24-April 2023 : LAB 44% / CON 29% / LDEM 11% / GRN 5%

[steve]

Weather report
More than 1,000 people crossed the Channel in small boats in just two days, taking the yearly total to 12,503. On Saturday 384 people crossed in seven boats, with 686 people crossing in 13 boats on Friday, a new daily record for crossings.

The rise contrasts with claims made by Sunak last month that his plan was “starting to work” after pointing to figures showing year-on-year figures were down 20% when the channel had been exceptionally windy.


Attachment Deleted

[steve]

Today's edition of name that nonce continues with speculation over the identity of the high profile BBC presenter involved.

I've no idea who it is but pretty confident Fiona Bruce can be ruled out.

[leftieliberal]

Jul 10, 2023 11:32:54 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 10, 2023 10:48:38 GMT leftieliberal said:

Mussolini in Italy didn't start out determined to eliminate huge chunks of his population or spread his malicious regime either. That came as a result of deciding to ally himself with Hitler. Margherita Sarfatti who was one of Mussolini's mistresses and his biographer was Jewish. If you have ever seen the film "The Garden of the Finzi-Continis" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Garden_of_the_Finzi-Continis you will appreciate that the treatment of Jews in Italy wasn't like in Germany and the deportation of Jews to German concentration camps took place under the puppet Italian Social Republic (which although headed by Mussolini, was firmly under the thumb of the Germans). Mussolini might well have lasted as long as Franco had he not made the mistake of allying with Hitler; the recent Channel 5 series on the rise of the Nazis from the Anschluss to the outbreak of WW2 showed both the British and French politicians treating Mussolini as fully independent of Hitler and as a trusted third-party who could persuade Hitler to limit his territorial ambitions. Famously, Mussolini also made the Italian trains run on time.

Don't forget that Mussolini invaded Ethiopia and used poison gas bombs against the population and that had nothing to do with Hitler. Not a nice guy. The reason Franco lasted so long is he avoided getting involved with foreign wars so only had to worry about internal opposition which he crushed with great brutality. Also not a nice guy. 

I don't think you can cite using poison gas as a tool of dictators. Churchill was willing to use it in Iraq in the 1930s www.theguardian.com/world/2003/apr/19/iraq.arts

Churchill was particularly keen on chemical weapons, suggesting they be used "against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment". He dismissed objections as "unreasonable". "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes _ [to] spread a lively terror _" In today's terms, "the Arab" needed to be shocked and awed. A good gassing might well do the job.

Before WW2 there was a willingness to use certain weapons in situations that after WW2 would be considered war crimes.

[domjg]

Jul 10, 2023 11:32:54 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 10, 2023 10:48:38 GMT leftieliberal said:

Mussolini in Italy didn't start out determined to eliminate huge chunks of his population or spread his malicious regime either. That came as a result of deciding to ally himself with Hitler. Margherita Sarfatti who was one of Mussolini's mistresses and his biographer was Jewish. If you have ever seen the film "The Garden of the Finzi-Continis" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Garden_of_the_Finzi-Continis you will appreciate that the treatment of Jews in Italy wasn't like in Germany and the deportation of Jews to German concentration camps took place under the puppet Italian Social Republic (which although headed by Mussolini, was firmly under the thumb of the Germans). Mussolini might well have lasted as long as Franco had he not made the mistake of allying with Hitler; the recent Channel 5 series on the rise of the Nazis from the Anschluss to the outbreak of WW2 showed both the British and French politicians treating Mussolini as fully independent of Hitler and as a trusted third-party who could persuade Hitler to limit his territorial ambitions. Famously, Mussolini also made the Italian trains run on time.

Don't forget that Mussolini invaded Ethiopia and used poison gas bombs against the population and that had nothing to do with Hitler. Not a nice guy. The reason Franco lasted so long is he avoided getting involved with foreign wars so only had to worry about internal opposition which he crushed with great brutality. Also not a nice guy. 

A good friend of mine is a historian specialising in the civil war period and after. Franco was most definitely not a nice guy. The trauma of his rule haunts Spain under the surface even today. 

I remember visiting the Alcazar at Toledo with him over 20 years ago. One of the strangest things about post Franco Spain was despite the very successful transition to liberal democracy until relatively recently there was a certain continuity of imagery and traditions from the Falangist time, with the aim of making the transition non abrupt and of not pissing off old falangists who might otherwise have sought to crush the new democracy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alc%C3%A1zar_of_Toledo

Anyway, the narrative of this place as a falangist holdout against a republican siege had not changed since Franco's time. There was fascist memorabilia everywhere and even a large map showing where Spanish troops had fought outside of Spain including showing Spanish volunteers proudly alongside the Wehrmacht attacking the Soviet Union!
There was also a supposed 'recording' playing on a loop of the telephone call where the Francoist colonel holding the Alcazar tells his son being held captive by the republicans to give his life 'for Spain' when they threaten to kill him if the Alcazar is not surrendered. It was a very unsettling experience, like entering a parallel universe as if suddenly in the world of Robert Harris' Fatherland. I remember the atmosphere of the place was grim. I also remember falangist flags flying out of windows in the city of Toledo. I'm sure things are very different now what with the removal of Franco's remains from the valley of the fallen etc. but back then it was very much don't challenge the past too much. 

[leftieliberal]

Jul 10, 2023 14:06:19 GMT domjg said:

Jul 10, 2023 11:32:54 GMT pjw1961 said:

Don't forget that Mussolini invaded Ethiopia and used poison gas bombs against the population and that had nothing to do with Hitler. Not a nice guy. The reason Franco lasted so long is he avoided getting involved with foreign wars so only had to worry about internal opposition which he crushed with great brutality. Also not a nice guy. 

A good friend of mine is a historian specialising in the civil war period and after. Franco was most definitely not a nice guy. The trauma of his rule haunts Spain under the surface even today. 

Agreed. Franco's survival as leader of Spain owed more to his decision to remain neutral during WW2 than anything else. After WW2 the West needed allies against the communist threat from the East and weren't too particular about who they dealt with as long as they were anti-communist. Salazar in Portugal was another example. 

[domjg]

Jul 10, 2023 14:23:57 GMT leftieliberal said:

Jul 10, 2023 14:06:19 GMT domjg said:

A good friend of mine is a historian specialising in the civil war period and after. Franco was most definitely not a nice guy. The trauma of his rule haunts Spain under the surface even today. 

Agreed. Franco's survival as leader of Spain owed more to his decision to remain neutral during WW2 than anything else. After WW2 the West needed allies against the communist threat from the East and weren't too particular about who they dealt with as long as they were anti-communist. Salazar in Portugal was another example. 

Yes, Franco provided the Americans air bases. He was their 'son of a bitch'.

[John Chanin]

Jul 10, 2023 8:43:45 GMT domjg said:

Jul 10, 2023 7:43:49 GMT crossbat11 said:

moby

Crikey moby, that is a good post, certainly in terms of articulating my position on these matters. That's not to say some won't legitimately disagree with where you and I and others are coming from, but, from my perspective, you've nailed it.

The hostility to Starmer from the right is predictable and understandable, but the depth of antagonism from the left is astonishing to me. The fact that these two spectrums of British politics are now making common cause on the issue is very disappointing when you think of the political and electoral consequences of derailing Starmer.

The Tories want to derail him quite naturally, but what's in it for the Left? Surely a tepid social democratic government, if that's what they think Starmer will oversee, is better than the only viable electoral alternative to that which is yet another Tory-led Government?

Maybe we live in a country and electoral system where tepid social democratic governments are the only non-Tory governments that ever get elected. That's Starmer's calculation I'm guessing, and I think he may be right.



P.S. That's not to say either that a "tepid" social democratic government cannot and will not do good things and be the gateway to real change. My point is that the offer to the electorate is the key here. What gets you the ticket to the dance. Electoral politics has to be the priority for Starmer right now.

"what's in it for the Left?" - I'm afraid for some though by no means all on the further left there's a revolutionary element to this and they are quite happy for the tories to remain in power and drag the country down and down as some of them believe only that will eventually force people into accepting more sudden, revolutionary change. In the meantime of course many would suffer but for some of these people it's more about an egotistical self-validation of their beliefs and 'means justifiying the ends' than concern about the effects on 'real people' to use a colinism. Most of them will be fairly economically cushioned from the effects themselves as well. It's alll about them, not about the country. All quite selfish and unpleasant. 

Revolutionaries have an interest in keeping people in a state of despair as that aids their revolutionary message. Just like Islamic fundamentalists. 

We have discussed this before.  Some people like you vote negatively - anything is better than the Conservatives.  Some people vote positively and are looking for a party that roughly represents their views.  The latter group understands the former, the former seems incapable of understanding the latter, as demonstrated by daft posts like this.

[pjw1961]

Jul 10, 2023 14:56:05 GMT John Chanin said:

Jul 10, 2023 8:43:45 GMT domjg said:

"what's in it for the Left?" - I'm afraid for some though by no means all on the further left there's a revolutionary element to this and they are quite happy for the tories to remain in power and drag the country down and down as some of them believe only that will eventually force people into accepting more sudden, revolutionary change. In the meantime of course many would suffer but for some of these people it's more about an egotistical self-validation of their beliefs and 'means justifiying the ends' than concern about the effects on 'real people' to use a colinism. Most of them will be fairly economically cushioned from the effects themselves as well. It's alll about them, not about the country. All quite selfish and unpleasant. 

Revolutionaries have an interest in keeping people in a state of despair as that aids their revolutionary message. Just like Islamic fundamentalists. 

We have discussed this before.  Some people like you vote negatively - anything is better than the Conservatives.  Some people vote positively and are looking for a party that roughly represents their views.  The latter group understands the former, the former seems incapable of understanding the latter, as demonstrated by daft posts like this.

The logic of that position is that you prefer to live under a vile Conservative government to an imperfect Labour one. Because those are the choices under FPTP. (I am of course a supporter of PR). 

[pjw1961]

Jul 10, 2023 14:03:11 GMT leftieliberal said:

Jul 10, 2023 11:32:54 GMT pjw1961 said:

Don't forget that Mussolini invaded Ethiopia and used poison gas bombs against the population and that had nothing to do with Hitler. Not a nice guy. The reason Franco lasted so long is he avoided getting involved with foreign wars so only had to worry about internal opposition which he crushed with great brutality. Also not a nice guy. 

I don't think you can cite using poison gas as a tool of dictators. Churchill was willing to use it in Iraq in the 1930s www.theguardian.com/world/2003/apr/19/iraq.arts

Churchill was particularly keen on chemical weapons, suggesting they be used "against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment". He dismissed objections as "unreasonable". "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes _ [to] spread a lively terror _" In today's terms, "the Arab" needed to be shocked and awed. A good gassing might well do the job.

Before WW2 there was a willingness to use certain weapons in situations that after WW2 would be considered war crimes.

Yes I was aware of Iraq 1920, but actually the use of poison gas was prohibited by the Geneva Protocol of 1925, so Italy was in breach of international law in 1936 and anyway I don't see why the numerous atrocities committed by the British Empire makes Mussolini's crimes any less. 

Btw, despite Churchil's enthusiam it seems the British never used poison gas in Iraq - the allegation only appeared in the 1990s. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_British_use_of_chemical_weapons_in_Mesopotamia_in_1920#:~:text=Efforts%20to%20develop%20gas%20weapons,of%20tear%20gas%20remained%20legally

[leftieliberal]

Jul 10, 2023 14:56:05 GMT John Chanin said:

Jul 10, 2023 8:43:45 GMT domjg said:

We have discussed this before.  Some people like you vote negatively - anything is better than the Conservatives.  Some people vote positively and are looking for a party that roughly represents their views.  The latter group understands the former, the former seems incapable of understanding the latter, as demonstrated by daft posts like this.

It's not the people; it's the system. If we had preferential voting (like AV or STV) then we could rank parties in order of preference. It is FPTP that forces negative voting on people by only giving them one X to put against a candidate's name. And almost everyone with the exception of UKIP or Reform UK is better than the Conservatives.

[steve]

Spaffer showing he remains the unremitting twat that we all know and despise.

youtu.be/2wJxnP5clkg

[Deleted]

LAB lead by 21 points, up 3 from last week.

redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-9-july-2023/

[neilj]

More from Redfield Wilton
"@redfieldwilton
Starmer leads Sunak by 10%, his joint-largest lead since Sunak became PM.

At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (9 July)

Keir Starmer 42% (+4)
Rishi Sunak 32% (-2)

Changes +/- 2 July'

[neilj]

Jul 10, 2023 16:15:32 GMT @isa said:

LAB lead by 21 points, up 3 from last week.

redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-9-july-2023/

Full results
"Labour leads by 21%, the largest lead for Labour since 19 March.

Westminster VI (9 July):

Labour 48% (+2)
Conservative 27% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 11% (–)
Reform UK 5% (–)
Green 4% (-1)
Scottish National Party 3% (–)
Other 1% (-1)

Changes +/- 2 July"

[neilj]

Delta poll

"Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 46% (-2)
CON: 28% (+3)
LDM: 9% (-1)
GRN: 7% (+2)
SNP: 4% (=)
RFM: 4% (-1)

Via
@deltapolluk
, 7-10 Jul.
Changes w/ 29 Jun - 3 Jul."

[alurqa]

Nice to see the Gov has found a creative way of saving money:

www.theregister.com/2023/07/10/pensioners_affected_by_dwp_legacy/
Number of pensioners hurt by DWP legacy system error actually 65,000
UK benefits department forced to use 'legacy bridge' to help reduce error after underpaying people by c £1B

The UK's government has upped its estimate of the number of people hit by a state pension underpayment related to errors caused by a complex mesh of legacy systems dating back to the 1980s.

In its annual report for 2022-23 [PDF], the Department for Work and Pensions said 165,000 pensioners were underpaid a total of £1.17 billion ($1.5 billion) due to these errors, although it said the final underpayment figure could range from £957 million ($1.22 billion) to £1.35 billion ($1.73 billion).

Note: the 165,000 figure is the correct one. I wonder how long they will wait before they have bite the bullet and upgrade these systems? At some point all the greybeards that operate the old, Cobol-based older Fujitsu system[1] will have to retire.

[1] Fujitsu; now where have I heard that name before? Oh, I remember, the Post Office. Oh shit.

[crossbat11]

Jul 10, 2023 15:35:38 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 10, 2023 14:56:05 GMT John Chanin said:

We have discussed this before.  Some people like you vote negatively - anything is better than the Conservatives.  Some people vote positively and are looking for a party that roughly represents their views.  The latter group understands the former, the former seems incapable of understanding the latter, as demonstrated by daft posts like this.

The logic of that position is that you prefer to live under a vile Conservative government to an imperfect Labour one. Because those are the choices under FPTP. (I am of course a supporter of PR). 

Where John Chanin is right is that the subject has been discussed many times before on this forum and whilst I disagree very much with John C's characterisation of people's voting motivations, I do get the impression that while everyone has the right to air an opinion on it, it could well be one of those debates we need to file under "Dialogue of the Deaf". 

[crossbat11]

Jul 10, 2023 16:29:51 GMT neilj said:

Delta poll

"Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 46% (-2)
CON: 28% (+3)
LDM: 9% (-1)
GRN: 7% (+2)
SNP: 4% (=)
RFM: 4% (-1)

Via
@deltapolluk
, 7-10 Jul.
Changes w/ 29 Jun - 3 Jul."

Looks to me that the Labour lead is stabilising at around 18% and all the pollsters are oscillating around this mean. No great outliers, just variance within MOE. 

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Hello all, been a tad busy but spotted this in the Times, News from behind the scenes about Kiernetto, so thought I’d share:


“Ed Miliband gave an animated Powerpoint presentation to the shadow cabinet on his revolutionary energy policies, speaking excitedly of the hope and change he believed they would bring.

His reception from Sir Keir Starmer, however, was decidedly lukewarm.

“[Starmer] thanked him for his presentation, but said he wasn’t interested in hope and change, he was more interested in creating sustainable new jobs to replace jobs in old sectors that were being lost,” said a source. “He then said he was not interested in tree-huggers, before adding to everyone’s surprise, ‘In fact, I hate tree-huggers’.”

The comments surprised some in the meeting, which took place the day after Starmer gave a speech on energy strategy in Aberdeen last month, but they are symptomatic of the divide that exists between him and Miliband.

Those close to the leader believe it is the economic challenge, not climate change, the party needs to focus on. They see Miliband as an eco-warrior who is more interested in the green agenda than the party’s central priorities of jobs, bills and energy security.

A shadow cabinet minister said: “Keir is always trying to anchor the party. Ed will always try to toe the line by saying that the party’s priorities are jobs, bills, energy security and climate change in that order. He can’t help himself, he is a hopey-changey kind of person.””

[crossbat11]

Jul 10, 2023 9:09:13 GMT colin said:

Jul 9, 2023 19:48:45 GMT crossbat11 said:

In fact, if you take the most populous countries, and biggest economies, in Europe most are governed by centre left or centrist administrations, as in Germany, France, Spain and Portugal. The UK looks like it will go that way next year 

I suppose that if you assume UK will go loc next time on the basis of OPs ( and i think that a very reasonable assumption) , then OPs on the other countries mentioned should be the basis for saying which way they are headed.

The following are the last General/Presidential election results for those four countries together with my approximate reading of the latest WIKI OP trend graphs for each -with the date of the next GE-all showing the key parties. The parties in bold are roc or far right 

Germany:- 2021/2025


SPD 25.7/19
CDU/CSU 24.1/23
Green 14.8/14
AFD 10.3/21


France 2022/2027


Macron 58.6/46
Le Pen 41.4/54


Spain 2019/2023


PSOE 28.0/29
PP 20.8/34
VOX 15.1/15
Podemos/Sumar 12.9/13

Portugal 2022/2026


PS 41.4/27
PSD 29.1/28
CHEGA 7.2/13



....not forgetting this recent actual election :-

heguardian.com/world/2023/jun/25/conservative-mitsotakis-expected-to-win-greek-general-election

I accept that all these current incumbents may well lose power at the subsequent due elections, although with the exception of Spain (very soon) and the UK (next year) they all still have some distance to run and the capacity for changes in political fortunes is therefore much greater. I suspect their electoral systems create more volatility too and it is far more difficult to predict outcomes than in a bipolar contest enforced by FPTP.


Looking at the imminent Spanish election where it does indeed look as if the PSOE centre left government led by Sanchez is in difficulty, the very latest poll puts PSOE and the centre right PP within 3 points of each other and the two far right and far left parties, Vox and Sumar neck and neck on 13%. Like France, where Melenchon did well last year. the far left are as strong as the far right in Spain.

[pjw1961]

Someone (I think crossbat11) asked about the public view of who will win the next GE as a potential indicator of the result. The R&W had this:

"39% of respondents believe a Labour Party majority would be the most likely outcome if a General Election were held in the next six months. A further 12% expect a Labour-led minority Government. 19% expect a Conservative Party majority, while another 9% expect a Conservative-led minority Government."

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

“He thinks the focus, for example, on the party’s pledge to end all North Sea gas and oil licences has been an unhelpful distraction, and something the Tories can easily weaponise.

“In contrast, he wants to see more focus on the party’s Bidenomics-led policies, which amounts to an ambitious plan for creating the industries and jobs of the future.”

…

“It is understood that he will visit Aberdeen this summer to talk to industry and union figures, after criticism of the party’s proposals to freeze North Sea oil and gas licences. Critics believe Labour has fallen into the same trap as the SNP — which has embraced the green agenda and has Green Party MSPs in the Holyrood cabinet — and risks losing votes.

A senior Labour figure said: “It will just take one North Sea oil worker to stand up and say that despite being a lifetime Labour voter, they are going to vote Tory because of this policy and it could be game over. We need to be the party that can sow the green shoots of recovery rather than the party of tree-huggers.””

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

A little while back when I ventured the view that it might be an idea to give special attention to replacing the kind of industry/manufacturing jobs lost under Thatch etc. with modern variants, it did not seem to delight everyone, but Starmer seems ok with it. How much they actually do is something else, but at least it’s acknowledged as a priority.

p.s. what do folk think of Labour’s education proposals the other day? Oracy etc.

[neilj]

A twist on the BBC presenter story, it seems a lawyer representing the 'victim' has said that nothing unlawful or inappropriate had taken place and they asked the Sun to rescind the story on Friday and that the story was 'rubbish'

Time will tell what the truth is

[Danny]

Jul 10, 2023 9:41:38 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 10, 2023 7:43:49 GMT crossbat11 said:

“People trusting us with the public finances,” she says, immediately. “It’s so frustrating, because the Tories have destroyed the public finances and family finances, but when we do focus groups with key voters – people who have voted Labour in the past, but have voted Conservative in the last couple of elections – if you ask: ‘What might stop you from voting for Labour?’ it’s: ‘Can we trust you with the money?’ And it’s my responsibility to make sure when people go to the ballot box next year they think: ‘I can trust her with the money.’”

It strikes me that in 2010 labour agreed it had mishandled the economy, and that contributed to losing at that election. This still strikes me as labour agreeing it is right to question whether they are able to run a national economy.

Its akin to the brexit big red bus, where the point was not the exact sum which britains might gain or lose from brexit, but to suggest there would be a net gain from leaving. The conservative goal here is to make the debate about doubt labour can cope, and labour is agreeing there is doubt. It smacks of labour agreeing they have no solution.

[Danny]

Jul 10, 2023 9:54:56 GMT leftieliberal said:

perhaps in the form of a tick box on one's income tax form that allows one to donate up to, say, £100 of one's income tax to a named registered political party,

10 million votes x 100 is £1 billion?

[James E]

Jul 10, 2023 16:25:07 GMT neilj said:

Jul 10, 2023 16:15:32 GMT @isa said:

LAB lead by 21 points, up 3 from last week.

redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-9-july-2023/

Full results
"Labour leads by 21%, the largest lead for Labour since 19 March.

Westminster VI (9 July):

Labour 48% (+2)
Conservative 27% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 11% (–)
Reform UK 5% (–)
Green 4% (-1)
Scottish National Party 3% (–)
Other 1% (-1)

Changes +/- 2 July"

As so often with R&W, beneath the apparently 'normal' headline figures there are some really odd details. 

They have the Conservatives ahead by 43/40 in London, the 4th time in their past 7 polls in which this has happened. And this is not a small sub-sample, as they had well over 500 respondents in London, so more than double the number they needed within an overall sample of 2000 ( the London sample is down-weighted from 569 to 280). They also have the Tories ahead in the West Midlands, which is quite a turnaround, as their polls in May and June averaged a Con to Lab swing of well over 20% there. 

On the other hand, Labour will be more than pleased to have a lead of 36 to 34 with the over 65s (N=415), and delighted with their 61/27 lead in the Eastern region (N=126).

Their figures by past vote look credible enough (e.g. 17% of Con2019 to Lab, 1% of Lab2019 to Con) although as always, they find higher levels of voter retention than most other pollsters. But there is something very strange in their sampling.

[neilj]

More details of the alleged incident involving a BBC Presenter here
www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66159357
'Claims made by the mother at the heart of the BBC presenter scandal are "rubbish", a lawyer representing the young person has said.
More details
www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66159357
In a letter to the BBC, the lawyer makes claims that throw doubt on the story that has dominated front pages through the weekend.

It says the young person sent a denial to the Sun on Friday evening saying there was "no truth to it".

However, the "inappropriate article" was still published, the lawyer said.

[Mr Poppy]

Jul 10, 2023 14:56:05 GMT John Chanin said:

Jul 10, 2023 8:43:45 GMT domjg said:

"what's in it for the Left?" - I'm afraid for some though by no means all on the further left there's a revolutionary element to this and they are quite happy for the tories to remain in power and drag the country down and down as some of them believe only that will eventually force people into accepting more sudden, revolutionary change. In the meantime of course many would suffer but for some of these people it's more about an egotistical self-validation of their beliefs and 'means justifiying the ends' than concern about the effects on 'real people' to use a colinism. Most of them will be fairly economically cushioned from the effects themselves as well. It's alll about them, not about the country. All quite selfish and unpleasant. 

Revolutionaries have an interest in keeping people in a state of despair as that aids their revolutionary message. Just like Islamic fundamentalists. 

We have discussed this before.  Some people like you vote negatively - anything is better than the Conservatives.  Some people vote positively and are looking for a party that roughly represents their views.  The latter group understands the former, the former seems incapable of understanding the latter, as demonstrated by daft posts like this.

In GE'19 then -ve voting possibly applied to ABCorbyn as well as ABCON (and in Scotland the BNAT's vote ABSNP). Usually happens when one party is pushing something you really object to (eg Scottish Independence for BNATs) or is led by someone you really don't want to be PM (eg Corbyn). IMO you often also see higher 'tactical voting' when a large % of people are -ve voting, although it is hard to prove then IMP we saw a lot of -ve (and tactical) voting in GE'97 and recent years in Scotland. 

There is also 'protest voting' (quite popular in by-elections but also sometimes* in GEs) where you might not want UKIP/RUK/Greens/OMRLP/etc to win but you'd want to vote for someone and want to register a 'protest' against the main parties.

All the above then have 'cognitive consistency' issues where someone people might convince themselves they are voting +ve (eg a LAB/Green for LDEM) when it is really -ve ABCON. The 'false recall' issue suggests there is some cognitive issues on the LoC side.

Then there is the DNV option, where you don't really object to LAB or CON as next HMG as you see them the pretty much the same (nothing much +ve or -ve about either) so you can't be bothered to vote. Blair-LAB v Hague-CON in GE'01 being a recent example of high DNVs given the turnout was a derisory 59.4%. Given not much difference between LAB and CON at the moment either then that is why I reckon turnout will be low for GE'24 (with the caveat that we might see 'protest' votes or someone emerge with a +ve reason to vote for them - such as LDEM backing Rejoin for the Rejoin fanatics). 

NB A 'win's a win' so low turnout is still a win. Might seem a bit disappointing but if there is high turnout due mostly to -ve voting then is that a good thing? I'd like to see 2+ good options and pick the best. Sadly it's probably DNV or a 'protest vote' for me at this stage, but that might change by GE'24 (preferably by CON giving me a reason to vote +ve for them but if LAB+LDEM give me a -ve reason then I'd vote CON)

Pretty complex but there are lots of reasons to vote - or not vote. Each person will of course have their own views and decision to make on the day.  

* EG if LAB have a huge majority in your seat then I expect some might consider voting Green in GE'24. Back in GE'15 then I did vote CON as Cameron promised a ref but I was very tempted to vote UKIP (and would have been UKIP VI until close to GE'15 having voted UKIP in EP'14 as a 'protest vote'). In GE'24 I'm not ruling out voting RUK at this stage (noting I don't want them to win but not bothered about Starmer-LAB and if we haven't got a grip on Illegal Immigration by GE'24 then I might take the chance to 'protest' about that via my vote). 

[Mr Poppy]

Jul 10, 2023 17:20:01 GMT James E said:

Jul 10, 2023 16:25:07 GMT neilj said:

Full results
"Labour leads by 21%, the largest lead for Labour since 19 March.

Westminster VI (9 July):

Labour 48% (+2)
Conservative 27% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 11% (–)
Reform UK 5% (–)
Green 4% (-1)
Scottish National Party 3% (–)
Other 1% (-1)

Changes +/- 2 July"

As so often with R&W, beneath the apparently 'normal' headline figures there are some really odd details. 

They have the Conservatives ahead by 43/40 in London, the 4th time in their past 7 polls in which this has happened. And this is not a small sub-sample, as they had well over 500 respondents in London, so more than double the number they needed within an overall sample of 2000 ( the London sample is down-weighted from 569 to 280). They also have the Tories ahead in the West Midlands, which is quite a turnaround, as their polls in May and June averaged a Con to Lab swing of well over 20% there. 

On the other hand, Labour will be more than pleased to have a lead of 36 to 34 with the over 65s (N=415), and delighted with their 61/27 lead in the Eastern region (N=126).

Their figures by past vote look credible enough (e.g. 17% of Con2019 to Lab, 1% of Lab2019 to Con) although as always, they find higher levels of voter retention than most other pollsters. But there is something very strange in their sampling.

You know they don't weight the regional x-breaks (by past vote*) so why do you look at them?

They do weight by GE'19 vote and hence the GE'19 x-breaks are IMO worth a look but the 'voter retention' (aka 'implied turnout') is usually dodgy with everyone - because ticking a box in a survey is different to actually bothering to vote in a GE. Actual turnout is usually quite a bit lower than 'implied turnout' - occasionally considerably lower (eg in by-election but also in GE'01)

EG My guess is that LAB won't have such a high GOTV in GE'24 as is implied by current polling as (see previous post) quite a few LAB VI won't have such a strong +ve reason to vote LAB and will hence be DNV, possibly 'protest vote' for Greens?

* They do weight the regions and age groups by % of total GB and hence London gets a massive haircut and like of SW are inflated upwards. Happy to agree they probably should try to get their sample improved (ie get more people form outside London to respond) - although they still wouldn't weight the region/age x-breaks by past GE vote and hence those x-breaks shouldn't be trusted as being 'representative'.