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.

    The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
    Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:

    Where are you getting these figures from?

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.

    However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%

    https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
    Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.

    For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
    Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.

    Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:

    Scotnat 47.7%
    Scotcon 23%
    Scotlab 19.6%
    Scotlib 6%
    Scotgreen 2.1%
    Scotreform 0.4%
    Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.

    You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
    BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.

    Here is the url you so revealingly published:

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base

    Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.

    Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:

    SNP gains from SCon:
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland)
    Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)

    SNP gains from SLD:
    Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
    Edinburgh West
    North East Fife
    Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)

    As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.

    However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.

    As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.

    If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
    I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
    FUDHY’s problem is that his Tank & Gunboat Unionism is designed to keep the Union together for a couple of years… before spectacularly imploding. I’m sure smarter Unionists see the problem with that tactic.
    Where are the tanks and gunboats involved?
    FUDHY’s very fond of military intervention. He posts about it on a regular basis.
  • GnudGnud Posts: 298
    Sarah Vine has laid into Dominic Cummings this evening, calling him "brutal" and "disloyal".

    No comment yet from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

    :D
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,585
    Gnud said:

    Sarah Vine has laid into Dominic Cummings this evening, calling him "brutal" and "disloyal".

    No comment yet from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

    :D

    I don't know how he could say he was plotting to get rid of a prime minister who had won a general election just a few days earlier with a straight face.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Since COVID and the reduction in particulate matter in the air due to reduced industry and traffic, we have experienced preternaturally clear skies. I have marveled at it with each dog walk.

    Today was hazy. The reason - the wildfires 2650 miles away. You can even smell the smoke.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2021
    Does anyone know anything about Michael Gove's new partner. Cant help feeling that Gove's the next fissure in the increasingly dysfunctional Tory Party
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,689
    U.S. COVID update: Florida dumps 3 days of cases, number in hospital rising fast

    - New cases: 61,262
    - Average: 38,229 (+2,827)
    - In hospital: 27,143 (+1,603)
    - In ICU: 7,046 (+564)
    - New deaths: 315

    https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1417672678144626690
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    Gnud said:

    Sarah Vine has laid into Dominic Cummings this evening, calling him "brutal" and "disloyal".

    No comment yet from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

    :D

    Hilarious! One of those 'More in Sorrow than in anger' pieces. AKA a thinly disguised eulogy. She hates Boris more than Dom does!


    "SARAH VINE: Brutal, disloyal and obsessive... My old friend Dom seems hellbent on destroying his former boss – whatever the cost"

    Something of a classic of the genre!
This discussion has been closed.