Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 23, 2024 16:26:25 GMT
Rafwan I think this was the section that related to the situation in the Ukraine. "Hundreds of thousands of us continue to march because human beings continue to die – and we will be there once again in London on Saturday, for another National March for Palestine. We will be demonstrating for a ceasefire and for the only path to a just and lasting peace: the end to the occupation of Palestine." Unfortunately the state of Israel occupies part of Palestine. Tricky one, that. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 23, 2024 16:28:34 GMT
Sunakered Calls for defence to be put on a " war footing " and reach 2.5%of GDP. It might be surprising therefore to know that despite the blatant and obvious aggression of war criminal Putin since 2014 that the last time it was 2.5% was under Labour in 2010 the current expenditure is in fact 7% lower than then. Almost as if the Tories haven't been fulfilling their primary role of government to protect the interests of the country. Hardly surprising that the regime that cut us off from our partners in the European union and imposed trade sanctions on itself would be equally fucking useless when it comes to physical defence You might think that the conservative group for closer relations with Russia, despite disappearing when the war started, is busy at work. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 23, 2024 16:35:43 GMT
Polling samples not designed to be representative for a random outside contender. Pollsters don't select and adjust samples on the basis of voting intention - that's what they are trying to find out! Their samples are designed to represent in miniature the whole population. A sufficiently large sample should indeed pick up the level of support for outside contenders, subject to a margin of error depending on sample size. It was noticeable during brexit polling that there was a problem, which I guess UK pollsters adjusted for. Its still true though that non-voters are grossly under represented in polling samples. So if a group of people who never vote suddenly get a cause and someone to vote for, as per brexit, then it can throw out the predictions. Because you had deliberately created not a sample representative of the whole nation, but one made up of people who vote for established parties. Maybe half the people dont vote, dont intend to vote, so if you did create a sample with these people in it, you are just throwing away money asking people who will not influence the outcome. Untill of course, they do. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 23, 2024 16:38:17 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 23, 2024 16:42:22 GMT
Pollsters don't select and adjust samples on the basis of voting intention - that's what they are trying to find out! Their samples are designed to represent in miniature the whole population. A sufficiently large sample should indeed pick up the level of support for outside contenders, subject to a margin of error depending on sample size. It was noticeable during brexit polling that there was a problem, which I guess UK pollsters adjusted for. Its still true though that non-voters are grossly under represented in polling samples. So if a group of people who never vote suddenly get a cause and someone to vote for, as per brexit, then it can throw out the predictions. Because you had deliberately created not a sample representative of the whole nation, but one made up of people who vote for established parties. Maybe half the people dont vote, dont intend to vote, so if you did create a sample with these people in it, you are just throwing away money asking people who will not influence the outcome. Untill of course, they do. The Brexit polling was not actually that far out, consistently showing it as very close. It was just that journalists and the commentariat were all convinced remain would win and it biased the reporting. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Apr 23, 2024 17:05:56 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives. Stephen Kinnock, the Shadow Minister for Immigration, made an excellent speech during the Commons debate on the Rwanda Bill too. He attacked it on both practical and moral grounds. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 23, 2024 17:13:42 GMT
Early days but according to 538 every poll for the us presidential election published since the 17th April shows Biden ahead.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Apr 23, 2024 17:17:21 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives. A depressingly young man was leafleting our road over the weekend for the local tory MP. I noticed him glance at my EU window flag as he went back up our drive. I tried to go outside to have a 'discussion' with him but was prevented by my wife. 'He's only a child' she said, 'leave him alone'. He was at least 30, ok maybe 25. I wouldn't have been rude in any case, just firm. Probably a family friend of David Johnston, our MP. He did look a bit like a 1990s Harry Enfieldesque 'tory boy' character. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 23, 2024 17:26:24 GMT
pjw1961No one is disputing the regime is culpable. However the Rwanda Bill directly contradicts Tory manifesto policy and isn't a finance bill ( other than of course financing the Rwanda government). As such there is no obligation for the lords to pass it. They're a revising chamber they are supposed to be there to offer a check on incompetence from the commons. If they cave when the government fails to show even a modicum of intelligence there's no point in them being there at all. The line that they had to give in isn't true, in terms of their supposed role. It's been agreed by the upper chamber that they will concede eventually to the wishes of the elected chamber, but given that the current elected chamber is not even as representative of the vote share of the parties as the upper chamber this is of debatable veracity Evidently the two parties that gain most from fptp conspire to pretend that the commons somehow is more representative of the public, even when it isnt.
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 17:57:52 GMT
My party position on the Rwanda disgrace. It's nice to be on the right side of basic morality. Oh dear Lord safe us from this f*ckwit. If the Lib Dems had a moral compass, they would have steered well clear of the Tories in 2010. The only compass setting on the Lib Dems' sorry ship is political opportunity. It usually leads to the rocks. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 23, 2024 18:09:15 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives. That is all very well , but for some reason you do keep ignoring the fact that there is historical precedent for the House of Lords delaying Bills passed by the Commons - the War Crimes Bill and the Ban on Hunting Bill being two examples. Why were those precedents not followed ? |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Apr 23, 2024 18:09:40 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives. A depressingly young man was leafleting our road over the weekend for the local tory MP. I noticed him glance at my EU window flag as he went back up our drive. I tried to go outside to have a 'discussion' with him but was prevented by my wife. 'He's only a child' she said, 'leave him alone'. He was at least 30, ok maybe 25. I wouldn't have been rude in any case, just firm. Probably a family friend of David Johnston, our MP. He did look a bit like a 1990s Harry Enfieldesque 'tory boy' character. Now that is the sort of bellicosity I CAN identify with!! |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 23, 2024 18:15:08 GMT
steve - I appreciate the party political knockabout stuff is inevitable but the reality is that the the Rwanda Bill could only have been stopped if enough Conservative MPs had displayed some moral compass and voted down their own government, which was never going to happen. The idea the unelected revising chamber could spend months and months ping-ponging with the Commons is simply delusional. Labour in the Commons voted against the Bill every time. They have pledged to repeal it in government. There is only one guilty party in this abomination and that's the Conservatives. The house of lords sets its own agenda. They could have voted to refuse to vote further on that bill. However, someone also poined out that if the same bill is refused twice by both chabbers, then it is supposed to be deemed lost and voting on it ceases. At some point the parliament act can be invoked to pass it. This requires it be tabled in two successive sessions of parliament. I am not clear if we are out of time on that by now, though the government could dissolve parliament and commence a new one immediately so as to meet the requirement. There may also though be time limit, one year perhaps. So either the lords had an absolute ability to block the bill before the election, or it didnt. But it was not obliged wither to endlessly keep voting or to give in. As thinsg stand the lords assented, whereas it could have stood on its principles and refused completely. Labour apparently left the chamber in the lords, ceding victory to the government. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 23, 2024 18:24:35 GMT
The Brexit polling was not actually that far out, consistently showing it as very close. It was just that journalists and the commentariat were all convinced remain would win and it biased the reporting. It was accepted at the time that normally non-voters turned out, on both sides. They were in effect new voters never accounted for in the polling, because there was no point polling people who dont vote. In the US, there is the potential for people who dont like either trump or Biden to switch to a new entry. But in particular, I expect pollsters are doing the same trick of saving money by not polling those who dont vote. So if a whole chunk turn up for someone new, then it may influence the outcome. In particular, I think the original point was about the possible effect of 15% voting for someone new. That could result from switchers, or it could be previous non voters. However, different pollsters might get wildly different results because they werent polling the sort of people who might switch to a newcomer. I havnt looked in detail at UK polling lately, but I expect the normally non voters are way under represented as usual. Should be 1/3 to 1/2 of all polled, and it never is. This is a group which isnt really being asked what they will do. There is a risk for the pollsters they never see these people, that people who fill in political polls are the ones who normally vote. But, for example, if these people are now royally pissed at the way we have been governed lately, they might turn out. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 18:56:40 GMT
Just to remind everyone, here's the Liberal Democrats' contribution to the refugee / immigration issue when they were foolishly granted power in the coalition
#rememberremember
 |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 18:58:26 GMT
And here's their man in the Home Office at the time. Norman Baker.  |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 23, 2024 19:03:19 GMT
Latest Savanta poll - LAB: 43% (=) CON: 27% (+2) RFM: 10% (+1) LDM: 9% (-1) GRN: 4% (=) SNP: 2% (-1
These are UK figures!) |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 19:19:10 GMT
Latest Savanta poll - LAB: 43% (=) CON: 27% (+2) RFM: 10% (+1) LDM: 9% (-1) GRN: 4% (=) SNP: 2% (-1
These are UK figures!) The Tories crawling back towards 30%. They know they're going to get a hiding, but maintaining a delusion of unity may save them from a flaying. The JIB "gut instinct" tells me that the economy has turned a corner and that Labour will inherit a 1997esque situation. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 23, 2024 19:20:13 GMT
As our resident brexitanian lunatic has yet to apologise for his infantile remarks about jen and me and insulting the integrity of this forum , perhaps they should refrain from calling anyone else here a fuckwit. I think they've got that role sealed up already. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 23, 2024 19:37:01 GMT
Latest Savanta poll - LAB: 43% (=) CON: 27% (+2) RFM: 10% (+1) LDM: 9% (-1) GRN: 4% (=) SNP: 2% (-1
These are UK figures!) The Tories crawling back towards 30%. They know they're going to get a hiding, but maintaining a delusion of unity may save them from a flaying. The JIB "gut instinct" tells me that the economy has turned a corner and that Labour will inherit a 1997esque situation. On a GB basis the poll would be Lab 44% Con 28%. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 19:44:33 GMT
As our resident brexitanian lunatic has yet to apologise for his infantile remarks about jen and me and insulting the integrity of this forum , perhaps they should refrain from calling anyone else here a fuckwit. I think they've got that role sealed up already. You've got some brass, I'll give you that. You don't need to speak on behalf of jen. I'm sure she'll feel the need to appear later. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Apr 23, 2024 20:31:22 GMT
The Tories crawling back towards 30%. They know they're going to get a hiding, but maintaining a delusion of unity may save them from a flaying. The JIB "gut instinct" tells me that the economy has turned a corner and that Labour will inherit a 1997esque situation. Don't think they are- not seen any evidence beyond this poll. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Apr 23, 2024 20:35:06 GMT
Best not run with "things can only get better" this time!
But the clue to Labour's lead is in the Tory figures to that same question which I now can't find but I assure you it was dreadful!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 23, 2024 21:04:26 GMT
As our resident brexitanian lunatic should know as it was pointed out to him last time the liberal democrats in coalition opposed the go home van nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 21:18:59 GMT
As our resident brexitanian lunatic should know as it was pointed out to him last time the liberal democrats in coalition opposed the go home van nonsense. This is what happens when you get into bed with the Tories.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2024 21:22:34 GMT
What a typically ugly picture from you.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Apr 23, 2024 21:26:44 GMT
The Tories crawling back towards 30%. They know they're going to get a hiding, but maintaining a delusion of unity may save them from a flaying. The JIB "gut instinct" tells me that the economy has turned a corner and that Labour will inherit a 1997esque situation. Don't think they are- not seen any evidence beyond this poll. I don't think jib gets political opinion polls and concepts like +/-3% margins of error etc. Which is a bit surprising when you think he has been visiting a website that is dedicated to political opinion polling for many years. Some may call it wilful ignorance. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Apr 23, 2024 21:27:56 GMT
What a typically ugly picture from you. Jib is defiling the site. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Apr 23, 2024 21:30:59 GMT
Best not run with "things can only get better" this time! But the clue to Labour's lead is in the Tory figures to that same question which I now can't find but I assure you it was dreadful! This may be resignation by voters that the economy is in a dire state rather than an indication of advanced disillusionment with a yet to be installed Labour Government. Besides 56% of respondents think that their prospects will either get better, or certainly no worse, should Labour get into office. Take the positives! |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 23, 2024 21:43:15 GMT
Don't think they are- not seen any evidence beyond this poll. I don't think jib gets political opinion polls and concepts like +/-3% margins of error etc. Which is a bit surprising when you think he has been visiting a website that is dedicated to political opinion polling for many years. Some may call it wilful ignorance. Others might call it an opinion, on polling trends. I expect things will tighten, that's all. If they don't, I'll be surprised. No need to get any knickers twisted at this time of night - I'm not rooting for the Tories. |
|
