He undoubtedly is but the problem is Johnson should be too. The man is clearly an idiot and that's ignoring his more sinister BS.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
He undoubtedly is but the problem is Johnson should be too. The man is clearly an idiot and that's ignoring his more sinister BS.
Interesting
Datapraxis ran their own MRP model on the yougov data set early this week and came out with similar results
It does show though that even off the same data set the assumptions you make in modeling are pretty important.
I suspect we will see more MRP models emerge over the next week or so and it will be interesting to see if they all show similar pictures of a relatively comfortable conservative win or if with different assumptions some come in as a hung parliament
The SNP would be finished if they got into bed with the Tories.
Nigerian people and British single mothers in Boris Johnson's firing line:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...of-racial-stereotyping-with-view-on-nigerians
Johnson accused of racial stereotyping with view on Nigerians ~
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...of-racial-stereotyping-with-view-on-nigerians
Totally disagree with most of your post. But hey, at least you found time. X
Good points. Backed up with data. Thanks.
I've always felt that this was a Brexit election and that would be the big catalyst for a change in voter behaviour.
I think on the quiet the SNP will be happy with a Tory government because it will enable them to build the divide between the UK and Scotland through rhetoric and make independence more likely in 5-10 years time.
There's no way on earth that any UK govt could allow a referendum in 2020 so why are the SNP crying so loudly for it to happen? So when it doesn't they can accuse Westminster of 'thwarting the will of the Scottish people' and so on.
Boris Johnson should be the winner in who is most unelectable. Unfortunately media coverage has told us the opposite for a good few years now.
Partially that - I think also there is a hope that if they have an indy ref before the end of the transition period with the EU it will be possible for them to basically extend that transition period for scotland only whilst they apply for full EU membership... that would obviously be more difficult (probably impossible) after the end of the transition period
I think basically the border issues between an EU scotland and a non EU UK would make that pretty unworkable in practical terms but can see the logic from the SNP about making it part of an indy ref (basically we guarantee that scotland can remain in Europe... which also plays in to the thwarting the will of the scottish people narrative as well
Last edited:
Looks like a change in approach from Labour. From the Beeb
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50580699
Essentially they don't see much threat from the Lib Dems and are going to be targeting Leave areas, talking up the benefits of a Labour deal and the risks of a Johnson deal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50580699
Essentially they don't see much threat from the Lib Dems and are going to be targeting Leave areas, talking up the benefits of a Labour deal and the risks of a Johnson deal.
This is an interesting article I read this week, discussing the scale of the change in voting patterns that Brexit has triggered. The change in the Tory Party vote over the past 4 years in particularly is pretty astounding.
https://www.thearticle.com/peter-kellner-some-of-the-most-startling-polling-numbers-i-have-ever-seen
That’s gonna be a tough sell, considering the general feeling about labours brexit position
It looks like Boris's strategy from the end of last parliament, where they framed Labour and parliament as the enemy of the people, and through the election campaign so far has worked as well as they could have expected.
Another interesting thing the Tories have done is sidelined the likes Rees-Mogg and put a lot of minority candidates forward for TV interviews etc in order to change their traditional image. The bloke they're putting forward for the Channel 4 debate is someone I'd never even heard of.
Holocaust refugee Lord Dubs defends Jeremy Corbyn as Labour launch pledges to defend faith communities
Lord Alf Dubs who campaigns for child refugees after arriving in the UK on the Kindertransport in 1939 says Chief Rabbi Mirvis went ‘too far’ in his attack on Corbyn.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/n...ch-pledges-to-defend-faith-communities/26/11/
Lord Alf Dubs who campaigns for child refugees after arriving in the UK on the Kindertransport in 1939 says Chief Rabbi Mirvis went ‘too far’ in his attack on Corbyn.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/n...ch-pledges-to-defend-faith-communities/26/11/
Trump apparently visiting the UK next week. Where he’ll inevitably interfere in the election, and everyone will pretend it’s a big surprise and scandal.
I suspect he may mention that the NHS is not for sale (repeatedly) ... though who knows with trump he could do anything from slag off johnsons deal to basically announce (a completly un-negotiated) trade deal with the UK ready to sign
I think its the Nato summit so I guess potentially a few leaders over who will be hounded to say something on the election - corbyns renegotiation plans etc ... will be interesting to see if macron or merkel say anything as well
Labour are trying to walk a tightrope by talking up their deal without it sounding like they're actually in favour of Leave. On a constituency by constituency basis they need more Leave votes, but they also need to keep squeezing the Lib Dems on Remain. Funnily enough, if they can get less press for this - making sure that pro-Leave campaigning only gets heard on a local platform rather than the national one - it might work for them. But if the national headlines for the next few days are full of Labour talking about how great it will be to Leave the EU under a Labour Government, they could easily lose votes from one group even as they gain from another.
Of course but that is hugely different from supporting them in Parliament or, even worse, coalition. That would destroy the SNP.
Wouldn't surprise me really, can never really trust what politicians say. Odd that we have these people running the country in light of that though!
Yep. That sounds about right. Will the electorate buy it?
I'm sure he'll be well prepped by Tory advisors on how to influence the election in their favour for his brother from another mother!
It’s not just the leader though, it’s their programme. Even if it was all perfectly costed and it stacked up, and there was a broad consensus for the need for it, does anyone believe they would be up to the job of delivering it?
I’m expecting a big ‘vote Boris! Corbyn is a communist!’ rant. And everyone will pretend to be shocked by him interfering in the election.
Personally i think this election is so far showing what a mistake it was for Labour to appear as a remain ish party.
There's not enough remainers and the leavers will vote Boris no matter how much of a fool he is.
given the popularity of trump in the UK that would probably be a boost for corbyn rather than Johnson I think
You mean like that time when Obama was asked, he suggested the UK was probably better of in the EU, where Nigel Farage was subsequently completely up in arms about foreign interference in domestic UK politics? The same Nigel Farage who constantly goes abroad to the US for getting help on Brexit? The same Nigel Farage that happily got Trump on the line in his own radio show and suggesting him to interfere in UK domestic politics (including an attempt to pressure Johnson to go for no deal) on Farage's behalf with leading questions and likely pre-scripted answers and narrative? The same kind of interference controversy where Trump has been openly pushing the UK since his election campaign in 2015 to break away from the EU (as he has tried to pick off other countries like France, but failed) so he can pick them off for toxic US trade deals through divide and conquer?
Gee, how could that possibly result in something scandalous?
What a slowly moving trainwreck. :/ Can't stop watching it happen either.
It's almost as bad as a good Boris Johnson hairday. Almost.
I'm not sure what the alternative is though. Appearing as a Leave party would not only split the party internally but would have stalled the limited revival they've had in the campaign so far, which has largely come from Lib Dem voters. If the Lib Dems were offering a second referendum and Labour were offering nothing to Remain voters, I think Labour would be much worse off than they are now. And I'm not sure that Labour could ever match the rhetoric of Farage and Johnson. For them, its about sticking two fingers up to the EU, and lots of people like that. Labour could never sincerely take that approach.
My view is that the one way to handle this was to change people's minds over the past 3 years, rather than try to find incredibly narrow electoral positions in the short campaign. Whether convincing Leavers to stick with Remain, or convincing Remainers to leave, neither is easy. But the divide between Leave and Remain is so large that a single policy that will satisfy both appears to be impossible.
Certainly, but the joyful part is that Boris can't actually ask him not to do it, because Trump is such an egotist that he'd certainly be deeply offended and cause Boris trouble elsewhere. Plus probably whining about the whole thing on Twitter anyway.
Huh? Not sure what you're saying here.
I suspect he’s not as unpopular as we think. The leavers seem to adore him for one. I suspect those with strong views on immigration (an increasingly large number) will also harbour favourable opinions.
I'm saying Labour shouldn't have gone neutral, they should have sold the idea they're a leave party. It would have lost seats to the Lib Dems but they'd maybe retain enough seats to then do a coalition and have a second referendum.
Alternatively they should have all grown the feck up and forced a government of national unity led by Corbyn.
I tend to agree with you, it's a fairly impossible position but they should have stuck with Leave consistently all the way through. Blocking a GE for so long was a big error also, it allowed the Tories to cast them as baddies to Brexiteers. Labour should have gone after the Tory deal and vowed to get a better one as a Leave party. That way, what they're offering in terms of spending etc would have cut through much better than it has done.
They spent far too much time flip flopping and hiding from the issue, however. This gradually eroded all credibility on the issue and is all on them.
Apparently they are now going to run 2 campaigns
pushing remain credentials in remain areas (lost track of how many people on here say remainers must vote labour)
and leave credentials in leave areas
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50580699
Last edited:
The majority of Labour voters are remainers, as are young people. They’d be obliterated if they back leave balls deep.
I doubt it, the demographic that you are talking about are ideologically driven. I think most would have stuck with the fundamental ideological aims of Labour. The middle aged, middle class centrists would have been a different matter.
It's a sacrifice to the Lib Dems that had to be made. Labour were never getting a majority so It's better for voters to go Lib Dem than Tory. Going leave would have meant Lib dems maintained course on a 2nd referendum in all likelihood.
I've not given up hope on a hung parliament but with the Lib dems doing so poorly on the revoke platform i worry they won't get the southern seats needed.
Interesting thread
I would say it's the exact opposite. Remainers don't know where to go. Other than the most ardent Corbynista few people could believe Corbyn favours remain. Trying to please everyone gets you nowhere.
- Status