The Hung Like a Donkey General Election December 2019 Thread

[bannedfromHandV]

17 minutes ago, Awol said:

Yes, the establishment were vehemently pro-Leave, weren't they?  Also, I thought we'd all agreed about 10 years ago that the rolling-eyes thing was a bit sh*t? 

If something is in opposition of Boris Johnson then by default it is anti-establishment.

Boris Johnson is the establishment embodied, if you think by voting/wanting Brexit you're going against the establishment then I'd suggest you're barking up the wrong tree entirely.

[Awol]

16 minutes ago, Chindie said:

It isn't enough to have barely swung a referendum on lies, it has to be revolutionary, heroic, sticking it to the man. They'll put a bronze statue of Farage's gurning pug face on the spare plinth in Trafalgar Square. True Englishmen can salute it, tears in their eyes, for years to come, the Union Jack warming their heart.

I feel your pain, man. 

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, bannedfromHandV said:

If something is in opposition of Boris Johnson then by default it is anti-establishment.

Boris Johnson is the establishment embodied, if you think by voting/wanting Brexit you're going against the establishment then I'd suggest you're barking up the wrong tree entirely.

Boris Johnson isn't a leaver.

He's a career opportunist. He supported the side that was most likely to benefit Boris. It worked.

Doesn't support mine, or your point, but it is what it is.

[bannedfromHandV]

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

Boris Johnson isn't a leaver.

He's a career opportunist. He supported the side that was most likely to benefit Boris. It worked.

Doesn't support mine, or your point, but it is what it is.

I just find it laughable that apparently siding with people like Farage, Johnson and Banks etc is somehow a poke in the eye for the establishment.

If anyone is anti-establishment it's Corbyn.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

3 minutes ago, Awol said:

If that poll from YouGov yesterday is remotely accurate (and I'd be surprised if it is)

Too be fair to them the same poll by the same people predicted the 2017 outcome down to individual seats.

[bickster]

Ah one of these days we'll learn to actually stop talking about nebulous bollocks like "The Establishment"

[peterms]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

The point that he is making, I think, is that their analysis should be taken alongside the analysis of others and in the context that they don't do 'macro' and that others do, &c.

An important point he is making, perhaps implicitly rather than spelling it out, is that their analysis should be taken alongside that of others but routinely isn't; and that the conclusions the media report are therefore lacking in an important dimension, but media audiences won't necessariy appreciate this.

[bickster]

Just now, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Too be fair to them the same poll by the same people predicted the 2017 outcome down to individual seats.

And got the 2015 spectacularly wrong, No polling company was close in both elections. They never get it right twice.

There's a league table somewhere, I think it was survation that got closest in 2015 and were wildly out in 2017.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

Talk about Polls with us then 

[sharkyvilla]

18 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Wtf does this shite even mean?

14 days until the election fought on multiple issues, other than Brexit.

Then January 31st as the next cutoff, which still doesn't get Brexit done.

Him and his party are dishonest dickheads.

I may be wrong but technically, doesn't the 'exit' bit of 'Brexit' actually happen then if the Tories win?  It's then Bregotiationoftradedeals after that.  

[cyrusr]

 

17 minutes ago, Awol said:

Ha, I didn't even know postal voting fraud was actually a thing in the US?

From memory I think it was '04 or '05 when six(6!) Labour Councillors in our very own Aston were nabbed for harvesting postal votes from constituents and filling them in? As I remember they set up in a warehouse to do it, not exactly a kitchen table type effort!  I definitely recall that after the shambles of voter fraud and intimidation at polling stations in Tower Hamlets 2015, the government commissioned a review into tackling electoral fraud, because the idea about voter identification at polling stations was one of the recommendations, in addition to clamping down on postal vote harvesting by activists (one wonders why the Labour government didn't address it after the situation in Aston was exposed, but I'm sure they had their reasons.)

Point is Labour's people (politicians, activists, supporters) have form for it, and over an extended period.  Not a nice thing to admit if that's the team you (not you specifically, of course) support, but there it is. 

Sorry to draw back to this post but think its valid.

Postal Vote - the 2004 incident is correct. Actually 1 councillor was cleared on appeal Link on BAILII (legal website) for Judgment. The Judgment does acknowledge though the remainder of the decision was good and that it was clear election fraud was taking place. 

Tower Hamlets - I can see evidence from 2014 issues in relation to their mayoral (Tower Hamlet, not London - I don't know why either) elections, but the guy was no longer a member of the Labour Party (left 2010) and formed his own party. He actually stood against the Labour Party so not sure you can link this to Labour? 

You might be right that Labour Party have form of electoral fraud, but it isn't just the Labour Party, all parties have had some form one was or another. This Report about Postal voting and electoral fraud 2001-09 highlights issues with Conservatives, Labour, and Lib Dems. As an example, it points to a conviction in relation to postal vote fraud for Conservatives in May 2009: -

Quote

1 May 2009 Six men were jailed at Reading Crown Court for postal vote fraud at the 2007 local elections in Slough; the longest sentence, four and a half years, was given to Mahboob Khan for conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and perjury. Eshaq Khan (the Conservative candidate who was elected) and Basharat Khan were each jailed for three and a half years for the same offences; Arshad Raja received eighteen months for conspiracy to defraud; Altaf Khan was jailed for four months for conspiracy to defraud and Gulnawaz Khan received eight months for personation. Charles Miskin, for the prosecution, said that the action of the convicted voteriggers was like a virus that needed to be eradicated.

I agree, there are further concerns with Labour Party, in particular in 2000s decade around Birmingham, but does that not point more to a local problem rather than an wider reaching issue? 

This is the link for Electoral Fraud summary from 2010 - 2017 (last incident in summary though is August 2016) just for completeness as well. This also shows concerns with Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems, BNP , UKIP and even our very own Nigel Kennedy (!) of some electoral fraud. I haven't located any further reports since 2017, though if someone can find this I would be most grateful .

The point I am making is this. Whilst you may be right that there is history of the Labour Party involved in dodgy practices and you can be suspicious of how they will act in the future, the same can be said of all of the major parties. You cannot simply single out the Labour Party for this, in particular when you use examples that are either 15 years out of date or doesn't actually involve the Labour Party.

[snowychap]

2 minutes ago, peterms said:

An important point he is making, perhaps implicitly rather than spelling it out, is that their analysis should be taken alongside that of others but routinely isn't; and that the conclusions the media report are therefore lacking in an important dimension, but media audiences won't necessariy appreciate this.

I accept that and agree - both that he is making that point and that the point has merit.

[Awol]

16 minutes ago, bickster said:

Ah one of these days we'll learn to actually stop talking about nebulous bollocks like "The Establishment"

Fair enough. If we're talking about the small group of people who control or exert strong influence over the levers of power in UK, how should we describe them as a group?

PS. You can't have, 'The Tories'  

Edited November 28, 2019 by Awol

[HanoiVillan]

18 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Too be fair to them the same poll by the same people predicted the 2017 outcome down to individual seats.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'down to individual seats', but if you mean they called nearly every seat correctly, that isn't the case; they actually missed quite a lot of seats, they just happened to miss roughly even numbers each way so their topline seat number predictions was close to the eventual result. 

[Dodgyknees]

I'm supposed to be working, bit I'm reading through twitter.

 

[HanoiVillan]

23 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Boris Johnson isn't a leaver.

We've done this before, but this is a bizarre thing to claim. You are essentially arguing that we shouldn't consider the man who led the leave campaign, and then almost certainly leads the country to leave the actual EU, can't be called a leaver because you think in his heart of hearts he's not a true believer. It's fatuous. 

[Dodgyknees]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

We've done this before, but this is a bizarre thing to claim. You are essentially arguing that we shouldn't consider the man who led the leave campaign, and then almost certainly leads the country to leave the actual EU, can't be called a leaver because you think in his heart of hearts he's not a true believer. It's fatuous. 

Pretty much up to the referendum, he was on record saying he was a believer in being in the EU.

Why did he change his mind a few months before the referendum?

[Awol]

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

We've done this before, but this is a bizarre thing to claim. You are essentially arguing that we shouldn't consider the man who led the leave campaign, and then almost certainly leads the country to leave the actual EU, can't be called a leaver because you think in his heart of hearts he's not a true believer. It's fatuous. 

I don't think Johnson reached his decision on the merits of the argument, but out of its utility to his career. That seems like a pretty fair analysis, but as you say if he does win and take us out of the EU then that makes him a Leaver by definition.

[mjmooney]

30 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

If anyone is anti-establishment it's Corbyn.

And he's a Leaver. 

[StefanAVFC]

12 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

We've done this before, but this is a bizarre thing to claim. You are essentially arguing that we shouldn't consider the man who led the leave campaign, and then almost certainly leads the country to leave the actual EU, can't be called a leaver because you think in his heart of hearts he's not a true believer. It's fatuous. 

It's absolutely the case.

Leave or Remain, doesn't matter to him. He is Pro-Boris.

Even still, he was vocally pro-EU until it became advantageous for him not to be.

Edited November 28, 2019 by StefanAVFC