Twister2 wrote: » How dangerous can the BP be if they get traction with their " this is not brexit " message.
Roger_007 wrote: » It seems to me that both sides of the Brexit debate in the UK are under the impression that the EU actually wants the UK to remain in the EU. While that may have been true three years ago, I'm not so sure that it's still true. A lot of water has gone under the bridge in the last three years and the mood in the EU seems to have changed. The UK has caused so much disruption with their indecision and party political shenanigans that the EU might be tempted to say to the UK 'take the deal that's on offer by Jan 31st or leave without a deal, there will be no more extensions or negotiations'. I don't think 'remain' is a realistic option anymore.
prawnsambo wrote: » You're really going overboard here. Survation published the poll. LD published part of it and linked to the rest. All the data is there. Your 'how many polls before the right answer' rightly belongs in the CT forum. Have you even looked at the data?
Joe_ Public wrote: » Not sure if you were a remain supporter you'd ignore or abandon labour if they were the only realistic contender to the conservatives, as will be the case in scores of constituencies. No doubt a lot of voters will, thus counterintuitivily reducing the odds of remain. Guess it depends on the constituency but you have that unique dynamic in play and its on both sides. By fielding a candidate in Cheltenham for example, TBP would be pretty much handing that seat to lib dems. Why would they want to do that? Bizarre times.
CelticRambler wrote: » Everything about this election serves to highlight the democratic deficiency within the UK that led to the Brexit referendum and, ultimately, to the Hokey-Cokey Brexit negotiations. Decades of FPTP has destroyed any constructive movement towards consensual government. This (overblown, imo) carry-on about the Lib Dems' supposed hypocrisy over a bar chart is just more of the same: attack, attack, attack. The first interviews with all party spokesmen are the same - determined attempts to undermine the (leader of the) other parties with precious little time or attention given to examining their hastily published vote-getting campaign promises. I can see the logic of tactical voting to get a remain-leaning parliament, or soft-Brexit at worst, but I don't have any great expectation that that'll be the outcome. It should have been easy enough to do with the numbers they had in the HoC until this week, but none of the personalites involved compromised enough to make it work, and if they didn't do it then over the single issue of Brexit, I can't see it happening when they come back in December with a similarly indecisive parliament.
quokula wrote: » It was stated in tiny small print that they hoped the majority of people wouldn't notice. And it was a wildly leading question purposely intended to produce a misleading result. This didn't come *after* a real poll showing them ahead. They commissioned both questions as part of the same poll. I'm assuming that people had to answer the fair question before answering the loaded one but I'm not sure if that was guaranteed - if they had seen or heard the loaded question before answering the fair one then that would have anchored their thinking and completely skewed the results. The other thing we don't know is how many polls they commissioned until they got the result they want, which is perfectly feasible with the small sample size. Survation are only required to show the workings of polls that actually get published (this is a requirement by the way, not some generous show of transparency from the Lib Dems like you make out) It's possible that it was all above board, but when the one they choose to publish is based on such a wildly misleading question, and they have form of misleading data elsewhere, and for it to be true it would require a completely historically unprecedented swing in the space of two years from the only 100% reliable poll we actually have which is the last election, it gets hard to believe.
quokula wrote: » Yes I looked at the data, I went through the spreadsheet. I work in data science (for products, not politics) so I know how easy it is to get different results based on the nature and phrasing of questions and the cohort of people polled. The data is available publicly because it's legally required to be. They did their best to only show the misleading result, with the hope nobody would read the smallprint. They were a very distant third at the last general election. They cherrypicked one poll that suggests they might have a chance to come second (taken from a small sample, at a time before the election campaign, before manifestos, before candidates have been nominated and before voters have engaged their brains) then combined that with a hugely misleading question implying the Libs were the only possible way to beat the Tories (which they still lost), and published the result of that in a way that implied it was the actual situation, hoping nobody would read the tiny smallprint they were legally required to include.
quokula wrote: » I used to be an actual card carrying member of the Lib Dems, though I just paid my membership fee, never attended any of the local meetings as they seemed to be timed to only attract people who don't have jobs. I voted for them in 2010 and 2015. Under Tim Farron they started to veer away from being a progressive party and almost all of the material they sent me consisted of baseless attacks on Labour that was usually heavily misleading, which continued under Vince Cable and got even worse since Swinson took over. Their cynical attempts to co-opt the Remain vote has been particularly distasteful. I actually saw Vince Cable in an interview yesterday (now that he's retiring and not campaigning for the Lib Dems) saying that a Soft Brexit remaining in the customs union is probably the most elegant solution to Britain's problems - the literal Labour policy that he railed against as party leader.
Deleted User wrote: » As a Brexit supporter, I would vote for the Liberal Democrats - then ignore the election result.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » Sinn Féin has said it will not run candidates in South Belfast, East Belfast or North Down urging its voters to back the pro-remain candidates in those constituencies. DUP's attempt at forcing an election pact with the UUP is really working out well for them.
Enzokk wrote: » Another election today, the new Speaker of the House will be elected today. Seems like the favourite is Sir Lyndsay Hoyle but we will have to see how it goes later.
Their attendance records will call into question the integrity of the party, whose MEPs consistently paint themselves as being committed to the day-to-day procedure of the European Parliament – despite being fervently opposed to its existence. One of the party’s most prominent MEPs, Alexandra Phillips, has posted videos on Twitter falsely claiming that the Brexit Party MEPs are the only ones who turn up to Parliament, while other MEPs proudly broadcast their speeches to thousands of gullible followers.
Enzokk wrote: » So it seems like no-deal is not off the table and this election will be crucial if the UK wants avoid that cliff edge,https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/1191324272385544192?s=20 I will take Johnson with a ton of salt, but it is obvious how he has won over the ERG. He only needs to convince Farage of this as well and he could be on the way to an easy majority, so it is imperative for Labour to work together with the other parties to stop Johnson. Unfortunately they will not be able to look past the promised utopia of a Corbyn led UK so they will sabotage this and blame everyone else for their part on not stopping the disaster coming.
Leroy42 wrote: » People seem to missing the point that Brexit has driven a coach through the traditional party lines. TM had a majority, then she had a working majority, in the HoC but failed to get her deal through because a large rump of her own party refused to vote for it. And Labour, when in government, will have the same problem. The party leaders are fighting hard to portray this election as the usual either/or decision, but really is isn't. It is clear that traditional party voting patterns can no longer be relied upon, at least when it comes to Brexit. And the media are largely running with that narrative because they still haven't come to terms with the new political reality.
J Mysterio wrote: » Johnson's word is worth absolutely nothing. He said 'do or die' and 'rather die in a ditch' with regard to Oct 31st. His deadlines are meaningless.
Deleted User wrote: » Why do people trash Johnson for being a liar? We know he's a liar, so are virtually all politicians - including all leaders of opposing political parties. What I want is a leader, and if that means using constructive deception, then I'm all for it.
VinLieger wrote: » Wait so let me get this straight you think a key quality of a good leader is somebody who lies habitually and tells everyone exactly what they want to hear regardless of the true facts of a situation?
LeinsterDub wrote: » https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1191341879599734784?s=19 If you see anyone claiming they know what the outcome of this election will be just show them them above tweet
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/df05300f57fe28ddd3330602c0adbfdb.svg)
