European Parliament Elections 2019

Jamie2k9

Christy42 wrote: »

They are still losing finance jobs. And that is just in preparation of Brexit. Nevermind if they actually leave.

Global slowdown could have also been used to keep shareholders quiet. If you will take every effect of it and call it politicing then yeah, it won't look like it is having an effect. Why did they not say global slowdown if that was the reason? Could the shareholders have argued against that? Can you advise those shareholders that they are being lied to and should kick up a fuss? I am pretty sure there is money there.

Ireland has cut growth forecasts because of Brexit.
Yes Steel had other issues. Brexit was always likely to finish off the weaker companies first like any recession.

More effective to use Brexit than Global Slowdown.

Again the losses are tiny and the financial job market in the UK is very strong now. 75,00-100,000 (other saying 200,000) predicted in 2016 if they voted leave, now just 5,000. Reality is most have set up small offices in Frankfurt, Dublin etc and in many cases just expanded existing offices (20-30 staff) to ensure EU market access. Irish Times reported in September less than 620 had left due to Brexit.

Itssoeasy

marno21 wrote: »

It would be wonderful if someone could electrify the fence Jeremy Corbyn is sitting on.

Atrocious but not surprising results for Labour. The Lib Dems have done extremely well given who their leader is but the firm policy position on Brexit for them and indeed the Greens is rewarding.

No surprise Farage romped home given the directness of his message, even if it is mainly soundbite based and has no real basis in reality. Although, the performance is roughly in line with what he managed with UKIP in 2014.

That's been a plus for the Libdems. Whether you agree with their EU position at least they have been honest and consistent throughout the process.

Eric Cartman

I think the brexit party romping away and ukip retirning to irrelevance completely proves that it was farage that was the secret sauce there ,

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

There has been a pattern developing over the last five or six elections of poor transfers between running mates, and it is not just at European election level, where distance is a factor.

In one of our local wards, the transfer rate from one FF candidate to another was as low as 23% this time, which makes McGuinness/Walsh look good. The FG candidate left in the running got 31%.

I would guess that one of the few parties that can still maintain transfer discipline is Sinn Fein.

Poor transfer percentage between running mates is understandable in a small geographical area where each are scrambling for votes, but here we are talking about a very large electoral area with well defined boundaries for both and where FG felt there was a very good chance to take two seats based on public polls that looked to tally with their own polling when late in the campaign they gave Walsh part of McGuinness`s territory to campaign in to bring her FPV up.
If Harkin is correct on the surplus transfer percentage based on the above I would find it a very poor transfer performance.


In fact were you yourself not speculating from the Rec C poll a transfer rate from a McGuinness surplus of 5% of 60% to bring Walsh up to 13% ?

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Poor transfer percentage between running mates is understandable in a small geographical area where each are scrambling for votes, but here we are talking about a very large electoral area with well defined boundaries for both and where FG felt there was a very good chance to take two seats based on public polls that looked to tally with their own polling when late in the campaign they gave Walsh part of McGuinness`s territory to campaign in to bring her FPV up.
If Harkin is correct on the surplus transfer percentage based on the above I would find it a very poor transfer performance.


In fact were you yourself not speculating from the Rec C poll a transfer rate from a McGuinness surplus of 5% of 60% to bring Walsh up to 13% ?

Yes, I was speculating on what was needed, and let's see what happens.

It will also be interesting to see whether your theory holds in the South, when Doyle goes out. Will Byrne do well from those transfers because of the Wexford factor, or will Clune get them because of the FG factor, or will Wallace pick some of them up?

L1011

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

More effective to use Brexit than Global Slowdown.

Again the losses are tiny and the financial job market in the UK is very strong now. 75,00-100,000 (other saying 200,000) predicted in 2016 if they voted leave, now just 5,000. Reality is most have set up small offices in Frankfurt, Dublin etc and in many cases just expanded existing offices (20-30 staff) to ensure EU market access. Irish Times reported in September less than 620 had left due to Brexit.

As useful as this anecdote is, I was in a "trendy" bar in Canary Wharf burning time before heading for a flight in LCY and was discussing Dublin with a barman. Apparently they'd been booked solid for their function room for going away / closedown parties since mid Feb and had probably seen a few hundred individual people leaving for Dublin or Frankfurt. One pub.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, I was speculating on what was needed, and let's see what happens.

It will also be interesting to see whether your theory holds in the South, when Doyle goes out. Will Byrne do well from those transfers because of the Wexford factor, or will Clune get them because of the FG factor, or will Wallace pick some of them up?

Well if you believed that 60% was needed, from Harkin`s tallies if anywhere near correct, it`s not happening.


My theory on the South

Fan of Netflix

Tommy Robinson got a pathetic vote as did UKIP, good news their leader Batten lost his seat.

robman60

Fan of Netflix wrote: »

Tommy Robinson got a pathetic vote as did UKIP, good news their leader Batten lost his seat.

Suppose it was hard for him to campaign much when he was removed from every online platform except YouTube.

The irony is UKIP, like Change UK, probably only served to reduce the number of seats for their respective sides of the argument. Delighted Change UK (ie. Stay the Same UK) will fade back into obscurity. Anna Soubry is odious.

trixiebust

Fan of Netflix wrote: »

Tommy Robinson got a pathetic vote as did UKIP, good news their leader Batten lost his seat.

Surprised at the low vote he got. Although having all 'social media' blocking your name wouldn't have helped his cause.

Was following Carl Benjamin, similarly his huge YouTube following didn't transfer to actual votes. His channel was recently demonetized too.

All those votes seem to have gone to the Brexit party.

Donald Trump

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think the brexit party romping away and ukip retirning to irrelevance completely proves that it was farage that was the secret sauce there ,

Perhaps just a clever rebranding. Did the UKIP MEPs not more or less implode in between being elected the last time and this election? How many of them were actually "left" as UKIP up to the election? Were there any?

Robert ninja

You have to look at the actual campaign video average & max views not the subs (this is true of many channels and content types). Assuming 100% of the people watching were:
1. British
2. Registered to vote
3. Available to vote
4. Cared to vote
5. Voted for UKIP

That would get about 100~200K votes. But it's absurd to think all the above conditions were met and as stated earlier also taking into account the censoring, de-platforming, de-financing and media slant on such parties and candidates. 90 degree uphill political battle for pretty much online entertainers. Although there's an attitude that people like Benjamin cost his party more votes than he gained. Or all the voters just followed Farage.

Larbre34

trixiebust wrote: »

Surprised at the low vote he got. Although having all 'social media' blocking your name wouldn't have helped his cause.

Nonsense, all the traditional media stoked his profile off the scale in the last 12 months, even his knuckle-dragging target market would've received the message. But of course, they are too feckless and slothful to advance their own aims by actually registering and voting - perhaps too many of them involved in illegality to want their name and address on a state run database. Happy enough to march in the hope of clashing with some lefties or a riot with the Old Bill but not actually to convert action into influence.

trixiebust

Larbre34 wrote: »

trixiebust wrote: »

Surprised at the low vote he got. Although having all 'social media' blocking your name wouldn't have helped his cause.

Nonsense, all the traditional media stoked his profile off the scale in the last 12 months, even his knuckle-dragging target market would've received the message. But of course, they are too feckless and slothful to advance their own aims by actually registering and voting - perhaps too many of them involved in illegality to want their name and address on a state run database. Happy enough to march in the hope of clashing with some lefties or a riot with the Old Bill but not actually to convert action into influence.

Agree in one sense, that the people he targeted to vote hadn't probably registered to vote even though they had attended his campaigns rallies. His YouTube channel is severely restricted & he is blocked from all other mediums.

The media stoking his profile is a bit of a nonsense imo. His name & anything to do with him has been blacklisted by all social media platforms. Mentioning his name on any of those mediums will get you instantly banned.

The print media have a view of a bigoted, right wing fascist...which hardly appeals to voters now does it?

lol at the assertion that tommy robinsons name has been censored

hes had coverage far beyond his relevance, importance wit or ability for a year or more

maybe he just didn't get any votes because voters didnt like his message

L1011

trixiebust wrote: »

The print media have a view of a bigoted, right wing fascist...which hardly appeals to voters now does it?

Which he is. He got an accurate media picture and far more coverage than most in the same position

Christy42

youreadthat wrote: »

Except there's no recession and British Steel wanted government money so tried to embarrass it out of them. Btw they are a terrible company, they can't even supply the company I work for with common grades of steel, and the one's they can are not at competitive prices.

Indeed but Brexit is still taking away companies as they lose or expect to lose orders.

I would point out they had gone back to profitability. Plus all the car manufacturing which has gone.


Plus 600m a week
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/fb6285a4-5460-11e9-a3db-1fe89bedc16e

As well as 800 billion in assets. Only a few jobs so far (and I mean so far since they are still a full EU member) but take a wild guess at where the new jobs will be. Similar to the car industry which seems to be losing out on future models etc. as opposed to staff being laid off all in one go.

If it was one company I would agree with you. Maybe even one industry but that has not been the case.

Larbre34

trixiebust wrote: »

The print media have a view of a bigoted, right wing fascist...which hardly appeals to voters now does it?

It does to like-minded creatures obviously. At least now we know how many of them there are in NW England, extrapolate from the turnout figure and say 100,000.

Nody

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I would except a economic decline if the event of a no deal but nothing significant and you are correct about the recent activity but the disruption would end within weeks,

Try decade which is the around the normal turn around for a trade deal to be negotiated as if you might have forgotten UK will leave with ZERO trade deals as it currently stands. US of course will happily bend UK over and take what it wants in a "quick" trade deal; we've already seen how supportive they were on for example the airline deal and what they expect from a new trade deal (full access to NHS contracts, all food standards set to US lower level etc.). Australia has already confirmed they will wait until the first deal is struck to ensure the know how far they can push UK to improve their terms in their favour only as well.

Of course this does not account for the losses incurred on day 1 if there is no deal with EU on things such as products coming in to the UK let alone leaving it which will be chaos incarnate.

is_that_so

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Listening to Marian Harkin on RTÉ. Sounds like the exit poll made a balls of Midlands North-West, good news for Ming. Funny how RTÉ are moving on from the exit poll issue without any discussion.

Yeah, Cuffe in Dublin was way off. I wonder if some of those interviewed who had gone Green in the local were convinced they'd done likewise in the EU. The forms were a serious mental challenge and once you went to 10 and above it was hard to keep track.

is_that_so

eagle eye wrote: »

I just don't understand how people vote for FG in Europe. They are just lackies, follow the line. It's like they never think for themselves or their country.

McGuinness is very good and people know Kelly from his GAA days. The party thing doesn't really enter people's heads for the Euros. Crowley in South regularly topped the poll, even in the bad days for FF.

Harry Palmr

Current EU wide state of play.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/may/26/eu-election-results-2019-across-europe

Greens and Liberal Democrats had a great night, along with a rise for the hard right and EFDD - Freedom and Direct Democracy (not sure what the difference is between them and the nationalist block)

Coillte_Bhoy

Donald Trump wrote: »

Perhaps just a clever rebranding. Did the UKIP MEPs not more or less implode in between being elected the last time and this election? How many of them were actually "left" as UKIP up to the election? Were there any?

24 elected last time out yet there were only 3 UKIP MEPs by the time of the election.

Jamie2k9

Nody wrote: »

Try decade which is the around the normal turn around for a trade deal to be negotiated as if you might have forgotten UK will leave with ZERO trade deals as it currently stands. US of course will happily bend UK over and take what it wants in a "quick" trade deal; we've already seen how supportive they were on for example the airline deal and what they expect from a new trade deal (full access to NHS contracts, all food standards set to US lower level etc.). Australia has already confirmed they will wait until the first deal is struck to ensure the know how far they can push UK to improve their terms in their favour only as well.

Of course this does not account for the losses incurred on day 1 if there is no deal with EU on things such as products coming in to the UK let alone leaving it which will be chaos incarnate.

New deals will take time however countries will put measure in place in the meantime. Example both UK and France would ensure goods flow as quickly as possible and not the scare mongering of weeks of delays etc.

Reality is no deal is bad for UK and everybody however not the end of the world. I think the EU have overplayed it's hand and I will be surprised if there is no adjustments to current deal with a new Tory leader. They say there won't be but you can bet people will be working in background.

Squatter

Seamai wrote: »

Heard both the chief counting officer in Cork and Paschal "Drama Queen" Sheehy making a big song and dance about the problems presented by the " 2 Foot plus long ballot paper" and it might be mid week before we have full results for Ireland South, what a bloody joke in this day and age, I know people have issues with e voting but there's also resistance out there from those who get a hard on at the prospect of a count stretched over several days.

I don't know the answer to this one, but I do wonder how many of our fellow EU members used e-voting in this weekend's election.

Given that the method of election to the European parliament by STV is uniform across all EU member states (at least I think it is) surely a common voting/vote counting technology must be available. If so then why in the same of Saint Eamon Ryan of Clonskeagh isn't Ireland using it?

As an aside, I heard Eamon on RTE this morning saying that he was heading to Castlebar for the count, and thence to Cork. Fair dues to him, that's a heck of a cycle!

Jamie2k9

Squatter wrote: »

I don't know the answer to this one, but I do wonder how many of our fellow EU members used e-voting in this weekend's election.

Given that the method of election to the European parliament by STV is uniform across all EU member states (at least I think it is) surely a common voting/vote counting technology must be available. If so then why in the same of Saint Eamon Ryan of Clonskeagh isn't Ireland using it?

As an aside, I heard Eamon on RTE this morning saying that he was heading to Castlebar for the count, and thence to Cork. Fair dues to him, that's a heck of a cycle!

Part of answer is a box for local, European and whatever else. Pointless wasting a day sorting out votes.

Zubeneschamali

Squatter wrote: »

Given that the method of election to the European parliament by STV is uniform across all EU member states (at least I think it is)

No, it really isn't. Many countries use a party list system of one sort or another.

eagle eye

It's not that difficult to write a few numbers on a ballot paper. In my polling station there were friendly lids which made it easy to post your completed ballots.
I don't like the idea of computerised voting, too easy to mess it up, for somebody to put malware in the system etc.

Squatter

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, it really isn't. Many countries use a party list system of one sort or another.

Thanks.

But presumably the voting is still by STV?

Squatter

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Part of answer is a box for local, European and whatever else. Pointless wasting a day sorting out votes.

An excellent low-tech improved efficiency suggestion! Take a bow!