FT General Election Poll 2019

[Leicester_Loyal]

Just re-watching bits of the interview as I only saw parts of it.

 

So in actual fact, if you earn less than 80k, you will infact be paying more tax? It won't just be effecting those on big amounts, because people with pensions etc. will also be hit with higher tax too?

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Just re-watching bits of the interview as I only saw parts of it.

 

So in actual fact, if you earn less than 80k, you will infact be paying more tax? It won't just be effecting those on big amounts, because people with pensions etc. will also be hit with higher tax too?

Possibly yes. And if you are married you lose that allowance as well, how ever much you earn. So it's not just affecting the over 80k earners.

 

Add that to the 60 billion they've promised to the WAASPI and it's one hell of a pack of fiscal lies.

 

They'll be more to come as well.

[Kopfkino]

11 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Just re-watching bits of the interview as I only saw parts of it.

 

So in actual fact, if you earn less than 80k, you will infact be paying more tax? It won't just be effecting those on big amounts, because people with pensions etc. will also be hit with higher tax too?

Of course, contrary to popular belief taxing dividends, changes to capital gains tax, changes to inheritance tax aren't just changes to the tax regimes for the well-off, it will affect many ordinary people. Forced nationalisations below market price and seizing 10% of large companies will also affect loads of ordinary people's pensions too. That's before we even get into economic incidence of taxes wrt capital taxes instead of just legal incidence. It's as bad as 'get Brexit done' in terms of being horribly simplistic and deliberately deceptive. The thing is, with a better leader, they could probably be a bit more honest and tell everybody that they need to pay a bit more tax and people would accept it. But instead we get some nebulous definition of being rich, make them the bogeymen, and pretend that we can achieve everything we want by adding 5% to their income tax bill. Sickeningly low standard of discourse.

Edited 26 November 2019 by Kopfkino

[Mike Oxlong]

33 minutes ago, Dirkster the Fox said:

OK, not bad, I'll take your GIF on chin. 

 

Just to be fair and in the spirit of being equal and sharing, I'm thinking of you after watching grandpa the racist on TV earlier:

 

 

 

If you read through my posts in this thread you’ll see that  I’m certainly no fan of Corbyn either 

[Strokes]

21 hours ago, leicsmac said:

...this is predicated on the assumption - as was Stokes earlier - that those nurses (and that football player) are a 100% certainty to leave should the changes one makes not be applied, and so therefore the retention of an existing nurse/football player is de facto the same as recruiting an entirely new one in terms of total numbers.

 

This is by no means the case, and so the assumption and the link are fallacious.

 

I can see where they're getting the figures from but putting this across using the language they have done is intellectually dishonest.

Your quite happy with the science of predictions when it comes to environment.

[Strokes]

6 hours ago, HappyHamza said:

Can @Jon the Hat or @Strokes use their clear thinking to explain this?

 

 

What my mate Matty Hancock says....

[Mike Oxlong]

5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What my mate Matty Hancock says....

Clearly the anus doesn’t understand the term “retention”

[SecretPro]

On top of all the islamophobia, homophobia and anti-black rhetoric (and that's just the leader), the Tory party has had to suspend two parliamentary candidates for antisemitism & holocaust denial in the last couple of weeks. The only governing party in Europe to support Orban's antisemitic government in Hungary last year. Now we've got Michael Gove belittling a black artist for daring to speak about politics (and Warsi, his own party fellow has plenty to say about Gove being one of the most disturbingly racist people she's known).

 

My conclusion though is inevitable: IT'S ALL CORBYNS FAULT.

[Leicester_Loyal]

Thanks for the replies, I've been away so have been out of the politics loophole.

[Leicester_Loyal]

44 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

On top of all the islamophobia, homophobia and anti-black rhetoric (and that's just the leader), the Tory party has had to suspend two parliamentary candidates for antisemitism & holocaust denial in the last couple of weeks. The only governing party in Europe to support Orban's antisemitic government in Hungary last year. Now we've got Michael Gove belittling a black artist for daring to speak about politics (and Warsi, his own party fellow has plenty to say about Gove being one of the most disturbingly racist people she's known).

 

My conclusion though is inevitable: IT'S ALL CORBYNS FAULT.

Enlighten me, how did Gove 'belittle a black artist'? Because he tweeted back Stormzys lyrics? Because he said he was a better rapper than political analyst? I also think the fact he's black has absolutely nothing to do with it...

 

So the Tory party has actively suspended candidates, whereas Labour have given them written warnings. Hmmm.

Edited 27 November 2019 by Leicester_Loyal

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

Your quite happy with the science of predictions when it comes to environment.

That's right, I am.

 

And when I refer to such predictions, I actually qualify my remarks in terms of their lack of absolutes - which is something neither the original creator of that nurses comment nor the defenders of them on here thought to do. If the original comment from Morgan had been something like "We're going to look to retain 19,000 nurses and recruit 31,000 more" rather than "we're going to have 50,000 more nurses" then none of this becomes an issue in the first place. It's easy and I can't understand why Morgan didn't frame it that way unless deception was the intent all along.

 

Clarity of communication - particularly from a leading politician who has influence beyond that of the Average One Vote Joe like you or I - is important.

[Gordon the Great]

9 hours ago, MattP said:

A few hours later.....

 

It takes him five times to be able to agree (under duress) that claiming "Rothschild Zionists run Israel and world governments" is anti-Semitic, then he refuses to apologise to the Jewish community.

 

He's either an antisemite or completely thick as mince.

Both............

[Guest MattP]

It will be genuinely interesting to see the polls at the weekend as the fieldwork starts today.

 

Yesterday has to be the worst day of political campaigning one man has ever been involved in. Two religious groups + the Archbishop back up accusations of antisemitism, then he has a press conference where he accidently invites an extremist organisation to come and talk with him. Then he polishes it off with a prime time interview where the accusations of antisemitic behaviour are all but confirmed and he refuses to apologise for it, then his fiscal policy and manifesto is torn to shreds due to incredible lack of knowledge of government finance. An interview so bad a part about a member still being in the party for holocaust denial after just getting a written warning for it doesn't even make the highlight package. Then wakes up to find it on every front page newspaper and he can't blame Murdoch or the right as even the Guardian lead with it.

 

If Labour close up even more, think we can be assured it doesn't even matter what happens during the next couple of weeks. 

[lgfualol]

Jesus, what a disaster for Labour. They really need to bin Corbyn off as leader if they want to stand a chance. I personally dont believe the "Corbyn is literally hitler" campaign, but the damage is done, he should just apologise even if he thinks he has nothing to apologise for.. hes ****ed.

 

Imagine Boris will get a nice and easy questioning given it is the BBC, but let's see. Should be fun.

Edited 27 November 2019 by lgfualol

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Jesus, what a disaster for Labour. They really need to bin Corbyn off as leader if they want to stand a chance. I personally dont believe the "Corbyn is literally hitler" campaign, but the damage is done, he should just apologise even if he thinks he has nothing to apologise for.. hes ****ed.

 

Imagine Boris will get a nice and easy questioning given it is the BBC, but let's see. Should be fun.

Neil will be just as harsh on Boris. 

 

If Boris decides to go down the route of defending anti-Muslim hate or not being equivocal when condemning Tory councillors who have said things about deporting them from the country etc he'll get exactly the same reaction. 

 

The only advantage Boris had is he has already done an interview with Neil for the Tory leadership that covered that so he should know what's coming.

Edited 27 November 2019 by MattP

[Footballwipe]

7 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Jesus, what a disaster for Labour. They really need to bin Corbyn off as leader if they want to stand a chance. I personally dont believe the "Corbyn is literally hitler" campaign, but the damage is done, he should just apologise even if he thinks he has nothing to apologise for.. hes ****ed.

 

Imagine Boris will get a nice and easy questioning given it is the BBC, but let's see. Should be fun.

Labour's next big decision will be who replaces the divine leader. It'll probably be one of his cronies which will solidify their downfall, ensure Tory wins for years to come and ensure people like me, despite all the good that some of their policies will bring, don't go anywhere near their name on the voting slip. I'd be tempted to vote tactically for them if I was in a marginal to dislodge some of the deeply unpleasant individuals (see: Raab) in our parliament, but otherwise, not for me Clive.

 

I think many of the cult will have made their mind up about Johnson's interview, even if he does tear him a new one. The one thing I suspect he'll do is power his way through Neil's questioning, parroting the rehearsed lines. I noticed JC went quiet when Neil intervened, Johnson won't do that. I suspect it has the potential to become a shouty match as he won't let the follow-up questions get in. Ride out the half hour.

 

Some of this campaigning, though. Good god. Javid's defending of the comments was remarkable. People will really say anything to retain their position of power. A plague very much on both houses. Labour seem more determined to quash the LD rise than attack the Conservatives, too (but then maybe I'm biased.) Just how many non-election wins can JC survive, because this will be the second.

[Alf Bentley]

44 minutes ago, MattP said:

It will be genuinely interesting to see the polls at the weekend as the fieldwork starts today.

 

Yesterday has to be the worst day of political campaigning one man has ever been involved in.  

 

Always worth reminding yourself how little attention most people pay to election coverage, compared to us political obsessives.

 

The vast majority of people won't have seen the Neil interview. Even via TV news / newspaper coverage, it will only register with a small minority. 

What are the readerships of the papers these days, after all, and the viewing figures for TV News? And of the minority who do read/listen, many will skim over it or already have fixed opinions of Corbyn, Johnson etc.

Same probably applies to much online, like Google News.

 

Some influence might permeate via Facebook/Twitter or the comments of friends, family or workmates, but it'll be mingled with other stuff & in most cases entering brains that are already inclined in one direction or another.

For the minority with whom such stuff does register, it might just tip the balance with some, but probably only if they're already a bit inclined in that direction:

e.g. If they're swing voters but not really sure that Corbyn would be a suitable PM - or, next week, if they're inclined to think that Boris can't be trusted & they see/hear from others that his interview confirms that. Likewise, whether they're thinking "something needs to change in this country" or "we don't need to take the unnecessary risk of a change of govt at a time like this"...

 

Edited 27 November 2019 by Alf Bentley

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Always worth reminding yourself how little attention most people pay to election coverage, compared to us political obsessives.

 

The vast majority of people won't have seen the Neil interview. Even via TV news / newspaper coverage, it will only register with a small minority. 

What are the readerships of the papers these days, after all, and the viewing figures for TV News? And of the minority who do read/listen, many will skim over it or already have fixed opinions of Corbyn, Johnson etc.

Same probably applies to much online, like Google News.

 

Some influence might permeate via Facebook/Twitter or the comments of friends, family or workmates, but it'll be mingled with other stuff & in most cases entering brains that are already inclined in one direction or another.

For the minority with whom such stuff does register, it might just tip the balance with some, but probably only if they're already a bit inclined in that direction:

e.g. If they're swing voters but not really sure that Corbyn would be a suitable PM - or, next week, if they're inclined to think that Boris can't be trusted & they see/hear from others that his interview confirms that. Likewise, whether they're thinking "something needs to change in this country" or "we don't need to take the unnecessary risk of a change of govt at a time like this"...

That interview was BBC1 at 7pm though - nearly 3 million watched the Sturgeon one, I'd imagine even more watched Corbyn last night.

 

Neil tweeted earlier that Boris hasn't actually arranged his date, he wouldn't try and do a runner from it would he?

[StanSP]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

Neil tweeted earlier that Boris hasn't actually arranged his date, he wouldn't try and do a runner from it would he?

Really?! He hasn't got long left to arrange it

Surprised they weren't all planned for the same week or near enough to it. How many interviews being done. Just Swinson and Johnson left? 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

Really?! He hasn't got long left to arrange it

Surprised they weren't all planned for the same week or near enough to it. How many interviews being done. Just Swinson and Johnson left? 

Farage was on the title credits yesterday so I presume he's up as well for some reason. No idea why given his party are now polling about the same as the Greens.

[Alf Bentley]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

That interview was BBC1 at 7pm though - nearly 3 million watched the Sturgeon one, I'd imagine even more watched Corbyn last night.

 

Neil tweeted earlier that Boris hasn't actually arranged his date, he wouldn't try and do a runner from it would he?

 

That's more viewers than I expected. Even so, a lot will be people like us (though I didn't get the chance to watch it) or people who are pretty clear about their voting intentions.

 

Understandably, for tactical reasons Johnson now seems to be operating a "safety first" campaign approach: avoid appearances with other leaders apart from the odd 1-on-1 with Corbyn, avoid the risk of unpredictable encounters with Joe Public etc.

Understandable as the Tories doubtless feel that the election is theirs to lose. But it would be a mistake to be too absent from the campaign - that didn't work well for May. I'd be surprised if Johnson does a runner & could be worse publicity than a bruising encounter with Neil, if he does. 

[Alf Bentley]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

Farage was on the title credits yesterday so I presume he's up as well for some reason. No idea why given his party are now polling about the same as the Greens.

 

TV coverage of Farage & the Greens - & N. Ireland - has almost disappeared.

 

It's all back to Tories v. Labour with a small side portion of Lib Dems & SNP.

 

Edited 27 November 2019 by Alf Bentley

[Sol thewall Bamba]

13 hours ago, MattP said:

Well that was disastrous.

 

How can you not bring yourself to just say "Rothschild Zionist" conspiracy theories are antisemitic? Why do you need to be pushed into it?

 

The Waaspi women stuff was hilarious.

 

"How are you going to pay for it"

"Let me say why we doing this"

 

We got there in the end, he's borrowing it as we all knew - what's the fcuking point of a fully costed manifesto?

 

Swinson and Boris next week

Neil is great, need more interviewers like him. When the interviewer is more clued up about the subject than the interviewee (as he was last night and I'm sure he will be for Swinson and Boris), you know there's something wrong. 

[StanSP]

Sorry but this thread here is why I can't accept that Tories are in some way better than Labour and why they are held to higher morals than Labour just because Corbyn is (allegedly) anti-semitic. 

 

They're all as bad as each other but Tories don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to throwing shit at Labour and not expecting some back. 

[Guest MattP]

18 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Sorry but this thread here is why I can't accept that Tories are in some way better than Labour and why they are held to higher morals than Labour just because Corbyn is (allegedly) anti-semitic. 

 

They're all as bad as each other but Tories don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to throwing shit at Labour and not expecting some back. 

I appreciate the effort but none of that is really even on the same level is it? For what's it worth I don't think you should be kicked out of a party for sharing a Facebook post about a bacon sandwich,I said the same about Naz Shah as well when she was uncovered to have shared very silly stuff about Jews online, a bit of education is what these people need.

The Labour members being spoken about are those who are doing things like denying the holocaust. Of course that should be dismissal rather than a written warning, you can't educate that out of a grown adult. I can't help but feeling in trying to equate the two you are actually making it worse.

 

Give this thread a read from Maajid Nawaz, in particular the parts about a lot of stuff not being talked about - just imagine if Boris had called the Christchurch killer "his friend", imagine he he had personally taken money from a racist regime, as Corbyn did with Iran. What would your reaction be to that? Would it be to condemn it? Or would it be to try and make out the Labour are worse because you want to convince yourself it's morally acceptable to vote Tory whilst he did it?

 

 

Edited 27 November 2019 by MattP