I was blaming the idea of leaving the EU on the Tory party. On the assumption that UKIP was a Tory party phenomenon, part of the split in the party. — Punshhh

That's what I find hard to accept. The right of the Tory party reflects a public view. Its Mps don't exist in a vacuum apart from the rest of us.

What added fuel to the fire was Blair's decision to allow unfettered access for east European citizens in 2004. — Punshhh

I'm not sure what it was that Blair allowed then... And why didn't the Tories un-allow it from 2010? Thereafter is when the immigration issue really blossomed.

The "public view" on EU rules has been primed by the tabloid press and figures like Boris Johnson spreading spurious claims about EU rules. Most if not all of it is wrong, or inaccurate. — Punshhh

I agree that most of the media is appalling. However, their aim is to sell copy, and their usual tactic is, just like the populists, to whip up fear. It's not surprising they've jumped on the opportunity Brexit offers to do that. If you're read The Guardian or the 'I' you'll know there are moderate voices, it's just that they can get drowned out in the ranting - which is why its propogators do it..

Still, fishermen could surely be said to have genuine grievances, so could those opposed to free movement. And even those who object to the EU directives - usually trivial though they are.

That's what I find hard to accept. The right of the Tory party reflects a public view. Its Mps don't exist in a vacuum apart from the rest of us.

Yes I don't deny that they did reflect a public view. But the public was from my experience quite isolated from the general public politically. It was mainly well off Tory supporters in Tory heartlands. Anyway going back to the hard right, I heard it from the horses mouth at the time. My ex partners father was the political editor of The Times during the 1980's, the time I am referring to and was present in the political establishment throughout the period. Anti EU rhetoric spread slowly through the party base, I was persuaded to an extent at the time. But decided a few years later that the fears were largely unfounded and the benefits of EU membership outweigh the issues they were concerned about. Well apart from those who were convinced that the Germans where planning to create a European superstate which they would control. If you subscribed to that view, there was no way back.

I'm not sure what it was that Blair allowed then... And why didn't the Tories un-allow it from 2010? Thereafter is when the immigration issue really blossomed.

In 2004 the other countries already in the EU put working and residency restrictions on immigrants from the east European states when they joined. The UK didn't, they could have done, but Blair didn't think many would come and thought it would be beneficial.

There will be a leaders debate tonight at 8.00pm on ITV. Between Johnson and Corbyn. It will be broadcast widely on news channels if you're not in the UK.

Highlights of the leaders debate, its difficult to be impartial due to the depth of the political division. Audience and initial public reaction is split, meaning that their opinions can't be taken as impartial.

For me the stand out points come down to the compulsive lying, the failure to answer questions and sound plausible by Johnson and the inability of Corbyn to address Brexit other than his fixed party line. Both were hamstrung by their party lines, Johnson "get Brexit done", Corbyn " I'll negotiate a sensible deal and offer it back to the people in a referendum".

Johnson's weakness, is he only has one policy, one slogan, one goal, get it done. Corbyn's weakness is he has to straddle a split party so has to try to appeal to both sides and not to alienate one, or the other.

Johnson is a one trick pony, a pony, who is untrustworthy, divisive and doesn't care for the real issues in the country.

Corbyn is balancing on a fence and finding himself a socialist up against four decades of anti socialist sentiment, drip fed by the press and pretty much endemic in public perception at this time. While having an extensive and progressive socialist plan to restore the social and economic health of the country, which is desperately wanted by a portion of the population and dismissed as Marxist by another portion.

Johnson's policy other than "just get it done", is more of the same deregulated capitalism, failure to address the disintegrating public services. More stripping of workers rights. And the prospect of a rip roaring capitalist trade deal with Trump selling out the NHS and access to a deregulated marketplace, a race to the bottom.

The sensible choice for me is a no brainer, it is depressing how many people are caught up in prejudice and deceit and can't think clearly about what is important for the country.

James OBrian on LBC has just made an interesting observation. In reference to the fraudulent change of the name and title of the Conservative press twitter account, yesterday during the debate lastnight.
The title was changed to FactcheckerUK aping genuine fact checker organisations, which have become important in UK politics, due to so much disinformation and untruths. This is a big story this morning.

What James is saying is that in the Tory spin press office during the debate, while in the knowledge that the headlines in the dominant right wing press would slam Corbyn in the morning. Decided to create this fraudulent fact checker because they were worried about Corbyn's attack on what a Johnson government would do to sell out the NHS. Why are they so scarred? That they would pull that stunt.

Maybe it's because the younger generations have been signing up to vote in large numbers since the vote was called and we all know what they think of the Tory's.

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/11/20/video-yougov-snap-poll-saying-johnson-won-debate-shows-time-more-than-1hr-before-debate-took-place/?fbclid=IwAR2p_ZVvxphcrbvlSrvwg4Ka14lQOvpitw_lchku6uYY6mcvgZxYeevQj4Q

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/19/tories-tweet-anti-labour-posts-under-factcheckuk-brand?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3a1MQTOZU4loBEGvb13rBONPdE4eoMqr0aiL5HvvnpksJ7lJl0aRcakVE#Echobox=1574196811

Fake polling, and fake factchecking. Genuine election anyone?

Thanks for that, there is so much going on now, I can't write it all here. The first time I saw this false poll was on BBC in the follow up coverage. Looks like the gremlins in the BBC are spreading fake news again.


Update,
The i newspaper is saying that the poll wasn't held before the debate, but immediately after and that the time referenced on the webpage had not been updated. Also they say the claim went viral amongst Corbyn supporters. I'm not sure what to think on that one. YouGov who ran the pole is run by Nadim Zahawi, a Conservative cabinet minister, so the result is dubious anyway.

"YouGov confirmed to i that the page was uploaded as a placeholder, originally without the data or the headline, but that it was updated when the data came in after the debate. That means when the headline was updated, the time stamp was not, giving the post the appearance of being pre-planned."
https://inews.co.uk/news/itv-debate-poll-jeremy-corbyn-boris-johnson-opinion-shared-before-false-1310553

unenlightened confirmed today that he doesn't think much of yougov anyway, and you can't trust anyone, especially unenlightened.

I have seen a few other polls on the debate, Corbyn is well ahead in all of them. I don't have time now to link them.

Anyway Dominic Raab the Tory Secretary of State said "no one gives a toss about social media" on BBC breakfast this morning. So it doesn't matter anyway.

It was the best of Doms, it was the worst of Doms. — Charley Dickeds

For me the stand out points come down to the compulsive lying, the failure to answer questions and sound plausible by Johnson and the inability of Corbyn to address Brexit other than his fixed party line. Both were hamstrung by their party lines, Johnson "get Brexit done", Corbyn " I'll negotiate a sensible deal and offer it back to the people in a referendum". — Punshhh

I think they stuck to their lines deliberately. They were given little time to answer questions and so chose to ram their core messages home. This was ITV, don't forget. I watched the whole thing and I don't think I learned anything of policy.

I don't think Corbyn can survive the Johnson attack which should have been: 'He wants to lead the country, yet after 3 years of Brexit debate he must be the only person in the country without a view! He's not a Remainer, not a Leaver, indeed he can't even decide that he's an Undecided! How can he negotiate a new withdrawal treaty with the EU when he has no view if what he's suggesting is a good or a bad idea?'

Yes, I agree about sticking to party lines. I mentioned it because the media focussed on it as being boring and not broadening the debate and were spinning lines that they were unfit to be prime minister because of it. Which I didn't agree with, I realised that they were aiming at a small audience of undecided, or poorly informed voters, so wanted to give them, their primary attack lines.

I thought Corbyn's reluctance to commit to a view was Johnson's attack line, he didn't seem to have any others apart from a few mumbled references to " the highest corporation tax in Europe", or 1.2 trillion in spending under Corbyn. Both blatantly in accurate. When I realised that was his only attack line, I was surprised and relieved, because it is in fact irrelevant. As Rebecca Long Bailey pointed out on Newsnight after the debate. Their policy is that the people would decide in a referendum, and the party would decide democratically in conference when the referendum is called what the party line would be and frontline politicians wouldn't be whipped on it. That It is sensible for Corbyn not to express a view going into a renegotiation with the EU, as it was a matter of negotiation.

I don't know why the right wing rags were banging on about it yesterday morning. Do they really not have anything else to attack Corbyn with?

I don't know why the right wing rags were banging on about it yesterday morning. Do they really not have anything else to attack Corbyn with? — Punshhh

The Labour manifesto comes out shortly. I forecast they'll go into orbit re the spending plans. It'll be Gordon Brown all over again. This will be an open goal for the Tories who can say they are spending on what the public wants, but responsibly. Personally I don't believe the UK public will trust the huge socialist spending sums can be repaid. The one thing above all which was clear from the debate is that neither leader has any public trust. It's a great opportunity for the Lib Dems, if they can get some air time..

Interesting that the conversation has moved on from Brexit...


The problem with the view that a labour government would bankrupt the country which is the usual slur. Is that most people don't remember what happened in the 1950's and 1970's. The older predominantly Tory supporting part of the population, who were there at the time, are falling in number due to demographic forces.

Whereas on the other side of the debate, the string of failing, or profiteering private provision of essential services over the last 30 years spells out that privatisation is not all it's cracked up to be either. I think I only need to mention two names to illustrate this point, for now. Jarvis and Carillion.

Now that the Labour manifesto has come out, lots of wealthy and powerful people are coming out of the woodwork and claiming that the're under attack, they'll leave the country etc. When all is being proposed is that they pay a little more tax, or pay the taxes they are avoiding paying. Oh, and it will bankrupt the country etc. With no thought for the poor.

Tories post fake Labour manifesto

Wow.

When all is being proposed is that they pay a little more tax, or pay the taxes they are avoiding paying. Oh, and it will bankrupt the country etc. With no thought for the poor. — Punshhh

Most people are basically selfish, and kind unselfish people seldom get rich..

Most people are basically selfish, and kind unselfish people seldom get rich..

Yes, the people who are rich tend to be more selfish, or put more effort into accruing wealth for some reason. The poor are more vulnerable and rely more on the state to look after their interests. Although there is a strange phenomena of poor people voting for the rich to keep them poor, a kind of defeatist attitude.

The reason that the government hasn't come out all guns blazing at the Labour manifesto is that they too are planning to say that they are going to splash the cash. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander. They seem to be tying themselves into a knot. This morning Priti Patel the Home Secretary started blaming the housing crisis and poverty on councils and providers who the government has starved of cash for the last 9 years. So basically blaming the government and claiming that the government is now going to put it right.

Wow.

Yes, they are desperate. This is an existential crisis for the Conservative party, they are terrified that a truly socialist party can get into government and take to task their privelidged lifestyles, so they fear. That the public could get a taste for it, while their party fades into oblivion due to the change in the demographic( the younger generations don't favour the Conservative party).

Sounds familiar.

This is a fascinating video broadcast on BBC Question Time recorded lastnight. It illustrates how low income relative to wealth has become in this country. The relationship between Labour (work) and capital.

The system is rigged to gradually drive down wages for the people who work. While the people who live on capital keep quiet and spend as little as possible, so that the workers don't realise where all the wealth is. When the Labour Party says it will increase tax for people earning over £80,000, people like this man think that they are taxing the ordinary worker, because he doesn't think he is in the top 5%. He thinks he's in the bottom half of earners, but actually he is in the top 5%.


https://mobile.twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1197651546940608514

Interesting point made on BBC lunchtime news. Namely that the poll tracker graphs of Labour/Lib Dems and of Tories/Brexit Paty are exact mirror images of eachother. This demonstrates that the Remain/Leaver divide is entrenched and the only movement is between parties on the same side of it.

Guardian poll tracker

Yes, I found that interesting. I think these pole trackers aren't giving us a true picture, for two reasons. It doesn't reflect the vote share destributed among constituencies and it doesn't show the effect of tactical voting. If one looks into constituencies and marginals, it gets quite complicated.

I was looking at the constituencies around the area where I live. My constituency is a safe Tory seat. In 2017 Tory's had approx 35,000 votes and Labour had17,000 votes, Lib Dems about 1,000.
So if you look at it in terms of wasted votes, the conservatives only needed 17,001 votes to win, so 17,999 were wasted on this constituency. Labour wasted 17,000 and the Lib Dems only 1,000. But it took a total of 35,000 of the the national Tory vote to secure the constituency. There are a lot of constituencies like this around here, basically all the rural constituencies in East Anglia, except North Norfolk. So roughly, it takes a lot of the national Tory share of the vote to secure these constituencies, whereas Labour has lost approximately half as much of their national share in these areas and Lib Dems, much less.

I know these demographics may work the other way in different areas, but it illustrates how unpredictable it is if one is not analysing the constituencies in more detail. Also, there is evidence of a lot more floating voters on this occasion than usual, making it more unpredictable. And a large number of younger voters introduced to the system, due to record numbers registering to vote.

The feeling here in Aus seems to be that the whole 'Brexit uncertainty' story has now (mercifully) faded off the front pages. We await the election, but my impression is that BoJo will win, and perform Brexit as advertised. I fully expect this to have many adverse consequences and result in an overall diminution of British wealth and prosperity, but I think this is what will happen.

https://www.facebook.com/conservatoffs/videos/2366273793584951/

A man without even an opinion.

Thanks for that poll tracker.

Tells actually a situation that is very surprising! Nothing portrayed in the Media would make you connect the present to such polls.

This is an existential crisis for the Conservative party, they are terrified that a truly socialist party can get into government and take to task their privelidged lifestyles, so they fear. — Punshhh

No Punshhh, it is this agitation and agravation that just makes ordinary politics to be out of the ordinary. When you look at the polls Boris Johnson has saved the Conservatives from utter ruin (if the polls are to be believed). And it's the Brexit party that is in an existential crisis. And why wouldn't they: what on Earth does a party to give other than a process that is well under way? I assume that you Punshhh aren't a conservative, so I guess you are the people helping Johnson getting the conservatives to support him with those kind of remarks... if you would be a reporter.

To put it simply, fear mongering and mud slinging works. In surprising ways.

Today the best possible thing happen to a conservative politician is that the liberal media is just going crazy in bashing him. Just like it seems to be for a leftist politician to be accused of being an unrepentant Marxist-Leninist or whatever. That's the kind of world we live in.


(Two typical British politicians)

I know these demographics may work the other way in different areas, but it illustrates how unpredictable it is if one is not analysing the constituencies in more detail. Also, there is evidence of a lot more floating voters on this occasion than usual, making it more unpredictable. And a large number of younger voters introduced to the system, due to record numbers registering to vote. — Punshhh

I agree that in this election more than most tactical voting will play a big part - on the Brexit issue above all. The pact between Libs/Greens/PC should make a small difference, but if Labour/Lib Dems vote for eachother to beat the Tories it could make a large difference. The Tories can only count on Brexit Party voters coming to their aid, and there are far less of them.

Tells actually a situation that is very surprising! Nothing portrayed in the Media would make you connect the present to such polls. — ssu

I am amazed that TV news just doesnt report the polls any more. I don't know why this is. Maybe they have been wrong at predicting the outcome before, but so what?

Maybe it's a huge conspiracy. :joke:

but if Labour/Lib Dems vote for eachother to beat the Tories it could make a large difference.

Yes, I don't think it will happen though. Although as I mentioned a few pages back, there aren't all that many seats where Labour and Lib Dems overlap( marginal). Whereas there are a lot where Tory's and Lib Dems overlap. Also Any seat which goes to a party other than the Tory's is a seat going towards preventing a Tory majority( apart from any Brexit party seats, although they have never won any as yet, I doubt they will win more than two or three).

Oh also about the poll tracker, the BBC has the polltracker on their website, along with a list of all the constituencies with the share of the votes from the 2017 election. They frequently tell their viewers to go to the website and have a look. It's part of their drive to get their viewers to be more interactive.