neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Jul 15, 2023 14:28:42 GMT
The thing some people tend to forget is that climate change is not just a shift in temperatures but also weather patterns Hence we can expect more storms and flooding My own home town has suffered two record floods in the last 5 years, with areas flooding that have never flooded before in living memory The World's weather system is all connected so for example the strong winds in the UK are a byproduct of the current heatwave in Europe www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/14/european-heatwave-lead-55mph-wind-gusts-uk-met-officeAs the planet heats up these unusual and destructive weather events will only get worse, no where is immune |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 14:35:50 GMT
"Unite is (currently) Labour’s biggest financial backer and guarantees the party almost £1.5m a year". It appears Starmer has learned from Thatcher (coal) and has been stockpiling (cash) so that he can take on the unions - or at least do without their money when they finally realise that Sir Keith Stalin is a Tory
Labour must ‘give people something to vote for’, says Unite headwww.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/labour-must-give-people-something-to-vote-for-says-unite-head'Vested interests' can easily replace £1.5m/yr and don't mind Tory Plan B given Plan A have made themselves unelectable after 'partygate' and the Truss error. Give it a rest you tedious tedious bore |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 15, 2023 14:37:15 GMT
telling people to "look over there" will not alter reality.
I didn't 🙄 WRT to food then IMO the planet can feed a global population of 8-10billion even with an increase in temperatures and some loss of land (rising sea levels). That is NOT to say we should not move more urgently to reduce carbon emissions and make a much bigger effort to preserve the environment. I'm not going to restate the case for Africa being able to grow a lot more food but some other areas: 1/ Reduce food waste. See "The UN estimates that global food waste from households, retail establishments and the food service industry totalled 931 million tonnes in 2019"lordslibrary.parliament.uk/food-waste-in-the-uk/2/ Tech a/ Higher yielding and drought tolerant crops. EG "Generating high-yielding varieties by genetic manipulation of plant architecture"
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15081053/b/ Vertical farms for 'leafy greens' has been covered before and I've posted about '3D printing protein' but vertical farms are being used for more than just 'jet lagged' lettuce:
‘A growing machine’: Scotland looks to vertical farming to boost tree stocks
www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/01/scotland-vertical-farming-boost-tree-stocks-hydroponicsSo we certainly should move faster to reduce the impact of climate change BUT there are other things we can do, and are starting to do, that will mean we can support 8-10billion on our planet (although that is easier if stays nearer 8 then pushes up to 10) |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jul 15, 2023 14:51:29 GMT
I'm not sure that his assumption is valid. What he says about jet-streams is true, but that only applies to the mid-latitudes, not to the rest of the world. Already, regional climate shocks have helped cause a disastrous reversal in the trend of global chronic hunger. For many years, the number of hungry people fell. But in 2015 the trend turned and has been curving upwards since. This is not because of a lack of food.
Generally, it is war that causes chronic hunger and there has been an upturn in wars since the beginning of the millennium. At some point the stocks of food held against famines run out which is why the trend in chronic hunger turned later. Climate change is highly likely to promote more wars as states and people fight over scarce resources. The possibility of 'water wars' in the middle east for example. Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Libya. Al-Qaeda/Islamic State a major factor everywhere apart from Ethiopia which has been their long-running dispute with neighbouring Eritrea, and not a single one where 'water wars' is a factor. It's religion not water that is driving these wars. Monbiot's problem is he sees everything through the climate change lens. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jul 15, 2023 14:59:24 GMT
From The Guardian: www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/labour-byelection-activists-respect-tory-voters-conservative-constituenciesLabour byelection activists warned: ‘Show respect to Tory voters or go home’ Labour activists campaigning before a byelection in a safe Conservative seat have been told to leave if they feel unable to be respectful to Tory voters, as the party attempts to tackle the assumption that it cannot compete in true blue heartlands.
Direct Tory attacks are also being scrapped or significantly toned down as Labour strategists try to convince voters in the Mid Bedfordshire seat that their candidate will put the “constituency ahead of the party” if necessary, should he win the seat.The very fact that Labour HQ are having to do this showed how worried they are that left-wing activists at by-elections will turn voters off Labour. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 15:09:27 GMT
WRT to food then IMO the planet can feed a global population of 8-10billion even with an increase in temperatures and some loss of land (rising sea levels). That is NOT to say we should not move more urgently to reduce carbon emissions and make a much bigger effort to preserve the environment. I'm not going to restate the case for Africa being able to grow a lot more food but some other areas: 1/ Reduce food waste. See "The UN estimates that global food waste from households, retail establishments and the food service industry totalled 931 million tonnes in 2019"lordslibrary.parliament.uk/food-waste-in-the-uk/2/ Tech a/ Higher yielding and drought tolerant crops. EG "Generating high-yielding varieties by genetic manipulation of plant architecture"
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15081053/b/ Vertical farms for 'leafy greens' has been covered before and I've posted about '3D printing protein' but vertical farms are being used for more than just 'jet lagged' lettuce:
‘A growing machine’: Scotland looks to vertical farming to boost tree stocks
www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/01/scotland-vertical-farming-boost-tree-stocks-hydroponicsSo we certainly should move faster to reduce the impact of climate change BUT there are other things we can do, and are starting to do, that will mean we can support 8-10billion on our planet (although that is easier if stays nearer 8 then pushes up to 10) I don't know if we can or not. Yes I'm sure we can destroy more natural habitat & biodiversity for agricultural use. I'm sure we will. The "environment" is fucked on this planet. What's left of it :- link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42398-019-00053-5#:~:text=Most%20of%20the%20striking%20changes,ecosystem%20services%20for%20future%20generations. Its us OR it. So no contest. God knows what sort of world my great grand daughter & her children will have to live in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 15:13:02 GMT
From The Guardian: www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/labour-byelection-activists-respect-tory-voters-conservative-constituenciesLabour byelection activists warned: ‘Show respect to Tory voters or go home’ Labour activists campaigning before a byelection in a safe Conservative seat have been told to leave if they feel unable to be respectful to Tory voters, as the party attempts to tackle the assumption that it cannot compete in true blue heartlands.
Direct Tory attacks are also being scrapped or significantly toned down as Labour strategists try to convince voters in the Mid Bedfordshire seat that their candidate will put the “constituency ahead of the party” if necessary, should he win the seat.The very fact that Labour HQ are having to do this showed how worried they are that left-wing activists at by-elections will turn voters off Labour. Why would an activist be deliberately rude or offensive to ANY voter during an election campaign ? Don't really get it. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 15, 2023 15:19:17 GMT
Climate change is highly likely to promote more wars as states and people fight over scarce resources. The possibility of 'water wars' in the middle east for example. Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Libya. Al-Qaeda/Islamic State a major factor everywhere apart from Ethiopia which has been their long-running dispute with neighbouring Eritrea, and not a single one where 'water wars' is a factor. It's religion not water that is driving these wars. Monbiot's problem is he sees everything through the climate change lens. You left Israel off your list and it has been suggested that water policy is a major factor in their behaviour on the West Bank. www.cejiss.org/water-and-the-palestinian-israeli-conflictIn fact it contributed to the 1967 war en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_over_Water_(Jordan_River)#:~:text=The%20War%20over%20Water%2C%20also,the%20Jordan%20River%20drainage%20basin. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 15, 2023 15:23:04 GMT
I'm not sure that his assumption is valid. What he says about jet-streams is true, but that only applies to the mid-latitudes, not to the rest of the world. Already, regional climate shocks have helped cause a disastrous reversal in the trend of global chronic hunger. For many years, the number of hungry people fell. But in 2015 the trend turned and has been curving upwards since. This is not because of a lack of food.
Generally, it is war that causes chronic hunger and there has been an upturn in wars since the beginning of the millennium. At some point the stocks of food held against famines run out which is why the trend in chronic hunger turned later. I'm not sure on what basis he makes the claim :-"Looking back on previous human calamities, all of which will be dwarfed by this," :- ......and lots more :- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_faminesThe world population is now much higher than in those examples so many more people will be affected. I would say that justifies Monbiot's claim. |
|
|
|
Post by richardstamper on Jul 15, 2023 15:33:28 GMT
I'm not sure that his assumption is valid. What he says about jet-streams is true, but that only applies to the mid-latitudes, not to the rest of the world. Already, regional climate shocks have helped cause a disastrous reversal in the trend of global chronic hunger. For many years, the number of hungry people fell. But in 2015 the trend turned and has been curving upwards since. This is not because of a lack of food.
Generally, it is war that causes chronic hunger and there has been an upturn in wars since the beginning of the millennium. At some point the stocks of food held against famines run out which is why the trend in chronic hunger turned later. The linked information might dispel some of your doubts. Yes, the jet streams are a mid-latitude phenomenon but many of the key "breadbasket" regions of the world (central North America, western and eastern Europe and Asia - see map at www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-climate-models-underestimate-food-security-risk-from-compound-extreme-weather/) are covered by the jet stream meanders so all are at increased risk of being affected simultaneously if stuck patterns become more common and individually or simultaneously as hot conditions become more extreme. The tropics and sub-arctic do not generate the surplus crops that provide the buffer in the world food supply, so the fact that they aren't affected directly by the jet streams is not material to the argument. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 15:41:33 GMT
I'm not sure on what basis he makes the claim :-"Looking back on previous human calamities, all of which will be dwarfed by this," :- ......and lots more :- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_faminesThe world population is now much higher than in those examples so many more people will be affected. I would say that justifies Monbiot's claim. You have to be careful of your definitions and starting points and what new effects you are actually measuring. On hunger WHO said -in 2021- "*As many as 828 million people were affected by hunger in 2021 – 46 million people more from a year earlier and 150 million more from 2019. *After remaining relatively unchanged since 2015, the proportion of people affected by hunger jumped in 2020 and continued to rise in 2021, to 9.8% of the world population. This compares with 8% in 2019 and 9.3% in 2020. *Around 2.3 billion people in the world (29.3%) were moderately or severely food insecure in 2021 – 350 million more compared to before the outbreak of the COVID‑19 pandemic. Nearly 924 million people (11.7% of the global population) faced food insecurity at severe levels, an increase of 207 million in two years. *The gender gap in food insecurity continued to rise in 2021 - 31.9% of women in the world were moderately or severely food insecure, compared to 27.6% of men – a gap of more than 4 percentage points, compared with 3 percentage points in 2020. *Almost 3.1 billion people could not afford a healthy diet in 2020, up 112 million from 2019, reflecting the effects of inflation in consumer food prices stemming from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures put in place to contain it. *An estimated 45 million children under the age of five were suffering from wasting, the deadliest form of malnutrition, which increases children’s risk of death by up to 12 times. Furthermore, 149 million children under the age of five had stunted growth and development due to a chronic lack of essential nutrients in their diets, while 39 million were overweight. *Progress is being made on exclusive breastfeeding, with nearly 44% of infants under 6 months of age being exclusively breastfed worldwide in 2020. This is still short of the 50% target by 2030. Of great concern, 2 in 3 children are not fed the minimum diverse diet they need to grow and develop to their full potential. *Looking forward, projections are that nearly 670 million people (8% of the world population) will still be facing hunger in 2030 – even if a global economic recovery is taken into consideration. This is a similar number to 2015, when the goal of ending hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition by the end of this decade was launched under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." We are not feeding everyone NOW. data.unicef.org/resources/sofi-2022/#:~:text=The%202022%20edition%20of%20The,shocks%2C%20combined%20with%20growing%20inequalities. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jul 15, 2023 15:53:56 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 15, 2023 16:02:30 GMT
WRT to food then IMO the planet can feed a global population of 8-10billion even with an increase in temperatures and some loss of land (rising sea levels). That is NOT to say we should not move more urgently to reduce carbon emissions and make a much bigger effort to preserve the environment. I'm not going to restate the case for Africa being able to grow a lot more food but some other areas: 1/ Reduce food waste. See "The UN estimates that global food waste from households, retail establishments and the food service industry totalled 931 million tonnes in 2019"lordslibrary.parliament.uk/food-waste-in-the-uk/2/ Tech a/ Higher yielding and drought tolerant crops. EG "Generating high-yielding varieties by genetic manipulation of plant architecture"
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15081053/b/ Vertical farms for 'leafy greens' has been covered before and I've posted about '3D printing protein' but vertical farms are being used for more than just 'jet lagged' lettuce:
‘A growing machine’: Scotland looks to vertical farming to boost tree stocks
www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/01/scotland-vertical-farming-boost-tree-stocks-hydroponicsSo we certainly should move faster to reduce the impact of climate change BUT there are other things we can do, and are starting to do, that will mean we can support 8-10billion on our planet (although that is easier if stays nearer 8 then pushes up to 10) I don't know if we can or not. Yes I'm sure we can destroy more natural habitat & biodiversity for agricultural use. I'm sure we will. The "environment" is fucked on this planet. What's left of it :- link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42398-019-00053-5#:~:text=Most%20of%20the%20striking%20changes,ecosystem%20services%20for%20future%20generations. Its us OR it. So no contest. God knows what sort of world my great grand daughter & her children will have to live in. I'm not ignoring the damage that we humans have done (past tense). EG from your link "According to reports, humans have destroyed about 83% of wild mammals and half the species of plants till date. On the whole, humans have consumed 30% of the known resources resulting into scarcer ecosystem services for future generations. If these trends continue, the Earth will soon be experiencing mass extinctions and we will be left with an even more degraded planet"I'm also not ignoring that we're still doing a lot of damage and not feeding everyone on the planet at the moment (although 'definitions' are a tricky thing to define). I'm also not predicting the future. We certainly have to make changes to our behaviour (at an individual/family/community/polity/global level) and I hope we do. Just saying that we could feed 8-10million people and stop fucking up the planet - IF we have the collective will to do so (and on that I'll accept that I am perhaps on the naive side of 'glass half full'). I'm not writing off PlanET A just yet. Unless you're Musk then there is no Planet B (or Elysium space station) and whilst I'm aware of the issues that likes of Netherlands are facing WRT to ensuring you bring the electorate with you then I am disappointed with the piss poor effort and 'dither+delay' from CON HMG and the U-turns from Tory Plan B (eg Reeves could tweak the fiscal rules or nudge a few taxes up just a bit to help with the state side of 'crowding in' more investment) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 15, 2023 16:17:56 GMT
That particular individual (with 2nd hand reporting and biased source noted) sounds like they should vote BNP if they stand (fortunately very few people vote for that kind of party and FPTP ensures they never gain the soapbox of a seat in HoC to spread their hate) although I note from the link LABlist states: "the smartest home for the anti-Tory tactical vote, Nazi or otherwise, is with Labour’s Alistair Strathern"
So perhaps LAB are going after the Nazi vote and prepared to assume they pick up anyone to the Left of there? I also note from the link that LAB are engaging in:
"Only Labour can beat the Tories here"Bookies reckon "Only LDEM can beat the Tories (T)here" www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.215148472If/when the by-election happens then it does seem likely the winner will only get 30%ish of the vote, assuming LAB and LDEM both make a serious effort to win that seat. A cheeky fiver on CON winning on the split vote (even as an 'emotional hedge' so you can be £25 the richer if CON manage to get say 32% with 'others' splitting the 68%)? I'm not sure what the Inds views are but maybe a win for the Ind would send a welcome message to all main parties to up their game. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 15, 2023 17:15:03 GMT
Old Etonian village idiot Jacob Rees Mogg gets schooled by a Australian comprehensive school graduate Geoffrey Robertson KC who sounds equally posh and is immensely more intelligent than the Somerset ghoul,gets schooled on the international right of asylum. youtu.be/S-aUQBY6CF8 |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jul 15, 2023 17:27:26 GMT
I'm not sure that his assumption is valid. What he says about jet-streams is true, but that only applies to the mid-latitudes, not to the rest of the world. Already, regional climate shocks have helped cause a disastrous reversal in the trend of global chronic hunger. For many years, the number of hungry people fell. But in 2015 the trend turned and has been curving upwards since. This is not because of a lack of food.
Generally, it is war that causes chronic hunger and there has been an upturn in wars since the beginning of the millennium. At some point the stocks of food held against famines run out which is why the trend in chronic hunger turned later. The linked information might dispel some of your doubts. Yes, the jet streams are a mid-latitude phenomenon but many of the key "breadbasket" regions of the world (central North America, western and eastern Europe and Asia - see map at www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-climate-models-underestimate-food-security-risk-from-compound-extreme-weather/) are covered by the jet stream meanders so all are at increased risk of being affected simultaneously if stuck patterns become more common and individually or simultaneously as hot conditions become more extreme. The tropics and sub-arctic do not generate the surplus crops that provide the buffer in the world food supply, so the fact that they aren't affected directly by the jet streams is not material to the argument. Yes, I'm fully aware of all that. It doesn't change the fact that it is wars causing increased hunger (for example the war in Ukraine preventing grain exports from one of the major grain-growing areas in Europe). |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 15, 2023 17:29:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Jul 15, 2023 17:46:40 GMT
Ben Wallace keen to avoid the Portillo experience.  ![]() |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 15, 2023 17:52:41 GMT
The world population is now much higher than in those examples so many more people will be affected. I would say that justifies Monbiot's claim. You have to be careful of your definitions and starting points and what new effects you are actually measuring. On hunger WHO said -in 2021- "*As many as 828 million people were affected by hunger in 2021 – 46 million people more from a year earlier and 150 million more from 2019. *After remaining relatively unchanged since 2015, the proportion of people affected by hunger jumped in 2020 and continued to rise in 2021, to 9.8% of the world population. This compares with 8% in 2019 and 9.3% in 2020. *Around 2.3 billion people in the world (29.3%) were moderately or severely food insecure in 2021 – 350 million more compared to before the outbreak of the COVID‑19 pandemic. Nearly 924 million people (11.7% of the global population) faced food insecurity at severe levels, an increase of 207 million in two years. *The gender gap in food insecurity continued to rise in 2021 - 31.9% of women in the world were moderately or severely food insecure, compared to 27.6% of men – a gap of more than 4 percentage points, compared with 3 percentage points in 2020. *Almost 3.1 billion people could not afford a healthy diet in 2020, up 112 million from 2019, reflecting the effects of inflation in consumer food prices stemming from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures put in place to contain it. *An estimated 45 million children under the age of five were suffering from wasting, the deadliest form of malnutrition, which increases children’s risk of death by up to 12 times. Furthermore, 149 million children under the age of five had stunted growth and development due to a chronic lack of essential nutrients in their diets, while 39 million were overweight. *Progress is being made on exclusive breastfeeding, with nearly 44% of infants under 6 months of age being exclusively breastfed worldwide in 2020. This is still short of the 50% target by 2030. Of great concern, 2 in 3 children are not fed the minimum diverse diet they need to grow and develop to their full potential. *Looking forward, projections are that nearly 670 million people (8% of the world population) will still be facing hunger in 2030 – even if a global economic recovery is taken into consideration. This is a similar number to 2015, when the goal of ending hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition by the end of this decade was launched under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." We are not feeding everyone NOW. data.unicef.org/resources/sofi-2022/#:~:text=The%202022%20edition%20of%20The,shocks%2C%20combined%20with%20growing%20inequalities. This is a curious argument we are having, if argument it be. I know you take global heating seriously and we are two of the gloomier people on this site about the likelihood of anything serious being done about it. I agree things are bad now, but that doesn't mean they can't get worse. The pattern of climate disruption will vary, but it will be widespread. Given there are now over 8bn people on the planet (it was only 3bn when I was born) most of whom will be affected, and an unknown but very large number severely so, it seems reasonable to say that the coming climate catastrophe will dwarf what has gone before. Humans still have power to act to mitigate this to some degree, but Monbiot's main point is that powerful interests are actively discouraging this and harassing those that do want to act. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 15, 2023 18:30:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jul 15, 2023 18:38:32 GMT
From The Guardian: www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/labour-byelection-activists-respect-tory-voters-conservative-constituenciesLabour byelection activists warned: ‘Show respect to Tory voters or go home’ Labour activists campaigning before a byelection in a safe Conservative seat have been told to leave if they feel unable to be respectful to Tory voters, as the party attempts to tackle the assumption that it cannot compete in true blue heartlands.
Direct Tory attacks are also being scrapped or significantly toned down as Labour strategists try to convince voters in the Mid Bedfordshire seat that their candidate will put the “constituency ahead of the party” if necessary, should he win the seat.The very fact that Labour HQ are having to do this showed how worried they are that left-wing activists at by-elections will turn voters off Labour. Why would an activist be deliberately rude or offensive to ANY voter during an election campaign ? Don't really get it. Well there are quite a few voters who are rude and offensive to political campaigners, of any party, and it's only human nature to respond in kind. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jul 15, 2023 18:46:53 GMT
While the boundary changes generally favour the Conservatives, there are a small number of Conservatives left without a seat, and Wallace is one of them. He would have to dislodge another sitting MP (as Braverman has done), fight a difficult marginal, or move to a different part of the country. This is likely to have informed his decision to stand down. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 19:09:17 GMT
This is a curious argument we are having, if argument it be. I know you take global heating seriously and we are two of the gloomier people on this site about the likelihood of anything serious being done about it. I agree things are bad now, but that doesn't mean they can't get worse. Not to me-and of course it will get worse. I'll try and explain it briefly. I get pissed off with all the hyperventilated angst about "climate change" by people who never seem to acknowledge that our species has already destroyed and continues to destroy so much of the earth's biodiversity. Never seem to comment on the selfish destruction of rain forests , wetlands , natural habitat of every description in order to grow our food , build our cities and enable our lives of never ending consumption of unnecessary stuff. Never talk about the pollution of our oceans and seas and the very mountain tops with plastic . Never talk about the shit heaps of our detritus which despoil the planet , to the beaches of the remotest island on earth. Never acknowledge that we are in such numbers on this planet now that we cannot feed ourselves already. And yet get oh so upset about the prospect of all this plunder and exploitation being compromised because we did all this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 19:11:18 GMT
Why would an activist be deliberately rude or offensive to ANY voter during an election campaign ? Don't really get it. Well there are quite a few voters who are rude and offensive to political campaigners, of any party, and it's only human nature to respond in kind. Ah -I misunderstood. I had assumed that the edict was in respect of gratuitous offence to a voter -not response to something said by a voter. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jul 15, 2023 19:12:50 GMT
"While the boundary changes generally favour the Conservatives..."
It's certainly true that the Tories will go into the next election with notionally more seats than they won in 2019. However, when I have experimented with Electoral Calculus, applying the same vote shares on the 2019 and 2023 boundaries, it seems to make very little difference. At worst, Labour appear to take about 3-5 fewer seats, and in some scenarios, they take 1 or 2 more.
I would be interested to see ordered lists of Lab and LD targets on the new boundaries - has anyone come across these?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2023 19:26:19 GMT
Well there are quite a few voters who are rude and offensive to political campaigners, of any party, and it's only human nature to respond in kind. Ah -I misunderstood. I had assumed that the edict was in respect of gratuitous offence to a voter -not response to something said by a voter. Well, if you imagine @jenny as a Labour canvasser I think it’s not difficult to also imagine a bit of gratuitous offence being handed out if someone told her that they were probably going to vote Conservative.  |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 15, 2023 19:28:54 GMT
James E Harpenden and Berkhamsted given the success locally of lib dems every seat in berkhamsted between 2019 and now have been won from the Tories by the lib dems and is in our target list
|
|
graham
Member
Posts: 3,777
Member is Online
|
Post by graham on Jul 15, 2023 19:29:32 GMT
Ah -I misunderstood. I had assumed that the edict was in respect of gratuitous offence to a voter -not response to something said by a voter. Well, if you imagine @jenny as a Labour canvasser I think it’s not difficult to also imagine a bit of gratuitous offence being handed out if someone told her that they were probably going to vote Conservative. My response would always be 'I have nothing against Tory voters at all. I just happen to view them as being 'a lower form of life.'' |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Jul 15, 2023 19:55:51 GMT
Ah -I misunderstood. I had assumed that the edict was in respect of gratuitous offence to a voter -not response to something said by a voter. Well, if you imagine @jenny as a Labour canvasser I think it’s not difficult to also imagine a bit of gratuitous offence being handed out if someone told her that they were probably going to vote Conservative. I'd be careful about referring to jen as jenny if I were you feckless. My daughter hates it - she says a jenny is a female donkey  |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 15, 2023 20:48:18 GMT
Ah -I misunderstood. I had assumed that the edict was in respect of gratuitous offence to a voter -not response to something said by a voter. Well, if you imagine @jenny as a Labour canvasser I think it’s not difficult to also imagine a bit of gratuitous offence being handed out if someone told her that they were probably going to vote Conservative. jen is definitely not Labour from her comments. Pro-Scottish independence, but I has never claimed any party affiliation I am aware of. |
|
