Westministenders: Before the Fire Alarm of Rome goes off

[RedToothBrush]

I’m going to keep this one very simple.

THE DEADLINE TO REGISTER TO VOTE IS 22ND MAY.
www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

Postal votes start to go out on 23rd May.

Your challenge is to persuade someone to register to vote or to get someone who is considering not to, to get their arse to the polling station.

Go forth and harass. Especially women and the young.

That’s it. No frills OP.

The U.S. election result was well within the margin of error of national polling - what caught people out was the electoral college. No one really considered that Trump could win the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by a substantial margin.

Believe it or not, the second round of the French election was a bigger polling miss - out by around 5 percentage points which is a very large miss by any standard and particularlg by French standards. Bet you haven't read that in the UK press!

There's a lot of misinformation about polling. The big fail was the 2015 GE; both Trump and Brexit were within the error margin, the failure was in the interpretation not the polling.

That tablet looks almost as good as mine pretty , but my poor deprived kids have to really really nag me to ever get round to making it. Absolutely no chance of me or them retailing it.

I agree that the Holyrood system looks like a better form of PR but STV might work better if it was council rather than ward wide?

howabout and pretty

I am willing to take one for the team and do a taste test

Its a hard job but someone has got to do it

Misti I am not so sure the 2015 GE polling was that much out because almost from the start of campaigning I thought despite the spin they were predicting a Conservative majority - depended how they interpreted the LibDem collapse and the effectiveness of targeted Tory campaigning. The SNP clean sweep was also predicted but it was such a huge swing the predictions were very heavily caveated in reporting. (A handful of Labour seats in Scotland would have been enough to change the UK result - not looking like any chance of that this time unfortunately)

Surely the French 2nd round was almost impossible given the levels of don't knows. abstentions and nose holding.

Not sure about that. I remember someone in the know - who paid very much closer attention to this stuff than I did at the time - assuring me that a Labour win was a mathematical certainty.

That's the problem with being "in the know" though kaija - far more susceptible to establishment groupthink.

The percentages from the 2015 polling were not that bad. The telephone polls not the internet ones were most accurate.

What people didn't really get was how that split in terms of constituencies and therefore seats.

To say that the polls are wildly out in the UK would be wrong though.

With the difference being so big at the moment, even taking that into account, its almost inconceivable that a Labour win might unexpectedly happen.

As for the US - see voter suppression such as ballots that were cast but not counted for some reason. Many suggestions that the polls were correct if that is included. The polls were most accurate for states which don't do this as much. There are lots of inconsistencies and irregularities that remain unanswered. One state has since been declared effectively 'undemocratic' by an international democracy watchdog.

The polls for the referendum were within the margin of error.

The polls for the French election were spot on.

Not sure it was so much establishment groupthink as taking the figures at face value. But perhaps that's what you mean.

I'm just mentally preparing myself for the Conservatives to win 450 seats or more. I just want to wake up on June 9th, look at the results and be able to say "it could have been worse".

The chances of Corbyn getting a majority are zilch.

But the labour manifesto just give another side to the conversation rather than leaving us solely with the idea that the poor must lose out so the well off can get richer. Personally I don't think expecting people who earn a lot to pay more tax is a particularly unreasonable or radical proposal.

Me too squishy 😔
Any thoughts on large purchases? Better now or in 1-2 years
My gut days now [before the shit hits the fan]

I think the statement he made earlier about whether or not he'd order nuclear retaliation was very reasonable too, and very well articulated.
I can't find it now though!
I do hope that what he actually said gets reported properly.

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Why is Paul Nuttall never asked about his family? Does he have one? No mention anywhere. Or is it because he's a man?

Bling Pot‏*@bling*_pot
Watch #leaderinterviews ITVTONIGHT asked about his personal life & squirmed, glossed over past said his 'partner' was a MEP - probs Nige!

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Ok I'm probably wrong but after extensive research (5 minutes) I am guessing that Paul Nuttall is in a relationship with Louise Bours MEP.

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Apologies if I'm wrong Louise. The only other credible candidate is Roger Helmer #UkipLoveCluedo

Ed Wilson‏**@eddwilson**
That took some working out.

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English

It's a process of elimination. But that's 5 minutes I'm not getting back

Ed Wilson‏**@eddwilson**
Along with various unpleasant thoughts.

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Ok this is suddenly getting a lot more interesting.

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Bours and Nuttall shared office and they claimed costs that were thousands more than tenancy agreement suggested

uk.businessinsider.com/paul-nuttall-expenses-ukip-mep-louise-bours-offices-farage-liverpool-north-west-2017-3
Paul Nuttall claimed European Parliament office costs that were thousands more than his tenancy agreement suggests

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
Allegedly

Otto English‏********@Otto**_English
I mean that's dodgy isn't it. Isn't that dodgy? And why no response? @ukip @paulnuttallukip

Bours' website indicates that she also claimed £7,280 for use of the Water Street office during the last six months of 2015, suggesting that she and Nuttall claimed £14,500 in total for that period. This is £4,306 more than the figure charged on the tenancy agreement.

A spokesperson for Nuttall and Boursinitially suggestedthat they had spent some extra money on leasing office equipment. However, office equipment costs, communication costsandstationaryare allaccounted for separately in their expenses. The spokesperson did not respond to further requests forexplanation.

[RTB: I wonder if Otto is right.]

I don't know Badders123. If it is a large purchase you need, I think go for it in case prices rise, but I am guarding my savings carefully at the moment (I am unemployed, and hoped to get back to work soonish, but Brexit could have a serious impact on the industry I work in).

I found the whole arguement about the nuclear arms and him not wanting to use them befuddling. Surely we would all prefer a leader who was not desparate to drop a nuke at the first sign of trouble? In fact I think the world would be a far better place if the only people who had access to WMD were people who really did not want to use them. Any leader who claims they would be happy to start a nuclear war without first considering all other options would really not be getting my vote.

Squishy I heard it on the World at One, and it did sound very reasonable.

I had a glimmer of 2015-style optimism about Corbyn and the Overton Window for a moment listening to him. Haven't felt that for a while.

Otto English‏*@Otto*_English
Paul Nuttall's personal life has now been updated.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Nuttall#Personal_life

(complete with source about who he is in a relationship with: news.sky.com/story/paul-nuttall-the-reluctant-leader-who-is-replacing-nigel-farage-10676038)

Hmmm....

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!

Tim Ireland‏*@bloggerheads*
This is so amazingly Freudian. See if you can guess what the President is DEFINITELY NOT THINKING ABOUT. It involves tapes and leaking.

The idea that Trump taped himself to protect himself (didn't Nixon do that) is funny enough. But that is brilliant.

That my feeling too squishy

That's where I heard it too Kaija.
I really do hope that what he said is reported properly, because I suspect it may be summed up with a headline like "Corbyn rules out using nuclear weapons".
www.ft.com/content/977fc2a6-548b-3d68-aad5-95d0aeb714a9

In a speech at London’s Chatham House, the Labour leader said he was “often asked if as prime minister I would order the use of nuclear weapons.”
"It’s an extraordinary question when you think about it – would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? Would you risk such extensive contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world?

If circumstances arose where that was a real option, it would represent complete and cataclysmic failure. It would mean world leaders had already triggered a spiral of catastrophe for humankind."

Who on earth could disagree with that?

Any leader who claims they would be happy to start a nuclear war without first considering all other options would really not be getting my vote.^

But people are being taught to fear.

This is why we need surveillance cameras everywhere.
This is why we need our internet to be tightly controlled.
This is why we must control immigration.
This is why we must give up our human rights so that we can deal with the real baddies.
This is why we must be on lists of workers, giving details of what our faith is and who are parents are.

In no way is it to do with Authoritarianism and the state taking control of YOU.

Its about protecting us from the bogey man who is perhaps less likely to kill us than a vending machine or a cow.

The entire point about mutually-assured destruction is that our enemies cannot know for certain that an attack on us will not result in nuclear devastation for them.

With Corbyn, they would know the chance of retaliation is zero, thus making the deterrent worthless. That's a policy that's as popular with the average voter as a piss-flavoured milkshake.

mrsS

I watched him on telly the other day and he certainly didnt say that nuclear retaliation was off the table

I dont tend to pay attention so this stance may well have changed

Do you happen to know where he has stated that it wouldn't be used? I would be interested in reading further about this aspect

Not that i am voting for him at the moment