UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[Ifreann]

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Literally the opposite.

After the snap election in 2017 was announced, the Tories freefell in polling numbers, while Labour gained strongly. This time around it's both doing the latter.



Who cares?

How many people haven't made up their mind yet?

Debates are pointless and a waste of time and nothing more than a charisma campaign.

It's an interview, though.

..yeah, so?

It's an interview on what is already in the manifesto. They can scrutinise it and call out lies or ridiculous unfulfillable promises without them in front.

More people watch football, cricket and rugby than TV debates. Probably more people watch Coronation and Hollyoaks as well. I didn't even watch the first debate, I think I was busy playing League or watching Lethal Weapon repeat which got moved to ITV4 cause of the debate. Not that it would change my mind whatever was said or revealed.

And that pingpongs back to my point, they're nothing more than a charisma race.

You mean wiff waff

Also it's good for Boris and Corbyn to be seen alongside other party leaders rather than the red vs blue debates where Boris just says "no but economy" and Corbyn saying "no but Tory austerity".

Have you seen the Democratic Party debates with 12 people on stage?

It's unwatchable horsecrap.

I'm not interested in what Sturgeon or the weird welsh guy thinks, I can't even vote for them. The others are just an unnecessary distraction adding nothing more than the TV debate equivalent of shouting in the House of Commons, which is nauseating.

The 2015 debates were a funny example of that. David Cameron barely spoke, he just allowed all the other morons to bicker over useless things, and ended up winning anyway.

Honestly, I'm more likely to vote for someone who doesn't attend a debate. It shows me they have the intelligence and strong spirit to avoid torturing oneself by talking to people of painfully opposing views, regardless of what their own view is. I don't talk to Jehovah witnesses, I simply close the door like I did on Tuesday. Plus points if they don't care about trial by media by not attending these stupid debates, or better yet, play the media into their own game like Trump and Macron do.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I went to a conservative party Christmas dinner last night. Those guys drink a lot.

[Vassenor]

It's interesting that the polls a week before the 2017 election were in more or less the same ball park,

Literally the opposite.

After the snap election in 2017 was announced, the Tories freefell in polling numbers, while Labour gained strongly. This time around it's both doing the latter.

ITV also confirming that Boris is ducking out of sit-down interviews with them.

Who cares?

How many people haven't made up their mind yet?

Debates are pointless and a waste of time and nothing more than a charisma campaign.

I don't even understand why Labour voters wish for a debate, considering how post-debate polls showed how deeply unlikeable Corbyn is compared to Boris. Why pit your own man against someone who is considered more likeable by the British public? The vast majority of people wouldn't piss on Corbyn if he was on fire. Are you hoping that Boris will f up or what exactly?

And that pingpongs back to my point, they're nothing more than a charisma race.

Who cares that Boris is too much of a coward to sit down for an interview that every other leader in the race was willing to do?

[Ifreann]

It's an interview, though.

..yeah, so?

It's an interview on what is already in the manifesto. They can scrutinise it and call out lies or ridiculous unfulfillable promises without them in front.

More people watch football, cricket and rugby than TV debates. Probably more people watch Coronation and Hollyoaks as well. I didn't even watch the first debate, I think I was busy playing League or watching Lethal Weapon repeat which got moved to ITV4 cause of the debate. Not that it would change my mind whatever was said or revealed.

The thing about interviews, you see, is that the interviewer puts questions to the politicians about the contents of the manifestos, and then they answer. Or sometimes they don't really answer, but either way it's informative to the public. Which is generally good ahead of an election.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Boris is generally more liked than Corbyn...or more accurately less unliked than Corbyn.

Both more liked and less unliked. I mean, the division is pretty clear.


https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... 019-01.png
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... 019-01.png



A strong majority of people dislike Corbyn, and while a slim plurality think he's authentic, his authenticity doesn't cut through his indecisiveness about major (or well, any) issues.

Like a good-willing grandpa tasked with running a birthday party for a teenager, but not knowing what he's doing. Authentic, but stupid. He may sate people's thirst for an authentic, real politician rather than one who is saying things with the only goal of furthering their own career, but at the end of the day most people think he's not nearly as competent as an AI throwing a coin when asked for a decision.

Bear in mind that even Millenials think Boris is more likeable than Corbyn.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Who cares that Boris is too much of a coward to sit down for an interview that every other leader in the race was willing to do?

Not 45% of people intending to vote for him and his crew, that's for sure.

..yeah, so?

It's an interview on what is already in the manifesto. They can scrutinise it and call out lies or ridiculous unfulfillable promises without them in front.

More people watch football, cricket and rugby than TV debates. Probably more people watch Coronation and Hollyoaks as well. I didn't even watch the first debate, I think I was busy playing League or watching Lethal Weapon repeat which got moved to ITV4 cause of the debate. Not that it would change my mind whatever was said or revealed.

The thing about interviews, you see, is that the interviewer puts questions to the politicians about the contents of the manifestos, and then they answer. Or sometimes they don't really answer, but either way it's informative to the public. Which is generally good ahead of an election.

Have you watched all of debates in which Corbyn took part?

Do you know anything more about his policies and his manifesto than before he spoke? (exclude anything you assumed anyway that turned out to be official like "more money for nhs and less poor people")

[Ifreann]

The thing about interviews, you see, is that the interviewer puts questions to the politicians about the contents of the manifestos, and then they answer. Or sometimes they don't really answer, but either way it's informative to the public. Which is generally good ahead of an election.

Have you watched all of debates in which Corbyn took part?

Do you know anything more about his policies and his manifesto than before he spoke? (exclude anything you assumed anyway that turned out to be official like "more money for nhs and less poor people")

Interviews and debates aren't the same thing, I don't know why you keep talking about debates when I'm very clearly talking about interviews.

Anyway, a party in government doesn't just mechanically pass its manifesto. If Labour wins a majority, it won't be Prime Minister 2019 Labour Manifesto.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

It's interesting that the polls a week before the 2017 election were in more or less the same ball park,

Literally the opposite.

A week before 2019 election:
Conservatives 44% Labour 32%
A 12% gap

A week before 2017 election
Conservative 45% Labour 34%
An 11% gap

"Literally the opposite" is bullshit.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Literally the opposite.

A week before 2019 election:
Conservatives 44% Labour 32%
A 12% gap

A week before 2017 election
Conservative 45% Labour 34%
An 11% gap

"Literally the opposite" is bullshit.

Just like it's more or less the same ballpark if my friend is in London and I am in Paris, but one month ago he was in London and I was in Newcastle.

Same distance.

Except circumstances couldn't be more different if you tried.

Fact remains, last snap election Tories kept falling, this one they keep rising.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

A week before 2019 election:
Conservatives 44% Labour 32%
A 12% gap

A week before 2017 election
Conservative 45% Labour 34%
An 11% gap

"Literally the opposite" is bullshit.

Just like it's more or less the same ballpark if my friend is in London and I am in Paris, but one month ago he was in London and I was in Newcastle.

Same distance.

Except circumstances couldn't be more different if you tried.

Fact remains, last snap election Tories kept falling, this one they keep rising.

Except I wasn't talking about a month ago. Read the statement you quoted.

Labour keep rising, the Conservatives have plateaued since the end of November.

[Vassenor]

Boris Johnson cancels speech after five protesters turn up

Coward.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Boris Johnson cancels speech after five protesters turn up

Coward.

Come on Vass we must have compassion for the man... imagine the drycleaning costs should BoJo's Armani get milkshaked.

[Gormwood]

Boris Johnson cancels speech after five protesters turn up

Coward.

Come on Vass we must have compassion for the man... imagine the drycleaning costs should BoJo's Armani get milkshaked.

He might also be lactose intolerant! The possibility of life-threatening flatulence!

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Just like it's more or less the same ballpark if my friend is in London and I am in Paris, but one month ago he was in London and I was in Newcastle.

Same distance.

Except circumstances couldn't be more different if you tried.

Fact remains, last snap election Tories kept falling, this one they keep rising.

Except I wasn't talking about a month ago. Read the statement you quoted.

Labour keep rising, the Conservatives have plateaued since the end of November.

Labour are not rising since the end of November. Both parties have plateaued, though in fact it looks like the Tories are rising at least slightly while Labour is dead stuck.

That is called a 30-day moving average my friend. I have helpfully removed the mean line for you so you can see how polls look like since the end of November.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

So both parties have plateaued now? Make up your mind, a post ago it was the Conservatives who 'kept' rising.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

So both parties have plateaued now? Make up your mind, a post ago it was the Conservatives who 'kept' rising.

Yes, after the snap election was announced.

What's so hard to understand?

Boris Johnson cancels speech after five protesters turn up

Coward.

Jo Cox only had one protester.

The article itself clearly says security concerns specifically around the protesters who attended.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

So both parties have plateaued now? Make up your mind, a post ago it was the Conservatives who 'kept' rising.

Yes, after the snap election was announced.

What's so hard to understand?

Well when you quote a post of mine talking about a week before election day, not after the snap election was announced, and you say the Conservative poll share keeps rising, why would anyone assume you were talking about any other time than a week before election day? What is so hard to understand about that?

[Ifreann]

So both parties have plateaued now? Make up your mind, a post ago it was the Conservatives who 'kept' rising.

Yes, after the snap election was announced.

What's so hard to understand?

Boris Johnson cancels speech after five protesters turn up

Coward.

Jo Cox only had one protester.

The article itself clearly says security concerns specifically around the protesters who attended.

Jo Cox wasn't assassinated by a protester at a public speaking event at which she was protected by a security team of, presumably, armed police.

[SD_Film Artists]

You mean wiff waff

Also it's good for Boris and Corbyn to be seen alongside other party leaders rather than the red vs blue debates where Boris just says "no but economy" and Corbyn saying "no but Tory austerity".

Have you seen the Democratic Party debates with 12 people on stage?

It's unwatchable horsecrap.

That's because it's full of Democrats
More to the point, during Corbyn-Boris debates there's no representation for remainers.

I'm not interested in what Sturgeon or the weird welsh guy thinks, I can't even vote for them. The others are just an unnecessary distraction adding nothing more than the TV debate equivalent of shouting in the House of Commons, which is nauseating.

The 2015 debates were a funny example of that. David Cameron barely spoke, he just allowed all the other morons to bicker over useless things, and ended up winning anyway.

Honestly, I'm more likely to vote for someone who doesn't attend a debate. It shows me they have the intelligence and strong spirit to avoid torturing oneself by talking to people of painfully opposing views, regardless of what their own view is. I don't talk to Jehovah witnesses, I simply close the door like I did on Tuesday. Plus points if they don't care about trial by media by not attending these stupid debates, or better yet, play the media into their own game like Trump and Macron do.

Why not hear the views of other parties? Otherwise you're just encouraging the tired, anachronistic two-party system.

[Hirota]

Does "talent" ever sound like "colour" to anyone on here?

It seems like a case of people exercising their confirmation bias to temporarily disable their auditory cortex.

And good on the new board of the Peoples vote. If you're going to investigate Arron Banks‎ for irregularities, keep it consistent.

[The New California Republic]

Does "talent" ever sound like "colour" to anyone on here?

It seems like a case of people exercising their confirmation bias to temporarily disable their auditory cortex.

I could maybe understand a person accidentally mishearing something, as that happens all the time, but to make a mini scandal out of it just makes it seem intentional.

[Fartsniffage]

Does "talent" ever sound like "colour" to anyone on here?

It seems like a case of people exercising their confirmation bias to temporarily disable their auditory cortex.

I could maybe understand a person accidentally mishearing something, as that happens all the time, but to make a mini scandal out of it just makes it seem intentional.

More likely a computer if it was on the news. Sky news auto-subtitles are hilarious sometimes, especially when Scottish people are talking.

[Salandriagado]

A week before 2019 election:
Conservatives 44% Labour 32%
A 12% gap

A week before 2017 election
Conservative 45% Labour 34%
An 11% gap

"Literally the opposite" is bullshit.

Just like it's more or less the same ballpark if my friend is in London and I am in Paris, but one month ago he was in London and I was in Newcastle.

Same distance.

Except circumstances couldn't be more different if you tried.

Fact remains, last snap election Tories kept falling, this one they keep rising.

This isn't statistics. This is numerology.

[The Archregimancy]

The following graph explains why Labour are not going to win this election far better than any comparisons of 2019 and 2017 poll ratings, and arguing over the extent to which those two elections resemble each other:



In only one of those elections - 2005 - did the leader with the worse approval rating win, and that was in the aftermath of the Iraq War.

We'll no doubt have the opportunity early next year to see if Labour would do much better (with similar policies) under Rebecca Long-Bailey or Keir Starmer; in other words, we'll find out soon enough if the problem is Corbyn specifically or if the problem is systemic.


And at no point since these data were first tracked have we gone into an election with two main party leaders who are so widely (and wildly) unpopular.