politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The PB / Polling Matters podcast returns!

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

TGOHF said:

https://twitter.com/los_fisher/status/979086222009155584?s=21

Sounds pretty much like endorsing deselections to me...

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/ReutersPolitics/status/979108308488478720

For context, Ronny Jackson is an Admiral in the US Navy, Harriet Miers for Justice on the Supreme Court this is not

Isn't it Robby Jackson?

TheJezziah said:

@oxfordsimon

It is the same line he has had for a while.

It isn't a very convincing one. It is all too easy to read it as tacit approval to get rid of people who aren't fellow travellers.

viewcode said:

Casino_Royale said:

Anazina said:

Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.

A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.

Be honest. That's a Callaghan manifesto.

It is an Ed M maifesto tbh. Nowt wrong with it, and would be lovely were it to be put into practice. As an Adult Education professional in the north, wait for investment in skills and what is patronisingly known as "Regions" or vast majority of the country if you like, with excitement.

oxfordsimon said:

TGOHF said:

https://twitter.com/los_fisher/status/979086222009155584?s=21

Sounds pretty much like endorsing deselections to me...

Full interview:

http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/exclusive-corbyn-interview/

JWisemann said:

Loving the irresistible rise in tory hubris here, really looking fwd to seeing it get popped again.

It is Labour and Corbynistas who have had all the hubris over the past few months and in May they will be defending a 2% lead not trying to eat into a 7% Tory lead as last June

dixiedean said:

viewcode said:

Casino_Royale said:

Anazina said:

Which would be? You can kiss goodbye to austerity, for a start. The Mansfield Tories: the eurosceptic anti business party that will take you out of the common market, stop the furriners coming in and let the deficit rip. Tony Benn in Union Jack boxer shorts.

A balanced approach to public spending and tax restraint from good stewardship of the economy, expanding skills training, employment and investment in regional Britain, continuing to control migration, valuing patriotism and ensuring national security.

Be honest. That's a Callaghan manifesto.

It is an Ed M maifesto tbh. Nowt wrong with it, and would be lovely were it to be put into practice. As an Adult Education professional in the north, wait for investment in skills and what is patronisingly known as "Regions" or vast majority of the country if you like, with excitement.

Possibly, but I was referring to the envisaged defence restructuring and nominal rises masking smaller real changes. The May administration does feel quite 1970's

HYUFD said:

JWisemann said:

Loving the irresistible rise in tory hubris here, really looking fwd to seeing it get popped again.

It is Labour and Corbynistas who have had all the hubris over the past few months and in May they will be defending a 2% lead not trying to eat into a 7% Tory lead as last June

Haven't been hubristic about the modest Labour leads, and doubt if you're wise to be hubristic about the modest Tory one, after what we can all agree has been a rough week for Labour (impact on Labour vote share: zero) and a good fornight for the Tories (impact: +1). The public is pretty evenly divided and pretty open IMO.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Just watching "Under Siege" on Channel 5.

The best Steven Seagal film EVER MADE

I've heard of Steven Spielberg...

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/978924384390995968

Nations don't have friends, they have interests.

And England has permanent interests in a stable and secure European neighbourhood, starting with the British Isles. The USA's interests in the transatlantic relationship are more contingent.

After Selmayrgate, it seems the EU parliament is little better than the commission...
https://www.politico.eu/article/european-parliament-top-posts-klaus-welle-martin-selmayr-appointments-brussels/

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Just watching "Under Siege" on Channel 5.

The best Steven Seagal film EVER MADE

I see you're limbo dancing under that threshold bar ....

Pulpstar said:

dr_spyn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.

The speadsheet tax error spin does seem rather implausible.

Exact tax calculations require specialist tax accountants (Which everyone assumes you know all about when you say you're an açcountant), but the in house team should have been able to get bearish - it's just corp tax less inadmissible items + stuff like capital allowances and group relief.

I think in this case it was a timing issue. Something to do with tax being due when the wine went into bond rather than at a later point (I had understood it was a VAT error not an NI problem)

CarlottaVance said:

The front page photo of today's Express could be subject to several interpretations.....not all of them optimistic!

https://twitter.com/StigAbell/status/979113257649745921

Left out the lemmings. though!

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/978924384390995968

Nations don't have friends, they have interests.

The UK's interest is to be in the EU, as a rule based multilateral organisation promoting free trade amongst its members. You can argue the UK's interest is to leave the UK because a small majority of low information voters chose that option in a referendum but I think that's different. Other nations have their voters to appease too.

alex. said:

Danny565 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Danny565 said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Danny565 said:

MikeL said:

Good poll for Con.

YouGov had a Lab lead of 2% in early March so last YouGov poll showed a substantial move. Holding on to that and increasing the lead any further is solid progress.

Plus remember it usually takes a while for news to filter through into poll changes - Corbyn's anti-Semitism problems only hit main news headlines on Monday.

LOL, the anti-Semitism thing is not going to move any votes.

Except for the votes of Jews and the non-Jewish who care about the LOTO being tolerant of anti-Semitism.

That probably isn't that many people.

And its also possible that it attracts some extra votes from people who don't like Jews.

The sad truth is that racism doesn't really change people's votes, unless they themselves are the victims of the racism. As exhibit A of that, I give you Zac Goldsmith doing quite well in the 2016 mayoral election (he did better than the Tories did in London a year later), despite running an outright racist and Islamophobic campaign.

Morally, the antisemitism isn't good at all, and is personally one of my biggest issues with Corbyn - but, as far as the general public are concerned, I doubt it even makes the top 10 of issues Corbyn-doubters have.

Events of recent weeks have given currency to attacks on Corbyn’s judgement on national security and discrimination that they didn’t previously have. That’s because it’s come directly from his own mouth and relates to both current and future events. Not his past.

I think that’s what could move votes.

If you say so. To me, from your post, it sounds like the Tories are banking on a re-run of 2017 strategy (except without the Brexit factor that pulled "Mansfield Man" over to the Tories), which strikes me as rather good news from a Labour perspective, but I suppose time will tell.

Well it’s possible that a rerun of 2017 could be quite successful in the context of a Labour Party coming off the fence over Brexit and not being able to simultaneously draw votes from both sides.

If Labour have come off the fence on Brexit it is only because the weight of their indecision has reduced it to splinters.

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/979113621518213121

How to win friends and influence people, a reminder be courteous in your dealings. Don't be like Christine.

Some people really need to learn that Malcolm Tucker was fiction.

It appears David Warner went to the same non-apology classes as Jezza....

Australia batsman David Warner has apologised for causing "distress" to cricket fans "in Australia and all over the world" after the ball-tampering incident which has seen him banned for a year.

Warner, Test captain Steven Smith and batsman Cameron Bancroft have all been banned by Cricket Australia bosses for their part in the incident.

"Mistakes have been made which have damaged cricket," he said.

"It's a stain on the game we all love."

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/43580069

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

Pulpstar said:

dr_spyn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Bargain Booze owner Conviviality could face administration after failing to secure emergency funding.

The firm, which is also a major supplier to chains like Wetherspoons, has suffered a string of profit warnings in recent weeks and revealed a £30m tax bill.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43576991

Why would somebody the size of Wetherspoons need a middle man?

,I would guess because they're Free Trade and not tied to their own Brewery.

Convivality own Matthew Clark one of the largest wholesalers in the industry that purchase and distribute alcohol from all sorts of breweries etc to all sorts of bars and restaurants.

The speadsheet tax error spin does seem rather implausible.

Exact tax calculations require specialist tax accountants (Which everyone assumes you know all about when you say you're an açcountant), but the in house team should have been able to get bearish - it's just corp tax less inadmissible items + stuff like capital allowances and group relief.

I think in this case it was a timing issue. Something to do with tax being due when the wine went into bond rather than at a later point (I had understood it was a VAT error not an NI problem)

That’s strange for us punters the tax and VAT is never due until it comes out of bond.

I haven’t spent much time looking at it as I don’t like retail. All the RNS said is “we have identified a payment to HMRC which falls due on 29 March”

Not sure quite what that would be. NI would be too obvious surely - and doesn’t it get paid monthly with PAYE anyway? So assumed it would have to be payments on account or VAT.

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

Surely, surely one can be critical of some of the Israeli governments policies without being assumed to be anti-Jewish.

Yes. But if you only ever criticise the Israeli government policies and actions, and not Palestinian policies and actions, then it can start to look rather one-sided.

The Middle East is a mess, and there are few good actors within the mess. The Palestinians are far from perfect (e.g. Hamas), and putting Israeli policies and actions under the microscope will not lead to peace.

AlastairMeeks said:

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

The median voter supported Leave.

JosiasJessop said:

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

Surely, surely one can be critical of some of the Israeli governments policies without being assumed to be anti-Jewish.

Yes. But if you only ever criticise the Israeli government policies and actions, and not Palestinian policies and actions, then it can start to look rather one-sided.

The Middle East is a mess, and there are few good actors within the mess. The Palestinians are far from perfect (e.g. Hamas), and putting Israeli policies and actions under the microscope will not lead to peace.

Quite agree about the Middle East. How about 'putting ONLY Israeli policies and actions” etc.

Actually I think that, given our record, the less any British politician says about the Middle East, the better.

AlastairMeeks said:

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

A subset of centrist Remainers choose to see offence in valid comments. Most people are getting on with their lives, in full acceptance of Brexit.

ydoethur said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Never saw a thing, like I never saw an empty seats on that train.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5555985/Labour-leader-belongs-FIVE-anti-Semitic-Facebook-groups.html

You do have to wonder a bit about a man who wants to be PM and is yet apparently incapable of basic comprehension including reading.

Alternatively we could just accept he's lying and leave it at that.

Explanation a and b aren’t mutually exclusive.

OldKingCole said:

JosiasJessop said:

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

Surely, surely one can be critical of some of the Israeli governments policies without being assumed to be anti-Jewish.

Yes. But if you only ever criticise the Israeli government policies and actions, and not Palestinian policies and actions, then it can start to look rather one-sided.

The Middle East is a mess, and there are few good actors within the mess. The Palestinians are far from perfect (e.g. Hamas), and putting Israeli policies and actions under the microscope will not lead to peace.

Quite agree about the Middle East. How about 'putting ONLY Israeli policies and actions” etc.

Actually I think that, given our record, the less any British politician says about the Middle East, the better.

Yes, I meant 'only'.

But I cannot agree with your last sentence. I think we have a valuable role in sorting out a mess that is partly of our making. We should not stand back just because some people are antisemitic asshats. We may not be the one to lead such a process; but we can play a positive role.

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

Surely, surely one can be critical of some of the Israeli governments policies without being assumed to be anti-Jewish.

Sure. But when you only support one side, are critical of everything the other dies, talk to deeply nasty people on one side “in the interest of dialogue” but don’t talk to the other side, don’t notice anti-semitism because you “didn’t look at it properly” and refuse to expel anti-semites from your party...

Well, people might start asking questions

TheJezziah said:

DavidL said:

It is a salutary reminder on perspective that the disgusting behaviour of Labour on anti-Semitism, the humiliating response to the Salisbury incident where Labour back benchers lined up to agree with the PM and disagree with their elected leader, an ever more chaotic and incoherent response to Brexit and the reopening of civil war in the PLP has, according to Yougov last night, not changed the Labour vote at all.

People are bored of politics and thinking about other things, it seems.

I think people said similar when the Conservatives were having a bad time (a few weeks back) and there were suggestions a different Labour leader would be 15-20 points ahead. The ones that are paying attention are largely polarised into their different voting blocks. Unless we see some really big events happening I expect the polls will stay fairly close for a while.

I actually think Salisbury is pretty big and that Corbyn's response makes him completely unfit to be PM. But that is obviously a sectional minority view.

What we are seeing, I think, is 2 blocks sustained by a very strong dislike of the other. Supporters on both sides may wince from time to time at their own sides incompetence but the priority will always be to stop the other. Its not particularly healthy.

AlastairMeeks said:

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

If it was in your power to stop Brexit would you do so?

FF43 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/978924384390995968

Nations don't have friends, they have interests.

The UK's interest is to be in the EU, as a rule based multilateral organisation promoting free trade amongst its members. You can argue the UK's interest is to leave the UK because a small majority of low information voters chose that option in a referendum but I think that's different. Other nations have their voters to appease too.

And if that’s all it was it would have been great. But the EU wanted to develop in another direction which wasn’t a good fit for us

That's a valid point of view, but not one that is widely shared amongst diplomats and trade specialists, not least because what I think you want isn't available to us. But I would make a practical distinction between national interests and what electorates vote for. As an extreme Godwin example, the people of Germany voted in a referendums to militarily occupy the Rhineland, leave the League of Nations and to make Hitler a dictator. Were they really in the German national interest?

To overturn the largest democratic vote in this country's history because you didn’t like the result would have worse consequences.

Once DC started down this route we needed see it through. Anything else would have been against the national interest

felix said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

I'm not sure what is this strange disease which prevents senior Labour officials and MPs, including JC from reading and understanding Facebook posts that are anti-semitic. It's a real mystery - maybe a kind of ADDD - attention deficit denial disorder.

I thought Labour's deficit denial was about something else but it may have more general application.

The Israelis are far more powerful in every way than the Palestinians and have much more responsibility for the situation as a result. This isn't an equal situation and any evaluation of it should take that into account. The simple fact is that Israel has been ignoring international law in an increasingly brazen fashion in recent years with barely a whisper from our government, or the war-infatuated segment of the PLP. Corbyn is in the firing line because he is the first potential PM in virtually forever to question this cosy, symbiotic accommodation of a violent, corrupt, racist settler state, and for no other reason.

Elliot said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

The median voter supported Leave.

The median voter is a 42 year old LibDem.

EDIT that should be mode

Corbyn may claim he is willing to talk to anyone, but that willingness does not extend to the media, with whom he refuses to engage. He is a coward. The unedifying sight of him scuttling into his people carrier while sending his cheerleaders out to defend him does him no credit. Excuses about his membership of and postings on various Facebook pages are disingenuous and wholly unworthy of someone who considers himself a potential PM.

Barnesian said:

Elliot said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Mortimer said:

TheJezziah said:

From a Labour POV, or at least from mine, I'm relatively happy to stay close to the Conservatives in the polls for the time being.

After several good weeks for Labour in which the Tory vote barely shifted we've had a good couple of weeks for the Tories in which Labours vote has barely shifted. Which is partially why I think the idea of Labour having a new leader and surging ahead 15-20 points in the polls in unrealistic.

If the polls look something like they have done over the past couple of months just before we get into the election campaigning period I'll be fairly optimistic about Labours chances. There won't be the same kind of swings we saw in the last campaign but with a strong campaign, which isn't an unrealistic expectation of Labour, we could advance enough to take it.

A big part of the next election will probably be decided on how many voters each party holds onto from the last election.

I'd rather be close in the polls, too. The idea that your boy might win will be a powerful motivator to moderates and Tories alike

Moderates see a choice between two sets of nutjobs. The Conservatives have spent the last 18 months telling them that they are traitors and saboteurs. Good luck in seeking their votes.

The median voter supported Leave.

The median voter is a</>the 42 year old LibDem.

EDIT that should be mode

Fixed that for you

JWisemann said:

The Israelis are far more powerful in every way than the Palestinians and have much more responsibility for the situation as a result. This isn't an equal situation and any evaluation of it should take that into account. The simple fact is that Israel has been ignoring international law in an increasingly brazen fashion in recent years with barely a whisper from our government, or the war-infatuated segment of the PLP. Corbyn is in the firing line because he is the first potential PM in virtually forever to question this cosy, symbiotic accommodation of a violent, corrupt, racist settler state, and for no other reason.

Corbyn is in the firing line because he is an apologist for numerous pro Palestinian groups who wish to wipe the Jewish state from the face of the earth whilst at the same time at home being seen as soft on allies who regard Jews as "not one of us".

The absolute boy!

https://order-order.com/2018/03/29/now-corbyn-says-group-which-accused-jewish-mps-of-fabricating-anti-semitism-are-good-people/

yuk

OldKingCole said:

Elliot said:

daodao said:

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/978924384390995968

Nations don't have friends, they have interests.

And England has permanent interests in a stable and secure European neighbourhood, starting with the British Isles. The USA's interests in the transatlantic relationship are more contingent.

The UK is in a very difficult position with an overweening hostile EU lording it from Berlin over most of the European continent. It really needed to keep Russia on side. I'm uncertain as to who decided to scupper this option, but the toxin on the door of Mr Skripal's home might have come from Porton Down (only 8 miles away) rather than directly from Russia.

No, it didn't.

I was somewhat suspicious of the Government’s assertions at first, (well, I would be, wouldn’t I) but given the widespeard support for Britain’s position from across the world, from Governments with whom we have, presumably, shared information not available to the general public I believe what we’re being told.

I don't think the vicinity to Porton Down is entirely casual, but to then jump to the conclusion that the agent must have come from there, as if modern transportation didn't exist, is simplistic.

Two factors I can think of:

- Skripal's intelligence maybe covered the production of chemical agents and so, when he was set up in the UK, his vicinity to the place researching such things was thought useful (modern transportation notwithstanding). However, his service record does not particularly give any hint that this might be the case, and there are plenty of other military facilities around Salisbury that might have wanted access to Skripal's perspective. If some of his intelligence was chemical agent related, the perpetrators may have had 'poetic justice' in mind.
- He casually ended up in Salisbury having requested a quiet small town life. The perpetrators can see as well on a map as we can that it is 8 miles from Porton Down and saw the opportunity for obfuscation in that.

Russia is a massive odds on favourite for this deed, and the broadness of the response and lack of dissenting governments (contrast Iraq) is another piece of evidence for the casual observer. I'll be very interested in what the OPCW comes back with.

Poll in the Express:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/938668/Brexit-economic-future-of-UK-how-do-brits-feel-poll-results-exclusive

35% for a second referendum, 65% against. I expect support for another vote will decline as we get closer to Sovereignty Day.

Floater said:

The absolute boy!

https://order-order.com/2018/03/29/now-corbyn-says-group-which-accused-jewish-mps-of-fabricating-anti-semitism-are-good-people/

yuk

Left wing Trump...good people on both sides....

Charles said:

OldKingCole said:

JosiasJessop said:

OldKingCole said:

JosiasJessop said:

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

You couldn't make this up

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43578225

Surely, surely one can be critical of some of the Israeli governments policies without being assumed to be anti-Jewish.

Yes. But if you only ever criticise the Israeli government policies and actions, and not Palestinian policies and actions, then it can start to look rather one-sided.

The Middle East is a mess, and there are few good actors within the mess. The Palestinians are far from perfect (e.g. Hamas), and putting Israeli policies and actions under the microscope will not lead to peace.

Quite agree about the Middle East. How about 'putting ONLY Israeli policies and actions” etc.

Actually I think that, given our record, the less any British politician says about the Middle East, the better.

Yes, I meant 'only'.

But I cannot agree with your last sentence. I think we have a valuable role in sorting out a mess that is partly of our making. We should not stand back just because some people are antisemitic asshats. We may not be the one to lead such a process; but we can play a positive role.

I fear our record, with the populations of all ME states, means that anything we do is likely to be seen as duplicitous. At best!

Don’t forget the Arab proverb: the British sell their friends and buy their enemies!

And Nassar 'The sun never sets on the British Empire because god does not trust the British in the dark..."

NickPalmer said:

TheJezziah said:

DavidL said:

TheJezziah said:

DavidL said:

It is a salutary reminder on perspective that the disgusting behaviour of Labour on anti-Semitism, the humiliating response to the Salisbury incident where Labour back benchers lined up to agree with the PM and disagree with their elected leader, an ever more chaotic and incoherent response to Brexit and the reopening of civil war in the PLP has, according to Yougov last night, not changed the Labour vote at all.

People are bored of politics and thinking about other things, it seems.

I think people said similar when the Conservatives were having a bad time (a few weeks back) and there were suggestions a different Labour leader would be 15-20 points ahead. The ones that are paying attention are largely polarised into their different voting blocks. Unless we see some really big events happening I expect the polls will stay fairly close for a while.

I actually think Salisbury is pretty big and that thy.

Whilst there are big chunks like that on both sides I did hear of a poll, think it was mentioned on a podcast I listened to so I'm not sure for a link, that put both parties at close to 70% in terms of their vote being a positive vote for the party with only low 20's% vote being against the other party. I think Labour might have been just slightly higher on both scores but similar figures for both parties.

Which still translates into millions of votes but I suspect those feelings have been around for a while. Although there might be a bit more dislike or things have just got more passionate in general the last few years, Scottish referendum, EU referendum etc.

In a funny way I think both comments are right. There are a LOT of partisans out there who really like what they feel their party stands for and are very loyal to it: it's what makes the polls pretty immobile. That doesn't stop them wincing when prominent figures in it are seen to cock up. The normal process is first to blame the BBC/media (whose collective glee at any misstep is a powerful laager reinforcement), then when it proves incontrovertible roll your eyes and say we all cock up someimes. It takes a great deal to actually think of changing to the other side, though demoralised voters just stay at home.

Probably right. I know why people get so attached, and parties are useful things, but I wish people were more flexible, especially as parties are coalitions and people might find the party shifts away from them.