politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Plunging opinion polls are not the Conservatives’ biggest prob

Pulpstar said:

CRO$$OVER

Labour
11/10
Brexit Party
4/5

Hope noone is in too deep on Labour..

Where are the posts praising shrewd ol’ Farage for having a grand at 3/1??!

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

This is also why I dislike the idea that ecoprotests are somehow similar to "fascists" who want to change things by force (not a comment you made, but something someone down thread said). Doing something about climate change is not equal to being a fascist, and neither are the tactics. These are the tactics of civil rights movements.

Civil rights direct action is justifiable because it is trying to overthrow a democratic deficit or change a repressive regime. These protests do not fall in to that category but are an attempt to impose a minority viewpoint by force (not violence as yet).

I thought it wouldn't be long before the Philistines and the Brexiteers had their say

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

HYUFD said:

Brexit Party storms into the lead in new European elections poll

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1118480874893381632?s=20

Brexit Party plus Tories plus UKIP are on 49%, Labour plus Greens plus LDs plus CUK on 47%.

That is the same arithmetic as I did. Makes one wonder about all this polling showing remain ahead doesn't it?

Don't forget the SNP and Plaid.
A more realistic way of looking at the deal is:
* Brexit deal - 37%
* Brexit no deal - 34%
* Remain - 25% (+whatever the SNP and PC get)
Where do the deal votes go if the only option is one of the other two?
* Labour presumably breaks Remain
* Tory presumably breaks No Deal
A country divided

A country divided (and bored stupid) we undoubtedly are. I also agree that there would be a tendency in the major parties in the manner you indicate. I just struggle to see a high 50%+ number for remain. It very much seems to depend on how you ask the question.

Yep - what I see most of all is that a significant minority really want to leave the EU at any cost and a smaller, but still significant, minority really don't. Put together, though, they are a majority. So we are stuck with this for years to come.

What was it David Cameron said about the choice between him and Ed Miliband?

That is just too awful to contemplate. I very much hope that once we reach a resolution, any resolution, it will slip back down the list of issues to where it belongs. I suspect myself that the majority who support one side or the other just have more important things to think about. The loons on both sides will bang on no doubt but we don't have to pay attention to them.

The tyre hitting the road is a very long drawn out and distracting set of negotiations, not just with the EU, to concede as little as possible so that the amount things get worse is kept to the least possible. It's possible people will say, never mind I'll accept anything you come up with, or they will happily cancel. Abesent that, the EU will be the dominating feature for the next decades.

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Breaking News - A Cross-Party agreement has been reached:

Wor Lass is voting Labour in the locals and in return I'm voting Green in the Euros.

Let's join the Tories and sabotage them, like they sabotaged Britain

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/17/tories-sabotaged-britain-lets-join-their-party-conservative-leader

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

Scott_P said:

Tinfoil hats at the ready...

https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1118484199240077312

Channel 4 "news" story.

Yawn......

They got Leave EU bang to rights for procuring fake news.

Is that the migrant crossing ad?

Yes, and also the migrants beating people up photos that they didn't run in the end.

They didn’t run the crossing one either did they?

Yes, it went viral.

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

Roger said:

Are the Hippies back? It's a long time since people demonstrated to make the world better rather than just themselves

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/16/more-than-100-people-arrested-in-london-climate-change-protests-extinction-rebellion

Adam Boulton was funny trolling this eco warrior
https://youtu.be/6i0eaMFk2kc

isam said:

williamglenn said:

isam said:

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

Scott_P said:

Tinfoil hats at the ready...

https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1118484199240077312

Channel 4 "news" story.

Yawn......

They got Leave EU bang to rights for procuring fake news.

Is that the migrant crossing ad?

Yes, and also the migrants beating people up photos that they didn't run in the end.

They didn’t run the crossing one either did they?

The fake migrant smuggling video was released 2 days before the referendum.

Not that it relates to the referendum, apart from stoking the xenophobic meme, as the "smuggling" is already illegal, and nothing to do with EU rules.

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

CRO$$OVER

Labour
11/10
Brexit Party
4/5

Hope noone is in too deep on Labour..

Where are the posts praising shrewd ol’ Farage for having a grand at 3/1??!

Cracking bet. I missed that price but the Exchange has been remarkably accommodating today.

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

This is also why I dislike the idea that ecoprotests are somehow similar to "fascists" who want to change things by force (not a comment you made, but something someone down thread said). Doing something about climate change is not equal to being a fascist, and neither are the tactics. These are the tactics of civil rights movements.

Civil rights direct action is justifiable because it is trying to overthrow a democratic deficit or change a repressive regime. These protests do not fall in to that category but are an attempt to impose a minority viewpoint by force (not violence as yet).

I mean, the repressive regime is one that is needlessly destroying the chance of continual human civilisation on this planet. The current system of human existence will lead to the destruction of it, potentially in my lifetime. That is the repression.

NorthofStoke said:

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

There is an interesting correlation between climate change denialism and Brexitism.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Let's join the Tories and sabotage them, like they sabotaged Britain

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/17/tories-sabotaged-britain-lets-join-their-party-conservative-leader

The Guardian pay for shit like that? Wouldn't make the grade as a thread header here.....

Foxy said:

NorthofStoke said:

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

There is an interesting correlation between climate change denialism and Brexitism.

I'd guess you are right there but what drives that correlation?

Benpointer said:

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

CRO$$OVER

Labour
11/10
Brexit Party
4/5

Hope noone is in too deep on Labour..

Where are the posts praising shrewd ol’ Farage for having a grand at 3/1??!

A big unknown has to be turnout, more particularly differential turnout across the parties.

IMO a lot depends on a) how well the Brexit and Remain movemeents can motivate their vote and b) whether Labour mebrace a 2nd vote.

The poll also asked the question what would happen if Labour supported a 2nd ref, and the numbers barely moved.

148grss said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

MarqueeMark said:

Tissue_Price said:

david_herdson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Twats...

Extinction Rebellion London protesters climb on top of DLR train

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-47959207

We should be treating these ecofascists the same way as any other group that seeks to impose its policy agenda by force. Media companies should not be inviting them onto to prime-time shows to explain their case, any more than they would give Yaxley-Lennon a nice, soft, studio interview.

To be fair, Adam Boulton gave him a pretty good savaging.
https://youtu.be/dDEnxNQTZrg

If he "cares so deeply", I trust he will not be breeding.....

What's the betting he has a lovely trust fund that means he doesn't have to have a proper job?

There is an alternative history where posh twats with lovely trust funds did not take over the Conservative Party and accidentally commit us to Brexit.

Yeah, goddamn it, don't people know that necessary radical change is achievable by doing what you're told and not rocking the boat. I mean, look at all movements for radical change in history: women got the vote by making their men sandwiches, slavery was abolished only because of the grace of white people and not at all due to bloody rebellions and wars, and Indian independence was completely about that one guy and his hunger strike, not a strategy of planned disobedience and an attempt at stalling the economy of the empire that controlled them. Not rocking the boat, makes things happen.

You know, this post is very funny.

Because although it's intended to be sarcastic, it's actually correct.

Women got the vote through their actions in wartime - there is a case to be made it was delayed because senior politicians in particular in the Liberal party thought anyone as nutty as the Suffragettes should be kept as far as possible from the ballot box;
Slavery was ultimately abolished first because a series of governments found banning it a useful form of economic warfare (the USA being a dazzling exception) and later because with industrialisation it was in any case an increasingly ineffectual way of running an economy;
India was granted independence at the time it was in the way it was for a complex variety of reasons but most of them were to do with Britain's economic weakness (I think there is confusion over Gandhi's hunger strikes and the reasons for them).

So no - protests don't usually work.

And certainly a bunch of posh fascists with the intellectual capacity of a Corbyn and the self-importance of a Johnson are not going to convince anyone by behaving like the retarded twats they undoubtedly are.

FF43 said:

MyBurningEars said:

148grss said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I wouldn't trust a free VPN....at the very least they sell your info.

However, for £30 a year you can get a trusted no-log one, and in this day and age you are an idiot to access any wifi outside your own home without using one.

I see the purchase / use of a VPN in the same way as buying anti-virus / firewall software.

Do you have a recommendation?

Personally, I have used Private Internet Access for the past 5 years and always had a solid experience, but back when I picked them there was a lot less competition for the retail user. With them you can have up to 5 devices connected at the same time under one subscription.

However, I believe they have recently raised their prices quite considerably (but I have a multi-year package with them so I haven't been affected).

I see a lot of adverts for NordVPN, IpVanish, ExpressVPN, but I honestly don't know how good they are.

ExpressVPN worked best for me amongst several options to get through the Great Firewall of China. The authorities are playing a not always very energetic cat and mouse game with VPN suppliers. They kind of know access to foreign websites is necessary. I use VPN because the Firewall slows internet access to a crawl for any website not on the Government whitelist. The sites I am accessing aren't necessarily controversial. And the Chinese government really hates Google. Google Search, Google Maps,Youtube and I think GMail are all banned.

I have used Express VPN in China - it worked well most of them time and is also good for watching UK-only BBC channels when abroad. Given that VPNs are so easy to use and widely available there seems to be little point in the government trying to restrict internet access - all it will achieve is a boost for VPN suppliers, soon everyone will have one, just as all foreigners do in China.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/Cat_Headley/status/1118494501998354433

Paging @DavidL .........

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.

That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.

Like Robert Smithson, I think that in general, humans are pretty good at sorting out environmental problems, but they need to have the money to do so (people who burn forests for charcoal are usually desperately poor) and they need to be actual problems before people will act.

And, as Cyclefree put it, if you really do want to do your bit, manage a proper garden at your home.

brokenwheel said:

Benpointer said:

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

CRO$$OVER

Labour
11/10
Brexit Party
4/5

Hope noone is in too deep on Labour..

Where are the posts praising shrewd ol’ Farage for having a grand at 3/1??!

A big unknown has to be turnout, more particularly differential turnout across the parties.

IMO a lot depends on a) how well the Brexit and Remain movemeents can motivate their vote and b) whether Labour mebrace a 2nd vote.

The poll also asked the question what would happen if Labour supported a 2nd ref, and the numbers barely moved.

Fair enough - just reminds me why I don't bet based on my political judgement.

TGOHF said:

Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.

Not control, no, if only, but we have a material impact. This is accepted by all of sound mind and good character.

MarqueeMark said:

timmo said:

Having a party on the Ballot paper called the Brexit party is actually better than having a party called UKIP because it is simpler to understand.
I can actually envisage the Tory party coming further down the list than currently shown.

The real hoot would be the Brexit Party getting 52%......

And not being allowed to take their seats!

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

This is also why I dislike the idea that ecoprotests are somehow similar to "fascists" who want to change things by force (not a comment you made, but something someone down thread said). Doing something about climate change is not equal to being a fascist, and neither are the tactics. These are the tactics of civil rights movements.

Civil rights direct action is justifiable because it is trying to overthrow a democratic deficit or change a repressive regime. These protests do not fall in to that category but are an attempt to impose a minority viewpoint by force (not violence as yet).

I mean, the repressive regime is one that is needlessly destroying the chance of continual human civilisation on this planet. The current system of human existence will lead to the destruction of it, potentially in my lifetime. That is the repression.

Trying to circumvent democracy is not the answer. BTW by any objective measurement human material well-being has never been higher. There are environmental challenges but the "imminent end of civilisation unless we act now" is irrational hysteria in my opinion.

I believe the environmental challenges we face are real and radical actions of some kind are probably necessary. However I also cannot forget that the 10 year old videos I watched in school in the 90s essentially said there would be no rainforests left by now.

So protestors being disruptive to get focus on the agenda I'm mostly fine with as an initial thing unless exceptionally twatish and they need to do more than childish attention seeking. But what next? What if as is always the case progress is not made as quickly as they want and what if it is not as bad as they say? How they react to that will be very interesting

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Free love cheap dope and lousy weather

https://truththeory.com/2017/08/20/25-pictures-1960s-offer-inside-look-hippy-era/

MarqueeMark said:

TGOHF said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.

That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.

Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.

The graphs the other day showed the oscillations in climate getting more divergent over the past 2 million years (earlier record are not supported by ice cores). We as a species have been affecting the climate what - 10,000 years, tops?

Taking steps to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is surely prudent. But will it make a jot of difference? Probably not. The best shot we have at changing climate is a single-species mass extinction event - for homo sapiens.

/EvenGloomierThanToriesMode

The level of CO2 we reach will determine which ice sheets will survive, if any, and how many metres of sea level rise future generations experience.

But it isn't likely to happen fast enough that we have to worry about the Thames Barrier being overwhelmed in our lifetime so no-one gives a monkey.

And that's why protestors are taking more radical action.

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1118502242099789824

brokenwheel said:

Benpointer said:

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

CRO$$OVER

Labour
11/10
Brexit Party
4/5

Hope noone is in too deep on Labour..

Where are the posts praising shrewd ol’ Farage for having a grand at 3/1??!

A big unknown has to be turnout, more particularly differential turnout across the parties.

IMO a lot depends on a) how well the Brexit and Remain movemeents can motivate their vote and b) whether Labour mebrace a 2nd vote.

The poll also asked the question what would happen if Labour supported a 2nd ref, and the numbers barely moved.

What did move the needle was the option of Labour's actual apparent policy - Brexit with the Customs Union. That gave the Brexit Party a 10% lead, with Labour on 15%, the same as the Tories and the Lib Dems.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/vdqicng3bz/PeoplesVote_190416_EUElections_w.pdf

Here's an interesting question - where will the Tories best region (Outside the Southeast) be ?

Roger said:

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Free love cheap dope and lousy weather

https://truththeory.com/2017/08/20/25-pictures-1960s-offer-inside-look-hippy-era/

For an acceptable alternative to the middle one, they should shop in Cwmbran:

Asda offers 'free alcohol' in wrong Welsh translation
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-47959424

Edit - come to think of it, wouldn't be the worst place to look for the other two...

ydoethur said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.

That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.

Like Robert Smithson, I think that in general, humans are pretty good at sorting out environmental problems, but they need to have the money to do so (people who burn forests for charcoal are usually desperately poor) and they need to be actual problems before people will act.

And, as Cyclefree put it, if you really do want to do your bit, manage a proper garden at your home.

I must run the most eco friendly garden in the world. No pesticides, lovely shrubs, all my own compost, wild flowers growing freely, and grass that I cut infrequently.

Admittedly that's because I'm too lazy, er, busy to do anything else. But in fairness I did deliberately design it that way when I built it three years ago.

The house down the road from me was empty for three years, the owner having died and it took years to sort out his estate, during which time the garden turned to a wilderness of brambles and weeds. When the house finally appeared on the estate agent's website the blurb read: "The garden has been managed in a natural way to maximise its appeal to wildlife".

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1118502242099789824

This one still has legs on the other side too. Asked if he can appeal: http://www.twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/1118494748984119296

kle4 said:

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

NorthofStoke said:

148grss said:

This is also why I dislike the idea that ecoprotests are somehow similar to "fascists" who want to change things by force (not a comment you made, but something someone down thread said). Doing something about climate change is not equal to being a fascist, and neither are the tactics. These are the tactics of civil rights movements.

Civil rights direct action is justifiable because it is trying to overthrow a democratic deficit or change a repressive regime. These protests do not fall in to that category but are an attempt to impose a minority viewpoint by force (not violence as yet).

I mean, the repressive regime is one that is needlessly destroying the chance of continual human civilisation on this planet. The current system of human existence will lead to the destruction of it, potentially in my lifetime. That is the repression.

Trying to circumvent democracy is not the answer. BTW by any objective measurement human material well-being has never been higher. There are environmental challenges but the "imminent end of civilisation unless we act now" is irrational hysteria in my opinion.

I believe the environmental challenges we face are real and radical actions of some kind are probably necessary. However I also cannot forget that the 10 year old videos I watched in school in the 90s essentially said there would be no rainforests left by now.

So protestors being disruptive to get focus on the agenda I'm mostly fine with as an initial thing unless exceptionally twatish and they need to do more than childish attention seeking. But what next? What if as is always the case progress is not made as quickly as they want and what if it is not as bad as they say? How they react to that will be very interesting

Potholer54 has a good video about how projections of possible outcomes a) need to be scientifically rigorous and b) need to be compared like for like. For instance, your science classes may have said "without changes to the current system there would be no rain-forests left by now" and the system changed to prevent that from happening. Doesn't mean the projections were wrong, just that people looked at those projections and aimed to stop that.

The scientific consensus is we have 10 years to make meaningful change or the feedback cycle will lead to unavoidable and cataclysmic changes. I would like to avoid that. If we have 20 years, what is the problem with trying to do it in 10? The Cost/Benefit is "if we do this thing, life may be sustainable" versus "if we don't do this thing, human civilisation may end". I understand that literal fascists also claim everything is a civilisational threat, but in this case the data is on our side.

justin124 said:

The main parties need to make more effort to remind voters of Farage's close links with Trump.That could yet prove toxic for him.

I really don't think they will. Too many awkward Trump/Corbyn and Trump/Boris parallels.

Benpointer said:

Foxy said:

NorthofStoke said:

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

There is an interesting correlation between climate change denialism and Brexitism.

I'd guess you are right there but what drives that correlation?

High blood pressure.

Dura_Ace said:

Benpointer said:

Foxy said:

NorthofStoke said:

Pulpstar said:

The climate change protestors should be in Beijing

The UK doesn't bother with air conditioning generally, has a good amount of wind power in its mix, has reduced our electric consumption due to mahoosive bills, runs fuel efficient cars (and is switching to electric slowly but surely) and is closing all our coal power stations.

What do these climate hippies want ?

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

There is an interesting correlation between climate change denialism and Brexitism.

I'd guess you are right there but what drives that correlation?

High blood pressure.

That parallel is pure gammon and spinach.

Richard_Nabavi said:

I think it was only two years ago that we were talking about the imminent collapse of the Labour Party, and a long period of Tory hegemony. Funny old world, indeed!

Clearly the Tories don't like being underbid.

Richard_Nabavi said:

I think it was only two years ago that we were talking about the imminent collapse of the Labour Party, and a long period of Tory hegemony. Funny old world, indeed!

I was promised a thousand years

kinabalu said:

NorthofStoke said:

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

Mistake to poo poo the hard evidence of man-made climate change.

People do that - poo poo it - because they do not want to accept it.

It is true that "just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you". The human contribution to climate change is a huge topic with a lot of uncertainty and unfortunately a highly polarised ideologically driven discussion. I've gone from completely accepting the "official" viewpoint (apart from advocating a big push for nuclear) to a more sceptical view but I do have a lot of uncertainty.

I believe that the costs of reducing emissions can be confidently estimated (subject to modification for technology changes) whilst the predicted effects of rising temperatures are very speculative. In addition the panic over CO2 emissions arises from mathematical models that are simplifications and have no track record. The "precautionary principle" is no use either as we are almost certainly in an inter-glacial and it could be that bumping up CO2 is counteracting the move to an ice-age.

If the predecessors of the extreme environmentalists had been listened to most of us would not be here or would have short miserable lives toiling on the land.

MikeL said:

The question for the next GE is how prominent is Brexit going to be?

When in the middle of a storm it's easy to lose perspective. It's worth remembering back to last July when Boris and Davis resigned after "Chequers" - the polls changed very quickly and Lab took a clear lead as Con Brexiteers were up in arms at what TMay had done. Within 4 to 6 weeks the whole thing had been forgotten and Con went back into the lead. I wonder if anyone can now even remember what decision was taken at "Chequers"?

Now of course failing to leave the EU will be remembered much more than Chequers but at the same time the very short duration of that poll blip is a reminder that things can quickly move on.

If we do actually leave the EU (on whatever terms) then I suspect all the detail and wrangling will be quickly forgotten by all except the most obsessive anoraks. The big risk for Con is a GE before Brexit has actually happened - whereas if it has happened they may well be perfectly OK.

E H H Green and Robert Blake both compared Europe to the Tarriff Reform campaigns of 1880-1932.

I quote from the late John Ramsden's History of the Conservative Party: The Age of Balfour and Baldwin (from memory) about a conversation a journalist had with a Tory activist in the 1950s:

'I went through all the things that were wrong with the National Government - the means Test, the failure to stand up to the dictators, the lack of rearmament, the failure to deal with India, a general drift and lack of clarity. At every stage, he nodded. Then he broke in, with a catch in his voice, 'But don't forget, they gave us the tarriff.' There was a generation of Conservative history in his words.'

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Pulpstar said:

Here's an interesting question - where will the Tories best region (Outside the Southeast) be ?

The obvious choices are East of England and the South West, but in both the Tories face being squeezed between keen remainers and keen leavers. So I'd plump for East Midlands, where people are more likely to be focused on the potential economic damage and therefore more receptive to the Tories' compromise Brexit.

Nah, here the Dehondt system favoured them last time round. It is quite possible that the Tories will lose both their EM MEPs.

I took the question to be about share of the vote.

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

The question for the next GE is how prominent is Brexit going to be?

When in the middle of a storm it's easy to lose perspective. It's worth remembering back to last July when Boris and Davis resigned after "Chequers" - the polls changed very quickly and Lab took a clear lead as Con Brexiteers were up in arms at what TMay had done. Within 4 to 6 weeks the whole thing had been forgotten and Con went back into the lead. I wonder if anyone can now even remember what decision was taken at "Chequers"?

Now of course failing to leave the EU will be remembered much more than Chequers but at the same time the very short duration of that poll blip is a reminder that things can quickly move on.

If we do actually leave the EU (on whatever terms) then I suspect all the detail and wrangling will be quickly forgotten by all except the most obsessive anoraks. The big risk for Con is a GE before Brexit has actually happened - whereas if it has happened they may well be perfectly OK.

E H H Green and Robert Blake both compared Europe to the Tarriff Reform campaigns of 1880-1932.

I quote from the late John Ramsden's History of the Conservative Party: The Age of Balfour and Baldwin (from memory) about a conversation a journalist had with a Tory activist in the 1950s:

'I went through all the things that were wrong with the National Government - the means Test, the failure to stand up to the dictators, the lack of rearmament, the failure to deal with India, a general drift and lack of clarity. At every stage, he nodded. Then he broke in, with a catch in his voice, 'But don't forget, they gave us the tarriff.' There was a generation of Conservative history in his words.'

The same John Ramsden who had been a Tory councillor for my patch of East London, until I turned it into a reasonably safe LibDem ward through to his sad death. I always enjoyed delivering Focus to his house.

IanB2 said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Pulpstar said:

Here's an interesting question - where will the Tories best region (Outside the Southeast) be ?

The obvious choices are East of England and the South West, but in both the Tories face being squeezed between keen remainers and keen leavers. So I'd plump for East Midlands, where people are more likely to be focused on the potential economic damage and therefore more receptive to the Tories' compromise Brexit.

Nah, here the Dehondt system favoured them last time round. It is quite possible that the Tories will lose both their EM MEPs.

I took the question to be about share of the vote.

I think Scotland may be their best outside the SE. The East Midlands is No Deal territory.

IanB2 said:

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

The question for the next GE is how prominent is Brexit going to be?

When in the middle of a storm it's easy to lose perspective. It's worth remembering back to last July when Boris and Davis resigned after "Chequers" - the polls changed very quickly and Lab took a clear lead as Con Brexiteers were up in arms at what TMay had done. Within 4 to 6 weeks the whole thing had been forgotten and Con went back into the lead. I wonder if anyone can now even remember what decision was taken at "Chequers"?

Now of course failing to leave the EU will be remembered much more than Chequers but at the same time the very short duration of that poll blip is a reminder that things can quickly move on.

If we do actually leave the EU (on whatever terms) then I suspect all the detail and wrangling will be quickly forgotten by all except the most obsessive anoraks. The big risk for Con is a GE before Brexit has actually happened - whereas if it has happened they may well be perfectly OK.

E H H Green and Robert Blake both compared Europe to the Tarriff Reform campaigns of 1880-1932.

I quote from the late John Ramsden's History of the Conservative Party: The Age of Balfour and Baldwin (from memory) about a conversation a journalist had with a Tory activist in the 1950s:

'I went through all the things that were wrong with the National Government - the means Test, the failure to stand up to the dictators, the lack of rearmament, the failure to deal with India, a general drift and lack of clarity. At every stage, he nodded. Then he broke in, with a catch in his voice, 'But don't forget, they gave us the tarriff.' There was a generation of Conservative history in his words.'

The same John Ramsden who had been a Tory councillor for my patch of East London, until I turned it into a reasonably safe LibDem ward through to his sad death. I always enjoyed delivering Focus to his house.

61 was no age to go. I didn't know him well, but he was very friendly and helpful on those occasions I did contact him.

Sean_F said:

OblitusSumMe said:

MarqueeMark said:

TGOHF said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.

That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.

Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.

The graphs the other day showed the oscillations in climate getting more divergent over the past 2 million years (earlier record are not supported by ice cores). We as a species have been affecting the climate what - 10,000 years, tops?

Taking steps to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is surely prudent. But will it make a jot of difference? Probably not. The best shot we have at changing climate is a single-species mass extinction event - for homo sapiens.

/EvenGloomierThanToriesMode

The level of CO2 we reach will determine which ice sheets will survive, if any, and how many metres of sea level rise future generations experience.

But it isn't likely to happen fast enough that we have to worry about the Thames Barrier being overwhelmed in our lifetime so no-one gives a monkey.

And that's why protestors are taking more radical action.

Plainly, people do give a monkey's. That's why the UK's carbon emissions are falling.

What people don't want is to destroy a system which generates the highest ever standard of living.

We are missing our targets which are not ambitious enough. I think I would characterise that as paying lip service to the problem.

I do not agree that taking more rapid action necessarily requires dismantling capitalism.

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Pulpstar said:

Here's an interesting question - where will the Tories best region (Outside the Southeast) be ?

The obvious choices are East of England and the South West, but in both the Tories face being squeezed between keen remainers and keen leavers. So I'd plump for East Midlands, where people are more likely to be focused on the potential economic damage and therefore more receptive to the Tories' compromise Brexit.

Nah, here the Dehondt system favoured them last time round. It is quite possible that the Tories will lose both their EM MEPs.

I took the question to be about share of the vote.

I think Scotland may be their best outside the SE. The East Midlands is No Deal territory.

I apologise if I was crediting the East Mids with a bit more common sense.

Pulpy has asked a good question, if one that is sadly too obscure for the bookmakers.

I'm always reminded of the Beatles and Revolution when it comes to the attitude of green politics:

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be
All right, all right, all right
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're doing what we can
But if you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be
All right, all right, all right
You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know it's gonna be
All right, all right, all right
All right, all right, all right
All right, all right, all right
All right, all right


Too many green politics and politicans are on the 'destruction/charman Mao' path, and no wonder normal people think 'you can count me out'.

Find a way to combat climate change without directly impacting on peoples lives in too much of a negative way.

IanB2 said:

ExiledInScotland said:

Foxy said:

kinabalu said:

NorthofStoke said:

Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.

Mistake to poo poo the hard evidence of man-made climate change.

People do that - poo poo it - because they do not want to accept it.

Here are some interesting graphs from those notorious eco-hippies at Bloomberg, with more detail in the link:

https://twitter.com/eroston/status/1116786363964194816?s=19

Real conservatives who want to maintain our way of life should take this seriously, as David Cameron did. Once Bangladesh is underwater, and Sub-saharan africa is in permanent drought is a bit too late. You think there are too many refugees already? well imagine that...

Strangely enough, the UK could be a pretty decent place to live in a warmer climate. We would have a longer growing season with more rain due to increased precipitation. There will be more storms however so we will need to upgrade our housing stock and improve flood defences - stop building on flood plains immediately and increase forestry on upland hills. The latter would also increase farmer prosperity, rural employment and allow us to develop carbon neutral power generation using softwood incinerator power stations.

Read "The New North" by Laurence Smith. His thesis is that Scandinavia, Siberia and Canada will be the places to be (and invest) in the future, given their mineral wealth and progressively improving climate.

Bumper wine harvests for Britain.