UK Politics: Who Pays the Andyman?

[SeanF]

13 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

It is not looking much like Jezzmas ...

YouGov have 42/33 and ComRes have 42/32.

Very grim. 

I can't quite believe myself the Tories will have a 10 point lead in polling day but we will see I suppose. 

Labour might well win, if they had a decent leader.

I've just been reading Adam Wagner's thread on the report submitted to the EHRC by the Jewish Labour Movement.  It really is grim reading.

[Rorshach]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

Ah, but it's OK because if you vote for Johnson, you'll get massive increases in public spending and tax cuts at the same moment he splits us from our biggest trading partners and we're running a larger than expected deficit.

No responsible government would go through with Brexit. Johnson's solution is clear: vote for an irresponsible one!

So..

Tories: "Honestly dishonest" or "Resposibly irresponsible"?

[Werthead]

On 12/2/2019 at 10:38 PM, mormont said:

Not sure where you get that idea, because I explicitly recognised that problem.

My point is, Corbyn and every Labour leader before him knows that. They knew it when they took the job. Labour leaders are perforce required to have a plan to deal with it and get their message across despite it: and complaining about it is not a plan.

You can tell me that nothing Corbyn could do can possibly work, if you like, but that just suggests that indeed, he should quit. Because you're really saying that nothing will be achieved by him staying.

FWIW I do believe he could find a way. Others have. Corbyn himself did OK last time out. But, whisper this: maybe the problem isn't entirely the hostile media. Maybe the problem is that Corbyn is a proud, prickly man who cannot get his own party, let alone the media, onside: and yeah, that is also part of his job and again he has signally failed to do it. And again, blaming the rest of the party might have some grounds, but ultimately won't do. Part of being a leader is that you don't get to blame everyone else for not making your job easy. It's the leader's job to overcome problems. Corbyn is bad at that.

I'm afraid this argument just boils down to, "Corbyn should surrender his principles and court Murdoch and the Daily Mail just to win votes, like Blair did." It's not going to happen and I'm perplexed at why you think it should happen.

I don't believe that anything Corbyn or any other genuine left-leaning leader do, or could do, would win over the overwhelmingly right-wing British press. It's not possible. Despite that, it is possible for the message to get through, as it did last time out.

[mormont]

1 minute ago, Werthead said:

I'm afraid this argument just boils down to, "Corbyn should surrender his principles and court Murdoch and the Daily Mail just to win votes, like Blair did."

Nope.

 

[dornishpen]

12 hours ago, SeanF said:

Labour might well win, if they had a decent leader.

I've just been reading Adam Wagner's thread on the report submitted to the EHRC by the Jewish Labour Movement.  It really is grim reading.

And of course half the replies to this twitter thread are gaslighting the antisemitism and saying it's all a conspiracy against Corbyn and the Labour Party despite all the specific examples. 

[mormont]

 

15 hours ago, Werthead said:

I'm afraid this argument just boils down to, "Corbyn should surrender his principles and court Murdoch and the Daily Mail just to win votes, like Blair did." It's not going to happen and I'm perplexed at why you think it should happen.

I don't believe that anything Corbyn or any other genuine left-leaning leader do, or could do, would win over the overwhelmingly right-wing British press. It's not possible. Despite that, it is possible for the message to get through, as it did last time out.

OK, to elaborate: nothing I said suggests that Corbyn should surrender his principles. Nothing I said suggests he should court Murdoch or the Daily Mail. 

Nothing I said, for that matter, suggests that I believe that winning over the right-wing press is the only way for a Labour leader to get their message out and persuade the electorate: and the idea that it is, I find bizarre. The only way I can explain this viewpoint is that it is a search for an excuse for Corbyn's failure: 'he could never have succeeded'. But that isn't good enough. Corbyn could do better and in fact he has done better. He found ways to get his message across when he stood for leader, when he was re-elected as leader and when he did better than expected in 2017. He's failed to do that this time. It does nobody any service to find excuses for that failure, particularly if those excuses are essentially a counsel of despair: because the clear consequence of what you're saying is, there can never be a left wing government elected in the UK. If that's true, what's the point in trying?

Anyway, moving on, while the BBC has (deservedly) taken some hits over its election coverage I do like this article on things the parties won't talk about.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50599633

In particular, the need for more university places is one that I have a professional interest in, the underfunding of children's services is a disgrace, and of course the house price issue is one that is crucial and hasn't been talked about seriously in any of the many elections we've had in recent years. 

[The Anti-Targ]

I listened to a youtube about page 48 of the Conservative manifesto (haven't read the page myself). It suggested that page is the recipe for the death of democracy in the UK. Anyone read it / have an opinion on it? And is page 48 only coincidentally the same number as article 48 which gave the funny mustachioed guy emergency powers in Germany?

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I listened to a youtube about page 48 of the Conservative manifesto (haven't read the page myself). It suggested that page is the recipe for the death of democracy in the UK. Anyone read it / have an opinion on it? And is page 48 only coincidentally the same number as article 48 which gave the funny mustachioed guy emergency powers in Germany?

No offense dude, but I think you should probably read it yourself. 

From what I saw...yes quite frankly, with the promise of ”updating” how Parliament and the courts Interact with The government in some vague way, an implication to freeing up LE to better combat terrorism and Organized crime. it does seem to be recipe for disaster and something  people are genuinely concerned with protecting Democracy and the will of the peoples should be disgusted by. You don't have to like the majority of political figures in Parliament to recognize it’s bad for the PM to just shut Parliament down by simple virtue of it not moving in a way he wants. It really shouldn't surprise anyone, however. Johnson is a guy who explicitly waxed nostalgically about British colonialism. Honestly expecting  him to show any genuine respect towards Democracy is absurd.

[The Marquis de Leech]

The stuff on page 48:

1. Get rid of Fixed Term Parliament Act.
2. Update parliamentary boundaries to ensure votes count the same.
3. Support First Past the Post.
4. Voter ID.
5. Voting age of 18.
6. Not proceed with second stage of Leveson Inquiry.
7. Look at relationship between Parliament and the courts.
8. Update the Human Rights Act.

The only truly disturbing element of that is (4), which is straight from the US Republican playbook. I disagree with (3) and (6), and I'm not sure how they manage (2) while still keeping the Isle of Wight, the Western Isles, and Orkney and Shetland as unique constituencies. (1) undoes constitutional vandalism, I agree with (5), and given the behaviour of the courts, I think (7) and (8) is warranted.

[Which Tyler]

Hang on - "given the behaviour of the courts" - enforcing the law of the land and preventing a rogue administration from just closing down parliament because they don't like being held to account?

By far the more concerning aspect of "the behaviour of the courts" was the people acting illegally in an attempt to close down democracy - which FTR was Johnson and chums, not the law courts.

 

 

By "Look at the relationship between the government and the courts" they mean "We should be above the law"

By "Update the human rights act" they mean "Strip the populace of some of their rights"

[Chaircat Meow]

Sharp fall in support for Scexit from the highs it reached just after the arrival of the Great Charlatan in no.10. 

Scottish Independence voting intention:

No: 56% (+5)

Yes: 44% (-5)

via @YouGov, 03 - 06 Dec Chgs. w/ Sep

[mormont]

11 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

The stuff on page 48:

1. Get rid of Fixed Term Parliament Act.
2. Update parliamentary boundaries to ensure votes count the same.
3. Support First Past the Post.
4. Voter ID.
5. Voting age of 18.
6. Not proceed with second stage of Leveson Inquiry.
7. Look at relationship between Parliament and the courts.
8. Update the Human Rights Act.

The only truly disturbing element of that is (4), which is straight from the US Republican playbook. I disagree with (3) and (6), and I'm not sure how they manage (2) while still keeping the Isle of Wight, the Western Isles, and Orkney and Shetland as unique constituencies. (1) undoes constitutional vandalism, I agree with (5), and given the behaviour of the courts, I think (7) and (8) is warranted.

I know you have a (misplaced) bee in your bonnet about the courts, but by any standards these pledges are horrific. They're deliberately vaguely worded, but have the clear intention of arrogating even more power to the executive branch and removing any checks and balances on that branch. Unless your entire philosophy is (and it may well be) that the executive can do whatever the fuck it wants, provided it submits itself to a vote that it controls whenever it decides to do so, this is all pretty disturbing.

[Chaircat Meow]

This is the highest I have ever seen Labour; still all to play for.

Westminster Voting Intention:

CON: 42% (=)

LAB: 36% (+4)

LDM: 11% (-1)

BXP: 4% (+1)

GRN: 2% (=) Via @SavantaComRes, 2-5 Dec. Changes w/ 2-3 Dec.

edit: apparently Lab have not been this high in a national poll since April!

[williamjm]

Given how much the Tory campaign has focused on anti-semitism I think maybe they should have tried a bit harder to vet some of the candidates:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/07/tories-investigate-three-candidates-over-alleged-antisemitism

10 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

This is the highest I have ever seen Labour; still all to play for.

Westminster Voting Intention:

CON: 42% (=)

LAB: 36% (+4)

LDM: 11% (-1)

BXP: 4% (+1)

GRN: 2% (=) Via @SavantaComRes, 2-5 Dec. Changes w/ 2-3 Dec.

That might be the first poll during the campaign that could indicate the Tories not getting a majority. Of course, it's always dangerous to read too much into a single poll.

[Chaircat Meow]

1 minute ago, williamjm said:

Given how much the Tory campaign has focused on anti-semitism I think maybe they should have tried a bit harder to vet some of the candidates:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/07/tories-investigate-three-candidates-over-alleged-antisemitism

That might be the first poll during the campaign that could indicate the Tories not getting a majority. Of course, it's always dangerous to read too much into a single poll.

No, a BMG poll a week or so ago also has the Tory lead down to 6%, and an ICM poll recently had it on 7%. There have been a few polls that were on the edge of hung Parliament territory. 

[Which Tyler]

Well, posted my vote off today.
I've not been impressed by the Lib Dems this campaign, but (apparently) they've got the best chance of beating our ERG twatopotamus, so they got my vote.

https://tactical.vote/compare?

[SeanF]

42/36 would put the Conservatives on c.335 seats.

The same company, Com Res has published a more up to date poll giving 41/33.

Survation has the Conservatives leading 44/29% in Wrexham, compared to 44/49% in 2017.

46/31 with Opinium.  That would probably give the Conservative 380 or so seats.

[Jen'ari]

It’s looking more likely that every vote is going to make a difference where I live, normally it would be unthinkable for anything other than a large majority for the Tory candidate but a combination of it being very much a pro remain area and Raab being the Tory candidate could actually see it go to the Lib Dems.

I’ve made up my mind to vote for the Lib Dems, I don’t like the thought of either of the main parties forming a government, if I HAD to pick between the two showers of shit I’d favour a Tory win to a Labour one, but like Mormont said previously there is very little choice for people in England at the moment.

That being said I hope I can at least do my bit to give Raab his Portillo moment .

[Which Tyler]

47 minutes ago, Jen'ari said:

It’s looking more likely that every vote is going to make a difference where I live, normally it would be unthinkable for anything other than a large majority for the Tory candidate but a combination of it being very much a pro remain area and Raab being the Tory candidate could actually see it go to the Lib Dems.

I’ve made up my mind to vote for the Lib Dems, I don’t like the thought of either of the main parties forming a government, if I HAD to pick between the two showers of shit I’d favour a Tory win to a Labour one, but like Mormont said previously there is very little choice for people in England at the moment.

That being said I hope I can at least do my bit to give Raab his Portillo moment .

Lin Dem also much more likely to kick out Raab than Labour where you are. All the tactical voting sites seem to agree on that

[williamjm]

1 hour ago, Jen'ari said:

It’s looking more likely that every vote is going to make a difference where I live, normally it would be unthinkable for anything other than a large majority for the Tory candidate but a combination of it being very much a pro remain area and Raab being the Tory candidate could actually see it go to the Lib Dems.

I’ve made up my mind to vote for the Lib Dems, I don’t like the thought of either of the main parties forming a government, if I HAD to pick between the two showers of shit I’d favour a Tory win to a Labour one, but like Mormont said previously there is very little choice for people in England at the moment.

That being said I hope I can at least do my bit to give Raab his Portillo moment .

I think even if the Tories do end up winning a majority then it would be beneficial if we could get rid of some of the most hardline Brexit MPs like Raab. Plus, it would be hilarious if he lost his seat.