mormont

UK Politics: Trumpy Cat Trumpy Cat Where Have You Been?

357 posts in this topic

14 hours ago, WaffleSausage said:

so the Question was  

Which doesn't make clear a State Visit is different that an official visit.  and what the difference is between them.

It's also clearly about cancelling a visit that's already been agreed; rather than a simple "Should Trump have been offered a State Visit this early in his presidency" - again, biasing the poll for approval.

14 hours ago, Arakan said:

To be clear: it is the good right of the Brits to leave the EU but it is nonetheless a sad day. An EU without the U.K. is like French fries without ketchup...

Please... never use that analogy again - it's enough to make me think that Brexit really is a good idea after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, I hope he loses everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Hereward said:

Good, I hope he loses everything.

I would suggest there are strong grounds to prosecute him for fraud, and for perverting the course of justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. I was including his liberty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/02/2017 at 4:53 PM, polishgenius said:

 

 

Look, we understand, especially in these times, that you can't take polls at pure face value, but there's a little more science to it than what you're implying.

If we had to ask every person before we decided a vote was representative, then that would be a referendum.

You don't know about polling averages which is what every single political analyst uses, every single one, let that sink in.  That you didn't understand that single polls of very limited sample size have little meaning by themselves makes me ask do you know how science is conducted?  It's a serious question, science involves repeating experiments and peer review, a single result is very often wrong, that's how science works, that's why it's called experimentation.  A political analyst will take many polls and collate the data.

Wording of the question can influence how people react to a poll, but not in this case, most people know the difference between a state visit and a visit, watch how people react very negatively when Trump's corruption accumulates over time, he would get more people agreeing to a state visit rather than a visit but in much lower numbers, who'd want a corrupt authoritarian coming to their home like a friend?  That's how people think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief, do you take all non-favourable responses that personally?

Even if I hadn't understood that poll trends are a far more important and useful tool than the results of any individual poll, which I did but didn't really feel the need to explain in detail in a snide response to a bit of pointlessly petulant sarcasm, a quick read of the topic would have shown you that that had already been discussed long before you dragged your tardy arse back in here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love a good liar haha.  Awww if you understood methodological analysis and it's importance, which you clearly didn't and still don't, then you'd have understood my first post which was the second response to when the poll was mentioned.  You might think you can lie about what has been said in this thread and when it has been said and by whom, gaslighting is the standard tactic when someone is shown to be intellectually limited, problem for you is this thread isn't that long and Trump hasn't been president for that long, so your tactic might work elsewhere, good for you sit in your hole and make people run around, you're the one sitting in a pit haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely confused about what I'm supposed to have lied about, here.


Well, the 'I understood statistics', I get that, but even if we accept I was lying, that's not gaslighting is it.

Edited by polishgenius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit to being confused about what the problem is here, too, but guys: don't start flaming each other over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clive Lewis has resigned because of labours failure to get any amendments to the brexit bill. Not sure anything will come of this in short term. 

Edited by Chaircat Meow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BBC and C4 news have done a good job this week of not getting too consumed by Brexit (perhaps assessing that lots of people have gotten bored with the arguments now) and refocusing on both the housing and NHS crises, and trying to hold the government to account more over both issues.

Interesting rumours over Corbyn planning to resign (even if it has a whiff of wishful thinking). Having gone through all this effort to stay in office that might seem unlikely, but I wonder if he's realised that we're creeping up on being halfway between the 2015 and 2020 elections and Labour's fortunes are getting worse and worse. I also wonder if the fact that Momentum have really failed to get out and mobilise Labour voters in the way they have for Corbyn directly is becoming clearer: the personal enthusiasm for Corbyn amongst some Labour voters is simply not transferring to the wider electorate at all and they're running out of time to do that. Without an unprecedented shift in fortunes, Labour are simply going to lose in 2020, whilst if they get someone with even a bit more nous into place they might stand at least a vague chance (especially if the Tories make a catastrophic hash of Brexit and get a really awful deal and continue fucking up the NHS).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think his idea with the three-line whip on the Brexit vote might have been the proverbial straw that broke the Corbyn's back. The Corbynista hardly look like the most die hard Brexiteers out there (or even among Labour voters) to me. So that idea might have actually hurt his standing with his base.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Notone said:

I think his idea with the three-line whip on the Brexit vote might have been the proverbial straw that broke the Corbyn's back. The Corbynista hardly look like the most die hard Brexiteers out there (or even among Labour voters) to me. So that idea might have actually hurt his standing with his base.

Yup, it's put him in an awkward position, his supporters in an even more awkward position and the party in the awkwardest position. Any credible challenger must now realise that 1) they're unlikely to win in 2020 without a major Tory collapse, so why run now when they can keep their powder dry for the 2020 leadership race, and 2) if a new leader takes over because Corbyn resigned, they will know (and probably be hit over the head) they're only there because Corbyn chose to go, which damages their credibility.

That's before we even get into the question of who could be a credible Labour leader a this time with even a vague chance of victory.

Edited by Werthead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is, if they all wait until after the 2020 election, they may not have a party to lead. If someone can give them a respectable showing in 2020, they might be able to hang on to have a realistic chance of power in 2025.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I doubt anyone's going to adopt a strategy of sitting around waiting to sweep to the leadership on the back of a 2020 election defeat. Many of the candidates will, not unreasonably, conclude there's a substantial risk they might not even be in Parliament at that point.

Leading the party to a 2020 defeat wouldn't be so bad. It's like taking over a relegation-bound team in the Premier League. If you save them, you're a miracle-worker. If you're relegated, it was the previous guy's fault and you get a season to regroup and shape the team in your image.

The trouble is, it would be difficult if not impossible to mount another challenge at the moment, so they need to wait for Corbyn to give up or for an undeniable cause. That might not happen before 2020.

ETA - whatever your political views I think it's undeniable that the country needs a strong opposition now more than it has done for decades at least. Which is why it's so infuriating that it has a shambles instead.

Edited by mormont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mormont said:

ETA - whatever your political views I think it's undeniable that the country needs a strong opposition now more than it has done for decades at least. Which is why it's so infuriating that it has a shambles instead.

Yup. I was all for giving Corbyn a chance, but he's had 18 months and so far achieved nothing of note.

They've still got that problem of there not really being any convincing big-hitters waiting to come in, and barely any credible MPs who anyone has heard of (but then that was Cameron's issue as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Werthead said:

Yup. I was all for giving Corbyn a chance, but he's had 18 months and so far achieved nothing of note.

They've still got that problem of there not really being any convincing big-hitters waiting to come in, and barely any credible MPs who anyone has heard of (but then that was Cameron's issue as well).

I understand Clive Lewis's resignation over Article 50 has made him the favourite with the bookies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Maltaran said:

I understand Clive Lewis's resignation over Article 50 has made him the favourite with the bookies.

I'm not sure he really passes the 'MPs who anyone has heard of' test Wert mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.