|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Nov 28, 2022 16:42:33 GMT
steve
You're being played. Labour's noises on Brexit and immigration are nowhere near either the Tories or the Brexit Party's positions on these issues. More importantly, nor will they be anywhere near them come the election. Farage and Warne know that too. They're playing politics and trying to embarrass Starmer and Labour by suggesting they've moved on to Tory ground.
I'm surprised you've been taken in. It's one of the oldest tricks and canards in politics. Misrepresent your opponents policies. Both Farage and Warne would be utterly appalled by the prospect of a Starmer government.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Nov 28, 2022 16:43:00 GMT
I assume you vote SNP, perhaps I'm wrong, if so apologies. Yes I do lack knowledge on voting systems. I think we have something called the additional member system in the Senedd. My point though doesn't benefit from getting into the weeds of that. Don't you vote for indy parties then? |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Nov 28, 2022 16:45:31 GMT
somerjohn
I hate to say it, but I think you are being played here too. Why on earth are you taking Warne remotely seriously? He's a google-trawling mischief-making, sometimes poisonous buffoon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 16:49:50 GMT
Colin: "why on earth do you think they can't decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters ?"Because no-one would have noticed this if I hadn't smelt a rat and highlighted the "error". Having highlighted the issue, I did indeed leave others to "decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters " Or are you claiming that you had noticed the 'error" and decided for yourself that it didn't matter? Look, it's fine for you to consistently like TW's posts and defend him here, as you seem to feel he's a fellow member of an embattled minority. But I'm surprised and disappointed that that defence extends to his manufacturing of quotes and mishandling of data. Aren't standards of truthfulness independent of political allegiance? Jim Jam did ,and explained to you how he perceived it. Get over yourself. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,711
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 16:51:13 GMT
That you assume that I only vote for one party also suggests that you have a lack of knowledge about voting systems, other than the silly FPTP only one - which is surprising for someone in Wales. Yes I do lack knowledge on voting systems. I think we have something called the additional member system in the Senedd. My point though doesn't benefit from getting into the weeds of that. Don't you vote for indy parties then? I seem to recall oldnat being quite positive about the greens once? Though dunno if he votes for them. He also has five sheds, and two jags. And a winery. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 16:51:46 GMT
Crossbat: "Why on earth are you taking Warne remotely seriously? He's a google-trawling mischief-making, sometimes poisonous buffoon.
Quite. But as you've just done, I like to draw attention to that. And, additionally, to provide evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 28, 2022 16:52:42 GMT
It reminds me of the early 70s when to my understanding then (and I was young and ignorant - no jokes about now being old and ignorant please! 😁) there was only a fag paper between Heath and Wilson, as indeed the public seemed to agree as there was a series of close elections. Therefore one voted for the one you thought would cause the least harm, or in my case sometimes spoiling my ballot paper with a rude message because I knew spoiled papers had to be checked by candidates' representatives and therefore my message would have more impact than an actual vote. Wow, you spoilt your ballot-paper. What an act of civil disobedience! Oh yes, I'm quite the rebel. I went on a protest march once. 🤩 |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 16:53:59 GMT
Colin: "Jim Jam did" One data point. Stats not your strong point?
And Jim Jam responded after I highlighted the point, so presumably hadn't noticed the error independently.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 17:00:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 28, 2022 17:04:09 GMT
Accruing the current poll lead to Starmer who was nowhere till the Tories massively self-immolated is quite the stretch. It’s like accruing the victory to Blair in ‘97 when Tory polling had already collapsed following Black Weds. This is why I have been saying that Labour's support is 'soft' - as evidenced by local by-elections. If there was a big positive move to Labour I'd have thought they'd have done more consistently well in these. My conclusion is that if (and it's an 'if' with a nine-foot capital I), the Tories can turn things (particularly the economy and immigration) round before the next GE the result could be closer than a lot of people currently think. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 17:05:54 GMT
ptarmigan - "Sometimes it just feels pointless engaging on here." Apologies - my post was a little harsh, but wasn't intended to be so. I understand your frustration. I find 'triangulation' unedifying and the practice of taking your core for granted depressing. But the reality is that under FPTP, people like us vote Labour or vote Tory, in any practical sense. I just don't see that we have any real choice at present. In my opinion it's as perfectly valid to vote simply against something as it is to vote positively for something though the latter is always a nicer position to be in. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 17:06:39 GMT
...and if anyone wants to check the GE'19 x-breaks for themselves then I tend to use rows 21-42 in the data that you can download from the link above. Numbers similar to those posted earlier (ie poll drums) to which jimjam added some commentary. LAB's lead is due to a number of factors but there are a lot more CON'19 now showing as LAB VI than LAB have lost to DK+WNV and that is how LAB will win a large majority at the next GE, even if Rishi can do something to reduce the higher 'differential' of CON'19 who are now DK+WNV. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 17:10:50 GMT
It makes me smile that the poster on here who to my mind most exhibits a key behaviour associated with trolling, deliberately setting out to provoke, is also the most vocal in accusing those who challenge him of trolling!
|
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 17:15:07 GMT
Mercian: "This is why I have been saying that Labour's support is 'soft'"I agree with you about the softness. But where I differ is in where I think that soft support will potentially go, if it does indeed melt away. Not to the Tories, but to the LDs if they get their act together and receive the usual level of enhanced visibility in the run-up to the GE. Why? Because Labour current VI disenchanted with Starmer's brexit stance isn't going to the Tories.
Maybe today's R&W (Lab -2, Con-1, LD +2, Green +1) is a straw in the wind.
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Nov 28, 2022 17:19:08 GMT
That you assume that I only vote for one party also suggests that you have a lack of knowledge about voting systems, other than the silly FPTP only one - which is surprising for someone in Wales. Yes I do lack knowledge on voting systems. I think we have something called the additional member system in the Senedd. My point though doesn't benefit from getting into the weeds of that. Don't you vote for indy parties then?
That you are ignorant of them doesn't give your silly "Midwich Cuckoos" comparison any meaning, point, relevance or value. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 17:22:27 GMT
Accruing the current poll lead to Starmer who was nowhere till the Tories massively self-immolated is quite the stretch. It’s like accruing the victory to Blair in ‘97 when Tory polling had already collapsed following Black Weds. What is “accruing” doing in the second sentence? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 17:27:39 GMT
It makes me smile that the poster on here who to my mind most exhibits a key behaviour associated with trolling, deliberately setting out to provoke, is also the most vocal in accusing those who challenge him of trolling! The simplest antidote is to pretend he’s not here. I genuinely have no idea why you read his stuff and then pontificate about it - it really doesn’t serve any purpose at all. (Unless your aim is to encourage even more posts from him?) I’m annoyed with myself for engaging in this actually, albeit one person removed, because it’s all grist to his mill and utterly pointless. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 28, 2022 17:28:22 GMT
Haha, being able to cite polling, is not the same as properly being able to explain it. Nothing James posted proves that the gain is mostly due to Starmer, as opposed to Tory implosion. It’s like the time a while back, when I suggested that some might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it, and this might have been enough to swing to Brexit. James E tried countering that by saying that actually, polling showed a majority thought Brexit would benefit them. robbiealive was quite taken with the idea this repudiated my point, but it didn’t of course. Because even if it’s the case that fifty-something percent or whatever thought Brexit would benefit them, you only needed a few percent of the others to swing the vote, given how close it was. To reiterate the point I made some time ago - about your claim that some people 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'. There is good polling evidence from before the 2016 referendum that very very few of those voting Leave expected adverse consequences for themselves or for the UK. Per the figures below from YouGov with fieldwork on 20-22 June 2016, just 3% of those intending to vote Leave thought that leaving the EU would make them worse off, while the overwhelming majority thought it would make them better, or make no difference. And to take a few other figures from the same poll, just 4% of Leavers thought it would make Britain worse (v 48% of them who thought it would make the country better off), and 2% of them thought it would be 'Bad for Jobs' (v 44% 'Good for Jobs'). So the polling numbers among those who voted Leave show that only a tiny minority expected adverse consequences. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdfIt depends what timescale you're looking at. I think a lot of Leave voters realised that there might well be some short-term (a few years) economic consequences, but that long term prospects would be good because of freedom from having to follow rules that might suit other countries more than us. TOH reckoned 2030 would be a reasonable time to make a judgement and that seems about right to me. Having said that, the economy was not a major consideration for me anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 17:28:31 GMT
Crofty: "What is “accruing” doing in the second sentence?
Maybe standing in for 'attributing'?
As, presumably, in the first sentence.
On the other hand, maybe accruing has a new meaning on the street that Carfrew is privy to (or lives on).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 17:30:33 GMT
ptarmigan - "Sometimes it just feels pointless engaging on here." Apologies - my post was a little harsh, but wasn't intended to be so. I understand your frustration. I find 'triangulation' unedifying and the practice of taking your core for granted depressing. But the reality is that under FPTP, people like us vote Labour or vote Tory, in any practical sense. I just don't see that we have any real choice at present. In my opinion it's as perfectly valid to vote simply against something as it is to vote positively for something though the latter is always a nicer position to be in. Dead right - and with our daft FPTP system it is all that the majority of the population do. At least some of us acknowledge that fact and are also trying to positively work towards a sensible constitution, with a form of PR that would mean we can vote positively for a change. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 28, 2022 17:37:08 GMT
Wow. A lot of stuff to scroll past today! Anyway this doesn't show any sign of a 'Farage bounce' now that he's emerging from the shadows. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,711
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 17:37:50 GMT
Crofty: "What is “accruing” doing in the second sentence?Maybe standing in for 'attributing'? As, presumably, in the first sentence. On the other hand, maybe accruing has a new meaning on the street that Carfrew is privy to (or lives on). Nah, you’re right, it should have been attributing. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 28, 2022 17:40:23 GMT
Mercian: "This is why I have been saying that Labour's support is 'soft'"I agree with you about the softness. But where I differ is in where I think that soft support will potentially go, if it does indeed melt away. Not to the Tories, but to the LDs if they get their act together and receive the usual level of enhanced visibility in the run-up to the GE. Why? Because Labour current VI disenchanted with Starmer's brexit stance isn't going to the Tories.
Maybe today's R&W (Lab -2, Con-1, LD +2, Green +1) is a straw in the wind.
Good point. But again if the nine-foot capital 'I' if happens, who knows? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 17:43:28 GMT
Colin: "Jim Jam did" One data point. Stats not your strong point?
And Jim Jam responded after I highlighted the point, so presumably hadn't noticed the error independently.
Why do you presume that ?. You know, as well as I do, that jim jam is an informed commentator on the granular detail of OPs. So I would presume that he had read tw's post and understood the point being made. I think jim jam's two responses to you tell you that. Or at least that he felt the key point had been made with the figure of 14%. I repeat -get over yourself-this isn't exactly a place of intellectual rigour and linguistic exactitude. If you really want to be Teacher you're going to have to be a tad less selective. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,711
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 17:47:43 GMT
Accruing the current poll lead to Starmer who was nowhere till the Tories massively self-immolated is quite the stretch. It’s like accruing the victory to Blair in ‘97 when Tory polling had already collapsed following Black Weds. This is why I have been saying that Labour's support is 'soft' - as evidenced by local by-elections. If there was a big positive move to Labour I'd have thought they'd have done more consistently well in these. My conclusion is that if (and it's an 'if' with a nine-foot capital I), the Tories can turn things (particularly the economy and immigration) round before the next GE the result could be closer than a lot of people currently think. It is interesting. I’m not sure how soft the support is, and although it might be a minority view on here, I happen to think the media can play quite a big role in the outcome. For example, at the moment assorted Telegraph pundits are giving Tories quite some stick for being so alike Starmer in their view, but that might change closer to the time. Whereas the Guardian however are more positive about things like nationalisation these days, and don’t have the same hostility toward Starmer as toward Corbyn. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Nov 28, 2022 17:50:14 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w To reiterate the point I made some time ago - about your claim that some people 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'. There is good polling evidence from before the 2016 referendum that very very few of those voting Leave expected adverse consequences for themselves or for the UK. Per the figures below from YouGov with fieldwork on 20-22 June 2016, just 3% of those intending to vote Leave thought that leaving the EU would make them worse off, while the overwhelming majority thought it would make them better, or make no difference. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdf Which when you take potential error into account and that leave only won by 4% hardly disproves the point, esp. when you take into account that the question only asks if they would be FINANCIALLY worse off, when they might consider they might be worse off in other ways. The point was always the views of Leave voters - people who 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'... If you read the YouGov poll that I have linked, there are all sorts of other questions about possible negative consequences to people's own prosperity, the economy, the NHS, pensions, immigration, and Britain's influence in the world. And none of these shows more than a very few expecting negative consequences. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 17:51:13 GMT
It depends what timescale you're looking at. I think a lot of Leave voters realised that there might well be some short-term (a few years) economic consequences, but that long term prospects would be good because of freedom from having to follow rules that might suit other countries more than us. TOH reckoned 2030 would be a reasonable time to make a judgement and that seems about right to me. Having said that, the economy was not a major consideration for me anyway. This is quite old now as most folks have moved on and polling companies aren't doing detailed questions. It does cover the issue of 'timescales' that you mention and note: Both YouGov and Ipsos MORI (and 'others' stated later in the article) have reported evidence that on balance voters are rather more optimistic about the consequences of Brexit in the long-term than they are about what it might mean in the short-term.
The % differences aren't massive and the article does mention some other factors (eg "those who advocate Brexit have long argued that it will present Britain with new opportunities that, if successfully grasped, will enable the country to prosper"). Although Covid and Putin's war in Ukraine have sucked up a load of political bandwidth for HMG then it is disappointing that we're only just getting around to the 'Brexit Bonus' aspects (eg 'unshackling' ourselves from the anti-growth Brussels regulation for various service sector industries). Also we clearly haven't taken control of our borders. whatukthinks.org/eu/perhaps-itll-all-be-ok-in-the-end-the-contrast-in-perceptions-of-the-short-term-and-long-term-economic-consequences-of-brexit/ |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,711
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 18:02:43 GMT
Which when you take potential error into account and that leave only won by 4% hardly disproves the point, esp. when you take into account that the question only asks if they would be FINANCIALLY worse off, when they might consider they might be worse off in other ways. The point was always the views of Leave voters - people who 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'... If you read the YouGov poll that I have linked, there are all sorts of other questions about possible negative consequences to people's own prosperity, the economy, the NHS, pensions, immigration, and Britain's influence in the world. And none of these shows more than a very few expecting negative consequences. Well, there’s only one question about the hit they might take personally, which was the point at issue. Just the financial impact. The other questions include how it might affect others. (Even if we ignored that and included those other questions, there can be some who might think it bad in general for the economy, while others might think it bad in some other way instead.Thus increasing the overall number with concerns. There might be some overlap, but can’t assume it’s the same small number of people sharing all the same concerns). |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 18:03:00 GMT
Colin: "
I repeat -get over yourself-this isn't exactly a place of intellectual rigour and linguistic exactitude.'
Get over myself? I see that I've made 467 posts on UKPR2, while you're on 2,759. So I think I'm considerably more sparing in sharing my views.
As for JimJam, only he can answer as to whether he detected the error in TW's post before I flagged it up. But it's you who presumed, on the basis of no evidence, that he had.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 18:11:09 GMT
It makes me smile that the poster on here who to my mind most exhibits a key behaviour associated with trolling, deliberately setting out to provoke, is also the most vocal in accusing those who challenge him of trolling! The simplest antidote is to pretend he’s not here. I genuinely have no idea why you read his stuff and then pontificate about it - it really doesn’t serve any purpose at all. (Unless your aim is to encourage even more posts from him?) I’m annoyed with myself for engaging in this actually, albeit one person removed, because it’s all grist to his mill and utterly pointless. I rest easy in the secure knowledge that he has blocked me (along with most of the other posters on here) as he told me as much some time ago. He's probably blocked you too so I doubt he'll see this unless someone more to his liking quotes it. I should indeed just ignore it but my word he can be annoying and sometimes I just can't help myself. |
|
