UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[Ifreann]

His pattern of prioritising helping the least fortunate in Britain over listening to the ramblings of some old billionaire.

I don't see how that's relevant, unless you're saying that being patriotic and being left-wing are mutually exclusive.

Quite the opposite, I would suggest that Corbyn's patriotism, expressed through skipping the Queen's Speech to help the poor, is far stronger than the patriotism of those who belt out the national anthem with good British gusto, but ruin and end the lives of their fellow Britons through their austerity policies.

[Vassenor]

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

[Ifreann]

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

Maybe Channel 4 can lend them that ice sculpture. Or what's left of it.

[Gormwood]

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

Maybe Channel 4 can lend them that ice sculpture. Or what's left of it.

Or get an ice sculpture of Boris and put it under some lamps for the interview.

[SD_Film Artists]

I don't see how that's relevant, unless you're saying that being patriotic and being left-wing are mutually exclusive.

Quite the opposite, I would suggest that Corbyn's patriotism, expressed through skipping the Queen's Speech to help the poor, is far stronger than the patriotism of those who belt out the national anthem with good British gusto, but ruin and end the lives of their fellow Britons through their austerity policies.

Unless he was wearing a Union Jack cloak at the time I'm failing to see how he's being patriotic. Of course you could say that helping fellow British citizens is broadly patriotic but it comes across more as a general left-wing charity thing rather than saying "I will give these British Citizens a strong spicey bowl of soup here just as I'd give British Citizens a strong naval defence in the Falklands." Also, I'm not a Tory so you really don't need to sell the anti-Boris stuff.

[Ifreann]

Quite the opposite, I would suggest that Corbyn's patriotism, expressed through skipping the Queen's Speech to help the poor, is far stronger than the patriotism of those who belt out the national anthem with good British gusto, but ruin and end the lives of their fellow Britons through their austerity policies.

Unless he was wearing a Union Jack cloak at the time I'm failing to see how he's being patriotic. Of course you could say that helping fellow British citizens is broadly patriotic but it comes across more as a general left-wing charity thing rather than saying "I will give these British Citizens a strong spicey bowl of soup here just as I'd give British Citizens a strong naval defence in the Falklands." Also, I'm not a Tory so you really don't need to sell the anti-Boris stuff.

Obviously Corbz does his volunteering in full Captain Britain cosplay.

[Nuroblav]

Has anyone else heard about 'Boriswave'? I wonder if anyone's actually using it

[Shamhnan Insir]

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

Maybe Channel 4 can lend them that ice sculpture. Or what's left of it.

None of this is new, remember when he would lie down in front of bulldozers to stop Heathrow and then vanished when the vote was held?
Either way this is all one massive distraction. That is his one job. He's out there like a puppet on a string to attract all the real attention as his team know how to play current media like a fiddle.

[Fartsniffage]

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

Maybe Channel 4 can lend them that ice sculpture. Or what's left of it.

Someone on twitter suggested Neil ask the questions he was going to ask Boris but have them answered by a panel of neutral fact checkers. I'd watch 30 minutes of that...

[Greater Loegria]

He didn’t sing the anthem and he and members of his shadow cabinet have frequently showed sympathy for the IRA.

So on the one hand we have millions more kids being forced into poverty as a result of Austerity cuts. On the other hand WHY RED MAN NO SING.

Not sure how these two things are equivalent.

---

Also Andrew Neil is pretty much confirming that Boris has chickened out and will not be sitting down with him for an interview.

You know full well it’s not just the fact he won’t sing it. It’s just representative of the fact he hates pretty much everything that made Britain what it is today for better or worse.

[Vassenor]

So on the one hand we have millions more kids being forced into poverty as a result of Austerity cuts. On the other hand WHY RED MAN NO SING.

Not sure how these two things are equivalent.

---

Also Andrew Neil is pretty much confirming that Boris has chickened out and will not be sitting down with him for an interview.

You know full well it’s not just the fact he won’t sing it. It’s just representative of the fact he hates pretty much everything that made Britain what it is today for better or worse.

[citation needed]

Reminder that Boris literally showed up to the Cenotaph this year drunk and laid his wreath upside down. But clearly it's Corbs who doesn't respect Britain.

[Auristania]

1. Labour may not be either leave or remain, but they are giving the decision back to the people. How is it so hard to understand this? I mean really? How much more explaining does someone have to do to show you Labour will have another referendum with remain and a Labour Deal on the ballot papers?

You've already said that and I've already accepted it. The problem is that Labour- being a non-remain party- keep adding caveats to any efforts to placate its remain Labour voters. For example with that "handing the decision back to the people", it's only if they win the election; there has been no promice to vote for a 2nd referendum in the event of a hung parliament or any simular initiative. Again, Corbyn is only using it as ballast in his ballancing act rather than wearing his heart on his sleave.

2. The economists are neither pro labour or pro-remain. Yet they have given support to the Labour manifesto.

Again, are the IFS not economists?

3. And yet:
[snip]
The panel shows are left wing on the BBC yes, but the News is right wing.

The article in the Independant was mostly talking about the Daily Mail etc, which I already know is biased against Corbyn. Also some of the articles have raised good questions which are in the public interest, such as his IRA , Hezbollah links.

The Tories have rubbed soldiers with IRA and other terrorist groups too.
But how do you achieve piece if you don;t open up negotiations?

There's a difference between talking with an enemy and getting chummy with them.

Really, you just hate Corbyn for no reason.

I've already mentioned several reasons; whether you agree with them or not is another matter. Also I think "hate" is too strong a term, more like "pity and dislike"

The Empire have 300 years of history in which a lot is not covered by schools.

A lot of things aren't covered in schools because there's only so many classes with so many hours. Still I doubt that the school system is whitewashing history.

4. I have yet to see a highly detailed Lib-Dem manifesto on tackling the public services, homelessness, etc.

https://www.libdems.org.uk/plan

They have a section on ending rough sleeping as well as other social reforms. And even if they didn't, I still don't see where you're getting this "single issue" stuff from.

#1 New Labour IS a remain party and indeed New Labour is a pro IS-IS party. Corbyn USED to be a Brexiteer, not any more. His rants versus No Deal prove that Corbyn is only willing to leave if and only if our EU Lords and Masters permit us to leave.

#2 Economics is the doctrine that it is morally right for the rich to be rich. Whenever people demand Justice, then Economists say higher wages is bad for the Economy. Whenever privatised Executives demand obscenely huge bonuses, then Economists say obscenely huge bonuses is good for the Economy. They would say that wouldn't they?

Neverendum: second referendum, what if we vote to leave? It won't count. Our Lords and Masters will demand a 3rd referendum and a 4th referendum until we Peasants learn to OBEY

[SD_Film Artists]

Unless he was wearing a Union Jack cloak at the time I'm failing to see how he's being patriotic. Of course you could say that helping fellow British citizens is broadly patriotic but it comes across more as a general left-wing charity thing rather than saying "I will give these British Citizens a strong spicey bowl of soup here just as I'd give British Citizens a strong naval defence in the Falklands." Also, I'm not a Tory so you really don't need to sell the anti-Boris stuff.

Obviously Corbz does his volunteering in full Captain Britain cosplay.

I stand corrected.

[Shrillland]

With just a week to go, here's my take on next week.

Wow. Just wow. What a mess this election is with Brexit just bleeding into every aspect of it. All major parties have adopted electoral fatalism as the last chance to save Brexit, last chance to undo Brexit, last chance to save the NHS or the BBC, last chance to save the United Kingdom itself from self-annihilation...whatever you think could happen after next Thursday, the only thing that's for sure is change is coming. And as I see it, it'll be the Tories that bring that change.

However the demographics may have changed over the last three years, the polling shows, simply by the fact that the Conservatives are still leading with a comfortable 42% average, that they want Brexit of some kind and want to get on with their lives. I personally think that Brexit as Johnson desires it will lead to the 2020s being Britain's darkest days since WW2 myself, but others aren't so pessimistic. Johnson is a problematic leader, but he has a decent figure in the personal popularity polls as well. Corbyn, on the other hand...well, I'm not one of those who thinks he's anti-semitic for criticising Israel and supporting Palestinian statehood, but there's no denying it's given him and his party too much baggage. Centrists and die-hard Remainers are going to the Greens, the Lib Dems, the SNP, anyone that can stop the train from going off the cliff. In this division, this is Boris Johnson's election to lose. My final projection:

Conservatives: 337
Labour: 227
SNP: 44
Liberal Democrats: 17
DUP: 9
SF: 6
PC: 4
SDLP: 2
Alliance: 1
Greens: 1
Sir Lindsey Hoyle(Speaker): 1

So a 25-seat Tory Majority.

[Major-Tom]

With just a week to go, here's my take on next week.

Wow. Just wow. What a mess this election is with Brexit just bleeding into every aspect of it. All major parties have adopted electoral fatalism as the last chance to save Brexit, last chance to undo Brexit, last chance to save the NHS or the BBC, last chance to save the United Kingdom itself from self-annihilation...whatever you think could happen after next Thursday, the only thing that's for sure is change is coming. And as I see it, it'll be the Tories that bring that change.

However the demographics may have changed over the last three years, the polling shows, simply by the fact that the Conservatives are still leading with a comfortable 42% average, that they want Brexit of some kind and want to get on with their lives. I personally think that Brexit as Johnson desires it will lead to the 2020s being Britain's darkest days since WW2 myself, but others aren't so pessimistic. Johnson is a problematic leader, but he has a decent figure in the personal popularity polls as well. Corbyn, on the other hand...well, I'm not one of those who thinks he's anti-semitic for criticising Israel and supporting Palestinian statehood, but there's no denying it's given him and his party too much baggage. Centrists and die-hard Remainers are going to the Greens, the Lib Dems, the SNP, anyone that can stop the train from going off the cliff. In this division, this is Boris Johnson's election to lose. My final projection:

Conservatives: 337
Labour: 227
SNP: 44
Liberal Democrats: 17
DUP: 9
SF: 6
PC: 4
SDLP: 2
Alliance: 1
Greens: 1
Sir Lindsey Hoyle(Speaker): 1

So a 25-seat Tory Majority.

I think your projection is fairly solid, though I expect the LibDems to comfortably under perform by a margin of a few seats and the Tories to perhaps expand into the 340 something range.

In my pessimistic view, Labour has reached their ceiling. Corbyn, as much as I hate to admit it, is historically unpopular in such an unparalleled way. If Labour breaks 35% I'd be equal parts astounded and delighted. We'll see, but I think it's so late in the campaign that Boris Johnson would have to personally take a shit in the River Thames to lose a majority.

And even then...

[Puertollano]

It's been clear that over the campaign the Labour Party have made the greatest gains, but is there enough time for them to re-take lost ground? Maybe, maybe not.

The Labour Party is running a superb online campaign, that can't be denied.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

With just a week to go, here's my take on next week.

Wow. Just wow. What a mess this election is with Brexit just bleeding into every aspect of it. All major parties have adopted electoral fatalism as the last chance to save Brexit, last chance to undo Brexit, last chance to save the NHS or the BBC, last chance to save the United Kingdom itself from self-annihilation...whatever you think could happen after next Thursday, the only thing that's for sure is change is coming. And as I see it, it'll be the Tories that bring that change.

However the demographics may have changed over the last three years, the polling shows, simply by the fact that the Conservatives are still leading with a comfortable 42% average, that they want Brexit of some kind and want to get on with their lives. I personally think that Brexit as Johnson desires it will lead to the 2020s being Britain's darkest days since WW2 myself, but others aren't so pessimistic. Johnson is a problematic leader, but he has a decent figure in the personal popularity polls as well. Corbyn, on the other hand...well, I'm not one of those who thinks he's anti-semitic for criticising Israel and supporting Palestinian statehood, but there's no denying it's given him and his party too much baggage. Centrists and die-hard Remainers are going to the Greens, the Lib Dems, the SNP, anyone that can stop the train from going off the cliff. In this division, this is Boris Johnson's election to lose. My final projection:

Conservatives: 337
Labour: 227
SNP: 44
Liberal Democrats: 17
DUP: 9
SF: 6
PC: 4
SDLP: 2
Alliance: 1
Greens: 1
Sir Lindsey Hoyle(Speaker): 1

So a 25-seat Tory Majority.

It's interesting that the polls a week before the 2017 election were in more or less the same ball park, if anything the Conservatives were doing even better then. Personally I think it will be a close result and the Conservatives won't get the majority they need.

We're all sick of Brexit and the only way to end the misery is to stop the process. If the Conservatives do get enough of a majority to push Johnson's deal through it is only the start of the process, not the end. There will be years more uncertainty as they work out what it actually means in practice, and as they try to negotiate deals.

[Turbofolkia]

We're all sick of Brexit and the only way to end the misery is to stop the process.

I mean, the Conservatives will say that the only way to end the misery is to Back Boris and Get Brexit Done. You see those vox pops on Channel 4 and on Newsnight where traditional Labour voters say "I'm voting Tory to get Brexit done so we can finally talk about the NHS". I know that's not true, but it's an effective message, which leads me to think that the Conservatives will get a majority.

[SD_Film Artists]

You've already said that and I've already accepted it. The problem is that Labour- being a non-remain party- keep adding caveats to any efforts to placate its remain Labour voters. For example with that "handing the decision back to the people", it's only if they win the election; there has been no promice to vote for a 2nd referendum in the event of a hung parliament or any simular initiative. Again, Corbyn is only using it as ballast in his ballancing act rather than wearing his heart on his sleave.



Again, are the IFS not economists?



The article in the Independant was mostly talking about the Daily Mail etc, which I already know is biased against Corbyn. Also some of the articles have raised good questions which are in the public interest, such as his IRA , Hezbollah links.



There's a difference between talking with an enemy and getting chummy with them.



I've already mentioned several reasons; whether you agree with them or not is another matter. Also I think "hate" is too strong a term, more like "pity and dislike"



A lot of things aren't covered in schools because there's only so many classes with so many hours. Still I doubt that the school system is whitewashing history.



https://www.libdems.org.uk/plan

They have a section on ending rough sleeping as well as other social reforms. And even if they didn't, I still don't see where you're getting this "single issue" stuff from.

#1 New Labour IS a remain party and indeed New Labour is a pro IS-IS party. Corbyn USED to be a Brexiteer, not any more. His rants versus No Deal prove that Corbyn is only willing to leave if and only if our EU Lords and Masters permit us to leave.

#2 Economics is the doctrine that it is morally right for the rich to be rich. Whenever people demand Justice, then Economists say higher wages is bad for the Economy. Whenever privatised Executives demand obscenely huge bonuses, then Economists say obscenely huge bonuses is good for the Economy. They would say that wouldn't they?

Neverendum: second referendum, what if we vote to leave? It won't count. Our Lords and Masters will demand a 3rd referendum and a 4th referendum until we Peasants learn to OBEY

1. Labour has refused to join the Unite to Remain pact, they have not completely supported remain bills in the commons, Corbyn himself has said he's neutral on Brexit. Labour keeps talking about stopping a Tory brexit while the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and Plaid are campaigning against ANY Brexit.

2. So Labour don't trust economists? No wonder The Economist magazine hasn't been supportive of Corbyn. And no it's not a Tory mouthpiece, it's critical of Boris too.

3. I don't like the SNP doctrine of eternal referendums either but after the huge changes in the political landscape since 2016 it's only right that the public get a say on whether to accept the final deal or not.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

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.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Either way it's a sign of how fucked this country is that not watching a TV program is apparently more heinous a crime than sending millions more kids into poverty.

Nope, more like being a pathetic liar.

I don't think anyone would care if his answer was a simple yes or no.

[Ifreann]

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.

It's an interview, though.

[SD_Film Artists]

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".

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Hmmmm

Before I saw the content, I should mention Chris Giles is the "economist" editor of the Financial Times, who got publicly called out by Andrew Neil (the former editor of The Economist and later economist editor then editor of Sunday Times) for being an idiot and not understanding that QoQ means, because Andrew Neil tweeted out figures showing Britain was the fastest growing major economy in the European Union. Chris Giles the petulant child screamed that Andrew Neil is not using the "latest" figures (year on year) which would be almost a year out of date, while Andrew was in fact using QoQ figures which simply compare economic growth of a quarter to the same quarter in the previous year. Comparing QoQ in Q4 (e.g. Q4 2018-Q4 2019) makes far more sense than comparing YoY in Q4 of 2019 (Q1 2018-Q1 2019)

It's downright moronic, in fact, for anyone who has even studied GCSE economics, or read the first page of any economics textbook.
https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/ ... 28?lang=en


In Chris Giles' own piece in 2017, he basically argued (like an A-level moron) that public finances should be treated like household spending.
https://www.ft.com/content/4855c09e-1c9 ... 96f5da8125

(The improvement in the public finances ought to make us question whether the tight squeeze on public spending should now be eased. Healthier than expected tax revenues are by far the most important foundation of the improved public finance outlook.)

--------------
Anyway, enough moaning about a moron far out of his depth in his job. Let's look at his tweet.

He tweets three tweets in a chain

The first tweet is three articles showing "promises" by the Conservatives to cut taxes. It is correct that the manifesto in specific says nothing about cutting taxes (beyond extending the personal allowance as all previous Tory governments have done).

The second tweet is one study looking at the public finance impact based on four of the only 6 tax-points in the Conservative manifesto.
They include:

• The corporation tax, which will stay the same, and does not affect the average person
• Health tourism tax, which does not affect the average person
• Plastic packaging tax, which affects everybody*
• Anti-tax evasion & avoidance measures, which does not affect the average person

The second tweet is an unironic facepalm gif coupled with Giles saying that the Tories are going to reduce one tax a little and raise another by double the amount.

I cannot be bothered to do the maths, but it appears Chris Giles believes that the average person/family will have taxes increased by over 400 pounds (double the 200 pound tax cut). From his own tweets, it can only be logically deduced he believes that the Tories will drain every family in the UK from 400 pounds a year via the plastic packaging tax, the only tax in the Conservative manifesto which affects everybody and is explicitly raised or introduced.

The plastic packaging tax, which wouldn't even be introduced for two years, is projected by his own figures (or whoever's he is using) to bring 330 000 000 into the public purse. For this figure to translate into a 400 pound tax rise for all families in the UK, it would affect 825 000 families. (330m/400)

Now, I'm no census expert, but I believe there's a few more people in the UK than that. I also don't think that the average family buys so much plastic as to erase 35 pounds a month tax cut, and then buy some more to double that into the negatives.

TL:DR Conclusion: Chris Giles if a colossal moron, and his facts can be countered by a 13 year old with Google. He offers nothing more than personal insight, which is mostly wrong and biased anyway, and you wouldn't know it's a public figure if the twitter name was obscured or faked by an #FBPE tag or an outright political left-wing/liberal online group.

[Hirota]

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.

Trumptonium is roughly correct. In 2017, the tories peaked in the polls around mid may at 48 points versus Labours 32/33 points. For the next 3 and a bit weeks Labour had the momentum (pun not intended) and the Tories stalled. You can see it here. They were at 44 points when May announced the snap election in April versus Labour in the low 20's. Labour made up a lot of ground during the campaign, whilst the Tories made some early gains in campaigning, then stalled. A week before the election in 2017 the Tories held a 8 point lead.

This time round the Tories started weaker in the polls- roughly 37 points around the end of October/Start of November, versus Labour at roughly 26 points - So there was only 11 points between the two at the start this time versus more than 20 points in 2017. But the problem is the Tories have not stalled (at least, not stalled yet), and the gap has remained in the low teens. Ipsos_mori was reporting a gap of 5 points a week before the election in 2017, and reporting a gap of 12 this time around.

Theres a few reasons for that bigger gap, but I think the main one is the Lib Dems are taking a larger share off Labour this time round with a much better showing so far than they had under Farron. Farrage's party has gone into free fall, which scuppered chances of a split vote between the Tories and BXP.

There is still obviously a chance for a Labour win or a hung parliament, but as we get closer with no evidence of a Tory slump, it's less likely.

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.

It's worth noting most analysts believe Corbyn narrowly won their last head-to-head. It's also worth noting that neither really impress, but you are right, Boris is generally more liked than Corbyn...or more accurately less unliked than Corbyn.

---

On another note, Andrew Neil nailed it again, and it's the same with the ITV interview. If Johnson wants to put to bed some of the concerns surrounding him he has that opportunity. Corbs failed to do so, Swinson and Sturgeon looked inept - so in that regard I can understand why he might not want to make a fool of himself the same as those 3. But I think he's more damaged by failing to even attempt to try and address those concerns in interviews.

You know, the closer we get to election time the less certain I am about who to vote for. I know I'm almost certainly not voting for Labour (the first time in my life that will be the case), but the Tories seem almost as bad, and I'm not sure I should be voting for the party I find "least bad."

I'm almost tempted to spoil my vote, just for the catharsis of expressing my disillusion.