FT General Election Poll 2019

[UpTheLeagueFox]

State of play, based on those four polls:

 

CON: 40, 41, 41, 39
LAB: 30, 29, 29, 26
LD: 15, 15, 16, 17
BRX: 8, 6, 6, 10

 

CON lead over LAB of 10, 12, 12, 13

[m4DD0gg]

Wheres the not voting option?

 

Not one of these lying inept parasites deserves voting for.

[RobHawk]

Javid floundering on Marr. More interested in spreading lies about labour, than actually talk about the true figures of there own plans. 

 

Staggering interview, absolutely appalling.

[Guest MattP]

Another classy candidate from the red mob.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, RobHawk said:

Javid floundering on Marr. More interested in spreading lies about labour, than actually talk about the true figures of there own plans. 

 

Staggering interview, absolutely appalling.

He was hopeless wasn't he? Marr was great though - really stepping up.

 

His interview with Caroline Lucas was brilliant as well, always great to see the climate change hypocrites called out.

[RobHawk]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

He was hopeless wasn't he? Marr was great though - really stepping up.

 

His interview with Caroline Lucas was brilliant as well, always great to see the climate change hypocrites called out.

Marr did press him really well. 

 

I actually thought Lucas handled that well but again great questioning by Marr. 

 

I only half caught the labour guy as the baby was kicking off, but my impression I got from him was 'wait for our manifesto'. Did I miss anything interesting there?

[purpleronnie]

1 hour ago, RobHawk said:

Javid floundering on Marr. More interested in spreading lies about labour, than actually talk about the true figures of there own plans. 

 

Staggering interview, absolutely appalling.

Probably be quite successful, people quite happily believe lies we all should know that given what's happened.

 

The whole debate on spending is an interesting one.

 

The facts are no-one actually really knows if one will be more successful if at all.

 

The same thing happened under Blair if you remember?.  You can read conflicting reports about how great it was or how it left us vulnerable to the global economic crisis and make your own minds up.

 

It's the efficiency of the spending that's the key.  You can certainly predict effects they might have but no-one truly knows how it will stimulate the economy, save money in the future etc.... I guess it depends on whether you think the 'risk' is worth it? and whether the electorate is willing to attempt to transform a stagnant economy, stagnant wages, stagnant cost of living and whether you think the tory or labour plans will have the most positive effects.

[Guest MattP]

13 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

Marr did press him really well. 

 

I actually thought Lucas handled that well but again great questioning by Marr. 

 

I only half caught the labour guy as the baby was kicking off, but my impression I got from him was 'wait for our manifesto'. Did I miss anything interesting there?

I drifted off watching it but I find Gwynne extremely boring anyway. Say what you like about McDonnell and Abbott but at least it gives you some interest watching them.

 

People like Lucas/Thompson etc actually sicken me, join ER protests but fly to the US multiple times a year, at least some of them practice what they preach; for people like Lucas it's a case if everybody else stopping to save the planet just so they can then carry on as normal. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

I drifted off watching it but I find Gwynne extremely boring anyway. Say what you like about McDonnell and Abbott but at least it gives you some interest watching them.

 

People like Lucas/Thompson etc actually sicken me, join ER protests but fly to the US multiple times a year, at least some of them practice what they preach; for people like Lucas it's a case if everybody else stopping to save the planet just so they can then carry on as normal. 

It's interesting - it's almost as if we've been here before.

 

Ah well, I'll play my part: accusations of hypocrisy are as irrelevant to the actual problem as they are accurate, that is to say, very much on both counts.

[Alf Bentley]

10 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

People like Lucas/Thompson etc actually sicken me, join ER protests but fly to the US multiple times a year, at least some of them practice what they preach; for people like Lucas it's a case if everybody else stopping to save the planet just so they can then carry on as normal. 

 

I didn't find Lucas' response hypocritical - and you have deliberately misrepresented it.

 

Here's the interview for anyone interested. The bit you're referring to is at 03:30 to 04:50

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07tk7cs

 

She didn't say she flew to the US "multiple times a year" or "[carried] on as normal". She said her son lived in the US so she flew "not often, but occasionally I do".

Should she not see her son again or should she take a boat to the US, in your view? I seem to remember that Greta Thunberg was ridiculed when she sailed to the US.... 

 

Now, if you have evidence that she flies "multiple times a year" or regularly flies to environmental conferences or something, that would be hypocrisy.....any evidence of that or are you just chucking mud and lies around?

Lucas went on to say that people should do what they can, but the focus should be less on individuals (generally, not just her), more on govts & corporations so as to change the way we live on a much larger scale.

 

To judge from the last couple of days, it seems that for the election you've decided to revert to your "right-wing propagandist / spambot" persona, spamming this thread with every single story you can find that is hostile to "the other side" (mainly Labour, but Greens in this instance) - and now you're adding a bit of misrepresentation to the mix.

 

If so, that's a shame, as you're perfectly capable of making good points from your perspective that are inconvenient to "my side" without treating other posters with contempt in this way.

I also don't think such propagandist spamming works as people on here aren't stupid. They can see what you're doing if you send multiple posts hostile to one side and deliberately misrepresent your opponents - just as they would if I started spamming the thread with posts hostile to the Tories and misrepresenting the views of Farage or whoever (as certain Lefty posters have done in the past).

[Alf Bentley]

Interesting selection of polls from individual constituencies here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Constituency_polling

 

Those look very good for the Lib Dems, bad for Labour and mixed for the Tories:

- Tories taking Workington from Labour, as already advertised (but not taking Gedling)

- Lib Dems taking Cambridge & Portsmouth S. from Labour and Finchley & South Cambridgeshire from the Tories

- Lib Dems within striking distance of taking Esher (Raab), Wokingham (Redwood) & even conceivably NE Somerset (Rees-Mogg)

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I didn't find Lucas' response hypocritical - and you have deliberately misrepresented it.

 

Here's the interview for anyone interested. The bit you're referring to is at 03:30 to 04:50

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07tk7cs

 

She didn't say she flew to the US "multiple times a year" or "[carried] on as normal". She said her son lived in the US so she flew "not often, but occasionally I do".

Should she not see her son again or should she take a boat to the US, in your view? I seem to remember that Greta Thunberg was ridiculed when she sailed to the US.... 

 

Now, if you have evidence that she flies "multiple times a year" or regularly flies to environmental conferences or something, that would be hypocrisy.....any evidence of that or are you just chucking mud and lies around?

Lucas went on to say that people should do what they can, but the focus should be less on individuals (generally, not just her), more on govts & corporations so as to change the way we live on a much larger scale.

 

But Alf, you don't get it. Pointing fingers at various individuals while saying that one really does care about the environment "but we can't change it doing this!" is so much easier than actually lobbying governments for some kind of really meaningful change on the matter.

 

In fact, you might even call it "virtue signalling"....

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I didn't find Lucas' response hypocritical - and you have deliberately misrepresented it.

 

Here's the interview for anyone interested. The bit you're referring to is at 03:30 to 04:50

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07tk7cs

 

She didn't say she flew to the US "multiple times a year" or "[carried] on as normal". She said her son lived in the US so she flew "not often, but occasionally I do".

Should she not see her son again or should she take a boat to the US, in your view? I seem to remember that Greta Thunberg was ridiculed when she sailed to the US.... 

 

Now, if you have evidence that she flies "multiple times a year" or regularly flies to environmental conferences or something, that would be hypocrisy.....any evidence of that or are you just chucking mud and lies around?

Lucas went on to say that people should do what they can, but the focus should be less on individuals (generally, not just her), more on govts & corporations so as to change the way we live on a much larger scale.

 

To judge from the last couple of days, it seems that for the election you've decided to revert to your "right-wing propagandist / spambot" persona, spamming this thread with every single story you can find that is hostile to "the other side" (mainly Labour, but Greens in this instance) - and now you're adding a bit of misrepresentation to the mix.

 

If so, that's a shame, as you're perfectly capable of making good points from your perspective that are inconvenient to "my side" without treating other posters with contempt in this way.

I also don't think such propagandist spamming works as people on here aren't stupid. They can see what you're doing if you send multiple posts hostile to one side and deliberately misrepresent your opponents - just as they would if I started spamming the thread with posts hostile to the Tories and misrepresenting the views of Farage or whoever (as certain Lefty posters have done in the past).

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

But Alf, you don't get it. Pointing fingers at various individuals while saying that one really does care about the environment "but we can't change it doing this!" is so much easier than actually lobbying governments for some kind of really meaningful change on the matter.

 

In fact, you might even call it "virtue signalling"....

I don't think the interview was misinterpreted at all - do you really think multiple doesn't come from that? I do.

 

I sense @Alf Bentley is getting desperate again as he sees the Tory majority as a possible. Wonderfully verbose and off road as always though. 

 

I bet it's hard for you both at the minute trying to defend this, you need to put a racist into number ten to stop something you hate - I'll keep being the propaganda machine though, I'll do anything to stop you lot, you can fantasise if you want about us being hard right whilst you try and catapult people like Milne into number 10.

 

Where are you in the world at minute @leicsmac it's hard to keep up? Korea or the USA? As long as you are preaching though it's good. I'm off to Sri Lanka in March, South Africa in Jan as well - don't worry though I'm going tell them how bad flying is for the planet as soon as I land. 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

I don't think the interview was misinterpreted at all - do you really think multiple doesn't come from that? I do.

 

I sense @Alf Bentley is getting desperate again as he sees the Tory majority as a possible. Wonderfully verbose and off road as always though. 

 

I bet it's hard for you both at the minute trying to defend this, you need to put a racist into number ten to stop something you hate - I'll keep being the propaganda machine though, I'll do anything to stop you lot, you can fantasise if you want about us being hard right whilst you try and catapult people like Milne into number 10.

 

Where are you in the world at minute @leicsmac it's hard to keep up? Korea or the USA? As long as you are preaching though it's good. I'm off to Sri Lanka in March, South Africa in Jan as well - don't worry though I'm going tell them how bad flying is for the planet as soon as I land. 

...Alf was right about the transformation, wasn't he?

 

That being said, I think I was overly sarcastic and snarky with my own post so some snark in return is totally fair enough.

 

I don't mind the accusations of hypocrisy being lobbed this way either - again, it's accurate, but it's as meaningless as calling Ms Lucas the same as the simple truth is without unified action from governments that evidently needs to be lobbied for and applied in terms of energy generation, resource processing and transportation any one, or hundred, or even million privileged people suddenly deciding to stop flying, turn off their computers and basically embrace neo-Luddism is so much purely symbolic hot air (figuratively speaking) anyway. But then, that really should be obvious when folks look at the biggest contributors to emissions by corporation or direct government as opposed to nation as a whole.

 

It is "virtue signalling" in its own way and actually does nothing to contribute to action that might help the environmental future of the planet.

[Alf Bentley]

31 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

I don't think the interview was misinterpreted at all - do you really think multiple doesn't come from that? I do.

 

I sense @Alf Bentley is getting desperate again as he sees the Tory majority as a possible. Wonderfully verbose and off road as always though. 

 

I bet it's hard for you both at the minute trying to defend this, you need to put a racist into number ten to stop something you hate - I'll keep being the propaganda machine though, I'll do anything to stop you lot, you can fantasise if you want about us being hard right whilst you try and catapult people like Milne into number 10.

 

 

You didn't answer my question: If Lucas is a hypocrite simply for flying to the US "occasionally, not often" to visit her son, should she go by boat or resign herself to never seeing him again?

 

Maybe "occasionally, not often" does mean "multiple times a year", maybe not or maybe her son comes back to the UK more often given her busy job. It's unclear.

But it would only be hypocrisy if she made frequent, unnecessary flights and/or called on others to never fly. Any evidence of that? She argues the opposite in the interview - that individuals should do as much as they can, but focus on big picture.

 

No, I'm not "getting desperate again" ("again"?!). I think a Tory majority govt and Hard/No Deal Brexit would be very bad for this country, but if it happens life goes on - and there are more important things in my life than who is in govt. Plus, I'm not likely to be one of those worst hit by the impacts if the country does go to shit.

 

A Tory majority seems quite possible - but so does a hung parliament (which would almost certainly remove the Tories from power completely). I agree with comments that you've made to that effect - a very fluid situation, lots of uncertain factors, neither big party covering itself with glory. Those constituency polls that I posted earlier don't suggest an inevitable Tory majority, if Lib Dems are on track to overturn massive majorities in the South.

 

I've been clear that I'm no fan of Corbyn - or of Milne, to the extent that I know about him. But the idea of Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings exercising untrammeled power is even more unattractive to me....matter of opinion.

If Corbyn ends up in No. 10, I'm confident that there will be enough people within Labour to restrict his worst political instincts (though I don't see him as a racist, but as someone with stupid black-and-white views on Israel/Palestine that lead him to act wrongly) and, anyway, he'd almost certainly depend on other parties if he did win...........whereas there's a real chance of Boris/Cummings (a serial liar/narcissist & a populist maniac) getting unrestrained majority power for 5 years.

Feel free to come back and challenge me if the polls ever suggest that there's a serious prospect of Corbyn forming a majority govt.... 

 

That's a shame if you intend to "keep being the propaganda machine". Posters will always have different biases, but the forum works better if people debate in a fair, honest way, I think.

If you make good on your threat, I suppose that I could follow suit - spam this thread with incessant anti-Tory posts and distort the views of "you lot" - but that would just help you to ruin the thread. I also don't think propaganda works on here - posters generally aren't stupid and can see a "propaganda machine" coming, especially if you announce that's what you're doing!  

[HappyHamza]

On 07/11/2019 at 14:00, Jon the Hat said:

Beaten to it!

You still don't appear to be talking about policy here. 

[HappyHamza]

6 hours ago, MattP said:

I drifted off watching it but I find Gwynne extremely boring anyway. Say what you like about McDonnell and Abbott but at least it gives you some interest watching them.

 

People like Lucas/Thompson etc actually sicken me, join ER protests but fly to the US multiple times a year, at least some of them practice what they preach; for people like Lucas it's a case if everybody else stopping to save the planet just so they can then carry on as normal. 

If you want to attend worldwide climate change events there are no serious means of doing so without flying.

 

The thing is, almost all climate change denial has gone from the fossil industries and their supporters.

 

What we now have is this attempt to point at what the individual does as being important.  So whether we recycle, or drive short distances etc.

 

But this is just a diversion tactic. The real issues involve public policy - when are petrol cars going to be entirely replaced with electric? When will planes utilise alternative fuels? When will oil stop being drilled for? The big questions the oil magnates and right wing don't want answering. 

[HappyHamza]

Thinking about the fake claims re spending reminds me of every other election. Let's not forget that Ed Miliband was called a socialist that would decimate our economy with his spending plans - spending plans that Osborne then effectively followed in terms of total change to expenditure (with different focus on the areas of tax and spend obvs).

 

In fact, go back to the 40s and the same was said about Clement Atlee. He went on to create the NHS, set up a huge house building campaign and created many great things that wouldn't have been possible under short term Tory thinking.  

 

In fact, the sort of attacks he saw were not that dissimilar from what the modern Labour party see today

 

 

 

 

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

If you want to attend worldwide climate change events there are no serious means of doing so without flying.

 

The thing is, almost all climate change denial has gone from the fossil industries and their supporters.

 

What we now have is this attempt to point at what the individual does as being important.  So whether we recycle, or drive short distances etc.

 

But this is just a diversion tactic. The real issues involve public policy - when are petrol cars going to be entirely replaced with electric? When will planes utilise alternative fuels? When will oil stop being drilled for? The big questions the oil magnates and right wing don't want answering. 

Well now I know it’s ok for me to pollute as much as I like, I’m on board. Once brexit is done I’ll vote green...

[Legend_in_blue]

9 hours ago, RobHawk said:

Javid floundering on Marr. More interested in spreading lies about labour, than actually talk about the true figures of there own plans. 

 

Staggering interview, absolutely appalling.

 

What made me was when Marr referenced his raincoat.

 

So, Javid, you took away my raincoat ten years ago, let me suffer in the rain, and then just decided to hand it me back. 

 

I thought that was a rather clever way of describing police, NHS, education cuts followed by look at how we're now investing in the police, NHS and education, replacing what was taken away.

 

Of course, Javid floundered on that as well.  Him, Raab, Patel, Rees-Mogg, can't stand any of them.  

[HappyHamza]

18 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Well now I know it’s ok for me to pollute as much as I like, I’m on board. Once brexit is done I’ll vote green...

Is occasionally flying for a good reason the same as polluting as much as you'd like?

[Strokes]

20 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

Is occasionally flying for a good reason the same as polluting as much as you'd like?

Only like to do as much as I need, there is always good reason.

[RobHawk]

28 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

What made me was when Marr referenced his raincoat.

 

So, Javid, you took away my raincoat ten years ago, let me suffer in the rain, and then just decided to hand it me back. 

 

I thought that was a rather clever way of describing police, NHS, education cuts followed by look at how we're now investing in the police, NHS and education, replacing what was taken away.

 

Of course, Javid floundered on that as well.  Him, Raab, Patel, Rees-Mogg, can't stand any of them.  

Agreed, I thought that was a great analogy too. I also liked how Marr kept shutting him down when he'd try and turn every answer back to his repeated bollocks about labour. He really didn't let him get away with it like a lot of interviewers do. 

 

Tbh though I'm still in shock at how bad that interview went for Javid. Rocking up with zero figures for your own parties pledges and then trying to make out the figures you have for the opposition are bang on.

 

What's worse is Labour produce their grey book alongside their manifesto to show how they will fund their pledges.

 

It really was a car crash and typical of the current Tory leadership imo.

[RobHawk]

7 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I didn't find Lucas' response hypocritical - and you have deliberately misrepresented it.

 

Here's the interview for anyone interested. The bit you're referring to is at 03:30 to 04:50

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07tk7cs

 

She didn't say she flew to the US "multiple times a year" or "[carried] on as normal". She said her son lived in the US so she flew "not often, but occasionally I do".

Should she not see her son again or should she take a boat to the US, in your view? I seem to remember that Greta Thunberg was ridiculed when she sailed to the US.... 

 

Now, if you have evidence that she flies "multiple times a year" or regularly flies to environmental conferences or something, that would be hypocrisy.....any evidence of that or are you just chucking mud and lies around?

Lucas went on to say that people should do what they can, but the focus should be less on individuals (generally, not just her), more on govts & corporations so as to change the way we live on a much larger scale.

 

To judge from the last couple of days, it seems that for the election you've decided to revert to your "right-wing propagandist / spambot" persona, spamming this thread with every single story you can find that is hostile to "the other side" (mainly Labour, but Greens in this instance) - and now you're adding a bit of misrepresentation to the mix.

 

If so, that's a shame, as you're perfectly capable of making good points from your perspective that are inconvenient to "my side" without treating other posters with contempt in this way.

I also don't think such propagandist spamming works as people on here aren't stupid. They can see what you're doing if you send multiple posts hostile to one side and deliberately misrepresent your opponents - just as they would if I started spamming the thread with posts hostile to the Tories and misrepresenting the views of Farage or whoever (as certain Lefty posters have done in the past).

I thought Lucas actually came across as really sensible in regards to green issues in the modern world and actually suggested that many on her side of the argument go too far in suggesting we should just stop everything.

 

Flights will not stop, but she made a good point about taxes on train tickets compared to flights etc and I know from experience that is also the case just in the UK itself. 

 

There's so many innovative green energy projects that have been scrapped by the torys and there's been nowhere near enough investment in the infrastructure needed for the electric cars for example. 

 

There's so much that could be done that would make a huge difference reletively quickly 

[twoleftfeet]

23 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I thought Lucas actually came across as really sensible in regards to green issues in the modern world and actually suggested that many on her side of the argument go too far in suggesting we should just stop everything.

 

Flights will not stop, but she made a good point about taxes on train tickets compared to flights etc and I know from experience that is also the case just in the UK itself. 

 

There's so many innovative green energy projects that have been scrapped by the torys and there's been nowhere near enough investment in the infrastructure needed for the electric cars for example. 

 

There's so much that could be done that would make a huge difference reletively quickly 

Yes the electric cars need infrastructure but until they can reduce the price of said cars they will always be niche. And the break even point on co2 emmisions over petrol engines may never be reached 

and if this is the case its worrying.