pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,604
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 12:39:02 GMT
You and JamesE are my go-to UKPR pollsters. Well, Graham too when he confines himself to Scottish polling! 😉🥴🤣 That's not what you said when Labour was running about 6% ahead and I said that wasn't enough!  By the by, I certainly wouldn't regard myself as a polling expert, although I can claim some knowledge of psephology. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 12:58:58 GMT
You and JamesE are my go-to UKPR pollsters. Well, Graham too when he confines himself to Scottish polling! 😉🥴🤣 That's not what you said when Labour was running about 6% ahead and I said that wasn't enough! By the by, I certainly wouldn't regard myself as a polling expert, although I can claim some knowledge of psephology. I said go-to, not that you are right all the time!!😉🤣 Just revisiting those 1987 and 1992 general elections that Labour lost, in case my memory was playing tricks on me, Kinnock did indeed win a combined total of 62 seats. This achievement, disguised a little by it being buried amongst the wreckage of two clear Labour electoral defeats, was both creditable and politically significant. It got Labour close enough in that 1992-97 Parliament to just about wipe out Major's overall majority by the time of the 1997 general election. It made Blair's mountain a much smaller one to climb than the one bequeathed to Kinnock by Foot. The fact that our Tony leapt over the mountain is another story!! History will be kind to Kinnock, I think, or at least it should be. He had a political giant as an opponent for a lot of his time as Labour leader and his inheritance was a rotten one. Almost as bad as Starmer's. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Feb 3, 2024 13:18:46 GMT
Can't handle Marr for 15 minutes but you are welcome to summarise as it would have been interesting! I took your comment to mean Starmer will get "less" powerful once the election is over? I think he has a very firm grip on his party to be honest that won't easily be shifted. The most likely challenge would come from the right of the party in my opinion rather than soft left but of course when you are in government then there's more reason to speak up than when you are trying to get into power and present a united front. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Feb 3, 2024 13:28:45 GMT
If there really are any Conservatives comforting themselves with 1992 then they are fools. The big Labour leads in the 1987-92 parliament were mid-term and racked up against Thatcher. As soon as Major replaced her they vanished and the polls were close for nearly two years before the election. The graph here amply illustrates this. Close polls translate into the government being re-elected; the current position is radically different. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1992_United_Kingdom_general_electionVery true, pj. I think the impression of some extraordinary Tory comeback on polling day in 1992 arose from a few isolated/maverick polls showing Labour ahead during the campaign. Legend has it that the eventual winners of an election always have some sort of mid-campaign "Black Tuesday"where a couple of polls indicate a tightening, or even an opposition lead. Usually Sunny Thursday follows! Polling methodology and accuracy has improved greatly since those days too. It suited Major to play the plucky underdog in that campaign but, as Kinnock admitted in a recent interview, Labour were never remotely in contention to win that election. He knew that, as did I while campaigning in Redditch. Never a snowball in hell's chance of Labour winning that one. Voters genuinely thought that they already had a new government and they preferred Major to lead it rather than Kinnock. That said, and in fairness to Kinnock, whilst Labour lost the popular vote by a significant margin in 1992, they did reduce the Tory majority and, combined with 1987, a small electoral bridgehead for Labour had been established following the ruination of 1983. Blair stormed the ramparts from it some five years later. EDIT. Does anyone remember the famous Guardian mid- campaign headline in 2015; "The Day the Polls Turned!". Labour took the lead in a couple of polls. The polls turned the other way a few days later! There is a bit of a myth about the 1992 campaign - to the effect that the polls had predicted a Labour victory. In fact, they were pointing to a Hung Parliament with Labour as the largest party - at best a minority Labour government. I agree that the polls were wrong all along and that the Tories were clearly ahead. However, had Kinnock avoided his late campaign mistakes I believe he could have managed a 2017 type result - ie Tories losing their majority and needing Ulster Unionist support to govern. The outcome saw a Tory lead of 7.6% across GB, but had the Sheffield Rally triumphalism et al been avoided that might have been trimmed back to a lead of 6% - 6.5%.That would have given Labour an additional 12-15 seats. Labour would then have ended up with circa 285 seats with the Tories just above 320. Major would have carried on, but we would not have waited until 1997 for another election. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2024 13:35:39 GMT
Can't handle Marr for 15 minutes but you are welcome to summarise as it would have been interesting! I took your comment to mean Starmer will get "less" powerful once the election is over? I think he has a very firm grip on his party to be honest that won't easily be shifted. The most likely challenge would come from the right of the party in my opinion rather than soft left but of course when you are in government then there's more reason to speak up than when you are trying to get into power and present a united front. ah. Sorry about that !. I like him . I suppose it was stating the obvious-that when in government he will be faced with "events", priorities, Whitehall , etc etc. It was a gentle suggestion that he start giving some idea what he is about. |
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Feb 3, 2024 13:51:00 GMT
"Bisto nostalgia". I dont even know what it means it's so cool. We obviously move in quite different social circles. Thanks....it was just me trying to be funny / clever really. Bisto was / is a gravy granules product...back in the day, it's adverts, often in cartoon form, portrayed a very cosy, very English, idyllic setting, of a time past, maybe that never truly was, where a roast dinner was practically a national dish on a Sunday. Ah!I sort of misread this as Bistro. Of course I remember Ah Bisto & Katie bloody Oxo cube. I can now see we move in not widely dissimilar social circles. Years ago, in my more bachelor days, some male friends & I used to have occasional & rotating meals. One or two of my mates regarded themselves as foodies, avant la lettre. & there was a scandal when one guy caught red-handed (& then red-faced) adding bisto to a sauce. It's still occasionally mentioned to this day. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 14:02:05 GMT
grahamIt's worth remembering that the mountain Kinnock had to climb in 1992 made Corbyn's in 2017 look somewhat of a molehill in comparison. Thatcher bequeathed Major an overall majority in excess of 100 seats compared to May's inheritance of 10 seats from Cameron. In fact Kinnock did much better in 1992 than Corbyn did in 2017 in terms of seats gained. 42 to Corbyn's 30. Of course Labour were much closer to the Tories in 2017 than they were in 1992 so Corbyn's seat gains had a much greater impact on the Commons arithmetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Feb 3, 2024 14:12:31 GMT
BMG poll as reported in the i newspaper:
Lab 44% (+1), Con 29% (+2), LD 11% (+1), RefUK 8% (-3), Green 6% (+1), Others 3% (-1)
Fieldwork 30-31 January 2024, 1505 adults polled in Great Britain. Changes relative to 28-30/11/23 polling
Leader popularity: Starmer +1; Sunak -30, 1% below Truss after the mini-Budget disaster, but 5% above Boris Johnson after Partygate in 2022.
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Feb 3, 2024 14:19:39 GMT
graham It's worth remembering that the mountain Kinnock had to climb in 1992 made Corbyn's in 2017 look somewhat of a molehill in comparison. Thatcher bequeathed Major an overall majority in excess of 100 seats compared to May's inheritance of 10 seats from Cameron. In fact Kinnock did much better in 1997 than Corbyn did in 2015 in terms of seats gained. 42 to Corbyn's 30. Of course Labour were much closer to the Tories in 2015 than they were in 1992 so Corbyn's seat gains had a much greater impact on the Commons arithmetic. You have mixed your dates up a bit there!
To be accurate , Thatcher bequeathed a majority of 96 to Major at the end of 1990 - the Tories had already lost by elections at Vale of Glamorgan and Mid-Staffordshire to Labour and Eastbourne to the LDs.By the time of the 1992 election the Tories had lost a further four by elections - two each to Labour and the LDs - which reduced Major's majority to 88.In the event the Tories reversed all their by election loses at the 1992 election. Labour entered the 1992 campaign with 232 seats - which precisely matched its 2015 result! By 2017 Labour had lost the Copeland by election so Corbyn began that campaign with 231 seats - compared with 262 after the 2017 election.Thus, Kinnock and Corbyn had similar starting points in 1992 and 2017 respectively. Of course, a key difference was Scotland where Labour had been reduced to a single seat in 2015. Had that not happened, Labour would have entered the 2017 campaign with circa 270 seats - and emerged with circa 300!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 3, 2024 17:18:16 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 3, 2024 17:32:05 GMT
"In a saga with more delays than a bank holiday train schedule, Wednesday saw the much-anticipated, and equally dreaded, roll-out of the UK's post-Brexit border checks on imports with businesses on both sides of the Channel braced for impact.
The new regime, which will be unfurled in three acts, introduces checks on EU imports, a move that will inevitably mean more paperwork, inspections, and costs for businesses and higher prices and less choice for consumers. Good thing there isn’t a cost of living crisis.
The move also means that the tragically short shelf-life of your bag of iceberg lettuce could get even shorter. An appropriate way to celebrate Brexit’s 4th Birthday. Congrats to all involved.
Sticking with this theme, this week the House of Commons’ European Scrutiny Committee heard this week that holidaymakers hoping to cross the English Channel could face 14 hour queues from October as the EU introduces a new requirement for fingerprint scans and photographs to be taken from all non-EU citizens entering the bloc (but not Ireland or Cyprus).
The warnings have added to fears of chaos at the border with the much delayed introduction of new post Brexit checks on goods entering Britain come into effect next week. Meanwhile the government is planning to cut funding by 70% for those responsible for ensuring these checks are carried out effectively and efficiently. "
B for B
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Feb 3, 2024 18:57:13 GMT
The move also means that the tragically short shelf-life of your bag of iceberg lettuce could get even shorter. An appropriate way to celebrate Brexit’s 4th Birthday. Congrats to all involved. Sticking with this theme, this week the House of Commons’ European Scrutiny Committee heard this week that holidaymakers hoping to cross the English Channel could face 14 hour queues from October as the EU introduces a new requirement for fingerprint scans and photographs to be taken from all non-EU citizens entering the bloc (but not Ireland or Cyprus). Still praying for chaos. Now it's been reduced to an aspiration of soggy lettuce at Lidl in Luton.  |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,604
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 18:57:26 GMT
Wales v Scotland - goodness me.
I can't remember a winning side look quite as deflated and a losing one look so happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 18:57:43 GMT
graham It's worth remembering that the mountain Kinnock had to climb in 1992 made Corbyn's in 2017 look somewhat of a molehill in comparison. Thatcher bequeathed Major an overall majority in excess of 100 seats compared to May's inheritance of 10 seats from Cameron. In fact Kinnock did much better in 1997 than Corbyn did in 2015 in terms of seats gained. 42 to Corbyn's 30. Of course Labour were much closer to the Tories in 2015 than they were in 1992 so Corbyn's seat gains had a much greater impact on the Commons arithmetic. You have mixed your dates up a bit there!
To be accurate , Thatcher bequeathed a majority of 96 to Major at the end of 1990 - the Tories had already lost by elections at Vale of Glamorgan and Mid-Staffordshire to Labour and Eastbourne to the LDs.By the time of the 1992 election the Tories had lost a further four by elections - two each to Labour and the LDs - which reduced Major's majority to 88.In the event the Tories reversed all their by election loses at the 1992 election. Labour entered the 1992 campaign with 232 seats - which precisely matched its 2015 result! By 2017 Labour had lost the Copeland by election so Corbyn began that campaign with 231 seats - compared with 262 after the 2017 election.Thus, Kinnock and Corbyn had similar starting points in 1992 and 2017 respectively. Of course, a key difference was Scotland where Labour had been reduced to a single seat in 2015. Had that not happened, Labour would have entered the 2017 campaign with circa 270 seats - and emerged with circa 300!
This edit button is good. I've now corrected my homework!! Pure typos, you understand, not historical inaccuracies. 😉😫🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 18:59:53 GMT
Wales v Scotland - goodness me. I can't remember a winning side look quite as deflated and a losing one look so happy. Watching Sheffield United v Villa instead. Quite good so far. 😉😅👍 |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,604
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 19:28:09 GMT
Wales v Scotland - goodness me. I can't remember a winning side look quite as deflated and a losing one look so happy. Watching Sheffield United v Villa instead. Quite good so far. 😉😅👍 Not quite as close a contest. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 19:36:02 GMT
Good to see Ian Botham's grandson get a try for Wales in their barnstorming second half comeback against the Scots.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Feb 3, 2024 20:46:45 GMT
Can't handle Marr for 15 minutes but you are welcome to summarise as it would have been interesting! I took your comment to mean Starmer will get "less" powerful once the election is over? I think he has a very firm grip on his party to be honest that won't easily be shifted. The most likely challenge would come from the right of the party in my opinion rather than soft left but of course when you are in government then there's more reason to speak up than when you are trying to get into power and present a united front. Your cheating. That's what Mr Marr said. |
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Feb 3, 2024 20:49:46 GMT
Thanks....it was just me trying to be funny / clever really. Bisto was / is a gravy granules product...back in the day, it's adverts, often in cartoon form, portrayed a very cosy, very English, idyllic setting, of a time past, maybe that never truly was, where a roast dinner was practically a national dish on a Sunday. Ah!I sort of misread this as Bistro. Of course I remember Ah Bisto & Katie bloody Oxo cube. I can now see we move in not widely dissimilar social circles. Years ago, in my more bachelor days, some male friends & I used to have occasional & rotating meals. One or two of my mates regarded themselves as foodies, avant la lettre. & there was a scandal when one guy caught red-handed (& then red-faced) adding bisto to a sauce. It's still occasionally mentioned to this day. I used to relish it when Bisto used to plaster my initials about the place on their posters AHH Bisto. |
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Feb 3, 2024 20:53:25 GMT
Is it MOT'd taxed and insured? |
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Feb 3, 2024 20:55:42 GMT
The move also means that the tragically short shelf-life of your bag of iceberg lettuce could get even shorter. An appropriate way to celebrate Brexit’s 4th Birthday. Congrats to all involved. Sticking with this theme, this week the House of Commons’ European Scrutiny Committee heard this week that holidaymakers hoping to cross the English Channel could face 14 hour queues from October as the EU introduces a new requirement for fingerprint scans and photographs to be taken from all non-EU citizens entering the bloc (but not Ireland or Cyprus). Still praying for chaos. Now it's been reduced to an aspiration of soggy lettuce at Lidl in Luton. there's going to be bad Beluga in Bangor too. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,604
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 21:20:01 GMT
Is it MOT'd taxed and insured? Oddly enough we know the answer to part of that. The Guardian reported that the car has a notice from the DVLA stuck on it warning the owner that they need to pay the road tax or face a fine. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Feb 3, 2024 21:23:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 21:42:31 GMT
Is it MOT'd taxed and insured? Oddly enough we know the answer to part of that. The Guardian reported that the car has a notice from the DVLA stuck on it warning the owner that they need to pay the road tax or face a fine. It just needs a "Vote Tory" sign on the top and a picture of he Tory candidate on each of the wheel clamps. "Get Moving with the Tories" posters in each window. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 3, 2024 21:44:24 GMT
The no deals with the SNP pledge still looks solid though. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Feb 3, 2024 21:49:15 GMT
"it was a bung" If that was your approach when a serving police officer, then it's no wonder that the Met earned such a dreadful reputation! " Actually the Met had a pretty good reputation while I was in it,it all went downhill after I left☺ Regarding the SNP camper as I said identifying physically marking it as an SNP campaign vehicle as was clearly the case with the Labour campervan you posted would have avoided the obvious confusion with what appeared on first site simply a gift for the leaders. It's also total bollocks that it was used as a campaign vehicle it sat outside the parent's of Peter Murrell's house in their driveway for two years unused and uninsured for two years before being seized by police Scotland in April 23 having been bought by the party in 2021, why was it there ? Why not at an SNP office? Given that the current leader of the SNP has stated he knew nothing about the ownership of the vehicle and given it's never been used for any SNP related business what do you think the purpose of retaining it might have been? It's also of course entirely irrelevant what I think but it's evident that this has contributed to the reduction of the popularity of the SNP , which overall I think is a bit of a shame.
I am one of the SNP members who has long had concerns about the centralisation of power within the SNP - which is why I have similar concerns about decision making in other parties as well. The media concentration on the leader, and the consequent wish in all parties to quell divergent opinions to avoid criticism, has been a significant factor in driving that process.
While the Tories have gone into self-destruct mode, and seem oblivious to the consequences, one of the lessons they will doubtless learn after the next UK GE will be to remove dissenting elements - as Starmer appears to be doing now. It's a dangerous path to go down.
As far as the campervan is concerned, your "what appeared on first site" [1] may be accurate if it was a BBC site! Quite understandably (and accurately) Westminster sees Scottish independence as an existential threat. The UK (and its dominant parties) will do anything to protect itself against that threat, and damaging the largest indy party is an obvious way to proceed - as the UK Covid inquiry is currently demonstrating.
In terms of polling, I'm not concerned that the SNP will lose seats at the UK GE. Whether MPs from Scotland are SNP or tame Labour ones following the leader's line, makes no difference to the governance of Scotland. Decisions will be made in Downing St on the basis of governing, and retaining votes, in England simply because its proportion of the population is so massive. If that includes a diminution Holyrood's powers then that would happen anyway. To quote Gove "It would be naive to think otherwise".
If Labour takes control of Holyrood at the next Scottish GE, I wouldn't suggest that they will be terrible (in the way that a Tory controlled Parliament would be). To a large extent they would probably continue much of what the SNP have done, but sadly, never deviating what their boss in Downing St thought appropriate (see my earlier comments on the undesirability of concentrating power in the leader). That they brought about no improvement in Scottish public services will hang them in due course.
What some, furth of Scotland, may not realise is that, here, the next UK GE is not being fought on Westminster issues (most of which relate to England's governance) at all, but on devolved matters. Silly, but when the media is predominantly Unionist, that is hardly surprising.
[1] Yes. I know it was just a typo! |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Feb 3, 2024 21:54:27 GMT
The no deals with the SNP pledge still looks solid though.
To repeat what I said in my reply to steve - that's a dangerous road to go down. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,604
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 22:24:12 GMT
I'm going to mention this although it is far from my 'polity' simply because it should not pass unremarked on. Michelle O’Neill's election as First Minister of Northern Ireland is one of those events that genuinely merits the description 'historic'.
When you consider that Northern Ireland is nothing more than a gerrymandered entity with no basis in history (it doesn't even cover all of the province of Ulster) that was created solely to have an artificial Protestant majority in a sub-section of the historic nation of Ireland, it is safe to assume that the people who carved it out never dreamed that such a thing would one day come to pass. Another step on the road to the inevitable reunification of Ireland. I might add that it is equally good news that the Republic is no longer dominated by the Catholic church, but is a modern, essentially secular, state.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 3, 2024 22:24:22 GMT
Labour once again failing to grasp that we need significant change, not incremental tinkering. It's getting harder and harder to believe this is sugar coating for the election, and that the real Starmer will burst forth once the election is won. A depressing sense of missed opportunity seems more likely by the day now. Meanwhile, in the science world, this story speaks volumes - www.theguardian.com/science/2024/feb/03/the-situation-has-become-appalling-fake-scientific-papers-push-research-credibility-to-crisis-pointThe entry of China in particular to the world of academic publishing was initially welcomed, as opening global science to more influences from a wider range of academics should have been a great benefit, but the entire world of scientific publishing is slipping into farce. Speaking to Dr A about this, she believes that many creditable researchers are also to blame. Far too many researchers fail to read widely enough or critically enough, with objective often seemingly to ensure your papers have huge lists of references, rather than making sure you've thoroughly read and digested everything you cite. This is an enormous problem though, whatever the cause. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Feb 3, 2024 22:28:18 GMT
I'm going to mention this although it is far from my 'polity' simply because it should not pass unremarked on. Michelle O’Neill's election as First Minister of Northern Ireland is one of those events that genuinely merits the description 'historic'. When you consider that Northern Ireland is nothing more than a gerrymandered entity with no basis in history (it doesn't even cover all of the province of Ulster) that was created solely to have an artificial Protestant majority in a sub-section of the historic nation of Ireland, it is safe to assume that the people who carved it out never dreamed that such a thing would one day come to pass. Another step on the road to the inevitable reunification of Ireland. I might add that it is equally good news that the Republic is no longer dominated by the Catholic church, but is a modern, essentially secular, state. |
|
