Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

In just three weeks there’ve been CON leads ranging between 1% and 18% in the published national pol

2456

Comments

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Pioneers, agree entirely that the sole guiding 'principle' of the PM is self-interest.

    However, there was another deal that was thrice on the table. Said at the time that pro-EU MPs voting the same way as ardent sceptics of the EU was not smart. And here we are.
  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    edited May 2021
    IanB2 said:

    Banking firm Revolut analysed the data of its 4,000 customers on the Isle of Wight on Monday, comparing it to the average spend for a Monday in February last year before the pandemic began.

    Isle of Wight drinkers spent more than twice as much on average on Monday than normal, according to the data, knocking back around 190 pints per minute at their peak.

    The biggest spenders in the area were 35-44 year old men, though Revolut said their customers tend to be slightly younger than the national average. Isle of Wight customers also splurged more per round than others across the country — spending £16.52 per transaction, compared to the average of £12.86 across Britain.

    The biggest spender of the customers analysed was one punter who spent £168.37 in one purchase in a pub or restaurant, the data revealed.

    Seems rather intrusive of revolut, although I think all the banks are mining customer data and selling it as “insights” these days.

    Whatever happened to privacy?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087
    The curious thing about the polls in recent months is how rapidly they have swung one way and then another. My theory is that's related to the marmite nature of the PM. It's impossible to be neutral on him.

    That means that if everything is going well, he is triumphant, but also that his support melts away like the snow in... erm... late May when things go badly.

    So to bet on the next election is mostly to bet on where we are in the love-hate cycle in a few years time. And whilst regaining control of the election date will help him a lot there, it's not foolproof.

    And there is still the Max Hastings theory- everyone who has dealings with the Bozza regrets it in the end. It's just that some people haven't regretted it yet. Eventually the gap between his ability to tell stories and to deliver on them gets too big to ignore. (See fishermen, unionists, farmers...)
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013

    Good morning

    On topic both the 1% and 18% polls do seem to be outliers but it is clear from the recent election results that the Conservatives are performing well and Labour not so

    Starmer's very public spat with Rayner, follows his miscalculation on taking the knee, wallpaper gate, and now the cringe worthy sight of him crying on TV.

    Add into the mix the increasing green vote, the loss of Scotland, and remember the conservatives had their best ever result for the Senedd, the outlook for Labour and Starmer are indeed bleak

    If he loses Batley and Spen after parachuting in their ideal candidate then I think that could see him go

    As far as the polls are concerned I think the realistic lead is probably between 8 - 10%

    Yeah that feels like the right kind of range. I don't get the uneasy stalemate in the Labour Party. The ferrets remain in the sack, on the fast flowing river yet after the hilariously failed attempt to do anything about the loony left / the red Tories (delete as appropriate) both sides sit snarling at each other.

    In an AND party like Labour it is increasingly visible that both sides can't coexist and be effective. Both seem to want to cling on to the name and the machine despite voters en masse telling them how much they hate it.

    We have seen how NOT to do it with the TIG shambles. But they could have done far better with an actual vision and programme that isn't just "we hate our former parties". Spin out the non-batshit Labour people into a "Progress" or similar party, with a forward looking vision for post-Brexit Britain and they can turn things around. Or, stay in the sack, waiting for the waterfall.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome

    Having an easy excuse influenced the outcome
    The only thing any politician could have said to change her status was "We will pay you the billions you think we owe you."

    She was staying put until they got their way. And she was deliberately chosen for ransom because the regime was banking on people like you saying "Oh, but she has a little girl..."
    And 'people like you' will apparently excuse anything from Johnson.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    IanB2 said:

    Banking firm Revolut analysed the data of its 4,000 customers on the Isle of Wight on Monday, comparing it to the average spend for a Monday in February last year before the pandemic began.

    Isle of Wight drinkers spent more than twice as much on average on Monday than normal, according to the data, knocking back around 190 pints per minute at their peak.

    The biggest spenders in the area were 35-44 year old men, though Revolut said their customers tend to be slightly younger than the national average. Isle of Wight customers also splurged more per round than others across the country — spending £16.52 per transaction, compared to the average of £12.86 across Britain.

    The biggest spender of the customers analysed was one punter who spent £168.37 in one purchase in a pub or restaurant, the data revealed.

    That would be enough for me to close my Revolut bank account. Aggregated anonymised data is one thing. But to brand a whole island. Not good.

    Meanwhile on the back to normality front went to a point to point yesterday. The only masks I saw were, bizarrely, on some of the grooms and the odd jockey.

    Otherwise it was all pretty normal.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739

    And there is still the Max Hastings theory- everyone who has dealings with the Bozza regrets it in the end. It's just that some people haven't regretted it yet. Eventually the gap between his ability to tell stories and to deliver on them gets too big to ignore. (See fishermen, unionists, farmers...)

    "It seems important to keep flagging the weirdness of the presidential imposture and abolition of accountability that characterise the Johnsonian age, from which honesty, and thus moral authority, have sailed away on a balloon ride." | Max Hastings
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013

    Mr. Pioneers, agree entirely that the sole guiding 'principle' of the PM is self-interest.

    However, there was another deal that was thrice on the table. Said at the time that pro-EU MPs voting the same way as ardent sceptics of the EU was not smart. And here we are.

    I don't blame the PM for this - he inherited the mess. Cameron's screwed up "renegotiation" and then the insipid remain campaign created the monster, and then Theresa "Nothing Has Changed" May ruled out the sane options and left us only with insane.

    Once the legend had been created that Farage and friends never ever said lets do Norway, that a vote to leave the EU was a vote to leave the EEA and CU, that we had to be not only all the way out but setting policy whose aim is to do the opposite of what they do (Boris's strategy for the Oz negotiations), then we were fucked.

    Lets assume for a minute that the 2017 parliament had declared a ceasefire and adopted (narrowly) a compromise. It would not have stuck. The coalition that created it would have fallen apart, another general election with an even harder vote for absolutism.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    edited May 2021
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome

    Having an easy excuse influenced the outcome
    The only thing any politician could have said to change her status was "We will pay you the billions you think we owe you."

    She was staying put until they got their way. And she was deliberately chosen for ransom because the regime was banking on people like you saying "Oh, but she has a little girl..."
    And 'people like you' will apparently excuse anything from Johnson.
    Oh, not anything. I think he has been very weak in implementing a green strategy that gives jobs to this country - instead, they have gone to China, France, Denmark, Sweden and Germany.

    But I seem to have a better understanding of international negotiating than the hand-wringing tendency.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343

    Sandpit said:

    I think 1% and 18% were both outliers, 12-15% sound about right from the recent polls.

    People are getting vaccinated, things are opening up again, spring is slowly turning to summer, no-one cares about wallpaper. Life is good for the government.

    Next year, when we are still 100bn in the hole and inflation starts to run away, might be a different story.

    Maybe by then, LotO might have dropped the over-emoting Prince Harry tribute act and have some policies to talk about.

    It think before the locals it was probably 6%, now it looks like it is say 10% (maybe 12%). That's a big change. Maybe it is vaccinations and opening up as people demob happy, but Starmer's personal ratings have gone through the floor and not really sure why. He is still the boring lawyer he was a month ago, his image hasn't changed. If you like that, why would you think any different. That is what I can't quite work out.
    A possible conclusion from recent polls is that it is certain that for now Labour has dropped a couple of points, but not clear the Tories have gained.

    The most helpful trend from a Tory view is for Green and LD to be gently rising as this makes a Labour recovery at scale almost impossible. Most of the vote when looked at as centre right v centre left is pretty fixed, and very even with centre left a point or two ahead.

    With the centre left vote split and at the moment no-one can see where a centre right split could come from ( Lozza, Heavy Woollens, other unmemorable party names and other assorted comedy turns are not it) the Tories just have to keep the split vote active and not to specialised geographically.

    The Tory problem of course is that have to win outright. Labour only need to come second well enough with their friends coming third fourth and fifth to oust them.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Under IFR air law and controlled airspace, rather more than protocol
    That’s a distinction not a difference
    Not to those whose licence to fly might end up on the line.



    (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

    (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

    (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

    (d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.
    The point was he received an instruction from ATC and followed it. Whether that is protocol or law doesn’t matter.

    FWIW an emergency situation was ongoing giving the pilot the right to deviate from ATC instructions anyway. At least according to what you posted, so thank you for providing evidence to back up my argument 🙂
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome

    Having an easy excuse influenced the outcome
    The only thing any politician could have said to change her status was "We will pay you the billions you think we owe you."

    She was staying put until they got their way. And she was deliberately chosen for ransom because the regime was banking on people like you saying "Oh, but she has a little girl..."
    And 'people like you' will apparently excuse anything from Johnson.
    Oh, not anything. I think he has been very weak in implementing a green strategy that gives jobs to this country - instead, they have gone to China, France, Denmark, Sweden and Germany.

    But I seem to have a better understanding of international negotiating than the hand-wringing tendency.
    A little of TSE's legendary modesty seems to have rubbed off on you.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Scott_xP said:

    And there is still the Max Hastings theory- everyone who has dealings with the Bozza regrets it in the end. It's just that some people haven't regretted it yet. Eventually the gap between his ability to tell stories and to deliver on them gets too big to ignore. (See fishermen, unionists, farmers...)

    "It seems important to keep flagging the weirdness of the presidential imposture and abolition of accountability that characterise the Johnsonian age, from which honesty, and thus moral authority, have sailed away on a balloon ride." | Max Hastings
    What Max Hastings is actually lamenting is rather the abolition of marketability of the Chattering Classes, whose opportunity to spout, and thus make money, have sailed away on a balloon ride.

    It's the snobbery of a spurned Class.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning everyone. Weather looks to be improving at last.
    Had a text late last night, which I only read this morning, to the effect that Grandson 2's got his driving theory test today.Hope he passes, although AIUI, there's a long wait for the practical one.
    WAS planning to go to the gym, but I’ve woken with a painful hip.
    Poor old chap. Emphasis on the old!

    On topic Labour picked a 'clean' leader to follow Corbyn, but an inexperienced politician. They'd have been far better with Milliband or even Jess Phillips.
    Starmer asks questions in a courtroom fashion, expecting answers. Johnson is, as Mr CC says, a politician and doesn't give them, just plays to the gallery. Which, to be fair, he's very good at.
    Against that, Johnson's Marmite; you either like/admire him or actively dislike him. At the moment he's getting away with it; one of these days he won't. But it won';t be like Blair, with a conscious, and painfully thought decision about Iraq; it'll be something he's done without thinking about it which turns out to be spectacularly bad.

    I still never quite understand why Labour supporters think that the country is going to wake up one morning and decide it hates Marmite. But it seems to be all they have.

    Those that don't seem to be divided into Marmite haters but lovers of Bovril, Vegemite, Tofu and those who don't eat food at all, actually.
    I'm not actually a Labour 'supporter'; I'm on the left, that's all. Personally I'd rather have Bovril than either Marmite of Vegemite, but that's a 'rather'.

    It's not that country will suddenly 'do something'; it's that Johnson will 'do something'.
    Rather like the appallingly stupid remark about poor Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe, which may well have condemned her to more time in prison.

    (Note the 'may well', not 'did', please.)
    Caveat noted.

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome
    A carefully chosen case, where the Iranians knew they had international law on their side but that there would be outrage about it in the UK.
    Do they have international law on their side? They probably do about the money but that’s not relevant to mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    edited May 2021

    The curious thing about the polls in recent months is how rapidly they have swung one way and then another. My theory is that's related to the marmite nature of the PM. It's impossible to be neutral on him.

    That means that if everything is going well, he is triumphant, but also that his support melts away like the snow in... erm... late May when things go badly.

    So to bet on the next election is mostly to bet on where we are in the love-hate cycle in a few years time. And whilst regaining control of the election date will help him a lot there, it's not foolproof.

    And there is still the Max Hastings theory- everyone who has dealings with the Bozza regrets it in the end. It's just that some people haven't regretted it yet. Eventually the gap between his ability to tell stories and to deliver on them gets too big to ignore. (See fishermen, unionists, farmers...)

    Not quite. Tory support has been pretty consistent in the polling. The voters may yet do a Max Hastings regret, but not yet. When they do they will be throwing stuff out of top floor windows.

    More generally, except in the week before a GE polling tells you nothing except to wait for the next one. They essentially fix a daily share price in a company in which shares can only be traded every 4-5 years. They are more like waiting for Godot than reality, though a better script and funnier.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Good morning

    On topic both the 1% and 18% polls do seem to be outliers but it is clear from the recent election results that the Conservatives are performing well and Labour not so

    Starmer's very public spat with Rayner, follows his miscalculation on taking the knee, wallpaper gate, and now the cringe worthy sight of him crying on TV.

    Add into the mix the increasing green vote, the loss of Scotland, and remember the conservatives had their best ever result for the Senedd, the outlook for Labour and Starmer are indeed bleak

    If he loses Batley and Spen after parachuting in their ideal candidate then I think that could see him go

    As far as the polls are concerned I think the realistic lead is probably between 8 - 10%

    Yeah that feels like the right kind of range. I don't get the uneasy stalemate in the Labour Party. The ferrets remain in the sack, on the fast flowing river yet after the hilariously failed attempt to do anything about the loony left / the red Tories (delete as appropriate) both sides sit snarling at each other.

    In an AND party like Labour it is increasingly visible that both sides can't coexist and be effective. Both seem to want to cling on to the name and the machine despite voters en masse telling them how much they hate it.

    We have seen how NOT to do it with the TIG shambles. But they could have done far better with an actual vision and programme that isn't just "we hate our former parties". Spin out the non-batshit Labour people into a "Progress" or similar party, with a forward looking vision for post-Brexit Britain and they can turn things around. Or, stay in the sack, waiting for the waterfall.
    Can ferrets sit in a sack? Can they sit at all?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    MrEd said:

    One thing that has really struck me is how big a difference to voting allegiance Brexit, and the attempted reversal of the vote, has made.
    It seems that it has, amongst both leavers and remainers, given former staunchly loyal voters the OK to leave their former home. I always knew it would have an effect on dislodging voters but the length of the political shenanigans following the vote to leave seems to have wonderfully concentrated minds on both sides of the divide as to whether their party of choice was likely to act in their own interest. I wonder if it has divided the electorate into camps of whether they believe that the politicians know best or not?

    Except that the net effect of the referendum has, of course, been to consolidate the Leave vote behind the Tories and splinter the Remain vote in umpteen different directions.

    It's been an unmitigated disaster for the political and cultural left. A wrecking ball. It's quite possible that we could have a lengthy Tory Hegemony - the comparison with the ruling party in Japan, which has enjoyed almost unbroken power since the late 1950s, is sometimes made at this point. Looking forward to the next couple of elections, it's far from clear that Labour and the Lib Dems can topple dominoes in the South faster than the Conservatives can in the Midlands and the North - and if Scotland falls off then they may never be able to do enough to assemble a Parliamentary majority.

    The reality is that the anti-Tory vote may now be too small and too inefficiently distributed to unseat the Government, now and for many, many years to come. Voting to Leave the EU against the wishes of Labour's politicians and core membership, and voting for Farage's vehicles, both appear to have acted as gateway drugs for millions of vital Labour supporters to switch sides outright - and there appears to be no particular reason for them to go back again.
    I think it's possible the Greens eventually supplant Labour in opposition to the Tories, and suck in some Lib Dems too.

    The political axis will then be dogma on climate change, globalism and enthusiastic Wokeness versus technological action on climate change, nation-state based international engagement and anti-Wokeness.
    The one big obstacle to the Greens doing so is that, unlike the German Greens, they don’t have their pragmatist wing which enables them to present a more voter friendly face to a wider part of the electorate. Ask a typical voter what they think of a Green politician and it will be the image of a self-righteous wokeist haranguing the masses on their folly and stupidity. Not a great recipe for electoral success.

    Where I can see the Greens doing well is (1) seats with a high percentage of university educated voters and low ethnic minority percentage. It’s no surprise the Greens picked up so many seats in Bristol and Sheffield, for example but not in places like Manchester and (2) as a protest vote against rural housing developments. In (1) they take votes from Labour and (2) from the Lib Dem
    True, but (a) that could change and (b) they don't have the baggage of the unions and the class-based roots that Labour do.

    And, yes, I'd expect them to have a young and quite affluent voting base. They'd be in with a shot of winning if they pulled in a lot of surbuban and commuting voters in the South by, for example, moderating on business.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TOPPING said:

    IanB2 said:

    Banking firm Revolut analysed the data of its 4,000 customers on the Isle of Wight on Monday, comparing it to the average spend for a Monday in February last year before the pandemic began.

    Isle of Wight drinkers spent more than twice as much on average on Monday than normal, according to the data, knocking back around 190 pints per minute at their peak.

    The biggest spenders in the area were 35-44 year old men, though Revolut said their customers tend to be slightly younger than the national average. Isle of Wight customers also splurged more per round than others across the country — spending £16.52 per transaction, compared to the average of £12.86 across Britain.

    The biggest spender of the customers analysed was one punter who spent £168.37 in one purchase in a pub or restaurant, the data revealed.

    That would be enough for me to close my Revolut bank account. Aggregated anonymised data is one thing. But to brand a whole island. Not good.

    Meanwhile on the back to normality front went to a point to point yesterday. The only masks I saw were, bizarrely, on some of the grooms and the odd jockey.

    Otherwise it was all pretty normal.
    I guess if a jockey got a cold they might be tempted to take banned substances to counter it
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    But that does require two things:

    1. That the attitude towards the EU remains the dominant feature of British politics
    2. That the UK outperforms the EU

    Now, I'm reasonably confident on 2 (but far from certain, because the reality is that 'events' don't always pan out as one expects). But I'd be far less certain about 1.

    BoZo's approach to the reality of Brexit so far has been to sell out every single interest group he "promised" would benefit from it.

    Northern Ireland? Fuck 'em

    Fishermen? Fuck 'em

    Farmers? Fuck 'em.

    While the effect of this so far has been to boost his popularity among those who are not members of these groups, I am tempted to suggest that there is a limit to how far you can stretch this political strategy and still "win"

    It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine what Brexiters would be saying if the UK had stayed in the EU, and it had done a trade deal with Australia on these terms. 'Brussels Bureaucrats Betray British Beef' is my guess.
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3484d6b0-ba68-11eb-88a0-2b24633e3d76?shareToken=e911845d1ce608b43c8605a763331cae
    18 pts would be an anihalation.....remember that Mr Canute..
    I read that Canada is next in line to agree a trade deal that will also include agriculture and wine and more trade deals will be modelled on these

    It has to be remembered that trade deals are the remainers ultimate nightmare, as each one makes rejoining more and more difficult and of course will have a substantial negative effect on EU countries as we import from outside

    Ireland and France with beef but also Australian, NZ, and Canadian wine which will be at the EU's expense as well

    This will be the last stand of those devotees of the EU like @Scott_xP and others

    Expect an avalanche of tweets on the subject over the coming months
    You've got it.

    There will always be a reason to sledge any new trade deal Britain secures.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:

    All good points but let's not forget that you are comfortable with a lying PM. Others not so much.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome

    Having an easy excuse influenced the outcome
    The only thing any politician could have said to change her status was "We will pay you the billions you think we owe you."

    She was staying put until they got their way. And she was deliberately chosen for ransom because the regime was banking on people like you saying "Oh, but she has a little girl..."
    And 'people like you' will apparently excuse anything from Johnson.
    Oh, not anything. I think he has been very weak in implementing a green strategy that gives jobs to this country - instead, they have gone to China, France, Denmark, Sweden and Germany.

    But I seem to have a better understanding of international negotiating than the hand-wringing tendency.
    I thought the Teeside Freeport was designed around windmill blade manufacturing?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739

    There will always be a reason to sledge any new trade deal Britain secures.

    If any of the cabinet resigned (they won't) as a result of a trade deal, would the fanbois still claim that was just remoaners whining?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083

    MrEd said:

    One thing that has really struck me is how big a difference to voting allegiance Brexit, and the attempted reversal of the vote, has made.
    It seems that it has, amongst both leavers and remainers, given former staunchly loyal voters the OK to leave their former home. I always knew it would have an effect on dislodging voters but the length of the political shenanigans following the vote to leave seems to have wonderfully concentrated minds on both sides of the divide as to whether their party of choice was likely to act in their own interest. I wonder if it has divided the electorate into camps of whether they believe that the politicians know best or not?

    Except that the net effect of the referendum has, of course, been to consolidate the Leave vote behind the Tories and splinter the Remain vote in umpteen different directions.

    It's been an unmitigated disaster for the political and cultural left. A wrecking ball. It's quite possible that we could have a lengthy Tory Hegemony - the comparison with the ruling party in Japan, which has enjoyed almost unbroken power since the late 1950s, is sometimes made at this point. Looking forward to the next couple of elections, it's far from clear that Labour and the Lib Dems can topple dominoes in the South faster than the Conservatives can in the Midlands and the North - and if Scotland falls off then they may never be able to do enough to assemble a Parliamentary majority.

    The reality is that the anti-Tory vote may now be too small and too inefficiently distributed to unseat the Government, now and for many, many years to come. Voting to Leave the EU against the wishes of Labour's politicians and core membership, and voting for Farage's vehicles, both appear to have acted as gateway drugs for millions of vital Labour supporters to switch sides outright - and there appears to be no particular reason for them to go back again.
    I think it's possible the Greens eventually supplant Labour in opposition to the Tories, and suck in some Lib Dems too.

    The political axis will then be dogma on climate change, globalism and enthusiastic Wokeness versus technological action on climate change, nation-state based international engagement and anti-Wokeness.
    The one big obstacle to the Greens doing so is that, unlike the German Greens, they don’t have their pragmatist wing which enables them to present a more voter friendly face to a wider part of the electorate. Ask a typical voter what they think of a Green politician and it will be the image of a self-righteous wokeist haranguing the masses on their folly and stupidity. Not a great recipe for electoral success.

    Where I can see the Greens doing well is (1) seats with a high percentage of university educated voters and low ethnic minority percentage. It’s no surprise the Greens picked up so many seats in Bristol and Sheffield, for example but not in places like Manchester and (2) as a protest vote against rural housing developments. In (1) they take votes from Labour and (2) from the Lib Dem
    True, but (a) that could change and (b) they don't have the baggage of the unions and the class-based roots that Labour do.

    And, yes, I'd expect them to have a young and quite affluent voting base. They'd be in with a shot of winning if they pulled in a lot of surbuban and commuting voters in the South by, for example, moderating on business.
    The middle aged moving away from London in seek of a quieter post-pandemic lifestyle are an obvious target market.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    But that does require two things:

    1. That the attitude towards the EU remains the dominant feature of British politics
    2. That the UK outperforms the EU

    Now, I'm reasonably confident on 2 (but far from certain, because the reality is that 'events' don't always pan out as one expects). But I'd be far less certain about 1.

    BoZo's approach to the reality of Brexit so far has been to sell out every single interest group he "promised" would benefit from it.

    Northern Ireland? Fuck 'em

    Fishermen? Fuck 'em

    Farmers? Fuck 'em.

    While the effect of this so far has been to boost his popularity among those who are not members of these groups, I am tempted to suggest that there is a limit to how far you can stretch this political strategy and still "win"

    It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine what Brexiters would be saying if the UK had stayed in the EU, and it had done a trade deal with Australia on these terms. 'Brussels Bureaucrats Betray British Beef' is my guess.
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3484d6b0-ba68-11eb-88a0-2b24633e3d76?shareToken=e911845d1ce608b43c8605a763331cae
    18 pts would be an anihalation.....remember that Mr Canute..
    I read that Canada is next in line to agree a trade deal that will also include agriculture and wine and more trade deals will be modelled on these

    It has to be remembered that trade deals are the remainers ultimate nightmare, as each one makes rejoining more and more difficult and of course will have a substantial negative effect on EU countries as we import from outside

    Ireland and France with beef but also Australian, NZ, and Canadian wine which will be at the EU's expense as well

    This will be the last stand of those devotees of the EU like @Scott_xP and others

    Expect an avalanche of tweets on the subject over the coming months
    You've got it.

    There will always be a reason to sledge any new trade deal Britain secures.
    Everything except Canadian wine. I'm willing to try it but my expectations are very low!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Under IFR air law and controlled airspace, rather more than protocol
    That’s a distinction not a difference
    Not to those whose licence to fly might end up on the line.



    (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

    (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

    (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

    (d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.
    The point was he received an instruction from ATC and followed it. Whether that is protocol or law doesn’t matter.

    FWIW an emergency situation was ongoing giving the pilot the right to deviate from ATC instructions anyway. At least according to what you posted, so thank you for providing evidence to back up my argument 🙂
    Not really. When the point at discussion is whether or not the pilot could or should have ignored ATC instructions, to have suggested that it was merely "protocol" to follow them was seriously misleading.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    MrEd said:

    One thing that has really struck me is how big a difference to voting allegiance Brexit, and the attempted reversal of the vote, has made.
    It seems that it has, amongst both leavers and remainers, given former staunchly loyal voters the OK to leave their former home. I always knew it would have an effect on dislodging voters but the length of the political shenanigans following the vote to leave seems to have wonderfully concentrated minds on both sides of the divide as to whether their party of choice was likely to act in their own interest. I wonder if it has divided the electorate into camps of whether they believe that the politicians know best or not?

    Except that the net effect of the referendum has, of course, been to consolidate the Leave vote behind the Tories and splinter the Remain vote in umpteen different directions.

    It's been an unmitigated disaster for the political and cultural left. A wrecking ball. It's quite possible that we could have a lengthy Tory Hegemony - the comparison with the ruling party in Japan, which has enjoyed almost unbroken power since the late 1950s, is sometimes made at this point. Looking forward to the next couple of elections, it's far from clear that Labour and the Lib Dems can topple dominoes in the South faster than the Conservatives can in the Midlands and the North - and if Scotland falls off then they may never be able to do enough to assemble a Parliamentary majority.

    The reality is that the anti-Tory vote may now be too small and too inefficiently distributed to unseat the Government, now and for many, many years to come. Voting to Leave the EU against the wishes of Labour's politicians and core membership, and voting for Farage's vehicles, both appear to have acted as gateway drugs for millions of vital Labour supporters to switch sides outright - and there appears to be no particular reason for them to go back again.
    I think it's possible the Greens eventually supplant Labour in opposition to the Tories, and suck in some Lib Dems too.

    The political axis will then be dogma on climate change, globalism and enthusiastic Wokeness versus technological action on climate change, nation-state based international engagement and anti-Wokeness.
    The one big obstacle to the Greens doing so is that, unlike the German Greens, they don’t have their pragmatist wing which enables them to present a more voter friendly face to a wider part of the electorate. Ask a typical voter what they think of a Green politician and it will be the image of a self-righteous wokeist haranguing the masses on their folly and stupidity. Not a great recipe for electoral success.

    Where I can see the Greens doing well is (1) seats with a high percentage of university educated voters and low ethnic minority percentage. It’s no surprise the Greens picked up so many seats in Bristol and Sheffield, for example but not in places like Manchester and (2) as a protest vote against rural housing developments. In (1) they take votes from Labour and (2) from the Lib Dem
    True, but (a) that could change and (b) they don't have the baggage of the unions and the class-based roots that Labour do.

    And, yes, I'd expect them to have a young and quite affluent voting base. They'd be in with a shot of winning if they pulled in a lot of surbuban and commuting voters in the South by, for example, moderating on business.
    They could go down the pragmatic route but there are no signs of it yet emerging either at the grassroots or leadership level. There is a lot of “Come to Jesus” attitude in the Greens which makes them think that voters should be coming round to their view rather than they need to adopt their own thinking to attract voters. I don’t see that changing my time soon.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
    Why is it a bluff? Of course they'd splash it if it didn't comply.

    The Belarussians were probably hoping it did come to that as that would have been a neater solution and the non-compliance would have given a shred of cover to the bomb/terrorist bullshit cover story.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793
    FPT:

    https://liberalspring.org/

    Aims to reform the LibDems to be more anti-NPI and passports/apps for covid.


    Looks like a Mike Yeadon project but others on here may know more.

    The problem with this, looking at their '10 pledges' is that we know lockdowns DO work. We also know that vaccinating children is probably the best way of dealing with this going forwards for future generations.

    It's bordering on anti-science.
    Indeed.
    Why on God's Green Earth would anyone listen to Yeadon?
    Mr "Casedemic!", "False Positives!", "we're at herd immunity [last September]", "There will not be a second wave," "Vaccines don't work."

    Jeez, it's almost as bad as people still giving Ivor Cummins money.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    IanB2 said:

    MrEd said:

    One thing that has really struck me is how big a difference to voting allegiance Brexit, and the attempted reversal of the vote, has made.
    It seems that it has, amongst both leavers and remainers, given former staunchly loyal voters the OK to leave their former home. I always knew it would have an effect on dislodging voters but the length of the political shenanigans following the vote to leave seems to have wonderfully concentrated minds on both sides of the divide as to whether their party of choice was likely to act in their own interest. I wonder if it has divided the electorate into camps of whether they believe that the politicians know best or not?

    Except that the net effect of the referendum has, of course, been to consolidate the Leave vote behind the Tories and splinter the Remain vote in umpteen different directions.

    It's been an unmitigated disaster for the political and cultural left. A wrecking ball. It's quite possible that we could have a lengthy Tory Hegemony - the comparison with the ruling party in Japan, which has enjoyed almost unbroken power since the late 1950s, is sometimes made at this point. Looking forward to the next couple of elections, it's far from clear that Labour and the Lib Dems can topple dominoes in the South faster than the Conservatives can in the Midlands and the North - and if Scotland falls off then they may never be able to do enough to assemble a Parliamentary majority.

    The reality is that the anti-Tory vote may now be too small and too inefficiently distributed to unseat the Government, now and for many, many years to come. Voting to Leave the EU against the wishes of Labour's politicians and core membership, and voting for Farage's vehicles, both appear to have acted as gateway drugs for millions of vital Labour supporters to switch sides outright - and there appears to be no particular reason for them to go back again.
    I think it's possible the Greens eventually supplant Labour in opposition to the Tories, and suck in some Lib Dems too.

    The political axis will then be dogma on climate change, globalism and enthusiastic Wokeness versus technological action on climate change, nation-state based international engagement and anti-Wokeness.
    The one big obstacle to the Greens doing so is that, unlike the German Greens, they don’t have their pragmatist wing which enables them to present a more voter friendly face to a wider part of the electorate. Ask a typical voter what they think of a Green politician and it will be the image of a self-righteous wokeist haranguing the masses on their folly and stupidity. Not a great recipe for electoral success.

    Where I can see the Greens doing well is (1) seats with a high percentage of university educated voters and low ethnic minority percentage. It’s no surprise the Greens picked up so many seats in Bristol and Sheffield, for example but not in places like Manchester and (2) as a protest vote against rural housing developments. In (1) they take votes from Labour and (2) from the Lib Dem
    True, but (a) that could change and (b) they don't have the baggage of the unions and the class-based roots that Labour do.

    And, yes, I'd expect them to have a young and quite affluent voting base. They'd be in with a shot of winning if they pulled in a lot of surbuban and commuting voters in the South by, for example, moderating on business.
    The middle aged moving away from London in seek of a quieter post-pandemic lifestyle are an obvious target market.
    Yes. I'm still not sure they've got the numbers but I expect climate change to only grow in salience over the next 10-15 years (a lot of disruption is now baked in due to the already high atompsheric PPM of CO2, which will probably take 30-50 years to meaningfully reduce) so that could change.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning everyone. Weather looks to be improving at last.
    Had a text late last night, which I only read this morning, to the effect that Grandson 2's got his driving theory test today.Hope he passes, although AIUI, there's a long wait for the practical one.
    WAS planning to go to the gym, but I’ve woken with a painful hip.
    Poor old chap. Emphasis on the old!

    On topic Labour picked a 'clean' leader to follow Corbyn, but an inexperienced politician. They'd have been far better with Milliband or even Jess Phillips.
    Starmer asks questions in a courtroom fashion, expecting answers. Johnson is, as Mr CC says, a politician and doesn't give them, just plays to the gallery. Which, to be fair, he's very good at.
    Against that, Johnson's Marmite; you either like/admire him or actively dislike him. At the moment he's getting away with it; one of these days he won't. But it won';t be like Blair, with a conscious, and painfully thought decision about Iraq; it'll be something he's done without thinking about it which turns out to be spectacularly bad.

    I still never quite understand why Labour supporters think that the country is going to wake up one morning and decide it hates Marmite. But it seems to be all they have.

    Those that don't seem to be divided into Marmite haters but lovers of Bovril, Vegemite, Tofu and those who don't eat food at all, actually.
    I'm not actually a Labour 'supporter'; I'm on the left, that's all. Personally I'd rather have Bovril than either Marmite of Vegemite, but that's a 'rather'.

    It's not that country will suddenly 'do something'; it's that Johnson will 'do something'.
    Rather like the appallingly stupid remark about poor Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe, which may well have condemned her to more time in prison.

    (Note the 'may well', not 'did', please.)
    Caveat noted.

    The reality is Iran was using her as a pawn. She was not going to be released u til every ounce of value has been extracted. Boris’s comments were used as an excuse rather than influencing the outcome
    A carefully chosen case, where the Iranians knew they had international law on their side but that there would be outrage about it in the UK.
    Do they have international law on their side? They probably do about the money but that’s not relevant to mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe
    Yes, she’s an Iranian citizen. Joint nationality laws don’t apply, with regard to domestic law when you’re in the other country where you are a national.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,040

    FPT:

    https://liberalspring.org/

    Aims to reform the LibDems to be more anti-NPI and passports/apps for covid.


    Looks like a Mike Yeadon project but others on here may know more.

    The problem with this, looking at their '10 pledges' is that we know lockdowns DO work. We also know that vaccinating children is probably the best way of dealing with this going forwards for future generations.

    It's bordering on anti-science.
    Indeed.
    Why on God's Green Earth would anyone listen to Yeadon?
    Mr "Casedemic!", "False Positives!", "we're at herd immunity [last September]", "There will not be a second wave," "Vaccines don't work."

    Jeez, it's almost as bad as people still giving Ivor Cummins money.
    I doubt it will be keeping Ed Davey awake at nights.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edited May 2021
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
    Why is it a bluff? Of course they'd splash it if it didn't comply.

    The Belarussians were probably hoping it did come to that as that would have been a neater solution and the non-compliance would have given a shred of cover to the bomb/terrorist bullshit cover story.
    Create a fake bomb threat to force a plane to land and shoot it down if it didn’t. Not obviously an outcome they would have been desirous of I would have thought?

    That they had four of their KGB on board wouldn’t have been ideal either.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,555
    edited May 2021
    TOPPING said:

    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:

    All good points but let's not forget that you are comfortable with a lying PM. Others not so much.
    I'm not so sure as those others tend to be people who voted for Tony Blair.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    Fishing said:

    I'm not so sure as those others tend to be people who voted for Tony Blair.

    Nope
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    MaxPB said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    But that does require two things:

    1. That the attitude towards the EU remains the dominant feature of British politics
    2. That the UK outperforms the EU

    Now, I'm reasonably confident on 2 (but far from certain, because the reality is that 'events' don't always pan out as one expects). But I'd be far less certain about 1.

    BoZo's approach to the reality of Brexit so far has been to sell out every single interest group he "promised" would benefit from it.

    Northern Ireland? Fuck 'em

    Fishermen? Fuck 'em

    Farmers? Fuck 'em.

    While the effect of this so far has been to boost his popularity among those who are not members of these groups, I am tempted to suggest that there is a limit to how far you can stretch this political strategy and still "win"

    It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine what Brexiters would be saying if the UK had stayed in the EU, and it had done a trade deal with Australia on these terms. 'Brussels Bureaucrats Betray British Beef' is my guess.
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3484d6b0-ba68-11eb-88a0-2b24633e3d76?shareToken=e911845d1ce608b43c8605a763331cae
    18 pts would be an anihalation.....remember that Mr Canute..
    I read that Canada is next in line to agree a trade deal that will also include agriculture and wine and more trade deals will be modelled on these

    It has to be remembered that trade deals are the remainers ultimate nightmare, as each one makes rejoining more and more difficult and of course will have a substantial negative effect on EU countries as we import from outside

    Ireland and France with beef but also Australian, NZ, and Canadian wine which will be at the EU's expense as well

    This will be the last stand of those devotees of the EU like @Scott_xP and others

    Expect an avalanche of tweets on the subject over the coming months
    You've got it.

    There will always be a reason to sledge any new trade deal Britain secures.
    Everything except Canadian wine. I'm willing to try it but my expectations are very low!
    They are renowned for their ice wines, of course.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    This habitual dismissing of "outliers" seems to me a variety of the here hyped "normalcy bias". It comes from a deep reluctance to accept evidence of change. It is better, I think, to see the so-called outlier as a straw in the wind. Maybe it's an erratic gust that's blowing the straw, but there could also be something more persistent behind it. Information theory tells us that it is the surprise that carries valuable information, not the half expected 'reversion to the mean'.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Ordered some lfts the gippy tummy is highly likely the fact I spent all of sunday running round woodlands, and all of saturday boozing (Am double pfizered too) but best to be sure !
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    TOPPING said:

    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:

    All good points but let's not forget that you are comfortable with a lying PM. Others not so much.
    Ah, but the 'lying' PM just achieved the highest polling lead - outlier or not - for any government that has been in power for this long a period in living memory. Even @ydoethur - to whom I'm happy to defer on modern history - could produce only a 17-point lead to match it: John Major, a year before he won the largest number of votes in British electoral history. Any guesses for who holds the current number 2 record?

    Clearly enough people have no absolutist moral attachment to Truth as if it were a Platonic Form, but take people and politicians as they find them, and simply like what they like...
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    The EMA shows a 10% Tory lead which implies, using Electoral Calculus, a 66 overall majority.

  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,458
    Fishing said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:

    All good points but let's not forget that you are comfortable with a lying PM. Others not so much.
    I'm not so sure as those others tend to be people who voted for Tony Blair.
    Not me. Never voted Labour. As per many previous posts BluestBlue persists in the view that all that matters is what the voters think and nothing else. As I have posted before this is a very scary view point as it implies a moral vacuum. It doesn't matter what you do provided you win.

    The BBC position shows the hypocrisy on this. The BBC cover up (and I agree very much with Philip on this, it is the cover up that is more important than the crime) needs a proper investigation and consequences, but apparently the same does not apply to Boris who persistently lies.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287

    The curious thing about the polls in recent months is how rapidly they have swung one way and then another. My theory is that's related to the marmite nature of the PM. It's impossible to be neutral on him.

    That means that if everything is going well, he is triumphant, but also that his support melts away like the snow in... erm... late May when things go badly.

    So to bet on the next election is mostly to bet on where we are in the love-hate cycle in a few years time. And whilst regaining control of the election date will help him a lot there, it's not foolproof.

    And there is still the Max Hastings theory- everyone who has dealings with the Bozza regrets it in the end. It's just that some people haven't regretted it yet. Eventually the gap between his ability to tell stories and to deliver on them gets too big to ignore. (See fishermen, unionists, farmers...)

    He will be gone before that happens so it is irrelevant
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Scott_xP said:

    Clearly enough people have no absolutist moral attachment to Truth as if it were a Platonic Form, but take people and politicians as they find them, and simply like what they like...

    c.f. Trump

    Democrats, those who believe in democracy, think this is a bad thing.

    Fascists, not so much.
    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Fishing said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic:

    The 1% leads were very obviously - as some of us pointed out at the time - a temporary suppressive effect due to the daily saturation coverage in the media treating Boris as a serial killer for getting some wallpaper. Then the coverage eased off in the days before the election, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and it was the Tories winning Hartlepool by almost 7000 votes and taking hundreds of council seats, while Starmer was left with the worst local election results for a new LOTO in 40 years and his leadership imploding.

    The exact same thing happened a few days before the GE with Phonegate - a firestorm over some other petty bullshit, namely Boris refusing to look at a phone and then putting it in his pocket. The result was that the final YouGov MRP tanked to show a majority of only 28, causing much glee to those who imagined they'd managed to get Boris at last. A few days later, the coverage was forgotten, the fundamentals reasserted themselves, and Boris won an 80-seat majority and the highest share of the vote in 40 years.

    It's almost as if a pattern is starting to emerge, but what could it possibly be... :wink:

    All good points but let's not forget that you are comfortable with a lying PM. Others not so much.
    I'm not so sure as those others tend to be people who voted for Tony Blair.
    Citation needed
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Barnesian, if recent form is anything to go by, Starmer will manage to add a 1 to the front of that forecast 66 seat Conservative majority.

    I do hope Labour can sort itself out. Four years of Corbyn idiocy (almost inflicted on the nation too) is still taking its toll.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    What if volatile polls represent volatility? We know that geographical variations are significant.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,087
    rcs1000 said:

    One thing that has really struck me is how big a difference to voting allegiance Brexit, and the attempted reversal of the vote, has made.
    It seems that it has, amongst both leavers and remainers, given former staunchly loyal voters the OK to leave their former home. I always knew it would have an effect on dislodging voters but the length of the political shenanigans following the vote to leave seems to have wonderfully concentrated minds on both sides of the divide as to whether their party of choice was likely to act in their own interest. I wonder if it has divided the electorate into camps of whether they believe that the politicians know best or not?

    Except that the net effect of the referendum has, of course, been to consolidate the Leave vote behind the Tories and splinter the Remain vote in umpteen different directions.

    It's been an unmitigated disaster for the political and cultural left. A wrecking ball. It's quite possible that we could have a lengthy Tory Hegemony - the comparison with the ruling party in Japan, which has enjoyed almost unbroken power since the late 1950s, is sometimes made at this point. Looking forward to the next couple of elections, it's far from clear that Labour and the Lib Dems can topple dominoes in the South faster than the Conservatives can in the Midlands and the North - and if Scotland falls off then they may never be able to do enough to assemble a Parliamentary majority.

    The reality is that the anti-Tory vote may now be too small and too inefficiently distributed to unseat the Government, now and for many, many years to come. Voting to Leave the EU against the wishes of Labour's politicians and core membership, and voting for Farage's vehicles, both appear to have acted as gateway drugs for millions of vital Labour supporters to switch sides outright - and there appears to be no particular reason for them to go back again.
    That's quite possible.

    But that does require two things:

    1. That the attitude towards the EU remains the dominant feature of British politics
    2. That the UK outperforms the EU

    Now, I'm reasonably confident on 2 (but far from certain, because the reality is that 'events' don't always pan out as one expects). But I'd be far less certain about 1.

    Times change remarkably quickly. In the mid-1980s, Labour was committed to leaving the EEC and to complete nuclear disbarment. Less than a decade later, it was the party of Blair and Mandelson.

    The Liberals (and the Alliance) went from the LibLab pact and their leader on trial for conspiracy to murder, to electoral irrelevance, to polling a quarter of the votes in a General Election in about six years.

    In Germany, the CDU has gone from utterly dominant 18 months ago, to polling on par with the Greens, and having lost 40% of their support.

    In the wake of the Global Financial Crisis, other than the Germans, can you name a single Western government that was re-elected? And can you really be sure we won't see another crisis of that magnitude in the next decade?
    Merkel for one.

    Obama, depending on your GFC timing.

    For many coalition countries it is difficult to tell since Elections are mainly rearrangement of mainly the same politicians who form their own government.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited May 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    Name me a politician you've voted for who never lies. Or be damned as a hypocrite.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287
    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    It never bothered you before you lost the vote
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Under IFR air law and controlled airspace, rather more than protocol
    That’s a distinction not a difference
    Not to those whose licence to fly might end up on the line.



    (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

    (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

    (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

    (d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.
    The point was he received an instruction from ATC and followed it. Whether that is protocol or law doesn’t matter.

    FWIW an emergency situation was ongoing giving the pilot the right to deviate from ATC instructions anyway. At least according to what you posted, so thank you for providing evidence to back up my argument 🙂
    Not really. When the point at discussion is whether or not the pilot could or should have ignored ATC instructions, to have suggested that it was merely "protocol" to follow them was seriously misleading.
    It would be interesting to hear the ATC conversation and if the pilot asked to continue to Vilnius which was a lot closer than Minsk - and if he was refused, what reason was given.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,087
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Under IFR air law and controlled airspace, rather more than protocol
    It is interesting just how close to the border the diversion was.

    I make it about 15 miles, which is approx 3 minutes flying time.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    edited May 2021

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    But that does require two things:

    1. That the attitude towards the EU remains the dominant feature of British politics
    2. That the UK outperforms the EU

    Now, I'm reasonably confident on 2 (but far from certain, because the reality is that 'events' don't always pan out as one expects). But I'd be far less certain about 1.

    BoZo's approach to the reality of Brexit so far has been to sell out every single interest group he "promised" would benefit from it.

    Northern Ireland? Fuck 'em

    Fishermen? Fuck 'em

    Farmers? Fuck 'em.

    While the effect of this so far has been to boost his popularity among those who are not members of these groups, I am tempted to suggest that there is a limit to how far you can stretch this political strategy and still "win"

    It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine what Brexiters would be saying if the UK had stayed in the EU, and it had done a trade deal with Australia on these terms. 'Brussels Bureaucrats Betray British Beef' is my guess.
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3484d6b0-ba68-11eb-88a0-2b24633e3d76?shareToken=e911845d1ce608b43c8605a763331cae
    18 pts would be an anihalation.....remember that Mr Canute..
    I read that Canada is next in line to agree a trade deal that will also include agriculture and wine and more trade deals will be modelled on these

    It has to be remembered that trade deals are the remainers ultimate nightmare, as each one makes rejoining more and more difficult and of course will have a substantial negative effect on EU countries as we import from outside

    Ireland and France with beef but also Australian, NZ, and Canadian wine which will be at the EU's expense as well

    This will be the last stand of those devotees of the EU like @Scott_xP and others

    Expect an avalanche of tweets on the subject over the coming months
    You've got it.

    There will always be a reason to sledge any new trade deal Britain secures.
    It's really not a remain/leave issue. Any trade deal is going to be a mixture of pros and cons - in general terms they make sense to the overall economy but hammer certain sectors. There isn't any reasonable doubt that the deal, if as reported, is bad for British farming (and therefore animal welfare). Is it worth it? I don't think so, you might? But where we might agree is that it's too ideological to favour or oppose ALL trade deals. Each one should be considered on its merits. For example, the New Zealand deal is pretty uncontroversial.

    The issue with this one is partly that, as BigG says, it's likely to be followed by a similar Canadian (and in the course US) deal. There won't be much left of British meat farming by the time all that has worked through, in the same way that we don't make semiconductors to any significant extent in this country. On the other hand, food will be cheaper and other sectors like whisky will benefit. Rather than approach it purely from the position of "lower tariffs are always good" or conversely "trade deals just benefit rich foreign capital", we should accept the pros and cons and decide if we think it's a good balance.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    Name me a politician you've voted for who never lies. Or be damned as a hypocrite.
    Some take it to extraordinary levels. Trump and Putin for example and...
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Scott_xP said:

    Clearly enough people have no absolutist moral attachment to Truth as if it were a Platonic Form, but take people and politicians as they find them, and simply like what they like...

    c.f. Trump

    Democrats, those who believe in democracy, think this is a bad thing.

    Fascists, not so much.
    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...
    Lukashenko?
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,667

    People often say that with little understanding of Singapore, a country with a huge migrant labour force living in shantytowns, a country that has the loosest sense of democracy and a state controlled media, a country that actively discriminates against gay people, migrants and enforces rigid discipline/control on issues ranging from the ethnic mix in your apartment block, to car ownership to which school you attend. People see the wealth (enjoyed by a minority) and think I'll have that.....

    Not where I want to be , most certainly, but it does sound very much like the current Conservative vision of where they want to take Britain.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    Name me a politician you've voted for who never lies. Or be damned as a hypocrite.
    Some take it to extraordinary levels. Trump and Putin for example and...
    Which liars have you voted for then, while moralizing about Boris?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    edited May 2021

    Good morning

    On topic both the 1% and 18% polls do seem to be outliers but it is clear from the recent election results that the Conservatives are performing well and Labour not so

    Starmer's very public spat with Rayner, follows his miscalculation on taking the knee, wallpaper gate, and now the cringe worthy sight of him crying on TV.

    Add into the mix the increasing green vote, the loss of Scotland, and remember the conservatives had their best ever result for the Senedd, the outlook for Labour and Starmer are indeed bleak

    If he loses Batley and Spen after parachuting in their ideal candidate then I think that could see him go

    As far as the polls are concerned I think the realistic lead is probably between 8 - 10%

    "Cringeworthy" is rather unworthy of you, @BigG, about anyone weeping over family tragedy. I've never derided Norman Tebbit for his grief over what happened to his wife. People are entitled to be upset if asked about awful things that have happened to people threy care about, regardless of their opinions.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    As well as a slightly higher Tory score, the biggest difference in the most recent polls is a Green score of 8 or 9% compared to 4 or 5% in the tighter polls at Labour's expense.

    So Labour really need to squeeze the Green share down again under FPTP
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Mary Queen of Scots beads and coronation cups worth over £1 million stolen from Arundel Castle
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57224777
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    You weren't so interested in truth when you were cheerleading Cameron.

    "Paying down the debt"
    "Reducing net migration to the tens of thousands"
    "Halved the bill"

    and lets not forget this:

    "We all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisers for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism.

    If we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge – gained while being paid by the public to serve the public – for their own private gain.”

    I believe that secret corporate lobbying, like the expenses scandal, goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics. It arouses people’s worst fears and suspicions about how our political system works, with money buying power, power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions in their own interest. It’s an issue that... has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money"

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Under IFR air law and controlled airspace, rather more than protocol
    That’s a distinction not a difference
    Not to those whose licence to fly might end up on the line.



    (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

    (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

    (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

    (d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.
    The point was he received an instruction from ATC and followed it. Whether that is protocol or law doesn’t matter.

    FWIW an emergency situation was ongoing giving the pilot the right to deviate from ATC instructions anyway. At least according to what you posted, so thank you for providing evidence to back up my argument 🙂
    Not really. When the point at discussion is whether or not the pilot could or should have ignored ATC instructions, to have suggested that it was merely "protocol" to follow them was seriously misleading.
    Pilots operate to protocol. It’s what they are trained to do. It’s what they do. Your point is a distinction not a difference
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Shaun Bailey to be made a life peer by Boris for his efforts as Tory candidate in the London Mayoral election
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/you-win-some-you-win-some-if-youre-a-tory-w6pztzrqv
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    alex_ said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
    Why is it a bluff? Of course they'd splash it if it didn't comply.

    The Belarussians were probably hoping it did come to that as that would have been a neater solution and the non-compliance would have given a shred of cover to the bomb/terrorist bullshit cover story.
    Create a fake bomb threat to force a plane to land and shoot it down if it didn’t. Not obviously an outcome they would have been desirous of I would have thought?

    That they had four of their KGB on board wouldn’t have been ideal either.
    Foot soldiers are expendable.

    It wasn’t their preferred outcome but I doubt they would have been heart broken
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    HYUFD said:

    Shaun Bailey to be made a life peer by Boris for his efforts as Tory candidate in the London Mayoral election
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/you-win-some-you-win-some-if-youre-a-tory-w6pztzrqv

    One way of destroying the House of Lords is to send complete non entities there.

    Mind you Labour isn't much better
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    HYUFD said:

    As well as a slightly higher Tory score, the biggest difference in the most recent polls is a Green score of 8 or 9% compared to 4 or 5% in the tighter polls at Labour's expense.

    So Labour really need to squeeze the Green share down again under FPTP

    That depends on where the Green vote is.

    Taking back Green votes in Bristol West or Sheffield Central doesn't help Labour against the Conservatives nor do taking back Green votes in the rural South.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited May 2021

    HYUFD said:

    As well as a slightly higher Tory score, the biggest difference in the most recent polls is a Green score of 8 or 9% compared to 4 or 5% in the tighter polls at Labour's expense.

    So Labour really need to squeeze the Green share down again under FPTP

    That depends on where the Green vote is.

    Taking back Green votes in Bristol West or Sheffield Central doesn't help Labour against the Conservatives nor do taking back Green votes in the rural South.
    In which case it would be less of a worry for Labour, if Green voters still vote Labour in marginal seats but only vote Green in Labour or Tory safe seats
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287

    Good morning

    On topic both the 1% and 18% polls do seem to be outliers but it is clear from the recent election results that the Conservatives are performing well and Labour not so

    Starmer's very public spat with Rayner, follows his miscalculation on taking the knee, wallpaper gate, and now the cringe worthy sight of him crying on TV.

    Add into the mix the increasing green vote, the loss of Scotland, and remember the conservatives had their best ever result for the Senedd, the outlook for Labour and Starmer are indeed bleak

    If he loses Batley and Spen after parachuting in their ideal candidate then I think that could see him go

    As far as the polls are concerned I think the realistic lead is probably between 8 - 10%

    "Cringeworthy" is rather unworthy of you, @BigG, about anyone weeping over family tragedy. I've never derided Norman Tebbit for his grief over what happened to his wife. People are entitled to be upset if asked about awful things that have happened to people threy care about, regardless of their opinions.
    I don't know what he cried about. I understand grieving because I've been there got the t shirt. If it was that then that is not an issue

    The trouble is that politicians are all viewed with about the same amount of opprobrium and mistrust. The politician is considered to be a liar before they have opened their mouth and everything they do or say is questioned. Were Starmer's tears crocodile or real.... I have no idea.

    Its only if they were not real that this interview will come back to haunt him....
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 2,701
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Shaun Bailey to be made a life peer by Boris for his efforts as Tory candidate in the London Mayoral election
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/you-win-some-you-win-some-if-youre-a-tory-w6pztzrqv

    One way of destroying the House of Lords is to send complete non entities there.

    Mind you Labour isn't much better
    Give the lad a break. He needs the money and he's got nothing better to do.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    HYUFD said:

    As well as a slightly higher Tory score, the biggest difference in the most recent polls is a Green score of 8 or 9% compared to 4 or 5% in the tighter polls at Labour's expense.

    So Labour really need to squeeze the Green share down again under FPTP

    Yes. A lot of that is fed-up leftists. I agree with the theme that Labour is in trouble, but the Green vote will tend to return in marginals.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Mary Queen of Scots beads and coronation cups worth over £1 million stolen from Arundel Castle
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57224777

    Stone of Scone redux?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002

    Good morning

    On topic both the 1% and 18% polls do seem to be outliers but it is clear from the recent election results that the Conservatives are performing well and Labour not so

    Starmer's very public spat with Rayner, follows his miscalculation on taking the knee, wallpaper gate, and now the cringe worthy sight of him crying on TV.

    Add into the mix the increasing green vote, the loss of Scotland, and remember the conservatives had their best ever result for the Senedd, the outlook for Labour and Starmer are indeed bleak

    If he loses Batley and Spen after parachuting in their ideal candidate then I think that could see him go

    As far as the polls are concerned I think the realistic lead is probably between 8 - 10%

    "Cringeworthy" is rather unworthy of you, @BigG, about anyone weeping over family tragedy. I've never derided Norman Tebbit for his grief over what happened to his wife. People are entitled to be upset if asked about awful things that have happened to people threy care about, regardless of their opinions.
    I did not mean to cause an issue with my comment on his crying but it does give the impression he is seeking to gain sympathy and not an altogether good look
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,461
    edited May 2021
    I find the opinion polls depressing, but not remotely surprising. I don't think the 18 point lead is much of an outlier. Actually, I expect the lead to widen over the summer, unless the virus returns with a vengeance, as vaccines/unlockdown proceed. I'd predict something like Tory 49%, Labour 28% by July/August.

    As an optimist, I then expect the fight back to start in autumn, as Labour begins to present a policy platform and the ecstasy of relief over the end of the virus gradually abates. The left will drift back to Labour from the Greens. The polls will start narrowing, but how much is anybody's guess. Maybe enough to save Starmer, maybe not. If the gap of over 10pp persists next spring, I'd expect Starmer to resign.

    One final comment. I think too much weight is put on the Red Wall. If the polls narrow, and if the trend is away from the government, that will be reflected just as much in the Red Wall seats as elsewhere. Some of the caricatures I read of Red Wall voters are way off the mark; they are as disparate as voters elsewhere.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Scott_xP said:

    Funny view of democracy you have that you believe the person who wins election after election should not govern...

    I never said that, or anything like that.

    My view is that truth should matter.

    Clearly yours isn't
    You weren't so interested in truth when you were cheerleading Cameron.

    "Paying down the debt"
    "Reducing net migration to the tens of thousands"
    "Halved the bill"

    and lets not forget this:

    "We all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisers for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism.

    If we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge – gained while being paid by the public to serve the public – for their own private gain.”

    I believe that secret corporate lobbying, like the expenses scandal, goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics. It arouses people’s worst fears and suspicions about how our political system works, with money buying power, power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions in their own interest. It’s an issue that... has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money"

    Reading Cameron's comments on lobbying now, they feel less like criticism and more like a manual.
    The odd thing is that Cameron could have received tens of millions for doing nothing just as Blair or Osborne have.

    But instead he chose to become Lex Greensill's lackey.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    I find the opinion polls depressing, but not remotely surprising. I don't think the 18 point lead is much of an outlier. Actually, I expect the lead to widen over the summer, unless the virus returns with a vengeance, as vaccines/unlockdown proceeds. I'd predict something like Tory 49%, Labour 28% by July.

    As an optimist, I then expect the fight back to start in autumn, as Labour begins to present a policy platform and the ecstasy of relief over the end of the virus gradually abates. The polls will start narrowing, but how much is anybody's guess. Maybe enough to save Starmer, maybe not. If the gap of over 10pp persists next spring, I'd expect Starmer to resign.

    There is no one else in the PLP who would do any better than Starmer, Burnham might but he is not an MP and has made clear he has no intention of standing again until the next general election at the earliest
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    We're catching up with the USA on fully vaccinated. Around 5% behind.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    The GOP would kill for a map like that in pretty much any big USA city in a presidential election.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Even EU enthusiasts not impressed:

    Good morning to those of you waking up to the European Commissioner for Transport, Adina Valean, not being very good (after her tweets about the Belarus incident)

    Those of us working on transport policy have known this a good while!


    https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1396746884652408832?s=20
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087

    HYUFD said:

    As well as a slightly higher Tory score, the biggest difference in the most recent polls is a Green score of 8 or 9% compared to 4 or 5% in the tighter polls at Labour's expense.

    So Labour really need to squeeze the Green share down again under FPTP

    Yes. A lot of that is fed-up leftists. I agree with the theme that Labour is in trouble, but the Green vote will tend to return in marginals.
    That's true- also the distribution of the votes matters a lot. It does put Labour in a tricky position, though. From a distance, it's easy to see a swathe of voters who don't like the current government. It goes from the quite hard left to the edges of the centre-right. Blair managed to keep them in one boat for a remarkably long time- though at a price that had to be paid later. Starmer isn't.

    (Though it should be noted that there's nobody out there who is obviously better, and a lot of the logic leading to Starmer's election still holds. If you are looking for an anti-Johnson to be future Prime Minister, Starmer's probably your man. The downside is that, by being an anti-Johnson, he doesn't hasten the day that the public concludes that it wants an anti-Johnson to be Prime Minister. But it's not obvious that finding a left-wing Johnson is a preferable strategy for either politics or government.)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,146
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mary Queen of Scots beads and coronation cups worth over £1 million stolen from Arundel Castle
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57224777

    Stone of Scone redux?
    Doubt it very much. I've never seen any such sentiment in connection with Marie Stuart's bling.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited May 2021
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    The GOP would kill for a map like that in pretty much any big USA city in a presidential election.
    Indeed, in the 2017 New York city Mayoral election Malliotakis, the GOP candidate got just 28% to 66% for Di Blasio and only won Staten Island.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_New_York_City_mayoral_election

  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    For comparison 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2016_by_electoral_wards.jpg

    A quick look suggests Con gaining in working class outer London and Lab gaining in middle class outer London.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Pulpstar said:

    We're catching up with the USA on fully vaccinated. Around 5% behind.

    The different levels of vaccination per country (or per state in the USA) should give an idea on what level of vaccination and infection herd immunity requires.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087

    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    For comparison 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2016_by_electoral_wards.jpg

    A quick look suggests Con gaining in working class outer London and Lab gaining in middle class outer London.
    I'd be interested to see the correlation between Conservative gains in 2021 and big UKIP votes in 2016.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
    Pure speculation, but wonder if pilot to Belarus control conversation went something like this:

    Belarus: You have a bomb on board, divert immediately to Minsk.
    Pilot: Nearest and best airport is Vilnius, will make for there.
    Belarus: You have no choice, go to Minsk.
    (Pilot now smelling a rat thinks, let's get the heck out of this country)
    (Belarus realising pilot is ignoring their instructions, scrambles a fighter - only just gets to the 737 before it crosses into Lithuanian airspace,)

    Fits the flight trajectory


  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pulpstar said:

    We're catching up with the USA on fully vaccinated. Around 5% behind.

    The different levels of vaccination per country (or per state in the USA) should give an idea on what level of vaccination and infection herd immunity requires.
    I think we will find out in the winter, the Indian variant.2 looks set to my eyes to become globally dominant. It's clearly spreading here but we're still going gangbusters on the vaccination front which imposes a wall on it. It WILL reach the USA at some point and that will be the test for their vaccination program.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    For comparison 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2016_by_electoral_wards.jpg

    A quick look suggests Con gaining in working class outer London and Lab gaining in middle class outer London.
    Overall Bailey did better than Goldsmith in outer London but worse than Goldsmith in West London
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Pulpstar said:

    We're catching up with the USA on fully vaccinated. Around 5% behind.

    There's definitely been a pretty big pick up in the second dose rate here and a small slowdown in the US as many areas approach demand satisfaction. I think we'll set the single day record this week for total numbers and possibly even the weekly record this week and then again next week as the government tries to get through as many second doses in groups 1-9 as possible before 7th of June.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    I think I heard that the US was moving faster through the age groups but wonder if that's also due to higher numbers of people refusing vaccines.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    For comparison 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2016_by_electoral_wards.jpg

    A quick look suggests Con gaining in working class outer London and Lab gaining in middle class outer London.
    I'd be interested to see the correlation between Conservative gains in 2021 and big UKIP votes in 2016.
    The Conservative gains appear to be in council house wards so would expect a good correlation.

    It looks like Bailey even won in New Addington and parts of Dagenham and Erith which Boris didn't in 2012:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2012_by_electoral_wards.png
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    HYUFD said:

    Second round winner of the London Mayoral election by ward

    https://twitter.com/lewis_baston/status/1396744241448095750?s=20

    For comparison 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_London_mayoral_election#/media/File:London_Mayoral_Election,_2016_by_electoral_wards.jpg

    A quick look suggests Con gaining in working class outer London and Lab gaining in middle class outer London.
    Labour really should be able to create a series of wards on a map like this that means you can get from from the west of Hayes to the east of Rainham entirely in Labour areas.
    They've cut off the north/south Tory Enfield to Sutton route but that's not good enough for them.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Floater said:

    Ryanair statement - one tiny little detail appears to be missing

    https://twitter.com/RyanairPress/status/1396543331878981632/photo/1

    That is shockingly bad. What incentive is there for Ryanair to play this down?

    Would the Russians, sorry, Belarusians actually have shot the plane down if it had kept flying to Vilnius? Surely not. Although it would have been a brave call for the pilot to make.

    The pilot was instructed by ATC to fly to Minsk. Protocol is you follow instructions
    Especially when there’s a fast jet off your wing with missiles loaded!

    As much as I love to rag on Ryanair, no blame on the airline nor pilots here. They followed instructions and did everything right.
    They didn't really have a choice.
    Everyone knows the odds are the fighter jet is highly likely a bluff but everyone also knows the stakes are too high to call it.
    Pure speculation, but wonder if pilot to Belarus control conversation went something like this:

    Belarus: You have a bomb on board, divert immediately to Minsk.
    Pilot: Nearest and best airport is Vilnius, will make for there.
    Belarus: You have no choice, go to Minsk.
    (Pilot now smelling a rat thinks, let's get the heck out of this country)
    (Belarus realising pilot is ignoring their instructions, scrambles a fighter - only just gets to the 737 before it crosses into Lithuanian airspace,)

    Fits the flight trajectory


    That does sound plausible. Airspace in Europe is hellishly complex, with each country having their own FIR and military jurisdiction, even when the flight planning and scheduling is done through Eurocontrol.

    No-one will be heading through Belarus for a while though.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    Sandpit said:


    That said, Belarus are going to be in deep trouble for this one, it’s really not the done thing to use military assets to force an overflying civilian airliner to land, just so you can haul a passenger you don’t like off the plane. If I were a Belarusian diplomat in Europe, I would be packing my bags this morning.

    Although the principles here seem pretty flexible; Previously there was a case where a country got its allies to abruptly yank permission to overfly them when it was already in the air to force it to land in another allied country in the hope of capturing a dissident, and the plane belonged to no less than the president of the state it was flying to, and everyone was just like lol, whatever.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We're catching up with the USA on fully vaccinated. Around 5% behind.

    There's definitely been a pretty big pick up in the second dose rate here and a small slowdown in the US as many areas approach demand satisfaction. I think we'll set the single day record this week for total numbers and possibly even the weekly record this week and then again next week as the government tries to get through as many second doses in groups 1-9 as possible before 7th of June.
    The average 2 dose gap is now 75 days (Down from 77 a few days ago), so there is a new push to get people fully vaxxed now I think.
    The Indian variant doesn't give Gov't the luxury of time it previously had bearing in mind immunological lag.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited May 2021
    I tend to agree with the hypothesis that there are two kinds of voters, those betrayed by Johnson, and those who have been betrayed but don’t realise it yet.

    The problem (for people like me who prize good governance and accountability), is that it could be a long time before the electorate finally turn against Johnson.

    My one confident prediction is that when they do, Johnson’s name and reputation will be utterly toxic.

    I want to return to the non-story of the Daylesford Organic food deliveries, which were apparently provided “at cost”, but for which Johnson claims he paid personally.

    The bill amounts to nearly £800 *per week* for a family of 2.5, and Daylesford does not do nappies and baby food.

    How is that even possible?
    Full price Daylesford is expensive, but not THAT expensive, and remember this was “at cost”.

  • The green leakage from Labour will become very interesting if the corbynite group manage to take over the greens. It could rip a giant section of the Labour votes away. Particularly if they use a membership wheeze like £1 student membership and a policy such as ending uni fees and stopping the loan repayments. That is when it starts to become a big issue.
This discussion has been closed.