politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the Brexit negotiations reach a critical point the latest Y
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the Brexit negotiations reach a critical point the latest YouGov trackers has “Brexit wrong” with 5% lead
New YouGov/Times poll sees CON up 2
Comments
-
Thirst0
-
Good old constituency polling, always good for losing cash in bets1
-
Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.0
-
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
I live in the constituency and we have been inundated with Lib Dem literature. The labour candidate had to resign so we have had nothing from them for months.0
-
Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?0
-
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?0 -
The Lib Dems will be severely over rated in Betting Markets in my opinion. You can tell their supporters are absolutely desperate to believe.Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?1 -
Perhaps they are the long searched for racists who didn't vote Leave?OldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
2 -
If the MoE for a sample size that small is, say double the normal +/-2.5% (I am guessing, but it won’t be far off) then we could easily be looking at a photo finish rather than that big lead.Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
Nevertheless the fact that Berger and the LDs have established sufficient profile to be out in front in a seat poll is big news - even if the seat poll itself is pretty worthless potentially far out from a hypothetical election.0 -
And 3% Lib Dems who think we are right to leave. Strange worldOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
Yes, MOE of 4.9%isam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
Extraordinarily self aware?OldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
They only named the Lib Dem and Tory candidates I think.Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?0 -
They used Jeremy Newmark’s name!Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?0 -
Surprised it's not 93%, most of the leavers on here now seem to be in the "It's the worst thing to happen to the country since the bubonic plague, but you have to respect therwilloftherpeople before you disrespect it, innit?" camp.OldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
Mr Stodge? And the residual Liberal Party is anti-EU. Not internationalist enough.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And 3% Lib Dems who think we are right to leave. Strange worldOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
Maybe they are Brexiters who think we should have had a coherent strategy before implementing Article 50?OldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
Can we infer from this poll, that the Lib Dems have done the same thing in all the other defectors' seats and decided not to publish those results?1
-
The fact that talks are continuing makes nonsense of Barnier's statement yesterday that a Deal had to be agreed by midnight last night!0
-
In the run up to the 2017 election, 68% wanted to respect the result.HYUFD said:
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/9096972017687470080 -
Pulpstar said:
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?
Just replicating likely general election conditions ?0 -
And only te Tory and LD candidates were mentioned! Sounds like garbage.Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
Amazing symmetry0
-
Do Liberal Clubs now have a relationship with the LibDems?Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I'm assured, on stacks of bibles, that the local Conservative (or Con) Club has nothing whatsoever to do with the political party of that name.
I'm very interested because they're about to hold a beer festival with all beers (and ciders) at £3 a pint. The poster says it it's open to non-members, but I'm a bit worried about being seen there.0 -
Indeed. If you don’t have a new candidate the polling company would (should) use the name of whoever stood last time. Which at least should grant a smidgin of name recognition.TheScreamingEagles said:
They used Jeremy Newmark’s name!Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1184425368758956033
How can they do a named candidate poll when we have no idea who the Labour candidate is ?0 -
Or 400 people on Golder's Green High Street at Sunday lunch time.Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
-
Very hard in constituency polls to find a sample of more than 500. A small sample just increases the margin of error.isam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
As has been pointed out single seat polls have not had a good record of success.
Note the poll, from Farage's favourite pollster, was commissioned by the LDs.0 -
-
FPT
kle4 said:
» show previous quotes
I didnt know you thought that possible!
It is very tight but they just take the biscuit0 -
Generally speaking the degree of accuracy that someone can place in a poll is in direct proportion to their liking of the numbers.justin124 said:
And only te Tory and LD candidates were mentioned! Sounds like garbage.Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I know that Survation carried out a poll for BREX at Peterborough that had LAB winning.0 -
No but I would not be surprised if others were on the way.rkrkrk said:Can we infer from this poll, that the Lib Dems have done the same thing in all the other defectors' seats and decided not to publish those results?
0 -
These "margin of error" values are based on the assumption a representative sample. I am, let say, sceptical that a sample size of 400 in a poll comissioned from a political party is very representative of the whole constiteuncy.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, MOE of 4.9%isam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
Aside from whether you like the results, what other indicators would you look at for how much to trust a poll, and how well does this one stack up?MikeSmithson said:
Generally speaking the degree of accuracy that someone can place in a poll is in direct proportion to their liking of the numbers.justin124 said:
And only te Tory and LD candidates were mentioned! Sounds like garbage.Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I know that Survation carried out a poll for BREX at Peterborough that had LAB winning.0 -
Make great bar charts for election leaflets though...eristdoof said:
These "margin of error" values are based on the assumption a representative sample. I am, let say, sceptical that a sample size of 400 in a poll comissioned from a political party is very representative of the whole constiteuncy.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, MOE of 4.9%isam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
0 -
The Survation figures sum through to 79%, which implies Brexit + Greens sum through to 21%
! 0 -
Hard to pass through the assembly when they have been shirking for almost 3 years , apart from lifting the cash.Scott_P said:0 -
Aye. It's one thing to think its wrong to do something, but completely another to think that honouring a vote and doing it anyway is the best thing to do.HYUFD said:
I wish some on here would recognise that.
I'm one of the 3% of LD voters who think its both right to leave, and would still do it anyway.
I don't support a No Deal exit in two weeks time, but lets be honest, that's not happening is it?1 -
The second sentence is not true. It also makes the risk of "lumpy sampling" considerably higher.MikeSmithson said:
Very hard in constituency polls to find a sample of more than 500. A small sample just increases the margin of error.isam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
...
0 -
-
I do think this is the right question to ask and I would be interested to see other firms ask it in this way. It certainly chimes with a lot of my own anecdotal experience both within the Conservative Party and on the doorstep (I accept both those samples are unrepresentative!)HYUFD said:
I think a lot of "second referendum" polling respondees are actually answering "If you could go back to June 2016, how would you vote?" regardless of the actual question they are asked.0 -
I have just spotted a Comres survey carried out for ITN 2nd - 14th October - sample size 22,956.
Con 29%
Lab 27%
LD 14%
Brx 12%
SNP 3%
Others 5%
Maybe Dont Knows account for remainder.0 -
It only had to be finished by midnight if a decision was to be made at the Summit. An extension removes that need.justin124 said:The fact that talks are continuing makes nonsense of Barnier's statement yesterday that a Deal had to be agreed by midnight last night!
Indeed, I do wonder if continued negotiations causing our PM to ask for an extension is their plan.0 -
Not if Don't Know wasn't excluded. I can imagine there being a fair amount of DK in this constituency given Labour's ongoing issues and the new high-profile LD candidate.Pulpstar said:The Survation figures sum through to 79%, which implies Brexit + Greens sum through to 21%
!
Edit: final release appears to have DK excluded.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1184432346457661440?s=210 -
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
Do you?0 -
There are always about 3%-points which are people answering the question wrongly, reading it wrongly or just answering randomly.OldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
-
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
0 -
Where was this found?justin124 said:I have just spotted a Comres survey carried out for ITN 2nd - 14th October - sample size 22,956.
Con 29%
Lab 27%
LD 14%
Brx 12%
SNP 3%
Others 5%
Maybe Dont Knows account for remainder.0 -
We have spent 3 years of blood an treasure on it.basicbridge said:We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
How much more "respect" are you looking for?0 -
Utterly at a loss at to why, when you are so perpetually enraged at OGH and all his works, you continue to spend your days posting on his website.basicbridge said:We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
Do you?0 -
UK Opinion Polls on Wilkipedia.bigjohnowls said:
Where was this found?justin124 said:I have just spotted a Comres survey carried out for ITN 2nd - 14th October - sample size 22,956.
Con 29%
Lab 27%
LD 14%
Brx 12%
SNP 3%
Others 5%
Maybe Dont Knows account for remainder.0 -
I'm not 100% but looking at the fieldwork those are just the unweighted VI figures, the released survey is about Brexit and has no headline figures for VIjustin124 said:I have just spotted a Comres survey carried out for ITN 2nd - 14th October - sample size 22,956.
Con 29%
Lab 27%
LD 14%
Brx 12%
SNP 3%
Others 5%
Maybe Dont Knows account for remainder.0 -
I look at the age splits in the data tables. There's a tendency in single seat polls for this to be very biased towards the older age range which mean that the younger responses have to be scaled up.Stereotomy said:
Aside from whether you like the results, what other indicators would you look at for how much to trust a poll, and how well does this one stack up?MikeSmithson said:
Generally speaking the degree of accuracy that someone can place in a poll is in direct proportion to their liking of the numbers.justin124 said:
And only te Tory and LD candidates were mentioned! Sounds like garbage.Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I know that Survation carried out a poll for BREX at Peterborough that had LAB winning.
In this case there were 79 18-34 year olds in the sample and their responses were scaled up to 121.1 -
Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.0
-
I went to speak at a meeting of a charity at the Conservative Club when I was a Labour MP - got a couple of amused looks. You do have to put up with looking at framed pictures of Margaret Thatcher amd the like.OldKingCole said:
Do Liberal Clubs now have a relationship with the LibDems?Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I'm assured, on stacks of bibles, that the local Conservative (or Con) Club has nothing whatsoever to do with the political party of that name.
I'm very interested because they're about to hold a beer festival with all beers (and ciders) at £3 a pint. The poster says it it's open to non-members, but I'm a bit worried about being seen there.0 -
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead
0 -
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
...is certainly one way of looking at it. Another way is that the advisory referendum was a request with no statutory force, not formally an instruction.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead
Not for me to pronounce on which is correct (if there is such a thing), but I don't think you can really accuse Parliament of "trying to ignore the referendum mandate", given that they've spent the last three years talking about little else.1 -
This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.2 -
We have been told for years Brexit is the end of the union anyway. I'm not sure it has much more impact to suggest boris' proposal causes it instead, or just more effectively, even if trueScott_P said:0 -
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
The traditional purpose of a Conservative Club was for Tory grandees to ply working men with free beer before voting. Selling expensive beer to OAPs is a radical change.OldKingCole said:
Do Liberal Clubs now have a relationship with the LibDems?Nigelb said:
There is that - but they might have conducted it in the Liberal Club...Freggles said:
Yes, but it's not exactly a close resultisam said:
Was the sample size really 400?TheScreamingEagles said:Survation and constituency polling wasn’t a happy relationship in the past.
I'm assured, on stacks of bibles, that the local Conservative (or Con) Club has nothing whatsoever to do with the political party of that name.
I'm very interested because they're about to hold a beer festival with all beers (and ciders) at £3 a pint. The poster says it it's open to non-members, but I'm a bit worried about being seen there.0 -
Yes the PM has ignored the referendum mandate. He voted against and torpedoed the WA for his personal political gain. Having promised a deal he now threatens the country with no deal which has no mandate. What a shame.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead1 -
everyone is fighting over NI, no-one is fighting over Scotland, quality earns a premiumCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
It's got nothing to do with seeing people as a a homogenous mass, it's about some individuals posturing that only they are the true leavers even as they condemn others who vote to leave when they themselves did not. I dont know what you are even on about.isam said:
It's interesting that, since the referendum, the years of progress at not seeing people who share one characteristic as a homogenous mass has been thrown away, seemingly by the people who argued for less broad brush thinking themselves.kle4 said:
Very true, and very crazyAlastairMeeks said:
In the looking glass world of Leavers, actually voting for Brexit at every opportunity is evidence that an MP is opposed to Brexit.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Indeed but not anymore hence her de-selectionAlastairMeeks said:
Talking of whom:Big_G_NorthWales said:
Antoinette Sandbach has been overwhelmingly deselected by her consituency in her safe seat of EddisburyMarqueeMark said:
Grieve has had it easy, with 400 MPs quietly (or otherwise) urging him on - and determinedly blocking off any route to the voters.Foxy said:
Grieve and co have played a much more astute game than Cummings.DavidL said:
You just haven't got this whole pointless gesture thing, have you?kle4 said:
Seems a point less trip, the EU will offer an extension if asked so theres no worries, it's in parliaments hands whether theres a deal to vote down or not.Foxy said:Sounds like a few MPs are having a nice day out.
https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1184359458966818817?s=19
Whether that plays well long term has yet to be seen. If we still end up with Brexit and a House shorn of its Europhile MPs, some may think Cummings has had the last laugh.....
https://twitter.com/Sandbach/status/1184371828980178944
NB Antoinette Sandbach voted for Theresa May's deal at every opportunity.
It does seem a big price to pay but she is one of several who will see their seats won by anti EU conservatives, unfortunately0 -
It's not a bad idea on theory but of course people can use that as an excuse to be a total asshat on the grounds they dont respect something.Cyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.0 -
Talking, obfuscating, delaying, hoping to be able to not implement the instruction from the voters.El_Capitano said:
...is certainly one way of looking at it. Another way is that the advisory referendum was a request with no statutory force, not formally an instruction.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead
Not for me to pronounce on which is correct (if there is such a thing), but I don't think you can really accuse Parliament of "trying to ignore the referendum mandate", given that they've spent the last three years talking about little else.
That sense of “ignore”... 😂0 -
Respect is probably the wrong word in this scenario, even if it is the most commonly used. I think we should follow through with the actions flowing from the referendum, but to me that is different to respecting it. I do not at all respect vote leave leaders or its arguments.Cyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.
0 -
The Scots still get much more per head than us Welsh.Carnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
Methadone is quote expensive, I suppose.0 -
That’s a very dangerous philosophyCyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.
Let’s say that the electorate votes in a Corbyn majority to Parliament
No matter how stupid they have been the have the right to have their decision respected and for Corbyn to form the next government1 -
I spend very little of my time reading, and even less of my time posting, on his blog.El_Capitano said:
Utterly at a loss at to why, when you are so perpetually enraged at OGH and all his works, you continue to spend your days posting on his website.basicbridge said:We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
Do you?
Its also a public blog - we can all add what we like. Do you have a problem with that?0 -
Don’t think so? I thought the Barnett formula calculated government spending in ScotlandCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
Looking at that, you'd think she (Berger) would be a shoo-in, but I always think in a GE campaign, on the day a lot of people wobble in the voting booth (I know I have).Pulpstar said:
She certainly can win. I think she will struggle.
For the record, I can't stand the woman. She comes in here (Merseyside) and gets dumped in a nice safe Labour seat. When her politics change, she neither holds a by-election in her own seat, but then scuttles off to a more winnable seat just because she knows she'll get an absolute kicking.
I do hope she fails in her bid, despite probably going to vote LD myself at the next GE.0 -
https://twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1184425557402030083
https://twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1184425560300277760
The whole thread is worth looking at.0 -
Indeed. With much of that time spent in attempts to frustrate that vote by those who said they would, and then failed, to respect it.Scott_P said:
We have spent 3 years of blood an treasure on it.basicbridge said:We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
How much more "respect" are you looking for?0 -
Leaving with no deal is leaving. The referendum vote didn’t put any restrictions on how.noneoftheabove said:
Yes the PM has ignored the referendum mandate. He voted against and torpedoed the WA for his personal political gain. Having promised a deal he now threatens the country with no deal which has no mandate. What a shame.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead0 -
The weighted figures excluding Don't Knows are Con 32 Lab 30 LD 16 BXP 13 but it's not clear if the weighting might've been slightly different for a proper VI poll. https://www.comresglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ComRes_ITN_Brexit-Referendum-Poll_Oct-19-2.pdfdyedwoolie said:
I'm not 100% but looking at the fieldwork those are just the unweighted VI figures, the released survey is about Brexit and has no headline figures for VIjustin124 said:I have just spotted a Comres survey carried out for ITN 2nd - 14th October - sample size 22,956.
Con 29%
Lab 27%
LD 14%
Brx 12%
SNP 3%
Others 5%
Maybe Dont Knows account for remainder.0 -
Both, and Wales too.Charles said:
Don’t think so? I thought the Barnett formula calculated government spending in ScotlandCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
Gavin Esler should be pleased if that is the case, he wanted to Change the UKScott_P said:
0 -
"Advisory" referendum. In other words one you think you can ignore. Weasely.El_Capitano said:
...is certainly one way of looking at it. Another way is that the advisory referendum was a request with no statutory force, not formally an instruction.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead
Not for me to pronounce on which is correct (if there is such a thing), but I don't think you can really accuse Parliament of "trying to ignore the referendum mandate", given that they've spent the last three years talking about little else.
Fortunately you seem to be well out of tune with the public.0 -
"Controversial" makes it sound like a dangerous and edgy opinion rather than selfish and spoiltCyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.2 -
They have the right to have their decision enacted. Not respected. The two are not the same.Charles said:
That’s a very dangerous philosophyCyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.
Let’s say that the electorate votes in a Corbyn majority to Parliament
No matter how stupid they have been the have the right to have their decision respected and for Corbyn to form the next government1 -
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1184425897522278400?s=21Alanbrooke said:
everyone is fighting over NI, no-one is fighting over Scotland, quality earns a premiumCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
In terms of different treatments, I'm actually wondering if Mr Johnson is quietly threatening the DUP with a referendum on leaving the UK if they don't play ball.Alanbrooke said:
everyone is fighting over NI, no-one is fighting over Scotland, quality earns a premiumCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0 -
A radical suggestion this, but 'enacting it'.Scott_P said:
We have spent 3 years of blood an treasure on it.basicbridge said:We had a proper poll, Mike. It was called a "referendum". It was one where participants and politicians all promised to respect the outcome. Even though i didnt vote for that i respect it.
How much more "respect" are you looking for?
No one said we could leave the day after the vote. EVERYONE said there would be at least two year negotiations. That we've run to three is unfortunate but hardly disasterous.0 -
No, but the campaign did. As always it comes back to either a strict technical interpretation, in which case it was "any old means of leaving, yes, but it was only advisory" or the ''respect the spirit of it" viewv in which case yes, politicians said they would respect the result, but then equally we need to respect what the leave campaign said about what would happen if we voted leave."Charles said:
Leaving with no deal is leaving. The referendum vote didn’t put any restrictions on how.noneoftheabove said:
Yes the PM has ignored the referendum mandate. He voted against and torpedoed the WA for his personal political gain. Having promised a deal he now threatens the country with no deal which has no mandate. What a shame.Charles said:
Parliamentary mandates are different to referendum mandatesnoneoftheabove said:
The mandate for the most radical change, no deal, was 1.8% of the UK electorate at the last GE. If 1.8% is ok for no deal why isnt the 35%+ the LDs would need ok for revoke (which isnt radical change, at least yet)?Charles said:
The ones who believe the LibDems that you don’t need a popular mandate for radical changeOldKingCole said:Who on earth are the 3% of Brexit Party voters who think we wrong to vote to Leave?
The referendum instruction was to leave
The general election established a body of people who should have oversight on the executive’s negotiations on *how* we leave
They have taken it on themselves to try and ignore the referendum mandate instead1 -
Who is it that decides which decisions to respect?Charles said:
That’s a very dangerous philosophyCyclefree said:This may sound controversial but I don't see why we should respect something if we think it unworthy of respect.
If X says or does something stupid, they're free to do so. It's possible to accept that they have the freedom to do so while still thinking that what they're doing or saying is irredeemably foolish. This idea that you should be entitled to have your decisions (as opposed to your right to take decisions) respected seems to me to be twaddle.
We'd do far better as a society to call things out for what they are than have all this pious humbug about respecting what we consider to be other people's stupidity, even if that means that our own nonsense is also called out by others.
Let’s say that the electorate votes in a Corbyn majority to Parliament
No matter how stupid they have been the have the right to have their decision respected and for Corbyn to form the next government0 -
well its a good ploy. Ireland would be bankrupt as a consequence.Carnyx said:
In terms of different treatments, I'm actually wondering if Mr Johnson is quietly threatening the DUP with a referendum on leaving the UK if they don't play ball.Alanbrooke said:
everyone is fighting over NI, no-one is fighting over Scotland, quality earns a premiumCarnyx said:
Eh? The Barnett formula (now in any case much eroded) is what NI are getting, plus all this bribery ...Charles said:
Whereas you lot automatically get your cut via the Barnett formula without all this unseemly wrestlingmalcolmg said:Amazing that everything depends on a handful of rogues from NI. Boris and others grovelling and throwing cash at them. What a pathetic state this wretched union is in. They deserve all they are going to get.
0
