politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After an eventful day a CON overall majority now a 60% chance
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After an eventful day a CON overall majority now a 60% chance on Betfair
Today’s moved by Farage sounds like a very important development but are we over stating it? Much of the coverage seems to be based on the widespread assumption that all the BP party vote will automatically go to the Tories.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What?
Is this conclusion drawn from... one by election, where they came 2nd by 683 votes?
Stay at home party a clear winner.
Having said that, there is one effect that the header fails to take into account even with this limited arrangement: in most times, and especially in a populist age, voters love strength. And to see Farage the big mouth of Brexit bend the knee to Boris will boost Boris' "strength" rating amongst the electorate, even if they dislike the alignment itself. Corbyn looks weaker and more friendless by the day...
The same is applicable to potential ex tory brexit party voters
The effect could be to reduce turn out
Presumably there will be another couple of hundred before the nominations go in.
Street lights, cars, postal votes. If anyone wants to vote they can. A low turnout is a function of either (or both) lack of choice (pacts and tactical voting) or disinterest and boredom.
Her suggestion today for MPs - 'why not just send them all to the jungle, we could call it "I'm the Prime Minister, Get Me Out Of Here!" . . . but not send any cameras with them.'
As I previously made the point on the previous thread, the UK has survived left-wing Governments in the past and even Churchill accepted the radical socialist policies of the Atlee Government in 1950 and 1951.
I actually think Corbyn comes across as reasonable and actually cares for the welfare of people unlike Boris who cares for himself only! I find the project fear around Corbyn as having parity with project fear around Brexit. If their is nothing to fear about Brexit as Leavers maintain why is Corbyn anymore of a threat?
In some places like Richmond Park, it may have the effect of scaring a few "voted Remain in 2016 and prefer the Tories and don't mind Brexit so long as there's really a Deal" into the arms of the LDs.
Still, I never liked Zac Goldsmith.
At which point one might wonder why he’s bothering at all . He really should have just ended the BP after Bozo got his deal .
You don't think Brexit has damaged the UK internationally or domestically then? The UKs international reputation is at rock bottom whilst Northern Ireland could erupt into civil war again and Scotland may go it own way. Meanwhile the economy will be adversely affected by any sort of Brexit. You see we all see different things...
Well I don't know if Brexit has damaged the UK yet because it's not even been enacted. Maybe if it had been sooner we wouldn't be in this mess. Losers consent and all that. But Corbyn is a nasty old fool who has pretty much wrung his hands for every terrorist organisation in the world who has had an interest in undermining the West. He still does. Now I'm not silly enough to think Boris is perfect, he isn't, far from it. But still. Corbyn as PM isn't just about economics (actually neither is Brexit), it's a life time of anti British and anti Western sentiment. A lifetime of cheer leading extremist Socialist republics in the Third World and using them as a template to dismantle the free market economy which sustains rich countries like ours. He's a bit shit crazy, vindictive, anti Semitic old bastard with the brain of a 15 year old Communist.
It amuses me that his terrorist connections keep being highlighted in the Tory/Brexit supporting media. It may have passed you by but the British Government was in talks with the IRA in the 1970s, 1980s and the 1990s. The DUP went into Government with Sinn Fein FFS! I have no doubt at all that many of the people Corbyn has been viewed associating himself with will also have been in dialogue with the very people the terrorist's are running a campaign of violence against.
As I previously made the point on the previous thread, the UK has survived left-wing Governments in the past and even Churchill accepted the radical socialist policies of the Atlee Government in 1950 and 1951.
I actually think Corbyn comes across as reasonable and actually cares for the welfare of people unlike Boris who cares for himself only! I find the project fear around Corbyn as having parity with project fear around Brexit. If their is nothing to fear about Brexit as Leavers maintain why is Corbyn anymore of a threat?
This a point I make to as many people as possible. In view, unless you are very wealthy you have nothing to fear from a Labour Government, led by a man who prefers haw haw to war war, despite what the media says. If you Joe Bloggs you have everything to gain from Labour government that would look after your interests, not just the big earners.
'It amuses me that his terrorist connections keep being highlighted in the Tory/Brexit supporting media. It may have passed you by but the British Government was in talks with the IRA in the 1970s, 1980s and the 1990s. The DUP went into Government with Sinn Fein FFS! I have no doubt at all that many of the people Corbyn has been viewed associating himself with will also have been in dialogue with the very people the terrorist's are running a campaign of violence against.
As I previously made the point on the previous thread, the UK has survived left-wing Governments in the past and even Churchill accepted the radical socialist policies of the Atlee Government in 1950 and 1951.
I actually think Corbyn comes across as reasonable and actually cares for the welfare of people unlike Boris who cares for himself only! I find the project fear around Corbyn as having parity with project fear around Brexit. If their is nothing to fear about Brexit as Leavers maintain why is Corbyn anymore of a threat?
There is a pretty big difference between talking with an opponent and acting as a supporter. You can't claim Corbyn was just acting as a negotiator when he was wreath-laying at the graves of terrorists. Especially when he refused to meet with Chukka Umunna.'
Spot on. This is the standard defence Corbyn's apologists have been trotting out since he became leader. They really believe it too. It's astonishing. No matter the evidence to the contrary, they will not see him for what he is.
Though Farage was still an elected UKIP representative in 2017 and leader of all its elected representatives in the only Parliament it had elected representatives in while Cameron stood down as an elected representative years ago.
Suggesting 2017 UKIP had nothing to do with Farage is like suggesting that 2019 SNP has nothing to do with Ian Blackford.
Has Michael Gove got nothing to do with the Conservatives?
It's a curiosity, isn't it? What perverse logic sets the age limit for women higher than men?
Basically, Mike made a rick in the header, forgetting that Farage wasn't involved in 2017.
Con 39 +1
Lab 31
LD 15
BXP 8 -1
Green 3
[Apologies if it's already been picked up and commented on earlier.]
I believe it was so women didn't immediately outnumber men on the electoral roll.
It amuses me that his terrorist connections keep being highlighted in the Tory/Brexit supporting media. It may have passed you by but the British Government was in talks with the IRA in the 1970s, 1980s and the 1990s. The DUP went into Government with Sinn Fein FFS! I have no doubt at all that many of the people Corbyn has been viewed associating himself with will also have been in dialogue with the very people the terrorist's are running a campaign of violence against.
As I previously made the point on the previous thread, the UK has survived left-wing Governments in the past and even Churchill accepted the radical socialist policies of the Atlee Government in 1950 and 1951.
I actually think Corbyn comes across as reasonable and actually cares for the welfare of people unlike Boris who cares for himself only! I find the project fear around Corbyn as having parity with project fear around Brexit. If their is nothing to fear about Brexit as Leavers maintain why is Corbyn anymore of a threat?
This a point I make to as many people as possible. In view, unless you are very wealthy you have nothing to fear from a Labour Government, led by a man who prefers haw haw to war war, despite what the media says. If you Joe Bloggs you have everything to gain from Labour government that would look after your interests, not just the big earners.
Labour would destroy the economy and peoples jobs - the rich will ride it out or move - its Joe Bloggs who will suffer the most.
It's not rocket science - wherever Labours approach has been tried it goes horribly wrong.
I mean, isn't that the definition of adding insult to injury?
If it turns out that a majority of voters, or enough voters to give him a majority, don't mind Corbyn being anti Nuclear weapons, pro a United Ireland, pro Palestine and whatever else his opponents use to discredit him, that's fair enough too
Argentina, Bolivia, Cuba for starters. I'm sure you can name more.
As for the union, the SNP are still polling below 2015 levels which was before the Brexit vote
The tragedy of WW1readily reduces me to tears, but I recoil from bogus nationalism and loathe the ignorance of the history and the causes of the conflict.
I'm a reluctant and occasional poppy wearer for that reason.
If they wish to have a permanent stake in the country there is a path they can take to get citizenship and if they get it then they get the vote same as any other citizen, same as anywhere else in the world.
The Tories start at nearly 40% of the vote in Sedgefield. UKIP never hit more than 1/6th of the vote there.
Not saying these are my views, just that's how some folks think.
If the UK economy is smaller than would have been the case by remaining in the EU, your not really saving money as economic activity in the UK is taxed and that revenue falls if economic activity is reduced.
The SNP are campaigning for another vote, it will gather steam until it becomes inevitable due to Brexit.
Let me tell you then that is was in 1997.
That's 22 consecutive years of trade deficit.
Which means that the trade strategy the UK has been pursuing during that period has been less than suitable for the UK economy.
And your mindset is to do nothing but continue to reinforce this failure.
Now if you want to know what I would suggest its that the UK should live within its means.
Now that's a scary concept for all those who want to live in the manner they think they're entitled to but can't actually afford.