General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

A Dub in Glasgo

Deleted User wrote: »

Let's say IndyRef2 takes place toward the end of 2020 and the nationalists lose again, yet win the next General Election too - should we then have a third referendum in 2024?

By your logic, this is not only concievable but welcome.

As long as there is a mandate

The mandate exists today therefore you think Johnson is perfectly OK to ignore that mandate

The pro-independence side started off the campaign on mid-20% and ended up at 45%. Today they are at 49% - we know exactly why you and the Tories want to run from another referendum

hotmail.com

sid waddell wrote: »

The concept of English nationalism is very strange to me, as England itself is highly divided along both class and geographical lines.

I can't think of another European country bar Spain which is so tied up with regional identity.

I can't imagine English nationalism has much traction among ethnic minorities, or in urban areas.

England has a massive north-south divide, the urban-rural divide is becoming ever more apparent too.

Many people in cities like Liverpool and to a lesser extent Manchester almost don't consider themselves English or British at all - Liverpool supporters booed God Save The Queen at Wembley recently.

There is huge identity of place in Yorkshire and the North East around Newcastle and surrounds.

English nationalism seems a very imported, alien concept to me, sort of American style or, dare I say it, Russian style. It seems a very Tory/Brexity thing.

Russia has continually promoted separatism within countries - Scotland, Catalonia, and in the US, Cal-Exit and Texit etc.

Is the next follow on from English nationalism a move to split England itself apart?

Great points.

I'm not sure English nationalism is the main reason for Brexit, it may be a factor, but the majority in Wales voted to leave and about a third voted to leave in Scotland.

So that doesn't explain why they voted to leave.

It probably requires a lot analysis in a few years time. Some want to point to short term reasons why the Brexit vote was passed, but I think it's far more complex than that. Ultimately, I've said it here before, the Brits never warmed to the EU and they want to be out.

McGiver

eskimohunt wrote:

This was already debunked

This is no debunking, it's an opinionated criticism with no counter study - and in fact no facts and underlying study at all - whereas the calculation of the death toll has was made was made in a proper study (you know not pulled out of thing air).

Also and more importantly, fullfact is associated with the Tory party. Hardly an unbiased assessment of anything really.

ancapailldorcha

McGiver wrote: »

Also and more importantly, fullfact is associated with the Tory party. Hardly an unbiased assessment of anything really.

Can you elaborate please?

McGiver

Stop moaning ffs wrote:

Managing of finances.

And wasting dozens of billions in 3 years due to creation and mismanagement of Brexit!

McGiver

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Can you elaborate please?

Oh yes. The founder is a Tory donor plus other dodgy things.

https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/full-fact-gets-charity-status-after-being-rejected-twice.html
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/faux-facts-disturbing-truth-about-fullfactorg
https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/unbiased-full-fact-comes-brexit/

Given this we can't trust them fully. Need to fact check a "fact check"!

Danzy

sid waddell wrote: »

British identity may have been an imperialistic construct but I don't agree that it has remained that, I think it has evolved.

I think a British identity generally feels less threatening to immigrants to England than an exclusively English one.

I would strongly suspect that history of the British Empire is held in more positive regard among those English people with an exclusively or primarily English identity than among those of an exclusively or primarily British identity.

I more than strongly suspect that the history of the British Empire is held in more positive regard among Brexiteers than it is among Remainers - it seems pretty self-evident to me that that is the case.

To me, as an outsider looking in, Britishness feels more diverse and inclusive, Englishness feels more white and more threatening.

It has adopted to suit the modern establishment needs.

sid waddell

John Major said this morning that the NHS would be as safe with Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith as "a pet hamster would be with a hungry python".

I've seen it said by at least one poster here that the notion that the Tories wanted to destroy the NHS had been "debunked".

I think John Major might know just a bit more about the true nature of those running the Tory party today than that poster.

Strazdas

sid waddell wrote: »

John Major said this morning that the NHS would be as safe with Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith as "a pet hamster would be with a hungry python".

I've seen it said by at least one poster here that the notion that the Tories wanted to destroy the NHS had been "debunked".

I think John Major might know just a bit more about the true nature of those running the Tory party today than that poster.

The public seem clueless about what is coming down the tracks. They have been warned repeatedly about what Johnson is really like and yet keep giving him 40%+ in the opinion polls.

sid waddell

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

John Major "the man who ran away from the circus to become an accountant"

Along with MacMillan, he was the best Tory PM of the post-war era.

I wouldn't have voted for him, but he was a decent man who came up the hard way and is widely respected across the political spectrum.

There are few enough current or former politicians you can say that about and even fewer PMs.

bilston

Strazdas wrote: »

The public seem clueless about what is coming down the tracks. They have been warned repeatedly about what Johnson is really like and yet keep giving him 40%+ in the opinion polls.

That's as much a reflection of Corbyn as anything

A small Tory majority of only a few seats might be the best outcome, as while it would put Johnson back in Downing Street it would also see the end of Corbyn (I assume anyway) and give Labour the opportunity to elect someone capable of winning an election and someone able to reach out beyond the left. A small Tory majority of say less than 6-10 seats could potentially collapse at any minute.

In saying part of me wouldn't be surprised to see Corbyn try and sit it out and stay as leader.

Bannasidhe

Strazdas wrote: »

The public seem clueless about what is coming down the tracks. They have been warned repeatedly about what Johnson is really like and yet keep giving him 40%+ in the opinion polls.

Saw a woman on a vox pop on BBC saying she will vote Tory even though she doesn't trust Johnson but she does like him.

Then we had the token Labour supporter who doesn't trust Corbyn.

What I find strange is Johnson has a proven track record of being untrustworthy while the reasons given for not trusting Corbyn are nebulous at best.

Sam Russell

sid waddell wrote: »

Along with MacMillan, he was the best Tory PM of the post-war era.

I wouldn't have voted for him, but he was a decent man who came up the hard way and is widely respected across the political spectrum.

There are few enough current or former politicians you can say that about and even fewer PMs.

It was said of John Major that he was the only person to run away from the circus to become an accountant. [His father was a music hall performer].

bilston

sid waddell wrote: »

Along with MacMillan, he was the best Tory PM of the post-war era.

I wouldn't have voted for him, but he was a decent man who came up the hard way and is widely respected across the political spectrum.

There are few enough current or former politicians you can say that about and even fewer PMs.

Major is someone who's reputation gets better the longer he is out of office. Who knows what sort of PM he would have been without Europe weighing him down.

Professor Moriarty

hotmail.com wrote: »

Great points.

I'm not sure English nationalism is the main reason for Brexit, it may be a factor, but the majority in Wales voted to leave and about a third voted to leave in Scotland.

So that doesn't explain why they voted to leave.

It probably requires a lot analysis in a few years time. Some want to point to short term reasons why the Brexit vote was passed, but I think it's far more complex than that. Ultimately, I've said it here before, the Brits never warmed to the EU and they want to be out.

Much of the Leave vote in Wales was driven by retired English people. In Scotland, the Unionist vote was a key factor.

Harry Palmr

If the Tories barely scrap a working majority Corbyn will stay on and perpetuate the cycle we're watching!

Danzy

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Saw a woman on a vox pop on BBC saying she will vote Tory even though she doesn't trust Johnson but she does like him.

Then we had the token Labour supporter who doesn't trust Corbyn.

What I find strange is Johnson has a proven track record of being untrustworthy while the reasons given for not trusting Corbyn are nebulous at best.

They just have to be seen as a smaller threat than Labour.


That has the working class stampeding towards the Tories.

sid waddell

Strazdas wrote: »

The public seem clueless about what is coming down the tracks. They have been warned repeatedly about what Johnson is really like and yet keep giving him 40%+ in the opinion polls.

When people arrive at an opinion based on things other than facts, you can't convince them with facts.

Democracy is a whole eco-system, not an electoral system, and for it to function properly it requires a free but responsible press and a commitment to education throughout society.

Britain has been sorely lacking that for many decades.

The US is seeing the same thing, an irresponsible press and a society where intellectualism is denigrated leaves politics wide open to being conned by lazy, "charismatic" charlatans.

We have now arrived at a situation where there is no longer any such thing as objective truth in the minds of enough of the UK and US public. That allows charlatans to get in to run the show based on their superior second hand car salesmanship skills.

If the public believes that everybody is lying, they'll always vote for the shameless liar, because at least they're "honest" in their lies. And because of that, they're never held to any standards, they're allowed a free ride.

Just look at the way Trump is allowed a free ride in the US by his supporters despite being a highly dangerous criminal and a traitor to his own country.

In psychological terms what we're seeing is something pretty similar to the 1930s.

sid waddell

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Saw a woman on a vox pop on BBC saying she will vote Tory even though she doesn't trust Johnson but she does like him.

Then we had the token Labour supporter who doesn't trust Corbyn.

What I find strange is Johnson has a proven track record of being untrustworthy while the reasons given for not trusting Corbyn are nebulous at best.

Yeah but like Trump, there's nothing that Johnson can be shamed on. If somebody has a reputation as a liar and a philanderer and a charlatan, what can you shame them with?

They wear it as a badge of honour. Same way you can't out troll a troll on the internet. The more you try and expose their horrible ways, the more they seem to enjoy it and the more people will support them, in an almost cult-like manner.

This wasn't the case with May and it isn't the case with Corbyn or Swinson.

All this is psychology 101.

Of course the bulletproof shield that Johnson has in the media helps enormously, because it portrays him as the natural leader, and at this stage that media protection is becoming something reminiscent of state propaganda in dictatorships.

Mr.Nice Guy

Yes the cognitive dissonance of our age is depressing. The same leaders who are excused for their repeated lying and disregard of facts are at the same time admired for "telling it like it is."

The next twelve months, starting with this upcoming election, will tell us a lot about whether the 2020s will be a cause for optimism or despondency.

Strazdas

sid waddell wrote: »

Yeah but like Trump, there's nothing that Johnson can be shamed on. If somebody has a reputation as a liar and a philanderer and a charlatan, what can you shame them with?

They wear it as a badge of honour. Same way you can't out troll a troll on the internet. The more you try and expose their horrible ways, the more they seem to enjoy it and the more people will support them, in an almost cult-like manner.

This wasn't the case with May and it isn't the case with Corbyn or Swinson.

All this is psychology 101.

Of course the bulletproof shield that Johnson has in the media helps enormously, because it portrays him as the natural leader, and at this stage that media protection is becoming something reminiscent of state propaganda in dictatorships.

Someone was pointing out on RTE Radio on Friday the apparent total contradiction of YouGov polls showing Johnson to be both "prime ministerial" and "untrustworthy". That's where we are right now....people know he is shifty and a liar but don't seem to care.

Joe_ Public

As this tweet shows, the tories arent even trying. Its the same when hospitals come up and johnson blunders on about 6 or 20 or 40 depending on how the words just tumble from his gob. He's not even bothered getting his story straight, just doesnt give a fck. They imagine complacently that they'll get away with this so we'll just have to wait and see.

https://twitter.com/prospect_clark/status/1198625952898658305?s=20

Joe_ Public

So tomorrow is the deadline for new voters to join the electoral register. Last friday saw 308,000 sign up to vote, the fourth busiest single day for applications in UK political history. Over 200,000 of those were under 35. I dont know the overall figure of new voters but it must be in the millions by now and that is unlikely to be good news for the tories. I doubt the polls take this into consideration.

prawnsambo

Joe_ Public wrote: »

So tomorrow is the deadline for new voters to join the electoral register. Last friday saw 308,000 sign up to vote, the fourth busiest single day for applications in UK political history. Over 200,000 of those were under 35. I dont know the overall figure of new voters but it must be in the millions by now and that is unlikely to be good news for the tories. I doubt the polls take this into consideration.

Depends on the polling methodology. Some pollsters use a 'bank' of respondents and just keep hitting them at random until they get to their target poll number. That would probably mean that they aren't getting new voters because they won't be in the bank of respondents.

Leroy42

Joe_ Public wrote: »

So tomorrow is the deadline for new voters to join the electoral register. Last friday saw 308,000 sign up to vote, the fourth busiest single day for applications in UK political history. Over 200,000 of those were under 35. I dont know the overall figure of new voters but it must be in the millions by now and that is unlikely to be good news for the tories. I doubt the polls take this into consideration.

But registering is easy/ . Will they actually get out and vote? History says they won't.

And of course they aren't one homogenous group. Within those numbers will be plenty across all parties.

CelticRambler

More magic mathematics from the Tories this weekend. 50000 "more" nurses, they say, but please don't read the small print because we're really only planning to train and recruit a quarter of that number. The rest will be existing nurses that we'll try to blackmail into working longer even though they want to retire and/or just get out of an unrewarding role. And immigrants - because as firm believers in Brexit, we know how much the British love immigrants (and besides, we need 12500 miscellaneous immigrants to replace the 10000 European nurses who don't want to live and work in England any more).

So 50000 "more" nurses, 20000 "more" police officers ... have we heard yet how many more teachers they're going to recruit? And out of curiosity, bearing in mind they were telling us only a couple of weeks ago that unemployment rates in Britain were the lowest ever, does anyone know where these all these new recruits are going to come from?

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

But registering is easy/ . Will they actually get out and vote? History says they won't.

And of course they aren't one homogenous group. Within those numbers will be plenty across all parties.

Not sure that History is such a great proxy here. Things haven't been this polarised and this is realistically the UK's last chance to stop Brexit.

Joe_ Public

Leroy42 wrote: »

But registering is easy/ . Will they actually get out and vote? History says they won't.

And of course they aren't one homogenous group. Within those numbers will be plenty across all parties.

Dont have figures to hand but there was a significant spike in first time voters in 2017 compared to previous years so i would expect that to be more marked again. Suppose you could always get a complete dog of a polling day and they decide to stay in bed. Remains to be seen i guess. But they definitely underestimated the youth and first time vote two years ago so i dont think that should happen this time.

Also wondering whether the independent vote is being downplayed. Its generally estimated just a little above 2017 mark but seems to me to be a range of strong independent candidates and beyond the likes of grieve and gaulke. May not translate into seats though.

Zubeneschamali

Joe_ Public wrote: »

But they definitely underestimated the youth and first time vote two years ago so i dont think that should happen this time.

If they haven't updated methods at all, they will miss by a lot (underestimate Labour). If they have updated according to 2017, they will still miss, since the youth/new voter surge is bigger this time.

Important, though, to note that in 2015 the polls were wrong the other way, pundits expected a hung parliament/coalition, and the Tories won an overall majority.

Joe_ Public

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If they haven't updated methods at all, they will miss by a lot (underestimate Labour). If they have updated according to 2017, they will still miss, since the youth/new voter surge is bigger this time.

Important, though, to note that in 2015 the polls were wrong the other way, pundits expected a hung parliament/coalition, and the Tories won an overall majority.

Yeah, i mean i think its just looking for reasons why the gap in the polls might close. This surge in voter registrations has to be a positive for the opposition, however you consider it. Likely to be a record in sign ups today, at the very least that can give activists a boost and give campaign a bit more momentum. Wishful thinking perhaps? Time will tell.