FT General Election Poll 2019

[Strokes]

17 minutes ago, twoleftfeet said:

I wonder what proportion of the English electorate want independence from not just Brussels but from the union?

I’d love someone to explain what the benefits of the union are to the average joe.

[Guest MattP]

8 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The social media rebranding was unwise and daft from the Tories last night but not a game changer in reality.

 

Before the 2015 election, something like #CameronMustGo or #GetCameronOut trended solidly for a fortnight yet he surprised everyone and got a majority.

I think social media, for all its power in some ways, is often overplayed in terms of importance.

A certain other political party aren't exactly houlier than thou on the subject either.

 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

A certain other political party aren't exactly houlier than thou on the subject either.

 

...perhaps there's a certain difference in the level of obviousness between the two? Or maybe there isn't - I'm sure some folks will say so.

[Alf Bentley]

48 minutes ago, MattP said:

The death knell for the Union was devolution (I think polling for Scottish independence was about 10-12% before it), many politicians from Labour and the Tories at the time called it and said it would lead to full independence. It gave the opportunity for the SNP to become a formidable political act, blame all the problems they have on Westminster and all whilst they ran one of the highest deficits in Europe put onto the debt of the nation as a whole.

 

I'm not sure that Scottish independence is inevitable yet, though it might become inevitable. Even now, support for independence is only just hitting 50%, isn't it? And that could fall for multiple reasons.

 

If we are heading down that road, the recent process dates back earlier than devolution, I think:

- 1970s: Scottish traditional industries increasingly in crisis

- 1979: 51.6% vote for devolution on 64% turnout (didn't happen as rules required support of 40% of registered voters)

- 1979-97: Decline of trad. industries continues, growing social problems, rule by Tory Govt at Westminster despite steep decline in Tory support in Scotland (21-22 Scottish Tory MPs in 1979-83; 10-11 in 1987-92; none in 1997)

- 1997: 74% vote for devolution on 60% turnout

- 1997-2007: Labour dominant, devolution apparently working well?

- 2007-2019: Increasing disillusionment with Lab & Con, rise of SNP, financial crash, austerity, growing support for independence, another 9 years of Tory rule at Westminster

 

 

Quote

 

It's weirdly the opposite of the Spanish situation where the GDP per capita in Catalonia is higher.

 

Stuff like socioeconomic history & geography explains a lot of this, I think.

 

Catalonia has long been one of the most advanced parts of Spain, big on finance & culture, with modern industries, with good transport links to the rest of Europe, tourism etc.

Whereas, for example, the Basque Country & Asturias went into decline in the late 20thC (like Scotland) due to decline of heavy industries like mining, steel & shipbuilding - and Andalusia & much of central Spain were a distant, poor peasant economy subject to depopulation & harsh climate.

 

Likewise, despite traditionally high standards of education, Scotland was also partly a big, rural, empty country - but with a heavy concentration of people & old heavy industries in the central belt, industries that were falling to bits by the 70s-80s.

Like Andalusia, Scotland is also a long way from the richest, most advanced parts of Europe (SE England, Benelux, Rhone Valley, W. Germany, N. Italy etc.).....so hard to reinvent itself, especially when it's all left to the market. 

[ealingfox]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

A certain other political party aren't exactly houlier than thou on the subject either.

 

 

 

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The social media rebranding was unwise and daft from the Tories last night but not a game changer in reality.

 

Before the 2015 election, something like #CameronMustGo or #GetCameronOut trended solidly for a fortnight yet he surprised everyone and got a majority.

I think social media, for all its power in some ways, is often overplayed in terms of importance.

 

That's not really why people are up in arms about it though. This was a deliberate ploy designed to misinform voters. Regardless of whether it succeeded or not, the principle of the act was wrong.

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

...perhaps there's a certain difference in the level of obviousness between the two? Or maybe there isn't - I'm sure some folks will say so.

I'm not overly comfortable with that Labour account either, but it's not really pretending to be something it's not. If you decide to believe that account without bothering to check any facts presented by a political party independently yourself, then you're an idiot. It states clearly it's an account run by Labour, so anyone with half a brain would know it has a vested interest.

 

This was the Conservatives' official press office account undergoing a temporary rebrand and posing as an independent fact-checking service during a televised debate in which many people across the country would be seeking out such services. It's a cynical ploy, and to me there was a clear motive for that.

[LiberalFox]

Yeah I can't see how anyone can defend it really. It's clearly deliberately trying to mislead the public in a brazen way. 

[Innovindil]

2 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Regarding this twitter fiasco, can anyone tell me if they actually posted something that was incorrect when named a fact whatever. Really cba to go on twitter and sift through the reeeing masses. 

Gonna try this again. What exactly did that tory twitter post that was deliberately trying to mislead the public? Honestly can't find anything on any news report about it, just some weird anger over a name change? 

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

Gonna try this again. What exactly did that tory twitter post that was deliberately trying to mislead the public? Honestly can't find anything on any news report about it, just some weird anger over a name change? 

The name change *is* the deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Surely you can see a political party posing as an independent fact-checking service is a bad thing?

 

Oh, and off the top of my head, it declared Boris the winner while posting under said brand. That's North Korean levels of taking the piss.

[Babylon]

6 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Gonna try this again. What exactly did that tory twitter post that was deliberately trying to mislead the public? Honestly can't find anything on any news report about it, just some weird anger over a name change? 

I'd imagine a pretend independent fact checking service, proclaiming one side a clear winner is enough isn't it?

[Jon the Hat]

3 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

The name change *is* the deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Surely you can see a political party posing as an independent fact-checking service is a bad thing?

 

Oh, and off the top of my head, it declared Boris the winner while posting under said brand. That's North Korean levels of taking the piss.

It isnt like they created a false twitter Handle, it was called @CCHQPress for gods sake! Get a grip.

[Innovindil]

2 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

The name change *is* the deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Surely you can see a political party posing as an independent fact-checking service is a bad thing?

 

Oh, and off the top of my head, it declared Boris the winner while posting under said brand. That's North Korean levels of taking the piss.

I dunno, I don't use twitter. I was under the impression you could name it whatever the hell you wanted because the hashtag/username thingy stayed the same. 

 

And tbf, that is taking the piss. I was just curious if they'd actually gone full lie mode and said something like "Labour's policies would lead to the extinction of the red squirrel" or some shite. 

 

Still seems a lot of hubbub over a name change to me mind. 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

It isnt like they created a false twitter Handle, it was called @CCHQPress for gods sake! Get a grip.

Because everyone knows what that means don't they. The CCHQ acronym is as clear as mud, how could anyone not realise it stood for Cunty Cockwomble Head Quarters. 

 

And if it's so clear and had no impact... why did they completely rebrand themselves and their graphics. People love doing that for no reason whatsoever. 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I dunno, I don't use twitter. I was under the impression you could name it whatever the hell you wanted because the hashtag/username thingy stayed the same. 

 

And tbf, that is taking the piss. I was just curious if they'd actually gone full lie mode and said something like "Labour's policies would lead to the extinction of the red squirrel" or some shite. 

 

Still seems a lot of hubbub over a name change to me mind. 

They swapped back pretty sharpish, who knows what might have happened if people hadn't kicked off. It was a clear attempt at fooling people and you don't rebrand for nothing. 

[Innovindil]

Just now, Babylon said:

They swapped back pretty sharpish, who knows what might have happened if people hadn't kicked off. It was a clear attempt at fooling people and you don't rebrand for nothing. 

Ah, I missed the rebrand bit, just saw that it supposedly said fact checking by cchq. 

 

Does seem they were taking the piss tbf. 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

It isnt like they created a false twitter Handle, it was called @CCHQPress for gods sake! Get a grip.

...and a lot of people would of course not be taken in.

 

But (and this is the whole point) some people would be - I'm not sure how it can be said that would not be the case with any kind of certainty. And even if just one person was, that's enough to make it successful as an attempt at deception.

 

Still, in the cut and thrust of politics utilising social media for such purposes is entirely fair game anyway, is it not?

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

It isnt like they created a false twitter Handle, it was called @CCHQPress for gods sake! Get a grip.

 

The handle isn't as prominently displayed as the name and profile picture (plus, do most people know what CCHQ stands for?). The rebrand totally changed the nature and purpose of the account to the layman - from partisan propaganda tool to alleged independent fact-checking service. If the Tories hadn't wanted to mislead people then they would have kept the account's name and profile picture, simple.

 

 

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

I dunno, I don't use twitter. I was under the impression you could name it whatever the hell you wanted because the hashtag/username thingy stayed the same. 

 

And tbf, that is taking the piss. I was just curious if they'd actually gone full lie mode and said something like "Labour's policies would lead to the extinction of the red squirrel" or some shite. 

 

Still seems a lot of hubbub over a name change to me mind. 

The name was changed because more people would be likely to believe it to be independently-verified fact at first glance. I'm not saying it's right that people don't check things for themselves, but as I've said a great deal of people take what they see at face value online. This was a cynical attempt to exploit that.

[Strokes]

It’s a shame they were pulled up on it so soon, it would have been interesting to see how far they would have pushed it.

[Guest MattP]

Still bizarre they did it, why not just post on the official account that Corbyn doesn't even know who is backing the deal and who isn't?

 

Ironically it's led to people talking about that rather than the lie Corbyn told.

[Babylon]

Just now, Innovindil said:

Ah, I missed the rebrand bit, just saw that it supposedly said fact checking by cchq. 

 

Does seem they were taking the piss tbf. 

Yeah changed all the logos, header graphics, colours. Changed the style and colours on images they uploaded. Tried to make it totally different from what they look like normally and completely un-conservative. 

[Babylon]

@Innovindil

 

 

[Babylon]

And we all believe that about the Conservatives don't we, there won't be a total carve up oh no. 

 

PS. Corbyn is also a cock. 

[David Guiza]

Alastair Campbell tweeted under the name of Boris Johnson and then when he changed it back it again this happened:-

 

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Still bizarre they did it, why not just post on the official account that Corbyn doesn't even know who is backing the deal and who isn't?

 

Ironically it's led to people talking about that rather than the lie Corbyn told.

Well, there we go. And there were plenty of good, independent sources rightly picking him up on that very point.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

And we all believe that about the Conservatives don't we, there won't be a total carve up oh no. 

 

PS. Corbyn is also a cock. 

Need to update this 😂