How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
Jockman said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
The assumption this makes is the electorate makes binary choices on single issues when they simply don't & generally have far more sophistication in making electoral decisions than those reaching this conclusion ever take into account.
A good point but not a perfect one. It assumes the electorate as a homogeneous group of voters.Some will fit your depiction, others will not. This applies in all elections and referenda.
For those that do fit your profile they will then formulate a hierarchy of interests - some students for example may prioritise student debt at the top of their hierarchy and, say, a triple lock at the bottom. Can't blame them. Some Pensioners will have an opposing heirarchy, others will have an identical one to these students.
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jockman said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
The assumption this makes is the electorate makes binary choices on single issues when they simply don't & generally have far more sophistication in making electoral decisions than those reaching this conclusion ever take into account.
A good point but not a perfect one. It assumes the electorate as a homogeneous group of voters.Some will fit your depiction, others will not. This applies in all elections and referenda.
For those that do fit your profile they will then formulate a hierarchy of interests - some students for example may prioritise student debt at the top of their hierarchy and, say, a triple lock at the bottom. Can't blame them. Some Pensioners will have an opposing heirarchy, others will have an identical one to these students.
As for your second point, we both know the reason UKIP had only 1 MP was due to structural imperfections in the system.
1 MP for 3 million votes? 57 SNP MPs for 1.5m votes IIRC.
Jockman said:
Apologies if I implied that correlation. The LibDems tanked because they were pretty useless and they were up against an Opposition licking its wounds from a recent slaughtering and so promising an early Christmas to all. That they were promising a second Ref was merely part of the mix but, referencing my post, it epitomised where this issue was in people's personal hierarchy.
As for your second point, we both know the reason UKIP had only 1 MP was due to structural imperfections in the system.
1 MP for 3 million votes? 57 SNP MPs for 1.5m votes IIRC.
I think we're more or less agreeing. On the UKIP thing, I'm offering a false equivalence to illustrate the same faulty reasoning on the Libdems electoral frailties with Brexit looming. I don't actually think in hindsight, Brexit was a massive issue in the last GE, it had been recently settled by referendum & the Tories shot themselves in the face so often that their travails quickly became and remained the main focus of media attention.As for your second point, we both know the reason UKIP had only 1 MP was due to structural imperfections in the system.
1 MP for 3 million votes? 57 SNP MPs for 1.5m votes IIRC.
Eddie Strohacker said:
The assumption this makes is the electorate makes binary choices on single issues when they simply don't & generally have far more sophistication in making electoral decisions than those reaching this conclusion ever take into account.
On the remoaner/Bracist point, what is being overlooked is the cloak of anonymity a forum affords people. It allows a far greater degree of latitude than nearly anyone would consider acceptable face to face & from there springs the rudeness & immaturity people like me never display...but the goon squad pensioner pals think is funny time & again & actually sends anyone packing with their ears ringing or even lands a punch. It doesn't.
Priceless.On the remoaner/Bracist point, what is being overlooked is the cloak of anonymity a forum affords people. It allows a far greater degree of latitude than nearly anyone would consider acceptable face to face & from there springs the rudeness & immaturity people like me never display...but the goon squad pensioner pals think is funny time & again & actually sends anyone packing with their ears ringing or even lands a punch. It doesn't.
Eddie Strohacker said:
sidicks said:
Priceless.
I'm sorry you are completely devoid of a sense of humour or irony, really I am but I do wish you would cease displaying it in public constantly. I am pleased that you were joking in this case.
sidicks said:
My sense of humour was not in question...I am pleased that you were joking in this case.
Incompatible statements. If you don't mind, I have enough trouble round here with black hearted reactionaries calling for my balls without you piling in unsolicited whilst I was busy proving to one & all my claim that I always respond in kind by enjoying a civilised discourse with Jockman.Eddie Strohacker said:
Incompatible statements.
Certainly not incompatible statements - had anyone else written the same thing it would have been obvious they were joking. The fact that you think you are better than everyone else made it unclear whether you were joking.Eddie Strohacker said:
If you don't mind, I have enough trouble round here with black hearted reactionaries calling for my balls without you piling in unsolicited whilst I was busy proving to one & all my claim that I always respond in kind by enjoying a civilised discourse with Jockman.
I’ll ‘pile in’ whenever and wherever I feel like, just as you do.Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 22 November 10:25
Eddie Strohacker said:
Incompatible statements. If you don't mind, I have enough trouble round here with black hearted reactionaries calling for my balls without you piling in unsolicited whilst I was busy proving to one & all my claim that I always respond in kind by enjoying a civilised discourse with Jockman.
You two should get a thread together.......oh, hang on
Eddie Strohacker said:
from there springs the rudeness & immaturity people like me never display...
From the master of giving truth a hiding.If it was a joke as you say, then that ultimately means that you know you display rudeness and immaturity.
Shot yourself in the Fibula with that one , emphasis on the fib.
Anyone who fails to see how hard Brexit leads inevitably to a Corbyn government has not thought about it very deeply.
It goes like this:
(1) Hard Brexit causes a recession.
(2) Labour blames the Tories for hard Brexit.
(3) The Tories say "Dont vote for Labour - they'll mess up the economy!"
(4) Labour says "The economy is already messed up, thanks to you" and "It is time to try a different approach".
A Tory government that takes us into a recession will not survive.
It goes like this:
(1) Hard Brexit causes a recession.
(2) Labour blames the Tories for hard Brexit.
(3) The Tories say "Dont vote for Labour - they'll mess up the economy!"
(4) Labour says "The economy is already messed up, thanks to you" and "It is time to try a different approach".
A Tory government that takes us into a recession will not survive.
ORD said:
Anyone who fails to see how hard Brexit leads inevitably to a Corbyn government has not thought about it very deeply.
It goes like this:
(1) Hard Brexit causes a recession.
(2) Labour blames the Tories for hard Brexit.
(3) The Tories say "Dont vote for Labour - they'll mess up the economy!"
(4) Labour says "The economy is already messed up, thanks to you" and "It is time to try a different approach".
A Tory government that takes us into a recession will not survive.
Very much this. There are a number of people who vote Tory with a metaphorical pinched nose, purely because they work, pay tax, have a mortgage and want to sustain a certain standard of living. They vote blue to safeguard these things as, whatever else they may do, historically the Tories protect the economy and the working middle class. If they drop that particular ball they are toast. It goes like this:
(1) Hard Brexit causes a recession.
(2) Labour blames the Tories for hard Brexit.
(3) The Tories say "Dont vote for Labour - they'll mess up the economy!"
(4) Labour says "The economy is already messed up, thanks to you" and "It is time to try a different approach".
A Tory government that takes us into a recession will not survive.
TTwiggy said:
Very much this. There are a number of people who vote Tory with a metaphorical pinched nose, purely because they work, pay tax, have a mortgage and want to sustain a certain standard of living. They vote blue to safeguard these things as, whatever else they may do, historically the Tories protect the economy and the working middle class. If they drop that particular ball they are toast.
I assume you weren't around in 1997?Jockman said:
TTwiggy said:
Very much this. There are a number of people who vote Tory with a metaphorical pinched nose, purely because they work, pay tax, have a mortgage and want to sustain a certain standard of living. They vote blue to safeguard these things as, whatever else they may do, historically the Tories protect the economy and the working middle class. If they drop that particular ball they are toast.
I assume you weren't around in 1997?Obviously Corbyn's party is nothing like Blair's, but if the Tories screw the economy, what else can they offer the less-than-true-Blue?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff