Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Thread Split! Culture Cup Rules!

Well one yawning undeniable fact about crime is the sky rocketing of knife crimes in London. Apparently, you are more likely to now be stabbed in London than shot in New York.

Duty281 wrote:I equally strive to be honest and accurate with my own statements, I do not 'hide and conceal'.

I respectfully disagree. It is the reason why your disappearing from the thread when challenged on a half-truth, a misrepresentation, or an out of context statement, has become something that many posters now expect you to do.

Samo wrote:Im still waiting on examples of your ‘consistent belief’ that a short term economic damage was a negative of Brexit

Not damage, necessarily, but upheaval/uncertainty etc.

And that's will be a negative of Brexit, as Brexit hasn't happened yet.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I equally strive to be honest and accurate with my own statements, I do not 'hide and conceal'.

I respectfully disagree. It is the reason why your disappearing from the thread when challenged on a half-truth, a misrepresentation, or an out of context statement, has become something that many posters now expect you to do.

I'm still waiting for a clear, solid example of when I have absconded from a thread due to being challenged in a respectful manner.

Maybe you believe you haven't. Others believe you have. It's an opinion formed from a repeated pattern of behaviour, which obviously we don't document, but which seeps in, perhaps by osmosis. But maybe you have legitimate reasons for it each time - obviously we can't know that, we can only go on what we see.

I have no inclination to trawl back through examples. It's not that important, just as I would hope that our opinions of you aren't that important to you.

Of course it's of little importance, but I'm mildly curious about this slightly odd, unsubstantiated claim.

Well, you could always go back and try and work out where we might be referring to. Then let us know and we can confirm or otherwise. I'm sure the evidence is there, it's just can anyone be bothered to look for it?

As mentioned to Hero earlier, I skimmed back as far as early November and couldn't find anything that relates to this.

In which case it seems unlikely that anyone will change their viewpoint.

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not disagreeing with you, Julius, I'm stating truthfully that what you have said is outright fiction. Someone who lies as often as you is on no sort of moral ground whatsoever.

Hi Mr Pot I'm Mr Kettle.
Though in fairness you don't outright lie, you're just very economical with the facts to your choosing.

Such as? Please give quotations and examples.

To quote yourself...

Well it has been my consistent belief for years - and still is my belief now - and will likely exist in one of the many, many pages on this sub-forum.

You don't need to trawl back through the forum, examples will do.

No, you do. Back it up like I asked you to do on another thread. You conveniently ignored that, by the way.

Back what up? Which thread?

Looks like 3 Tories are ablut to quit and join this new group..

A couple more go and it will be hard to justify paying the DUP money...

Fun times ahead..

I wonder if this will lead to pr making its way into British politics soon.

Luke wrote:I wonder if this will lead to pr making its way into British politics soon.

As good for British politics as it would be, it does have the pitfall of removing direct representation that you get with FPTP, which many see as a negative. It would require a monumental shift in the way things currently are.

Samo wrote:

Luke wrote:I wonder if this will lead to pr making its way into British politics soon.

As good for British politics as it would be, it does have the pitfall of removing direct representation that you get with FPTP, which many see as a negative.  It would require a monumental shift in the way things currently are.

Not necessarily, Samo. The Scottish system allows for constituency MSP's and List MSP's under the Additional Member system. We vote for the candidate that we want to represent us locally and we also vote for the party that we want to govern. List MSP's are appointed from each party based on the proportion of votes that the party receives. It makes it difficult for one party to win a majority (although the SNP have managed it once) so should, in theory, lead to a more collaborative approach to governing.

superflyweight wrote:

Samo wrote:

Luke wrote:I wonder if this will lead to pr making its way into British politics soon.

As good for British politics as it would be, it does have the pitfall of removing direct representation that you get with FPTP, which many see as a negative.  It would require a monumental shift in the way things currently are.

Not necessarily, Samo.  The Scottish system allows for constituency MSP's and List MSP's under the Additional Member system.  We vote for the candidate that we want to represent us locally and we also vote for the party that we want to govern.  List MSP's are appointed from each party based on the proportion of votes that the party receives.  It makes it difficult for one party to win a majority (although the SNP have managed it once) so should, in theory, lead to a more collaborative approach to governing.  

Im aware, I’ve voted in most of them since the switch

Its not purely PR though, but does seem to contain the best of both worlds.

Won't kill Labour...Because Labour is a strong brand...People that vote Labour all their lives wil stilll vote for it..

Nurses that have to use Foodbanks....People waiting for operations....Immigrants that see Tories joining this new Party who have been fiercely anti immigration will still vote Labour..

George Galloway is unimportant in these things..

Labour will get 30%....If the Tories get a landslide...Labour will survive..

Samo wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Samo wrote:

Luke wrote:I wonder if this will lead to pr making its way into British politics soon.

As good for British politics as it would be, it does have the pitfall of removing direct representation that you get with FPTP, which many see as a negative.  It would require a monumental shift in the way things currently are.

Not necessarily, Samo.  The Scottish system allows for constituency MSP's and List MSP's under the Additional Member system.  We vote for the candidate that we want to represent us locally and we also vote for the party that we want to govern.  List MSP's are appointed from each party based on the proportion of votes that the party receives.  It makes it difficult for one party to win a majority (although the SNP have managed it once) so should, in theory, lead to a more collaborative approach to governing.  

Im aware, I’ve voted in most of them since the switch

Its not purely PR though, but does seem to contain the best of both worlds.

Apologies Samo, I forgot you were based up here. I think it does offer the best of both worlds - allows a more representative parliament but generally still prevents the kind of nutter parties that Duty and Secretfly would vote for from gaining any traction.

Must admit PR would be a good thing...

Someone put a formula in to FPTP

Tig/Libs 33
Tory 30
Lab 26

Tories got 300..Lab 225.. Tig/lib 59

For the simple reason and why Labour Can't be destroyed..

They own the big Cities....London..Manchester...Liverpool and industrual towns etc and the Tories win the Countryside..

So how long will the Lib Dems last with this new 'Independent Group' claiming their turf?

It does feel like Vince Cable has been struggling to get heard despite Brexit being the one issue where they have a clear unambiguous principled stand. They've recovered since their nadir in 2015 general election but they're still bit of a toxic brand for centre/left-leaning voters who remember their role in austerity from the coalition and they are already outnumbered by this new grouping. I'd personally be surprised if they stay in their current form nationally in next 1-2 years.

Was interesting to see the speeches from the 3 Tory defectors yesterday - I think they actually came across as more sincere in their motivations than most of the Labour defectors. However, it was striking that Soubry was unrepentant in her defence of the government's record on austerity and this may put off couple of Labour waverers - certainly, I can see the likes of Benn, Cooper or Watson feeling uneasy on sharing a platform with such views, and perhaps we're unlikely to see many more defectors from Labour *unless* Corbyn mishandles Brexit so spectacularly it leads to a mass exodus.

At the moment looks more likely the next defections will come from Conservatives. One thing I would say for certain is that the balance of power looks to have shifted a bit away from DUP and even possibly ERG - time will tell though.

Could Corbyn be any more politically useless? Coming out in support of Begum now.

How can we not have a party that are serious opposition for a Convervative party which is looking more and more inept every day?

Matter of time before Blair and the Lib Dems get behind it..

A new Party needs millions and millions to set up structure..

The Libs will provide that....BUT they are toxic...

If a few more Tories go we are looking at a GE...Nicky Morgan and Grieve are making noises....

Like I said any new Party has a problem with the Labour and Tory vote being overwhelming in Metropolitan and rural areas respectively..

Scottrf wrote:Could Corbyn be any more politically useless? Coming out in support of Begum now.

How can we not have a party that are serious opposition for a Convervative party which is looking more and more inept every day?

Corbyn's been treading water for a while. I have sympathy over the slime he's had lobbed at him, but his meteoric rise 2015-16 and his subsequent strengthened position as leader have been based largely on young, often ardently pro-EU members, many of whom only became active in politics because of their opposition to or concerns over Brexit. The fact that he's been able to get away with his vague, non-committal stance on Brexit for so long really is a testament to the abject failings of the government.

Corbyn's marginals are in predominantly Leave seats....He has to try to pin Brexit on the Tories while looking both ways..

Young voters voted for a £10 minimum wage and an end to tuition fees and because being anti Establishment is cool.

Polling suggests he still has a big lead in young voters...His problem is 45-65s are going blue..

Brexit isn't as important to the youth as people think....They don't understand the European parliament..

Wasnt the remain vote largely dominated by younger voters?

14% of people voted Labour because of Brexit according to Yougov..

6th after...

Manifesto
NHS
Dislike of Tories
Tactical
Tuition Fees

14m are living in Poverty....In work Poverty is at record levels...The great NHS is understaffed and cancelling operations at record numbers....Child Poverty is soaring....Disability benefits are being slashed...Student debt is causing kids anxiety..

But hey all these people think about is Brexit 24/7 !!!..

All this new Party is designed to do is keep the Tories in power...Personally with all the pain in this Country I don't welcome it..

As for Anti Semitism well that's always been more prevalent on the right than the left as History shows...But these media barons don't want Tax Haven reform or Leveson 2..

They know plenty of muppets will buy the smears though...

Another Labour MP leaves...though this one isn’t joining the Independent Group.

88Chris05 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Could Corbyn be any more politically useless? Coming out in support of Begum now.

How can we not have a party that are serious opposition for a Convervative party which is looking more and more inept every day?

Corbyn's been treading water for a while. I have sympathy over the slime he's had lobbed at him, but his meteoric rise 2015-16 and his subsequent strengthened position as leader have been based largely on young, often ardently pro-EU members, many of whom only became active in politics because of their opposition to or concerns over Brexit. The fact that he's been able to get away with his vague, non-committal stance on Brexit for so long really is a testament to the abject failings of the government.

Bit in bold - the young are often inexperienced and gullible - this is the group that in the past are shifted off to fight overseas wars.  

Well with the bit in bold it suggests that they are being taught to be pro-EU and anti-Brexit in the schools and in the universities.  Is there any evidence that universities and school colleges are being overrun by left-wing teachers and academics that overwhelming support the EU and are vehemently opposed to Brexit?

People characterise Corbyn as being an old school Marxist and anti-capitalist. If true that may be a reason why he might be less than ideologically happy with the concept of the EU - at least in present form - which is often characterised as "neoliberal".

No name Bertie wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Could Corbyn be any more politically useless? Coming out in support of Begum now.

How can we not have a party that are serious opposition for a Convervative party which is looking more and more inept every day?

Corbyn's been treading water for a while. I have sympathy over the slime he's had lobbed at him, but his meteoric rise 2015-16 and his subsequent strengthened position as leader have been based largely on young, often ardently pro-EU members, many of whom only became active in politics because of their opposition to or concerns over Brexit. The fact that he's been able to get away with his vague, non-committal stance on Brexit for so long really is a testament to the abject failings of the government.

Bit in bold - the young are often inexperienced and gullible - this is the group that in the past are shifted off to fight overseas wars.  

Well with the bit in bold it suggests that they are being taught to be pro-EU and anti-Brexit in the schools and in the universities.  Is there any evidence that universities and school colleges are being overrun by left-wing teachers and academics that overwhelming support the EU and are vehemently opposed to Brexit?

B*stards - first they spread their evolution theory and now this!

superflyweight wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Could Corbyn be any more politically useless? Coming out in support of Begum now.

How can we not have a party that are serious opposition for a Convervative party which is looking more and more inept every day?

Corbyn's been treading water for a while. I have sympathy over the slime he's had lobbed at him, but his meteoric rise 2015-16 and his subsequent strengthened position as leader have been based largely on young, often ardently pro-EU members, many of whom only became active in politics because of their opposition to or concerns over Brexit. The fact that he's been able to get away with his vague, non-committal stance on Brexit for so long really is a testament to the abject failings of the government.

Bit in bold - the young are often inexperienced and gullible - this is the group that in the past are shifted off to fight overseas wars.  

Well with the bit in bold it suggests that they are being taught to be pro-EU and anti-Brexit in the schools and in the universities.  Is there any evidence that universities and school colleges are being overrun by left-wing teachers and academics that overwhelming support the EU and are vehemently opposed to Brexit?

B*stards - first they spread their evolution theory and now this!

Its almost as if the better educated can understand and better see the benefits of EU membership.

Oh wait. https://www.theweek.co.uk/89378/fact-check-did-uk-s-better-educated-vote-remain

Such a logical fallacy. The vast majority of undergraduate degrees will contain nothing about the European Union, so it’s silly to assume that gaining such a degree will automatically bestow wisdom about the European Union.

But then, this is Barry Sheerman we’re talking about. Used to be my local MP. ‘Moronic’ doesn’t do him justice.

My first job - a long time ago - they only hired people with a degree. It didn't have to be relevant to the job (mine wasn't), but having a degree (in their opinion) showed an overall ability to learn and understand new things to an extent that non-graduates (in their opinion) would be less likely to possess.

You could argue that their opinions are incorrect i.e. they have indulged in a logical fallacy. Or you could argue that they were correct.

Duty281 wrote:Another Labour MP leaves...though this one isn’t joining the Independent Group.

Choreographed....This has been worked out for months....

I imagine Blairites are plotting a drip drip..

The coup in 2016....Had one going every hour for the next news schedule..

My guess is Jess Phillips for the Sunday papers.

Duty281 wrote:Such a logical fallacy. The vast majority of undergraduate degrees will contain nothing about the European Union, so it’s silly to assume that gaining such a degree will automatically bestow wisdom about the European Union.

But then, this is Barry Sheerman we’re talking about. Used to be my local MP.  ‘Moronic’ doesn’t do him justice.

Its not a logical fallacy when the numbers back up the claim.

According to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split.

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Such a logical fallacy. The vast majority of undergraduate degrees will contain nothing about the European Union, so it’s silly to assume that gaining such a degree will automatically bestow wisdom about the European Union.

But then, this is Barry Sheerman we’re talking about. Used to be my local MP.  ‘Moronic’ doesn’t do him justice.

Its not a logical fallacy when the numbers back up the claim.  

According to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split.

You have spectacularly missed the point.

JuliusHMarx wrote:My first job - a long time ago - they only hired people with a degree. It didn't have to be relevant to the job (mine wasn't), but having a degree (in their opinion) showed an overall ability to learn and understand new things to an extent that non-graduates (in their opinion) would be less likely to possess.

You could argue that their opinions are incorrect i.e. they have indulged in a logical fallacy. Or you could argue that they were correct.

And I might have agreed with that once upon a time, but not since access to higher education has opened up so widely.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Another Labour MP leaves...though this one isn’t joining the Independent Group.

Choreographed....This has been worked out for months....

I imagine Blairites are plotting a drip drip..

The coup in 2016....Had one going every hour for the next news schedule..

My guess  is Jess Phillips for the Sunday papers.

Have to agree. Just a question of how many more resignations there will be.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:My first job - a long time ago - they only hired people with a degree. It didn't have to be relevant to the job (mine wasn't), but having a degree (in their opinion) showed an overall ability to learn and understand new things to an extent that non-graduates (in their opinion) would be less likely to possess.

You could argue that their opinions are incorrect i.e. they have indulged in a logical fallacy. Or you could argue that they were correct.

And I might have agreed with that once upon a time, but not since access to higher education has opened up so widely.

Perhaps - but for the Brexit vote, we'd need to study the age range of those that were polled before we can cry 'fact' or 'fallacy'. Except that age would then become an additional variable.

I'd still say the figures presented show a strong indication for the argument, but not proof.

Duty281 wrote:

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Such a logical fallacy. The vast majority of undergraduate degrees will contain nothing about the European Union, so it’s silly to assume that gaining such a degree will automatically bestow wisdom about the European Union.

But then, this is Barry Sheerman we’re talking about. Used to be my local MP.  ‘Moronic’ doesn’t do him justice.

Its not a logical fallacy when the numbers back up the claim.  

According to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split.

You have spectacularly missed the point.

Explain it to me then.

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Such a logical fallacy. The vast majority of undergraduate degrees will contain nothing about the European Union, so it’s silly to assume that gaining such a degree will automatically bestow wisdom about the European Union.

But then, this is Barry Sheerman we’re talking about. Used to be my local MP.  ‘Moronic’ doesn’t do him justice.

Its not a logical fallacy when the numbers back up the claim.  

According to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split.

You have spectacularly missed the point.

Explain it to me then.

You're saying 'better-educated' people understand our membership + the benefits of the European Union more than those who are, presumably, less-educated. By 'better-educated' you mean those who have a formal undergraduate degree (or an even higher qualification than that). There are two things wrong with this:

1) The vast majority of undergraduate degrees have nothing whatsoever to do with the European Union. What does an accounting graduate, or English Literature graduate, or psychology graduate learn about the European Union during their studies? Practically nothing, I would wager. So why should we assume they 'can understand and better see the benefits of EU membership' than someone who did not go to University? You might take the viewpoint that graduates are more intelligent than non-graduates, but this would largely be based (nowadays) on some sweeping assumptions, and the knowledge about the European Union that the two groups have would still be an unknown.

2) The term 'better-educated' only takes into account formal education. People can research issues in their own time and become as wise as Old Father Time on certain topics - but if they dropped out of school at 15, they'll still pop up as 'less-educated' than someone who does football studies at Southampton Solent.

But then how would you explain why "according to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split."

Because if you believe that the most obvious explanation/correlation is incorrect, then there must be a better one.

I think it’s all rather irrelevant anyway. Degree or no degree, most people don’t understand Brexit. John Barnes made this point on QT last night (still not sure why I put myself through it) and some journo tried to imply he was calling ordinary people thick - like saying someone is thick for not understanding how to perform a kidney transplant.

You don't know how to perform a kidney transplant?

Just pop the bad one out and the good one in. That’s the will of the ill. Get on with it.

Suture self.

JuliusHMarx wrote:But then how would you explain why "according to YouGov, 68% of voters with a university degree wanted to remain in the EU, while 70% of voters with only GCSE qualifications or lower voted to leave. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split."

Because if you believe that the most obvious explanation/correlation is incorrect, then there must be a better one.

Generational gap? Younger voters are likelier than older voters to take more 'liberal' positions on political topics. Younger voters, in this country, are also far more likelier to have a degree than older voters, due to higher education access opening up over the past 20 years. I believe those two things are unrelated.

Possibly, hence my previous post about needing to know the age range of those polled. Otherwise we can't say for certain either way.

You could correlate the youth vote for brexit with the degree vote for brexit, but THAT would be a logical fallacy.

Not at all, you’re far more likely to have a degree if you’re in the 21-35 bracket than in the +65 grouping. Nowadays, access to higher education is just below 50%, whereas before Blair’s reforms it was around 15%.