politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE2017 sees a changed political geography with 3 new regions
Options
Comments
-
That wasn't my reason for going, though it was university-related: my then girlfriend was studying there.YBarddCwsc said:
Many people who attended Yale University make the trip to Wrexham.david_herdson said:Thanks for the thread leader and the observations within it.
I have indeed visited both Ellesmere Port and Wrexham!
There is a book for Yale alumni to sign as they pay their respects to Elihu Yale, buried improbably enough in St Giles, Wrexham,
I wish I'd known: I might have had a look. I can't say I saw a great deal else that would trouble the tourist guides (though I can't say I was looking particularly hard either).0 -
Villefranche is a key LD targetRoger said:OT. I just got my first election literature. A large photo of Jeremy Corbyn looking like Streinikov in Dr Zhivago. It was from the Lib Dems
0 -
Good to see the LDs are for enforcing the Treaty of Troyes.MikeSmithson said:
Villefranche is a key LD targetRoger said:OT. I just got my first election literature. A large photo of Jeremy Corbyn looking like Streinikov in Dr Zhivago. It was from the Lib Dems
0 -
-
1974 changed everythingjustin124 said:
UKIP are still fighting more seats than did the Liberals pre-1974.SirNorfolkPassmore said:UKIP's standing candidates in relatively few seats (looks to be about half) is a major error on their part.
The Greens have already been kicking off about broadcast coverage, and this is grist to their mill.
Broadcasters have to take into account evidence of past and current support in complying with impartiality obligations. There will almost certainly be substantially more Green than UKIP candidates and, combined with the local elections, it detracts from UKIP's case to get more coverage, Question Time slots and so on than the Greens. And, for the future, it simply limits their national vote share. This will adversely affect coverage in future elections. They ought to have found paper candidates and stood in 500+ seats. This is what a death spiral looks like.0 -
Its certainly warming up in America...and I am not talking about the spring -> summer weather.williamglenn said:0 -
Michael Foot backed the action in the Falklands. Fat lot of good it did him, but he did.Razedabode said:Judging by that speech, I think we can basically say corbyn wouldn't have backed action against the falklands (i think east timor and the med migrant crisis were interventions he agreed with)
0 -
The trouble is, when it is pointed out that several other situations don't receive the same attention (killing mice in traps, shooting, killing rats) accusations fly around of "whataboutery". But you are right, if ever there was an activity ripe for examination.Ishmael_Z said:
The Banwen Miners Hunt are called that for a reason. And I agree - barring the Beaufort on a Saturday most hunts are well under 50% toff, and that includes the mounted field. I hunt with my builder, my tree surgeon and the lady behind the till at the local petrol station.TOPPING said:
A huge misapprehension about hunting is that it is toffs in red coats. 90% of a typical field in a typical hunt will be normal people.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
But you are getting dangerously close to pointing out the facts there with that observation.
And without wishing to throw anyone else to the wolves, do these people not know about organized pheasant shooting? Harmless birds bred solely to be shot in numbers of 100s per day (more than most hunts killed foxes per season when they killed foxes), the remains sold to go in tinned cat food if they get utilised at all, and the cost of a day beyond anyone without a hedge fund.0 -
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.Pulpstar said:
Bit of light monstering of Corbyn on the front of the Daily Mail today.Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>
The car is into first gear anyway.0 -
Well that Trident wheeze in the manifesto didn't last long...he just can't get himself to bend like John the Marxist.
Jeremy Corbyn could abandon a manifesto pledge to replace the UK’s Trident nuclear submarines within weeks of being elected as Prime Minister.
Labour is committing to the renewal of the nuclear deterrent in the party’s General Election manifesto.
But Mr Corbyn today refused to commit to a like-for-like replacement of the UK’s existing complement of four submarines needed to sustain a continuous at sea deterrent as he said the system would be renewed.0 -
Hm, and just how many years ago was that?justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.Pulpstar said:
Bit of light monstering of Corbyn on the front of the Daily Mail today.Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>
The car is into first gear anyway.0 -
Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv
0 -
Save me from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In their "Mirrlees Review" of the British tax system, billed as deep, far-reaching, and radical, these "independent" guys strangely didn't manage to say anything at all "radical" about either tax havens or inheritance tax.Jason said:As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised.
0 -
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote. Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn.
I didn't say that. But he hasn't been making things any worse during the campaign to date, and in terms of firming up the Labour vote that could be the difference in plenty of seats. Appearing more reasonable may not win him many extra votes, because he is not trusted or liked, but there is a battle over whether Labour voters will turnout and how many might dislike him enough to vote for someone else. If the Tories give him a free hand those people might give him a chance, and that could be the difference between a bad night and a disastrous night.
I'm sure the Tories have loads lined up against him, and I'm not voting for any Labour candidate at any level while Corbyn is leader, but I think they're overestimating how offputting he will be in general.
'...But he hasn't been making things any worse during the campaign to date,'
I think we both know that is wishful thinking, especially if the pollsters are overestimating Labour again - and I believe they are. 30% is above what Brown got and only a fraction below Miliband's performance. It does not seem credible to me that Corbyn is doing that well.
'...but I think they're overestimating how offputting he will be in general.'
Here's where I completely disagree. I think they are underestimating.
I stick by what I said - 1992 all over again, without Labour's massively disproportionate electoral advantage.
0 -
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
But it is far from the CND position adopted by Labour in the 1983 & 1987 elections. Perhaps more akin to Labour's stance on Polaris in 1964.FrancisUrquhart said:Well that Trident wheeze in the manifesto didn't last long...he just can't get himself to bend like John the Marxist.
Jeremy Corbyn could abandon a manifesto pledge to replace the UK’s Trident nuclear submarines within weeks of being elected as Prime Minister.
Labour is committing to the renewal of the nuclear deterrent in the party’s General Election manifesto.
But Mr Corbyn today refused to commit to a like-for-like replacement of the UK’s existing complement of four submarines needed to sustain a continuous at sea deterrent as he said the system would be renewed.0 -
Adolf wasn't anti-semitic though :innocent face:justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.Pulpstar said:
Bit of light monstering of Corbyn on the front of the Daily Mail today.Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>
The car is into first gear anyway.0 -
The problem for Corbyn on defence is this ridiculous assertion of ethical foreign policy. Who the hell is promoting unethical fp? It's just a matter of perspective. He would never use nukes but he's going you buy them? He wouldn't commit troops but he's maintaining the 2% defence spend? He thinks Kosovo was a mistake..... it's just not joined up, it's batshit crazy.0
-
Remember no drones either...dyedwoolie said:The problem for Corbyn on defence is this ridiculous assertion of ethical foreign policy. Who the hell is promoting unethical fp? It's just a matter of perspective. He would never use nukes but he's going you buy them? He wouldn't commit troops but he's maintaining the 2% defence spend? He thinks Kosovo was a mistake..... it's just not joined up, it's batshit crazy.
All I can guess is he is going to spend it on lots of plant pots for the offices and loads of paper pushers with little to nothing to do.0 -
Because they are paid for government agents. Obvs.Cyan said:
Save me from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In their "Mirrlees Review" of the British tax system, billed as deep, far-reaching, and radical, these "independent" guys strangely didn't manage to say anything at all "radical" about either tax havens or inheritance tax.Jason said:As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised.
0 -
Speak for yourself! In Torbay, up to 3 days ago we had already got 70,000 leaflets out since the election was called....Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>0 -
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
How do you expect him to be doing worse? He has spectacularly bad ratings which are not really recovering. That he lags around ten points behind his party 20/30 in leader ratings, and TM about performs Tory ratings should say it allkle4 said:
I didn't say that. But he hasn't been making things any worse during the campaign to date, and in terms of firming up the Labour vote that could be the difference in plenty of seats. Appearing more reasonable may not win him many extra votes, because he is not trusted or liked, but there is a battle over whether Labour voters will turnout and how many might dislike him enough to vote for someone else. If the Tories give him a free hand those people might give him a chance, and that could be the difference between a bad night and a disastrous night.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I'm sure the Tories have loads lined up against him, and I'm not voting for any Labour candidate at any level while Corbyn is leader, but I think they're overestimating how offputting he will be in general.0 -
Yes!!Dura_Ace said:
Star wipe to a reconstruction of Boris on the phone trying to get that bloke beaten up.Cyan said:
I disagree. I think it's about pumping up the richer and nastier Tory activists, by playing the "don't let the bearded commie oiks take away our fun" and "let's kill sentimentalism and the Labour party forever" card. The kind of cap doffer working class person who might be persuaded to vote Tory by Theresa May's support for foxhunting probably wouldn't dream of voting Labour.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Or it could possibly be a cockup, as SirNorfolkPassmore says.
I could make a killer Labour broadcast:
FILM OF THERESA MAY SAYING "You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."
CUT TO A REDCOAT CARRYING THE TWITCHING BODY OF A SAVAGED FOX
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
CUT TO A CHILD AT A FOXHUNT WITH BLOOD SMEARED ON ITS FACE
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJWkS2A9T00 -
You mean Britain's most popular newspaper. Good luck with that meme Ken.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.Pulpstar said:
Bit of light monstering of Corbyn on the front of the Daily Mail today.Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>
The car is into first gear anyway.0 -
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
Its nonsense in the context of it won't do anything except excite the cult. It is ancient history, shown by the fact that people continue to log onto the Mail website in droves and many are not extreme right wingers. It is well known that many readers are women and centre / soft left of centre looking for some gossip.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
They have a business model the can only Guardian dream of.
Whenever the Daily Mail do an attack piece it is the first thing the tw@tteri bring up, but it doesn't work. It is better to expose flaws in the facts of their hit piece. The problem for Corbyn, unlike the Mail going for Ed through his father (which I thought was totally misguided), Corbyn is a walking / talking terrorist sympathizer.
As I say the Guardian have also in the past supported some real extremists, but that has no relation to their modern day positioning.0 -
Yes - remind a vast swathe of voters who Labour need to vote for them that the paper they read once backed Fascists. These Labour folk are genius.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
0 -
Because she doesn't need to offer morekle4 said:
If she is 'after them' why is she only promising a free vote rather than promising to repeal?Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations0 -
-
For some, any paper that does not fawn at Corbyn’s feet must be branded with an –ism.kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
It doesn't. It's like lambasting Clement Attlee's record on human rights for not overturning the law against homosexuality.kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
Apologies, I live in a very safe tory constituency and haven't seen any leaflets or posters of any colour yetMarqueeMark said:
Speak for yourself! In Torbay, up to 3 days ago we had already got 70,000 leaflets out since the election was called....Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>0 -
I could make a killer Tory broadcastCyan said:
I disagree. I think it's about pumping up the richer and nastier Tory activists, by playing the "don't let the bearded commie oiks take away our fun" and "let's kill sentimentalism and the Labour party forever" card. The kind of cap doffer working class person who might be persuaded to vote Tory by Theresa May's support for foxhunting probably wouldn't dream of voting Labour.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Or it could possibly be a cockup, as SirNorfolkPassmore says.
I could make a killer Labour broadcast:
FILM OF THERESA MAY SAYING "You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."
CUT TO A REDCOAT CARRYING THE TWITCHING BODY OF A SAVAGED FOX
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
CUT TO A CHILD AT A FOXHUNT WITH BLOOD SMEARED ON ITS FACE
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
FILM OF Jeremy Corbyn SAYING "You know we oppose immigration controls and want a multicultural Britain"
CUT TO A newspaper article saying "at least 1400 young children were abused at Rotherham and the Local Labour Party and Labour MP and Labour council not only did nothing but turned a blind eyes to all complaints"
Cut to the picture of a young child in distress with caption "Failed by Labour's multicultrism"
Of course, the Labour Party appear to be more concerned about teh lives of foxes than young children in the UK..
There you are.. which would resonate betetr?0 -
FrancisUrquhart said:
Its nonsense in the context of it won't do anything except excite the cult. It is ancient history, shown by the fact that people continue to long onto the Mail website in droves and many are not extreme right wingers. They have a business model the can only Guardian dream of.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
"when most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead ..."kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
Most?! It was 80 years and more ago. I would have thought that not only are all those involved dead but that they died well before many people posting on PBC were even born.0 -
With the decline in UKIP and some of that going to Labour (even if not most of it, which is going Tory), 30% is plausible, though I am very surprised we keep seeing it as 27-28 seems more likely.Jason said:
'...But he hasn't been making things any worse during the campaign to date,'
I think we both know that is wishful thinking, especially if the pollsters are overestimating Labour again - and I believe they are. 30% is above what Brown got and only a fraction below Miliband's performance. It does not seem credible to me that Corbyn is doing that well.
'...but I think they're overestimating how offputting he will be in general.'
Here's where I completely disagree. I think they are underestimating.
I stick by what I said - 1992 all over again, without Labour's massively disproportionate electoral advantage.
But my point was that the scores for Corbyn are dreadful, but not everything he ever says or does is dreadful, and the Tories shouldn't just rely on people thinking everything he does is dreadful. Many Labour policies are, as we know, popular, but that need not help them much if the party and Corbyn are not trusted or liked enough, but they could do more to push that home.
Apart from May on foxes (and I only know about that from here and twitter), I don't recall anything of the Tory campaign other than Strong and Stable. Fine, in a straight choice between Corbyn and May I already know what I need to, but the Tories presumably want to maximise their victory, and so far they seem pretty lazy.
0 -
.
It's bad enough with Labour wanting to take us back to the politics of the 1970's.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
You want to take us back to the politics of the 1930's for heaven's sake.0 -
Hmm. I suspect a large chunk of respondents stopped reading after "If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the Euro...."Scott_P said:0 -
Vote winner / motivator with a very small group in key marginals.RobD said:
Hm, vote reinforcer rather than winner?kle4 said:
CharlesRobD said:
I'll nibble.. which PB Tories have been saying that?Bromptonaut said:If PB Tories think backing fox hunting is a vote winner they truly are losers in the court of public opinion.
We have a Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and merely a National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Vitriolically opposed by people who were never going to vote for her anyway.
Most people will go "meh"
Downside, I suppose, is the time issue. But with the Labour manifesto, the Tories weren't getting much time anyway....0 -
Fantastic. Missing a couple from my seat, but a work in progress after all.Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
Yes - and let's not forget dear old William Beveridge and John Maynard Keynes - avid supporters of the EUGENICS movement.dyedwoolie said:
It doesn't. It's like lambasting Clement Attlee's record on human rights for not overturning the law against homosexuality.kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
Wow, not so much a lovable oaf then?Cyan said:
Yes!!Dura_Ace said:
Star wipe to a reconstruction of Boris on the phone trying to get that bloke beaten up.Cyan said:
I disagree. I think it's about pumping up the richer and nastier Tory activists, by playing the "don't let the bearded commie oiks take away our fun" and "let's kill sentimentalism and the Labour party forever" card. The kind of cap doffer working class person who might be persuaded to vote Tory by Theresa May's support for foxhunting probably wouldn't dream of voting Labour.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Or it could possibly be a cockup, as SirNorfolkPassmore says.
I could make a killer Labour broadcast:
FILM OF THERESA MAY SAYING "You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."
CUT TO A REDCOAT CARRYING THE TWITCHING BODY OF A SAVAGED FOX
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
CUT TO A CHILD AT A FOXHUNT WITH BLOOD SMEARED ON ITS FACE
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJWkS2A9T00 -
Except Jack Wdavid_herdson said:
"when most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead ..."kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
Most?! It was 80 years and more ago. I would have thought that not only are all those involved dead but that they died well before many people posting on PBC were even born. 0 -
Maybe MoscowMikeSmithson said:
Villefranche is a key LD targetRoger said:OT. I just got my first election literature. A large photo of Jeremy Corbyn looking like Streinikov in Dr Zhivago. It was from the Lib Dems
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRXKHTTzayU0 -
It's 313 now, think they might still have a few missing though, only 601 Conservatives.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
But it is a fact that most readers are totally unaware of! By highlighting its past Corbyn could hope to counter the credibility of attacks on him by a newspaper from a neofascist stable.He should seek to label the paper as the rightwing equivalent of the Morning Star on the left!FrancisUrquhart said:
Its nonsense in the context of it won't do anything except excite the cult. It is ancient history, shown by the fact that people continue to long onto the Mail website in droves and many are not extreme right wingers. They have a business model the can only Guardian dream of.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
Any idea if it is complete?kle4 said:
FantasticSandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
Ah, thanks!Sandpit said:
It's 313 now, think they might still have a few missing though.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
And it will fail miserably. It is brought up time and time again and it doesn't work.justin124 said:
But it is a fact that most readers are totally unaware of! By highlighting its past Corbyn could hope to counter the credibility of attacks on him by a newspaper from a neofascist stable.He should seek to label the paper as the rightwing equivalent of the Morning Star on the left!FrancisUrquhart said:
Its nonsense in the context of it won't do anything except excite the cult. It is ancient history, shown by the fact that people continue to long onto the Mail website in droves and many are not extreme right wingers. They have a business model the can only Guardian dream of.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
A better attack is pointing out inaccuracies in their reporting. The problem is with Corbyn they don't have to try and stretch the truth as they did with Ed to try and portray him as a left wing extremist.0 -
And what would any rational person think when they are told this shocking news? "Oh, that was 80 years ago"justin124 said:
But it is a fact that most readers are totally unaware of! By highlighting its past Corbyn could hope to counter the credibility of attacks on him by a newspaper from a neofascist stable.He should seek to label the paper as the rightwing equivalent of the Morning Star on the left!FrancisUrquhart said:
Its nonsense in the context of it won't do anything except excite the cult. It is ancient history, shown by the fact that people continue to long onto the Mail website in droves and many are not extreme right wingers. They have a business model the can only Guardian dream of.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
For god's sake President Trump, STOP USING TWITTER all the time.williamglenn said:0 -
It was the Daily Mirror, Corbyn's noisiest cheerleader, which notoriously carried a headline in January 1934: "Give the Blackshirts a helping hand." The paper even urged readers to join the British Union of Fascists.0
-
Can we article 50 on that euro vision poll please? It's the biggest load of tripe ever conceived. The banality of western culture incarnate.0
-
In what way are they seeking to take us back to the 1970s?Disraeli said:.
It's bad enough with Labour wanting to take us back to the politics of the 1970's.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
You want to take us back to the politics of the 1930's for heaven's sake.0 -
So we keep hearing. At what point will the lack of heat be important?Blue_rog said:
I completely agree. The Tory election machine hasn't even warmed up yet.Jason said:
I don't think you're living the real world, kle4, if you believe the public are warming to Corbyn. As far as gaffes go, I would say just about everything Corbyn says is a gaffe, but I'm guessing most of that is priced in anyway. There's an irony in what you say about him moderating his language - it's simply incredible. As for the Labour manifesto, let's see what the public thinks after Labour's costings have been scrutinised. I predict a complete meltdown in these so-called popular pledges.kle4 said:
Plenty of people like the idea of standing up to america, even if they are not as overtly anti-american as Corbyn. The Tories are being complacent, assuming people will automatically dislike anything Corbyn says because he is the one saying it. I don't doubt he will find it harder to get a message across because he is not trusted or liked, but at the moment he is not making gaffes, he personally seems reasonable and affable when speaking, and he is moderating what he says to appear reasonable.Jason said:
I think the opposite. His views will horrify the vast majority of every right thinking person in this country, and bashing America will not appeal to anyone outside of his personal core vote.LadyBucket said:I've just watched about five minutes of Jeremy Corbyn talking about defence and I have to say apart from the fact that this man's views chill me to the bone, he does look to be in his element in this kind of scenario.
The conservatives really do need to up their game because I feel Jeremy Corbyn is going to hog the headlines "again".
The Tories need to do better if they want to win big. And I don't buy that they would rather not win big in order to keep Corbyn in place.
Still tight - TP needs a rise in the Con vote and almost all the UKIP vote.RobD said:
Don Valley!Scott_P said:
I agree to an extent that the Tories have so far been complacent (they can afford to) - but that will change markedly after next week. I don't think they've even started on Corbyn and McDonnell yet.</>0 -
Chortle ....MikeSmithson said:
Villefranche is a key LD targetRoger said:OT. I just got my first election literature. A large photo of Jeremy Corbyn looking like Streinikov in Dr Zhivago. It was from the Lib Dems
0 -
For all of the boffins out there - if the Tories did replicate 1992 and achieved 14 million votes - how would that translate into seats?0
-
The Mirror also got this rather juicy exclusiveleomckinstry said:It was the Daily Mirror, Corbyn's noisiest cheerleader, which notoriously carried a headline in January 1934: "Give the Blackshirts a helping hand." The paper even urged readers to join the British Union of Fascists.
http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4436284.ece/ALTERNATES/s1227b/Daily-Mirror-2921936.jpg0 -
Because the Daily Mail isn't standing for election?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
The Liberals won 6 seats in the 1970 general election. UKIP 2017 .... titter ....justin124 said:
UKIP are still fighting more seats than did the Liberals pre-1974.SirNorfolkPassmore said:UKIP's standing candidates in relatively few seats (looks to be about half) is a major error on their part.
The Greens have already been kicking off about broadcast coverage, and this is grist to their mill.
Broadcasters have to take into account evidence of past and current support in complying with impartiality obligations. There will almost certainly be substantially more Green than UKIP candidates and, combined with the local elections, it detracts from UKIP's case to get more coverage, Question Time slots and so on than the Greens. And, for the future, it simply limits their national vote share. This will adversely affect coverage in future elections. They ought to have found paper candidates and stood in 500+ seats. This is what a death spiral looks like.0 -
NO, keep going.kle4 said:For god's sake President Trump, STOP USING TWITTER all the time.
His use of Twitter already contributed to one court defeat. I can't wait to see it being quoted in other proceedings.
His letter to Comey is already being suggested as him giving up executive privilege.0 -
I just wondering....I remember thinking in 2015 the Tory election machine didn't really seem to have got going, not until the last couple of weeks. But according to insiders that actually made little difference to the result, they had quietly under the surface already done huge amounts of work in key seats and their polling was telling them they had got the messages they wanted across.kle4 said:
So we keep hearing. At what point will the lack of heat be important?
Perhaps we are still thinking about fighting old schoo, pre internet, pre social media, GE's. Where you needed to be on the telly every day to get your message out.0 -
A most unlikely hit man I'd have thought! Guppy must've been desperateCyan said:
Yes!!Dura_Ace said:
Star wipe to a reconstruction of Boris on the phone trying to get that bloke beaten up.Cyan said:
I disagree. I think it's about pumping up the richer and nastier Tory activists, by playing the "don't let the bearded commie oiks take away our fun" and "let's kill sentimentalism and the Labour party forever" card. The kind of cap doffer working class person who might be persuaded to vote Tory by Theresa May's support for foxhunting probably wouldn't dream of voting Labour.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Or it could possibly be a cockup, as SirNorfolkPassmore says.
I could make a killer Labour broadcast:
FILM OF THERESA MAY SAYING "You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."
CUT TO A REDCOAT CARRYING THE TWITCHING BODY OF A SAVAGED FOX
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
CUT TO A CHILD AT A FOXHUNT WITH BLOOD SMEARED ON ITS FACE
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJWkS2A9T00 -
I wonder what Adolf Hitler's favourite breakfast cereal was? Should they be shamed into closing down production today as a result?justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
It was 80 years ago for God's sake. Even if we accepted your point that the Daily Mail supported Hitler, do you think it still eulogises Adolf Hitler today? If not, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
If you want to make a point about people still backing those that history has condemned for the destructive consequences of their views and actions, then let's give a kicking to those who still think Karl Marx has something to say to the modern world. Or those who thought Chairman Mao had it right in his Little Red Book - whilst overseeing the death of 45 million in just four years in the Great Leap Forward.
Thank God nobody who espoused support for such idiotic ideologues and mass-murdering criminals is still seeking political office today.
Oh......0 -
Maybe we could run the figures by Diane Abbott?justin124 said:
That is impossible to say without knowing the turnout and the total votes polled by other parties.Jason said:For all of the boffins out there - if the Tories did replicate 1992 and achieved 14 million votes - how would that translate into seats?
0 -
How many million are we giving to Corbyn ?Jason said:For all of the boffins out there - if the Tories did replicate 1992 and achieved 14 million votes - how would that translate into seats?
A polling error such that the French had in their final Macron vote leaves Labour on about 23%, and the Tories on 49% I think !0 -
Nobody ever buy a VW or a Hugo Boss suit every again....MarqueeMark said:justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
I wonder what Adolf Hitler's favourite breakfast cereal was? Should they be shamed into closing down production today as a result?
It was 80 years ago for God's sake. Even if we accepted your point that the Daily Mail supported Hitler, do you think it still eulogises Adolf Hitler today? If not, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
If you want to make a point about people still backing those that history has condemned for the destructive consequences of their views and actions, then let's give a kicking to those who still think Karl Marx has something to say to the modern world. Or those who thought Chairman Mao had it right in his Little Red Book - whilst overseeing the death of 45 million in just four years in the Great Leap Forward.
Thank God nobody who espoused support for such idiotic ideologues and mass-murdering criminals is still seeking political office today.
Oh......
0 -
Indeed - but it is reporting the election and will be reporting him in a very negative light. Why should he not return the compliment?Dadge said:
Because the Daily Mail isn't standing for election?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
Well, I didn't want to rule out some long lived intern. Some of these fascists last a long time.david_herdson said:
"when most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead ..."kle4 said:
That was a long long time ago for heaven's sake. When most of those involved with the paper at the time are dead, who cares? If someone tells me the Mail is a hotbed of extremist and offensive nonsense, that's relevant, but because is supported Osward Mosley? What does that have to do with anything today?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
Most?! It was 80 years and more ago. I would have thought that not only are all those involved dead but that they died well before many people posting on PBC were even born.0 -
-
I suspect it would not be wise for Corbyn to focus on the past.justin124 said:
Indeed - but it is reporting the election and will be reporting him in a very negative light. Why should he not return the compliment?Dadge said:
Because the Daily Mail isn't standing for election?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0 -
it's confirmed for me that they are standing in rochdale which is what I've been trying to find out, thanks.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
Except they won't all go to the Tories, a lot will return to Labour or not vote at all.Scott_P said:0 -
Yep.leomckinstry said:It was the Daily Mirror, Corbyn's noisiest cheerleader, which notoriously carried a headline in January 1934: "Give the Blackshirts a helping hand." The paper even urged readers to join the British Union of Fascists.
Then owned by Lord Rothermere who also owned the Mail. I wonder what the fash loving common thread was?-1 -
Are you betting in that particular tar pit ?paulyork64 said:
it's confirmed for me that they are standing in rochdale which is what I've been trying to find out, thanks.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv
Danczuk when he was 12-1 was OK I think, but a market for the very brave in my opinion...0 -
Giving power to the Unions.justin124 said:
In what way are they seeking to take us back to the 1970s?Disraeli said:.
It's bad enough with Labour wanting to take us back to the politics of the 1970's.justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
You want to take us back to the politics of the 1930's for heaven's sake.
Clueless management of the country.
Uncosted spending.
The 1976 IMF crisis (where we took the largest loan from the IMF that had been requested up to that time)
I lived through it and it was not pretty.0 -
Because what happened before most of the staff on it were born is irrelevant? The paper's stance 80 years ago has nothing to do with why they are negative toward him now. If he wants to show them in a negative light, he doesn't need to bring up details of things that happened before he was born to do so. It's laughable, and I don't even read the damn Mail.justin124 said:
Indeed - but it is reporting the election and will be reporting him in a very negative light. Why should he not return the compliment?Dadge said:
Because the Daily Mail isn't standing for election?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.
He can just do the Trump thing and talk about fake news, and poor reporting and all that no need to try to make the argument 'The paper supported fascists 80 years = they are fascists now by association' argument.0 -
but it has the greens standing in york central and they definitely withdrew yesterday.paulyork64 said:
it's confirmed for me that they are standing in rochdale which is what I've been trying to find out, thanks.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv0 -
The point is that the Daily Mail has a longstanding hitory of rightwing extremism and is no more to be trusted for objective reporting than the Morning Star.MarqueeMark said:
I wonder what Adolf Hitler's favourite breakfast cereal was? Should they be shamed into closing down production today as a result?justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
It was 80 years ago for God's sake. Even if we accepted your point that the Daily Mail supported Hitler, do you think it still eulogises Adolf Hitler today? If not, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
If you want to make a point about people still backing those that history has condemned for the destructive consequences of their views and actions, then let's give a kicking to those who still think Karl Marx has something to say to the modern world. Or those who thought Chairman Mao had it right in his Little Red Book - whilst overseeing the death of 45 million in just four years in the Great Leap Forward.
Thank God nobody who espoused support for such idiotic ideologues and mass-murdering criminals is still seeking political office today.
Oh......-1 -
I have a small investment on the Blues, hoping for a favourable split in the opposition.Pulpstar said:
Are you betting in that particular tar pit ?paulyork64 said:
it's confirmed for me that they are standing in rochdale which is what I've been trying to find out, thanks.RobD said:
Is this complete, because there are only 288 UKIP candidates...Sandpit said:Awesome - crowdsourced spreadsheet of all the Parliamentary candidates
https://candidates.democracyclub.org.uk/media/candidates-parl.2017-06-08.csv
Danczuk when he was 12-1 was OK I think, but a market for the very brave in my opinion...0 -
CON 407Jason said:
LAB 166
L DEM 7
UKIP 0
GREEN 1
SNP 47
PLAID 3
OTHER 1
would be my guess on those figures.#
Remain Leave
CON 30 67
LAB 38 19
L DEM 18 2
UKIP 0 8
GREEN 6 1
SNP 6 1
PLAID 1 1
Other 1 1
And a manual adjustment of 7 extra seats for the Tories from the SNP in Scotland.0 -
It's ok, IIRC they never did beat the man up. So it's all good.Roger said:
A most unlikely hit man I'd have thought! Guppy must've been desperateCyan said:
Yes!!Dura_Ace said:
Star wipe to a reconstruction of Boris on the phone trying to get that bloke beaten up.Cyan said:
I disagree. I think it's about pumping up the richer and nastier Tory activists, by playing the "don't let the bearded commie oiks take away our fun" and "let's kill sentimentalism and the Labour party forever" card. The kind of cap doffer working class person who might be persuaded to vote Tory by Theresa May's support for foxhunting probably wouldn't dream of voting Labour.Charles said:FPT
Also worth noting that in Wales, Lancashire and the West Country hunting isn't really a "toff" activity. It's not the horsemen from the HH or the Vine that May is after. It's the working class folks who hunt on foot.
I suspect this could reinforce some of the appeal in rather unexpected locations
Or it could possibly be a cockup, as SirNorfolkPassmore says.
I could make a killer Labour broadcast:
FILM OF THERESA MAY SAYING "You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."
CUT TO A REDCOAT CARRYING THE TWITCHING BODY OF A SAVAGED FOX
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
CUT TO A CHILD AT A FOXHUNT WITH BLOOD SMEARED ON ITS FACE
soundtrack: "the Nasty Party"
hts://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJWkS2A9T00 -
I've been thinking the same. During the campaign there was lots of commentary about how the Conservatives were invisible, Labour's ground game etc. Of course after the campaign it was all Lynton Crosby is a genius. I'm inclined to reserve judgment on the campaigns and just look at the polling.FrancisUrquhart said:
I just wondering....I remember thinking in 2015 the Tory election machine didn't really seem to have got going, not until the last couple of weeks. But according to insiders that actually made little difference to the result, they had quietly under the surface already done huge amounts of work in key seats and their polling was telling them they had got the messages they wanted across.kle4 said:
So we keep hearing. At what point will the lack of heat be important?
Perhaps we are still thinking about fighting old schoo, pre internet, pre social media, GE's. Where you needed to be on the telly every day to get your message out.
Edit: mind you, the polling was all that good last time either...0 -
@scotlibdems: Third day in a row that the First Minister is in a marginal SNP/Lib Dem seat.
Fearing the #LibDemFightback0 -
How Green were the Nazis?MarqueeMark said:
I wonder what Adolf Hitler's favourite breakfast cereal was? Should they be shamed into closing down production today as a result?justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
It was 80 years ago for God's sake. Even if we accepted your point that the Daily Mail supported Hitler, do you think it still eulogises Adolf Hitler today? If not, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
If you want to make a point about people still backing those that history has condemned for the destructive consequences of their views and actions, then let's give a kicking to those who still think Karl Marx has something to say to the modern world. Or those who thought Chairman Mao had it right in his Little Red Book - whilst overseeing the death of 45 million in just four years in the Great Leap Forward.
Thank God nobody who espoused support for such idiotic ideologues and mass-murdering criminals is still seeking political office today.
Oh......
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Green-Were-Nazis-Environment/dp/0821416472#reader_08214164720 -
It'll be a good night for the Lib Dems in Scotland I reckon.Scott_P said:@scotlibdems: Third day in a row that the First Minister is in a marginal SNP/Lib Dem seat.
Fearing the #LibDemFightback
Biggest chance of busting people's sub 10 seat bets from anywhere.0 -
Just as long as they aren't splitting the vote. Bloody splitters!Pulpstar said:
It'll be a good night for the Lib Dems in Scotland I reckon.Scott_P said:@scotlibdems: Third day in a row that the First Minister is in a marginal SNP/Lib Dem seat.
Fearing the #LibDemFightback
Biggest chance of busting people's sub 10 seat bets from anywhere.0 -
Is he going to have a go at Barclays for facilitating slavery as well?justin124 said:
It is not nonsense but historical fact - however inconvenient that might be to extreme rightwingers here. The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Why should Corbyn not take the opportunity to remind voters of that?FrancisUrquhart said:
Putting aside your nonsense...go look at who the Guardian have supported in the past for instance.justin124 said:
But that is coming from Adolf Hitler's favourite British newspaper - a point that Corbyn would do well to draw to public attention.
Bizarrely for the mud thrown at the Daily Mail (and plenty is deserved) not only are they one of the most read in print newspapers, their internet traffic is insane. Now a lot of it is people looking at the sidebar of shame and general tittle tattle, but people will not fail to notice if the Mail start sticking massive anti-Corbyn clickbait stuff up.0
This discussion has been closed.