Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s polling round up and why Corbyn doesn’t have Labour’

SystemSystem Posts: 12,597
edited May 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s polling round up and why Corbyn doesn’t have Labour’s best interests at heart

New @ORB_Int poll for The Sunday Telegraph Con 46 (+4) Lab 31 (nc) LD 9 (-1) UKIP 8 (nc) https://t.co/zkP1tzQcEc

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • eekeek Posts: 30,799
    edited May 2017
    First - and to mark the win TFBSZ
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Third :)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Dammit
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    RobD said:

    Dammit

    The morning thread should be published around 5am.

    Just saying.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    edited May 2017
    FTP....Re Corbyn calling for all drones to be removed.

    Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime....Imperialist war crimes that is.
    image

    I know Corbyn wants to ape Trump's we are the outsider type campaign, but it appears he wants to literally turn the UK into Trumpton...Blair had his plastic policeman policy, Abbott has her low cost replacement.

    image
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    Dammit

    The morning thread should be published around 5am.

    Just saying.
    You were supposed to private message me that! :o
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    edited May 2017
    Labour rules out tax rises for 95% of earners

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723

    I initially misread it as Labour rules out 95% tax for earners....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As a Leaver, the Turkish accession issue really stuck in my throat. That being said, the UK government made a big fuss of being in favour of UK accession. Given they knew it was basically impossible, the position of HMG was fundamentally disingenuous.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    It was the implied imminence that was an issue. Yes it was and presumably still is the stated aim, so it is not an outright falsehood, but it was overblown.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    kle4 said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    eek said:

    Did anyone post this earlier

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/860951471222923266

    It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..

    The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
    Maybe he thought about every candidate in those 50 years and liked them all, we don't know.
    We can make an educated assumption.
    Well, it is an awfully long time to never have wavered before even once, admittedly.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    We are truly in the darkest timeline.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    We are truly in the darkest timeline.
    I didn't realise it was Eurovision next weekend.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    We are truly in the darkest timeline.
    I didn't realise it was Eurovision next weekend.
    OK, who are you, and what have you done with the real TSE? :D
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    It is much like the negotiations for UK entry into the euro 20 years ago. There was no way we would join, but the illusion had to be maintained, so the talks continued.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,345
    edited May 2017
    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's vote holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?

    [edit: vote, not core]
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    Yeah, and the EEC was just a trade bloc etc etc...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited May 2017
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Labour rules out tax rises for 95% of earners

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723

    I initially misread it as Labour rules out 95% tax for earners....

    Insofar as I can make out, Labour now want to introduce a new income tax band for those earning more than £80,000. Although McDonnell doesn't say what the new rate will be set at. And it was only a couple of weeks ago that he was talking about more taxes for those earning £70,000.

    Basically, they're just making this up as they're going along. Oh, and some wag has pointed out that £80,000 would just so happen to raise the new threshold conveniently above the salary of an MP. Which is nice.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    Yeah, and the EEC was just a trade bloc etc etc...
    Which bit do you disagree with: that Turkey's membership would always be vetoed by Cyprus, or that the Turkish government has no interest in making the changes required for EU membership?
  • RobinWiggsRobinWiggs Posts: 621
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    That's a shame - but (SPOILER ALERT) we don't win this year. Again.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,265
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    We don't. While there are some swings towards Labour/away from Con (students, rich remainers (like in Oxon) and the metropolitan elite), the overall trend indicates Labour being below 25%.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    On topic. So how many open goals does that mean the Tories have? Will it push up the spread betting ranges?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    edited May 2017
    Black_Rook said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Labour rules out tax rises for 95% of earners

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723

    I initially misread it as Labour rules out 95% tax for earners....

    Insofar as I can make out, Labour now want to introduce a new income tax band for those earning more than £80,000. Although McDonnell doesn't say what the new rate will be set at. And it was only a couple of weeks ago that he was talking about more taxes for those earning £70,000.

    Basically, they're just making this up as they're going along. Oh, and some wag has pointed out that £80,000 would just so happen to raise the new threshold conveniently above the salary of an MP. Which is nice.
    I am sure they have a load of detailed economic modelling to back up why £80k and not £70k or £50k ;-)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    We are truly in the darkest timeline.
    I didn't realise it was Eurovision next weekend.
    OK, who are you, and what have you done with the real TSE? :D
    Blame Mrs May.

    This is the first Eurovision to be held during a general election campaign since 2001.

    Mrs May is as bad as Tony Blair.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,265
    Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will get pounded like a dockside hooker on flat-fee Fridays.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.

    Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.

    It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    For many years, the EU's policy on Turkish accession was a necessary fiction. It worked to everyone's short-term advantage, but it was never sustainable in the longer-term.

    I believe it has, in fact, been incredibly damaging to the EU and regional security, as it disarmed the Ataturk factions of their ammunition (that good relations with Europe were the future) and helped usher in an ever more nationalist and Islamist Erdogan.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    A timely reminder. Subtract the error from the last election from the current Labour shares we're getting from the polls and you get to around 27%, i.e. Michael Foot territory. That looks a lot more realistic, although unless they're successful in boosting turnout in the inner cities (a very tough ask) then one imagines that they are likely to do worse than that.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    We are truly in the darkest timeline.
    I didn't realise it was Eurovision next weekend.
    I always know when it's Eurovision weekend because Mrs B and I spent the first few hours of her labour watching it back in 2004. Pity us: we're about to be sharing the house with a teenager.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,345
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    I remember it. That's what's worrying me. We know the explanation for the 2015 polling failure: the Sturgis inquiry said unrepresentative samples (too many Labour geeks joining panels), the pollsters say differential turnout ("Lazy Labour"). Those are supposed to have been corrected. What's the excuse this time?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,798
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Labour rules out tax rises for 95% of earners

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723

    I initially misread it as Labour rules out 95% tax for earners....

    Easily dismissed first impression though. They'd never be able to pay for their programme if they limited themselves like that.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Black_Rook said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    A timely reminder. Subtract the error from the last election from the current Labour shares we're getting from the polls and you get to around 27%, i.e. Michael Foot territory. That looks a lot more realistic, although unless they're successful in boosting turnout in the inner cities (a very tough ask) then one imagines that they are likely to do worse than that.
    Also add to that the fact that Corbynistas skew younger and hence less likely to vote. Hence my estimate of 24.7% for Labour.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Tis a shame signing A50 does not irrevocably bar the UK from the Eurovision song contest.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    MTimT said:

    rcs1000 said:


    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.

    For many years, the EU's policy on Turkish accession was a necessary fiction. It worked to everyone's short-term advantage, but it was never sustainable in the longer-term.

    I believe it has, in fact, been incredibly damaging to the EU and regional security, as it disarmed the Ataturk factions of their ammunition (that good relations with Europe were the future) and helped usher in an ever more nationalist and Islamist Erdogan.
    I think that's absolutely right. What seemed like a little, self serving, lie has probably been enormously damaging to Turkey and the rest of the region.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    An odd thought just crossed my mind. Complacency is the Tories' principal worry at the moment.

    But should it be? Might they indeed receive a bumper turnout of their supporters because people feel good about supporting the winning side, even if their vote is in an ultra safe Conservative seat?
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited May 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:


    The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.

    And yet, one week after the Brexit vote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36672242
    "The EU has opened a new chapter in Turkey's EU membership talks..."
    Would you like to give me odds on Cyprus approving Turkish membership of the EU?
    One issue among many. It isn't a hindsight issue to think the Turkish joining claims were well overdone at the time, even for Leavers.
    As far as I'm concerned, the statement can't be a lie, because it was the stated aim of the EU to bring Turkey in and they are therefore estopped from denying it as a possibility.
    The stated policy of the EU was that - if Turkey conformed to all requirements and received the unanimous support of all the countries in the bloc - then it could join.

    What was disingenuous, was that most EU functionaries knew that even if the former part was possible, the latter was not. Of course, the Turkish government knew that EU membership was not on the cards, because it had no interest in conforming to the requirements.
    Yeah, and the EEC was just a trade bloc etc etc...
    Which bit do you disagree with: that Turkey's membership would always be vetoed by Cyprus, or that the Turkish government has no interest in making the changes required for EU membership?
    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/27/boris-johnson-turkey-recep-tayyip-erdogan-lewd-poem-mevlut-cavusoglu-kurds

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    I remember it. That's what's worrying me. We know the explanation for the 2015 polling failure: the Sturgis inquiry said unrepresentative samples (too many Labour geeks joining panels), the pollsters say differential turnout ("Lazy Labour"). Those are supposed to have been corrected. What's the excuse this time?
    My own view, which I know some pollsters say that they have corrected for, is they just haven't accounted properly for the ageing electorate.

    Get this wrong, and you;'re underestimating the shellacking Labour are about to experience.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/02/21/fifty-shades-of-grey-voters-corbyns-punishing-polling-with-older-voters/
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Black_Rook said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Labour rules out tax rises for 95% of earners

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723

    I initially misread it as Labour rules out 95% tax for earners....

    Insofar as I can make out, Labour now want to introduce a new income tax band for those earning more than £80,000. Although McDonnell doesn't say what the new rate will be set at. And it was only a couple of weeks ago that he was talking about more taxes for those earning £70,000.

    Basically, they're just making this up as they're going along. Oh, and some wag has pointed out that £80,000 would just so happen to raise the new threshold conveniently above the salary of an MP. Which is nice.
    I am sure they have a load of detailed economic modelling to back up why £80k and not £70k or £50k ;-)
    Diane did a detailed spreadsheet with lots of 'sensitivity' analysis. Trouble is, she was thinking about a different type of sensitivity.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I think a not insignificant number of LEAVE voters though if there was even a 10% chance of poor Muslims having free movement they didn't want to risk it. Even if it was not in the foreseeable future.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,844
    I saw some numbers floating around earlier that 51% of X thought Labour's failure was a result of the failed 'blairite' coup? What was X - the Labour membership?

    I am increasingly convinced that not only will Corbyn not go when he loses, he will not lose the leadership contest.

    I have been trying to decide for a while now whether or not to vote 'tactically' for Labour (would prefer to vote LD) - I can't stand Corbyn, but I do like the local MP, and I don't want to contribute to the coming Tory landslide. I am in a straight Lab/Tory marginal so any other vote isn't much use, but I just don't think I can bring myself to vote Labour and have my contribution to Corbyn's vote share be used as justification for staying on.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,265
    MTimT said:

    Black_Rook said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    A timely reminder. Subtract the error from the last election from the current Labour shares we're getting from the polls and you get to around 27%, i.e. Michael Foot territory. That looks a lot more realistic, although unless they're successful in boosting turnout in the inner cities (a very tough ask) then one imagines that they are likely to do worse than that.
    Also add to that the fact that Corbynistas skew younger and hence less likely to vote. Hence my estimate of 24.7% for Labour.
    I'd agree with a figure around that, with the caveat that the change in MP numbers will be significantly greater than UNS due to the vote movements.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,345
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    I remember it. That's what's worrying me. We know the explanation for the 2015 polling failure: the Sturgis inquiry said unrepresentative samples (too many Labour geeks joining panels), the pollsters say differential turnout ("Lazy Labour"). Those are supposed to have been corrected. What's the excuse this time?
    My own view, which I know some pollsters say that they have corrected for, is they just haven't accounted properly for the ageing electorate.

    Get this wrong, and you;'re underestimating the shellacking Labour are about to experience.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/02/21/fifty-shades-of-grey-voters-corbyns-punishing-polling-with-older-voters/
    I have two articles to write this month and we're already overstretched at work. I may actually be working 18/7 at this point. Damn. Shit. Damn, no time. Can somebody do a list of the polling changes done by each poster and cross-ref them to that pollster's Labour vote? YouGov have compensated for the over70's, but I don't know about the rest.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    MTimT said:

    An odd thought just crossed my mind. Complacency is the Tories' principal worry at the moment.

    But should it be? Might they indeed receive a bumper turnout of their supporters because people feel good about supporting the winning side, even if their vote is in an ultra safe Conservative seat?

    It could happen - I also think sometimes after a certain tipping point of support rising you get a number of others who just sort of get swept up by thinking if x is popular and winning its ok to vote for them I guess, magnifying what was already a rise. We'll see if the Tories are that lucky - I do think with them polling so high, if someone believes they are even close to correct it makes the fervent haters look ridiculous, like Paul Mason's 'Tories are racist' thing - nearly 50% of people are not racist and will even others will presume such claims are nonsense, solidifying those already thinking of moving across.

    They may not be that lucky. But it's possible.
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I suspect it suits Turkey to be a country permanently awaiting accession as it has the trade access it wants without the tedious oversight of Brussels.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    nunu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I think a not insignificant number of LEAVE voters though if there was even a 10% chance of poor Muslims having free movement they didn't want to risk it. Even if it was not in the foreseeable future.
    I'm sure that's true, which makes how hard the message was pushed unnecessary to boot.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    nunu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I think a not insignificant number of LEAVE voters though if there was even a 10% chance of poor Muslims having free movement they didn't want to risk it. Even if it was not in the foreseeable future.
    That's a perfectly good reason to vote Leave. But the chance was never really 10%. It was less than ten basis points. Here is a full list of EU countries that were genuinely keen on Turkey joining the EU: err...

    Ask yourself this simple question: would it have been politically popular in even one of the EU states to veto Turkish membership?>

    People pretended it was likely/desirable for Turkey to join the EU because: (a) they wanted Turkey's help in sorting out regional security issues, and (b) the US government had pressured European states for decades to help out NATO member Turkey. But (really) no-one wanted Turkey to join.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's core holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Remember when Labour were consistently polling 34/35% in the run up to the GE2015?

    Remember what they actually polled.
    I remember it. That's what's worrying me. We know the explanation for the 2015 polling failure: the Sturgis inquiry said unrepresentative samples (too many Labour geeks joining panels), the pollsters say differential turnout ("Lazy Labour"). Those are supposed to have been corrected. What's the excuse this time?
    That depends if the current scores are wrong or not, which we do not know.
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    I take it this has been mentioned:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/06/100bn-brexit-bill-legally-impossible-enforce-european-commissions/

    Basically the EU knows it can't legally enforce its demands for money. In many ways that's old news though them knowing it and us knowing they know is knew.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    BenedictWhite said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I suspect it suits Turkey to be a country permanently awaiting accession as it has the trade access it wants without the tedious oversight of Brussels.
    I think that's absolutely right.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    kle4 said:

    MTimT said:

    An odd thought just crossed my mind. Complacency is the Tories' principal worry at the moment.

    But should it be? Might they indeed receive a bumper turnout of their supporters because people feel good about supporting the winning side, even if their vote is in an ultra safe Conservative seat?

    It could happen - I also think sometimes after a certain tipping point of support rising you get a number of others who just sort of get swept up by thinking if x is popular and winning its ok to vote for them I guess, magnifying what was already a rise. We'll see if the Tories are that lucky - I do think with them polling so high, if someone believes they are even close to correct it makes the fervent haters look ridiculous, like Paul Mason's 'Tories are racist' thing - nearly 50% of people are not racist and will even others will presume such claims are nonsense, solidifying those already thinking of moving across.

    They may not be that lucky. But it's possible.
    I'm just hoping for a repeat of the 31 election. :D
  • TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,683
    RobinWiggs said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    That's a shame - but (SPOILER ALERT) we don't win this year. Again.
    Of course that's all due to the decline of the English language. I've actually checked; English language winners 31, French language winners 14 (last one in 1988).
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Keep believing that. Yeah I suppose about as likely as a Shinner meeting the Queen.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's vote holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Yeah, I don't get it either. Either the score is wrong (and if it is, with all those factors it feels like it should be considerably wrong), or even scarier, Corbyn is right. I find that very suspect, frankly. I recognise he is the first leader I have actually truly disliked to a considerable degree (although he seems a pleasant chap to get along with, so long as you stick to certain topics), and so like most people have certain biases to anything that resembles good news for the man, but I just cannot buy it. The 30% scores have finally breached my natural inclination to talk up Labour's chances.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Sounds about right. Childhood memories (1965-72) of living around the corner from George Grivas' house in Limassol where mysterious meetings were occasionally held under the close surveillance of Cypriot intelligence.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    MTimT said:

    An odd thought just crossed my mind. Complacency is the Tories' principal worry at the moment.

    But should it be? Might they indeed receive a bumper turnout of their supporters because people feel good about supporting the winning side, even if their vote is in an ultra safe Conservative seat?

    It could happen - I also think sometimes after a certain tipping point of support rising you get a number of others who just sort of get swept up by thinking if x is popular and winning its ok to vote for them I guess, magnifying what was already a rise. We'll see if the Tories are that lucky - I do think with them polling so high, if someone believes they are even close to correct it makes the fervent haters look ridiculous, like Paul Mason's 'Tories are racist' thing - nearly 50% of people are not racist and will even others will presume such claims are nonsense, solidifying those already thinking of moving across.

    They may not be that lucky. But it's possible.
    I'm just hoping for a repeat of the 31 election. :D
    3 different parties with Liberal in their name? A little overkill 1930s.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/860989389232623617
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    rcs1000 said:

    BenedictWhite said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I suspect it suits Turkey to be a country permanently awaiting accession as it has the trade access it wants without the tedious oversight of Brussels.
    I think that's absolutely right.
    Let's do that. Perpetually pretent we want to re-join, but never actually re-join.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    TudorRose said:

    RobinWiggs said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sad news, I won't be doing a Eurovision thread this year.

    I've really not been able to follow the Eurovision news this year (Thank you Mrs May)

    That's a shame - but (SPOILER ALERT) we don't win this year. Again.
    Of course that's all due to the decline of the English language. I've actually checked; English language winners 31, French language winners 14 (last one in 1988).
    Can't be bothered to do the research, but it would be fascinating to see the count of highly cited scientific papers by English vs all other languages ...

    Unfair, I know, but just saying.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    nunu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    BenedictWhite said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I suspect it suits Turkey to be a country permanently awaiting accession as it has the trade access it wants without the tedious oversight of Brussels.
    I think that's absolutely right.
    Let's do that. Perpetually pretent we want to re-join, but never actually re-join.
    Don't you mean perpetually pretend we want to leave but never actually finish transitioning?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Keep believing that. Yeah I suppose about as likely as a Shinner meeting the Queen.
    How about we do a deal. You pay me £100 every January first, and on the day that Turkey joins the EU, I pay you £10,000.

    If you're serious in your beliefs, you'll bite my hand off.
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    nunu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    BenedictWhite said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    But everyone (including Cameron) pretended like it was going to happen at some point. How are we supposed to read minds. Indeed Croatia was allowed into the E.U early as a compromise so that Austria wouldn't block Turkey's accession, and Cameron was "Turkey's biggest cheerleader". No wonder we believd it at the time.

    As I said, Cameron was disingenuous and paid the price. But anyone with half a brain could see that: (a) the governments of Greece and Cyprus would never approve Turkish membership of the EU, and (b) the Turkish government wasn't going to make the required changes.
    I suspect it suits Turkey to be a country permanently awaiting accession as it has the trade access it wants without the tedious oversight of Brussels.
    I think that's absolutely right.
    Let's do that. Perpetually pretent we want to re-join, but never actually re-join.
    I think they might smell a rat, though in the case of Turkey I suspect everyone knows about the rat but just doesn't mention it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    Black_Rook said:

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/860989389232623617

    UKIP up? Are we reaching the final stubborn core of them, those who are unwilling or unable to join with the other parties now the mission is complete? That 3% predicted earlier looks more reasonable than thought, considering how many of that 6% may not get a chance to vote UKIP, especially as they are likely concentrated in seats with pro-Brexit MPs UKIP will have said they are not standing against.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,190
    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    Even Michael Foot got 27/28%, Labour has a core vote of about 25%+ and the Tories about 30%+ even Corbyn cannot take them.much below that despite his best efforts
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Black_Rook said:

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/860989389232623617

    Lib Dems - http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4jbuk8Bes1rwkg8yo1_500.gif

    :D
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    RobD said:

    Black_Rook said:

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/860989389232623617

    Lib Dems - http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4jbuk8Bes1rwkg8yo1_500.gif

    :D
    That's cruel, to be mocked by Ed Squared
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    Even Michael Foot got 27/28%, Labour has a core vote of about 25%+ and the Tories about 30%+ even Corbyn cannot take them.much below that despite his best efforts
    He is giving it a bloody good old British try...
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    "Trumpez"

    https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/860967117558099968
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited May 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Keep believing that. Yeah I suppose about as likely as a Shinner meeting the Queen.
    How about we do a deal. You pay me £100 every January first, and on the day that Turkey joins the EU, I pay you £10,000.

    If you're serious in your beliefs, you'll bite my hand off.
    As I said things have changed since the referendum and clearly it isn't going to happen anytime soon.

    I'm pointing out your belief that support for Turkish entry wasn't genuine based on the idea that Cypriots could not be pressurized into signing a treaty is a bit farfetched.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    nunu said:

    "Trumpez"

    https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/860967117558099968

    Not quite mistake (trompez), just a pun worthy of TSE
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    I'm not. A lot of people seem in favour in theory for alliances, or tactical voting, but on such a scale, with genuine increases in the Tory vote seemingly occurring (without losing many of their remainers, the most likely to support a soft brexit)? I cannot see it.

    The EU leaks and subsequent rowing may have harmed this too, since both sides look like they are playing extreme hardball, not merely that May is not going for soft brexit, therefore the prospect of preventing hard brexit looks less certain even if tactical voting worked.

    Night all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,873
    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    Baked in already imo
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Keep believing that. Yeah I suppose about as likely as a Shinner meeting the Queen.
    How about we do a deal. You pay me £100 every January first, and on the day that Turkey joins the EU, I pay you £10,000.

    If you're serious in your beliefs, you'll bite my hand off.
    As I said things have changed since the referendum and clearly it isn't going to happen anytime soon.

    I'm pointing out your belief that support for Turkish entry wasn't genuine based on the idea that Cypriots could not be pressurized into signing a treaty is a bit farfetched.
    All you are proving is that you don't know anything about Cyprus.
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    No. Looks cobblers to me besides which above a certain level of support it will not make any difference anyway.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    I never take any story seriously that has a cop out like "upto".
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    The Progressive Alliance will be crushed by the Evil Empire.

    There was a demonstration of this on Thursday, with May as Moff Tarkin and UKIP as Alderaan. :p
  • spire2spire2 Posts: 183
    Any discussion ive missed re shy corbynites not pucked up in polling?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    rcs1000 said:

    brokenwheel said:

    Both. Neither were impossible.

    If what you were saying is true why was one of Boris' very first foreign engagements as FM a hurriedly prepared trip to meet Erdogan and re-affirm support for their EU membership ambitions? Does that not indicate that the UK's support for Turkish entry was far more than just a fig leaf?

    I admit that events since the referendum have made accession in the near future unlikely, but to pretend that wasn't the end-game is completely disingenuous.

    I'm sorry, you don't know anything about Cypriot politics. Any Cypriot politician that signed an accession treaty (and it requires a treaty) would be a dead man. And I don't just mean "would destroy his political chances", I mean he would would be killed.
    Today that is true but tomorrow? You say that but let's not forget the EU has many former enemies amongst its members. The UK and France, France and Germany and so on. That is part of the purpose of the EU.

    Let's imagine that instead of Erdogan going full on Islamist dictator that Turkey made rapid progress on the Acquis Communitaire. Now imagine that Turkey as a final offer said they would pull completely out of Turkish Cyprus and have a reunited Cyprus in exchange for accession. You seriously think Cyprus would say No? We don't want to reunite our island and let you in?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Stubborn old Labour. High 20s, early 30s. It'll be fine right, won't it, Mr Corbyn?

    This is beginning to worry me. Labour got 31% in 2015. Since then we've had Brexit, Corbyn and the May Ascendancy. How the actual fuck is Labour's vote holding up? It's not Wales or South West England or the West Midands, we'd've seen it in the locals. It's not Scotland nor NI nor SE England. Unless London is undergoing some sort of Labour bodysnatcher thing, how the heck do we get Labour 31?
    Yeah, I don't get it either. Either the score is wrong (and if it is, with all those factors it feels like it should be considerably wrong), or even scarier, Corbyn is right. I find that very suspect, frankly. I recognise he is the first leader I have actually truly disliked to a considerable degree (although he seems a pleasant chap to get along with, so long as you stick to certain topics), and so like most people have certain biases to anything that resembles good news for the man, but I just cannot buy it. The 30% scores have finally breached my natural inclination to talk up Labour's chances.
    Labour are likely to be picking up support from 2015 Green voters - some UKIP voters - and from a few 2015 non-voters. I have come across several people who have not voted for 20 years who appear determined to turn out for Corbyn next month.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2017
    Labour are playing the long game. Lose this election, maybe the next one too, and eventually the British public will come to their senses and elect Corbyn as PM. Makes sense. But keeping Corbyn in place is paramount, regardless of interim setbacks.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,830
    BenedictWhite said:

    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    No. Looks cobblers to me besides which above a certain level of support it will not make any difference anyway.
    Outside of about five seats in the richest parts of London, there will be no meaningful anti Brexit tactical voting.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    spire2 said:

    Any discussion ive missed re shy corbynites not pucked up in polling?

    I keep wondering about that possibility, replacing any previous shy tory factor. Labour certainly need it to be the case.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,011
    spire2 said:

    Any discussion ive missed re shy corbynites not pucked up in polling?

    I discussed it here

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/23/why-a-1997-style-landslide-or-even-a-1983-style-landslide-might-not-happen-but-maybe-a-2005-style-majority-of-66-will/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424

    Go on Jezza, you get out there....lets see some really big rallies.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    edited May 2017
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424

    Go on Jezza, you get out there....lets see some really big rallies.
    Couldn't resist... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROKXlvYMKQc :D
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Paristonda said:

    I saw some numbers floating around earlier that 51% of X thought Labour's failure was a result of the failed 'blairite' coup? What was X - the Labour membership?

    I am increasingly convinced that not only will Corbyn not go when he loses, he will not lose the leadership contest.

    I have been trying to decide for a while now whether or not to vote 'tactically' for Labour (would prefer to vote LD) - I can't stand Corbyn, but I do like the local MP, and I don't want to contribute to the coming Tory landslide. I am in a straight Lab/Tory marginal so any other vote isn't much use, but I just don't think I can bring myself to vote Labour and have my contribution to Corbyn's vote share be used as justification for staying on.

    If you like your local MP, and he is opposed to Corbynism, then keeping him in the PLP is more important.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,162
    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424

    Go on Jezza, you get out there....lets see some really big rallies.
    Couldn't resist... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROKXlvYMKQc :D
    All those National Flags flying above Kinnock....Mrs Bucket would have a heart attack.
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424

    To be fair, they have earned it, what with all those 24 hours to save the NHS skits and the Tories will literally kill, then eat your babies.
  • ManchesterKurtManchesterKurt Posts: 931
    edited May 2017
    Burnham really did get a landslide across Manc...

    1st preferences imagehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_FdkaqXcAMuM5B.jpg
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,230
    BenedictWhite said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Labour are so fucked

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/860997069397479424

    To be fair, they have earned it, what with all those 24 hours to save the NHS skits and the Tories will literally kill, then eat your babies.
    With apologies to BigG, who is not a fan of this type of humour - why wait to kill before you eat?
  • BenedictWhiteBenedictWhite Posts: 1,944
    rcs1000 said:

    BenedictWhite said:

    MTimT said:

    Are we giving any credence to this story, PBers?

    Up to one third of voters thinking of voting tactically to stop Tory Hard Brexit.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-tactical-voting-progressive-alliance-hard-brexit-block-tories-a7721551.html

    No. Looks cobblers to me besides which above a certain level of support it will not make any difference anyway.
    Outside of about five seats in the richest parts of London, there will be no meaningful anti Brexit tactical voting.
    Quite, and possibly not even there.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025