jib
Member
Posts: 3,009
Member is Online
|
Post by jib on Jun 28, 2024 22:11:49 GMT
"All"? JiB is the only person who has commented on it!  " And his comment is total cobblers. It represents the biggest win in seat terms ever. Post noted for appx. 145 hours from now. "biggest win in seat terms ever". One of us understands the self interested Tory voter very well. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 28, 2024 22:12:21 GMT
robbiealiveThe example took about two seconds to find. I didn't bother looking for any more. Of course there are other reasons for delays, but why deliberately add to them? Surely the protestors could just open their ranks to let an ambulance through? I have seen a few videos of frustrated drivers with jobs to go to manhandling protestors. These people may well have to have jobs where they will be docked pay for arriving late, or possibly be sacked. It was a lot harder to find a video of JSO people being manhandled than it was to find them blocking an ambulance, but here's one. www.youtube.com/watch?v=81UjzkzHbw0
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 28, 2024 22:13:37 GMT
Rather than me quote all his lies, what do you think he has said that is the complete, unspun, truth? Btw, it is not "uncomfortable for me to hear" because as a working class person from Essex I have been hearing it all my life, not just from ignorant loudmouthed yobs in pubs but my own friends and relatives. I know how to deal with it. Well off the top of my head he recently reminded us that he had made a speech warning about potential war in Ukraine 10 years ago, which he did, so it wasn't a lie. Thank you for reminding us that Farage is a long-term and committed Putin apologist (and 'Russia Today' regular). The idea that Putin invaded Ukraine because he was scared of NATO is indeed a lie and diametrically opposite the truth. Putin invaded Ukraine because he thinks NATO is weak and ineffective and he would get away with it. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 28, 2024 22:23:01 GMT
pjw1961Well neither of us knows exactly how Putin's mind works, so to say that one guess at how his mind works is true and another a lie is at best a wild exaggeration. Every opinion different to your own is not automatically a lie. Or perhaps, like Messrs Farage and Kinnock you are a narcissist and just believe that you are always right?
|
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Jun 28, 2024 22:24:53 GMT
robbiealive The example took about two seconds to find. I didn't bother looking for any more. Of course there are other reasons for delays, but why deliberately add to them? Surely the protestors could just open their ranks to let an ambulance through? I have seen a few videos of frustrated drivers with jobs to go to manhandling protestors. These people may well have to have jobs where they will be docked pay for arriving late, or possibly be sacked. It was a lot harder to find a video of JSO people being manhandled than it was to find them blocking an ambulance, but here's one. www.youtube.com/watch?v=81UjzkzHbw0 I found three example in 3 seconds! See my post. Thanks for the fourth. Oh & by the way JSO generally do everything they can to let emergency vehickes thru. My mother had an absolute set of values. It was always wrong for men to attack women. You are much more "Men should not attack women unless they get in the way, forget to buy beer, etc". So 5-minute delay & they are getting sacked. As I hv said critics of JSO have no sense of proportion. You always quote the most extreme possibility. The other day I needed air for tires. Woman in front had no idea how to top air in her bf's car. I pumped up a v low tire & all was well. According to yr code I should hv kicked her to the ground/ |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jun 28, 2024 22:33:05 GMT
So as we head into the final furlong of the election race there is a clear divergence between pollsters - mainly on the Reform and Tory vote shares:
JL Patners/Norstat/More in Common and
Survation
- Have Tories at 23-25%
- Have Reform at 11-15%
Opinium/Varian/Savanta/DeltaPoll/BMG/WeThink
- Have Tories at 20-21%
- Have Reform at 14-17%
Ashcroft/Ipsos/R&W/YouGov/Techne/Whitestone Insight:
- Have Tories at 18-19%
- Have Reform at 15-21%
Find Out Now - Electoral Calculus/People Polling:
- Have Tories at 15%
- Have Reform at 17-21%
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 28, 2024 22:33:25 GMT
robbiealiveYou are being very imaginative. I said that I could sympathise with the frustration of the drivers trying to get to work. I never said anything about attacking women. I also didn't say that they would be sacked for being 5 minutes late although it's not impossible. It is you who are inventing extreme possibilities. If we all have to include in every post everything that we don't agree with the site would become unreadable. But here's a few anyway: Attacking women Putin Just Stop Oil Firms that sack people for being 5 minutes late. I could go on, but I'm sure you'd find something I haven't covered that you can imagine I said.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbold on Jun 28, 2024 22:35:37 GMT
Farage just said on Question Time that the Labour candidate in Clacton made some 'deeply offensive racist remarks', which is why he was pulled from the constituency. norbold Absolutely completely untrue.
As I think I said earlier, he was told right from the beginning that he was to support the campaign in Colchester and not spend much time in Clacton. He didn't do that, instead concentrating on Clacton. As an employee of the Labour Party he was then ordered to leave Clacton and return to his home in the Midlands to campaign there under pain of - well, we're not sure exactly under pain of what. Maybe his employment, maybe that he would never be allowed to stand for parliament again. But it was something like that. It had absolutely nothing to do with his supposed racist remarks.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbold on Jun 28, 2024 22:37:22 GMT
Farage has also just said he hopes to 'lift poor people out of society' (he meant poverty), so perhaps he doesn't know what he's talking about tonight. What do you mean tonight!? |
|
|
|
Post by norbold on Jun 28, 2024 22:40:28 GMT
oldnat , rather surprisingly, decided to intrude into the affairs of a polity of which he always claims little knowledge by publishing two of the local by-election results last night. Here is the missing one: Hackney - Hoxton West ward by-election-Labour hold LUCAS, Benjamin Alexander Labour Party 880 (64.0%) +10.6 HO, Cheuk Ting Green Party 238 (17.3%) + 2.1 JAISIN, Farhan Conservative and Unionist Party 154 (11.2%) -4.1 PAYNE, Geoffrey Gavin John Liberal Democrats 103 (7.5%) -4.9 No TUSC as previously I know ward boundaries have changed many times over the years, but the area of West Hoxton was where I took part in my first-ever canvas, some 60 odd years ago. It's good to see all my hard work has finally paid off... |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jun 28, 2024 22:58:55 GMT
On the question of a "unity candidate" to replace Biden - there are loads of problems with that.
Firstly, there isn't a coherent "party hierarchy" to reach a consensus amongst themselves and then apply it via a Graham Brady. That kind of mechanism doesn't exist, because the formal structure doesn't exist, and it's too late to do it via pressure on state parties and donors and so on - Biden is already the presumptive Democratic nominee for November and he stays that unless he chooses otherwise.
And there are various reasons why he very probably won't walk away - not just the power/ego side of it, but also the more practical and patriotic- he won't, *can't* walk away unless he's certain that whoever replaces him has a better chance of beating Trump than he thinks he does, and that's a huge question that can't begin to be answered until well after he's lit the blue touchpaper and retired to a safe distance. Because if it comes to a week of floor votes among the delegates at the Convention in August, realistically we have no idea who will end up the nominee, how that person will play with the wider US electorate, and without the long scrutiny of a primary process, what flaws, misdeeds, secrets etc could emerge between the Convention and the election in November.
Yes there have been some good names touted today, Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, but realistically either serious candidates are all going to judge that with only four months to establish themselves against a former President and media dominator then they can't win, or they're going to believe it's winnable and *everyone* is going to get into this. Because if they don't, and the Dem candidate wins, their chance is probably gone forever. After Reagan won the Republican nomination in 1980 there wasn't a truly competitive primary for a nomination worth having until nearly 30 years later in 2008. For the Democrats, for those who stayed out of the race in 1992 cos they thought Bush Senior wasn't beatable, it was 2004 before there was an open contest again.
So for Biden, his choice is stay, and try to beat Trump as he already did once before, or unleash utter chaos in the vague hope that whoever climbs that particular ladder can have a better shot at beating Trump than him. Hypothetical polls don't count for anything, asking people about the Governor of California or Michigan as President is like doing a GB poll on the Mayor of Tyneside or the First Minister of Wales as PM.
And the same chaotic problem hits everyone else who might apply pressure to Biden - how can they know that persuading him to stand down won't just hand the election to Trump anyway?
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jun 28, 2024 23:02:41 GMT
"Similar to how I see the outcome in 6 days from now. Anyone who thinks they have a "free vote" because Labour will win anyway need to bloody wake up and smell the coffee.This will be a really tight election" Just the 250 seat majority for Labour then and lib dems and Tories within ten seats of each other. Really tight. Said nobody ever. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jun 28, 2024 23:02:48 GMT
Farage just said on Question Time that the Labour candidate in Clacton made some 'deeply offensive racist remarks', which is why he was pulled from the constituency. norbold Absolutely completely untrue.
As I think I said earlier, he was told right from the beginning that he was to support the campaign in Colchester and not spend much time in Clacton. He didn't do that, instead concentrating on Clacton. As an employee of the Labour Party he was then ordered to leave Clacton and return to his home in the Midlands to campaign there under pain of - well, we're not sure exactly under pain of what. Maybe his employment, maybe that he would never be allowed to stand for parliament again. But it was something like that. It had absolutely nothing to do with his supposed racist remarks.
Yes, total nonsense from Farage. Did you read Lord Kinnock's comments earlier today chiding Labour for not doing enough to challenge Reform? He also made some broader comments about the need for Labour to be more ambitious and deliver real change. There's this view that Kinnock, Blair and Starmer are all fundamentally the same. This fails to take account of their political times, let alone the policies they actually advocated. Kinnock is centre-left. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 28, 2024 23:04:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 28, 2024 23:05:57 GMT
RAFKinnock has done very nicely for himself financially, but politically he was a serial loser.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2024 23:09:04 GMT
Just had a little tinker on EC. Fed the following VI in:
LAB 33% (lower than any LAB VI I have seen in last 2/3 weeks)
CON 28% (higher than any CON VI I have seen in last 2/3 weeks)
LDEM 14% (not unreasonable)
RFM 15% (possibly generous?)
GRN 6% (not unreasonable)
Result: LAB majority 88
Even on that basis, hard to see past a Starmer Labour Government with a comfortable working majority come next Friday.
|
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jun 28, 2024 23:11:48 GMT
In terms of what happens now... I suspect relatively little impact. Biden is clearly digging in, so everyone will wait for the next round of polls, and I suspect they'll show not much movement. All last night will have done is entrenched what everyone already thought anyway. There might be some shift amongst Independents (as there was after Trump's convictions) but I doubt it'll be enough to move the needle on VI.
Put another way, Trump changed no minds last night, he just stood up and talked his usual schtick. And whilst last night was extremely uncomfortable viewing, if the choice in November is still going to be Biden v Trump then I expect almost everyone who said they were backing Biden prior to last night to still be backing him now because he's still not Trump. Maybe a bit of bleeding to DK/WNV or to the third-party guys, but if there is than that will probably come back.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Jun 28, 2024 23:12:04 GMT
Posterwatch: finally, the dam bursts. After a prolonged period of zero posters in the village, one has at last appeared, on a house not previously known for broadcasting their political preferences. It's Labour 1, everyone else 0. I am back from the dark heart of Bristol, lots of posters and quite a number of garden stakes, what a difference a close race makes. Anyway, the totals I spotted were: Con: 0 Lib Dem:0 Green: 8 Labour: 6
Only a few roads within the constinuency, but markedly more than I have seen anywhere else. According to a friend I quizzed whilst at the concert, Bristol North East also has a reasonable number, mostly Labour there.
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2024 23:25:54 GMT
I agree with Neil: “There is no next time. It [targeting Reform] must start now,” he (Neil Kinnock) said. “We have to combat this populist nationalism with words, in explaining to people what these people are, not just who they are. “People like Farage love the personal attention like all narcissists, so we have to focus on explaining what they are and all their inconsistencies and falsehoods. They plant and harvest lies – they always have.” Kinnock added that if Labour was overly cautious in government, it would play into Reform’s narrative that there was little difference between the two main parties. “Absolutely vitally, [the populist right] have to be combated with actions,” he said. “That means the implementation of change which is positive and cumulative, and driven by strong purpose in the service of the community.” Kinnock warned his party that leaving the Conservatives to combat Farage’s threat would backfire. “I hope that [the Tories] will resist Faragism, but they haven’t shown guts for the fight, and they’re going to have to,” he said. Kinnock is correct to say that 'Farage plants and harvests lies ' , but alas he is not alone! I would direct him to what Starmer promised during the Leadership campaign in early 2020. 'Once a liar - always a liar.' |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jun 28, 2024 23:28:13 GMT
We Think 🔴 Lab 42% (-1) 🔵 Con 20% (-2) ⚪ Ref 16% (+3) 🟠 LD 10% (NC) 🟢 Green 7% (NC) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC) 🟣 Ind 2% (NC) Bearing in mind this is Reform voters, there is a big disconnect between them and Farage over Putin being provoked to invade Ukraine 'Nigel Farage said this week that the West provoked the war in Ukraine - our polling shows that only 17% of Reform voters agreed that the West provoked the invasion. Full results: The decisions of Putin: 61% The actions of the EU and NATO: 17% Something else/Don't know: 22%' These polling findings go some way in supporting the argument I was making in an earlier post. That argument being that Farage's foreign affairs utterances aren't really of much importance to the people now rallying to the Reform flag. They have different buttons and Farage is pressing them. I'd go further than that - as I've argued before, I think many RefUK voters won't care about (or even be particularly aware of) the probity of the candidate in their particular seat. They're not looking for heroes to lead a movement in their name, they're backing a concept, a brand, that chimes with them - as bardin1 said earlier, that this isn't "their" Tory party anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2024 23:29:27 GMT
"All"? JiB is the only person who has commented on it! " And his comment is total cobblers. It represents the biggest win in seat terms ever. Post noted for appx. 145 hours from now. "biggest win in seat terms ever". One of us understands the self interested Tory voter very well. No - it wont be on the scale of 1931. Something like the 1935 result is more of a possibility - but I doubt that it will quite match 1997 or 2001. |
|
|
|
Post by guymonde on Jun 28, 2024 23:31:30 GMT
I taxied a friend to a clinic in Epsom and also ferried some other friends from abroad around SW London over the last couple of days. Mainly LD strongholds Richmond, Kingston, Twickenham. 1 Lab poster in a window and at least 50 LD garden poles. Zero Con, Reform, Green. Somehow I think LD may do OK
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2024 23:32:24 GMT
Farage just said on Question Time that the Labour candidate in Clacton made some 'deeply offensive racist remarks', which is why he was pulled from the constituency. norbold Absolutely completely untrue.
As I think I said earlier, he was told right from the beginning that he was to support the campaign in Colchester and not spend much time in Clacton. He didn't do that, instead concentrating on Clacton. As an employee of the Labour Party he was then ordered to leave Clacton and return to his home in the Midlands to campaign there under pain of - well, we're not sure exactly under pain of what. Maybe his employment, maybe that he would never be allowed to stand for parliament again. But it was something like that. It had absolutely nothing to do with his supposed racist remarks.
I hope he sues Farage for defamation. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jun 28, 2024 23:33:19 GMT
RAFKinnock has done very nicely for himself financially, but politically he was a serial loser. He lost twice so that's mathematically true. Once in an unwinnable election in 1987. The other (in 1992) in an election Labour was expected to win. That said, who else in the Shadow Cabinet could have done better than Kinnock that year? John Smith, possibly but it's hard to say. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2024 23:39:30 GMT
RAF Kinnock has done very nicely for himself financially, but politically he was a serial loser. He lost twice so that's mathematically true. Once in an unwinnable election in 1987. The other (in 1992) in an election Labour was expected to win. That said, who else in the Shadow Cabinet could have done better than Kinnock that year? John Smith, possibly but it's hard to say. I believe Kinnock could have managed a 2017 type result in 1992 - by denying the Tories an overall majority. The Sheffield Rally may have made the difference there. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jun 28, 2024 23:44:12 GMT
Is there actual research evidence (eg Election studies) that Kinnock's triumphalism at the Sheffield rally, changed sufficient votes to cost Labour at that election - or is it just one of those myths that gains ground through regular repetition?
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Jun 28, 2024 23:47:27 GMT
I taxied a friend to a clinic in Epsom and also ferried some other friends from abroad around SW London over the last couple of days. Mainly LD strongholds Richmond, Kingston, Twickenham. 1 Lab poster in a window and at least 50 LD garden poles. Zero Con, Reform, Green. Somehow I think LD may do OK Spent 30 years in Kingston so i know these areas well. I think LDs will take those areas - nearby Wimbledon may be quite tight I think as Labour has a good local candidate from what I can see online (local mum with kids in primary school - always goes down well and will have a catchment from her contacts). Just a question of whether she can stem the tactical voters flow to LD. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2024 23:58:12 GMT
Is there actual research evidence (eg Election studies) that Kinnock's triumphalism at the Sheffield rally, changed sufficient votes to cost Labour at that election - or is it just one of those myths that gains ground through regular repetition? I am not suggesting that the rally cost Labour the 1992 election - rather that it might well have made the difference between Major's 21 majority and a Hung Parliament similar to that which faced Theresa May in 2017. The actual outcome in GB vote share was a Tory lead of 7.6% - but had that margin been restricted to 6.5% there would have been no Tory majority. The Tories held on to four seats by fewer than 100 votes , and i am inclined to believe that Sheffield proved crucial in such very tight contests plus a handful more. That rally brought out the Tory vote and boosted turnout to their advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 29, 2024 0:00:10 GMT
I taxied a friend to a clinic in Epsom and also ferried some other friends from abroad around SW London over the last couple of days. Mainly LD strongholds Richmond, Kingston, Twickenham. 1 Lab poster in a window and at least 50 LD garden poles. Zero Con, Reform, Green. Somehow I think LD may do OK Spent 30 years in Kingston so i know these areas well. I think LDs will take those areas - nearby Wimbledon may be quite tight I think as Labour has a good local candidate from what I can see online (local mum with kids in primary school - always goes down well and will have a catchment from her contacts). Just a question of whether she can stem the tactical voters flow to LD. There is a serious risk of Labour voters being misdirected in Wimbledon by the Tactical Voting sites. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jun 29, 2024 0:27:51 GMT
Is there actual research evidence (eg Election studies) that Kinnock's triumphalism at the Sheffield rally, changed sufficient votes to cost Labour at that election - or is it just one of those myths that gains ground through regular repetition? I am not suggesting that the rally cost Labour the 1992 election - rather that it might well have made the difference between Major's 21 majority and a Hung Parliament similar to that which faced Theresa May in 2017. The actual outcome in GB vote share was a Tory lead of 7.6% - but had that margin been restricted to 6.5% there would have been no Tory majority. The Tories held on to four seats by fewer than 100 votes , and i am inclined to believe that Sheffield proved crucial in such very tight contests plus a handful more. That rally brought out the Tory vote and boosted turnout to their advantage.
The tiny majorities you mention, that determined UKGov, are yet more evidence of the stupidity of FPTP elections. |
|
"
