Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 68.6 % :thumbsup: 4.1 % 😯 0.5 % :grinning: 17 % 🧥 2.1 % 🙏 1 % 😟 2.6 % :cry: 2.6 % :shit: 1.5 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562904
After using the GWR trains a couple of times, I've stopped worrying about the seats being too hard. Lots of extra capacity created by these new trains, but I'm sure that at peak times it's still extremely busy from about DIdcot onwards so people will moan about that. And lots of the same people who are moaning would be moaning if they build a new line too because it would be a "vanity project" and they should "expand the existing lines", or something.
bluebellnutter liked this
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#562907
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:58 am
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:44 am
Based on what? Honestly the Tories are running on fumes , they would be crushed in a GE.
Based on opinion polling. I see absolutely no evidence Labour would win an election, whereas I see lots saying Remain would win a second referendum.
Image

Have the last few years taught you nothing about opinion polling? They mean jack shit outside of crunch time. Labour benefits massively from election broadcast rules since it stops 95% of the media simply being a Conservative political party broadcast.
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#562909
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:01 am
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:29 am
East Coast ran an effective service that returned money to the public coffers. Maybe companies who return a profit but run a shit service, should instead run a good service? Maybe if profit is the primary goal of a public service, that's a bad thing?
East Coast were largely treading water, whereas Virgin have introduced an ambitious new timetable and are introducing new trains to run the service. These are projects which have an inherent risk during setup (new stuff goes wrong) but put the ECML on a better footing for the next 30 years than anything East Coast did would have done.
That'd be the contract Virgin terminated early as the money was front-loaded, so they got a massive wad of cash from the taxpayer then fucked off.

What I love most about the private sector is that it guarantees the most effective use of resources.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562911
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:01 pm
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:01 am
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:29 am
East Coast ran an effective service that returned money to the public coffers. Maybe companies who return a profit but run a shit service, should instead run a good service? Maybe if profit is the primary goal of a public service, that's a bad thing?
East Coast were largely treading water, whereas Virgin have introduced an ambitious new timetable and are introducing new trains to run the service. These are projects which have an inherent risk during setup (new stuff goes wrong) but put the ECML on a better footing for the next 30 years than anything East Coast did would have done.
That'd be the contract Virgin terminated early as the money was front-loaded, so they got a massive wad of cash from the taxpayer then fucked off.

What I love most about the private sector is that it guarantees the most effective use of resources.
What "wad off cash"? That's just complete rubbish. The franchise payments were backloaded, not front loaded.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562914
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:58 am
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:58 am
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:44 am
Based on what? Honestly the Tories are running on fumes , they would be crushed in a GE.
Based on opinion polling. I see absolutely no evidence Labour would win an election, whereas I see lots saying Remain would win a second referendum.
Image

Have the last few years taught you nothing about opinion polling? They mean jack shit outside of crunch time. Labour benefits massively from election broadcast rules since it stops 95% of the media simply being a Conservative political party broadcast.
Some of us can remember more than one election. 2015 the polls understated Tory support in that.

Maybe the difference was that in 2017 the Tory leader embraced a very divisive Brexit, told her base she'd take their houses to pay for dementia, and went to pieces? In 2015, the Tory leader was pushing a popular referendum and stuck very competently to his message. May could do a Cameron in a 2019 election. "Give me the majority I need to get my deal through. Labour don't even have a deal".

Worth considering, no? Plus Labour's picked up a habit of piling up votes where it doesn't need them, winning big city safe seats by up to 40,000. So I'd be wary of assuming a good Labour vote share gets it into power.
 
By bluebellnutter
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#562915
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:58 am
Have the last few years taught you nothing about opinion polling? They mean jack shit outside of crunch time. Labour benefits massively from election broadcast rules since it stops 95% of the media simply being a Conservative political party broadcast.
So basically your entire argument is based on something which nobody predicted happening happening exactly the same way again because reasons.

What the last few years have taught me is that people who don't like what the polls tell them find excuses not to believe them, even when they've been basically right, and that loads of people have absolutely no idea what a "margin of error" is.

Let's go through this...

2017 General Election - polls showed it narrowing but none of them showed Labour winning - accurate
2016 EU referendum - polls showed an incredibly tight race - result within margin of error
2015 General Election - polls underestimated Tory support but the race was still tight and the polls were right about that
Last edited by bluebellnutter on Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lord_kobel liked this
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#562916
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:06 pm
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:01 pm
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:01 am


East Coast were largely treading water, whereas Virgin have introduced an ambitious new timetable and are introducing new trains to run the service. These are projects which have an inherent risk during setup (new stuff goes wrong) but put the ECML on a better footing for the next 30 years than anything East Coast did would have done.
That'd be the contract Virgin terminated early as the money was front-loaded, so they got a massive wad of cash from the taxpayer then fucked off.

What I love most about the private sector is that it guarantees the most effective use of resources.
What "wad off cash"? That's just complete rubbish. The franchise payments were backloaded, not front loaded.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... gin-trains

You're right sorry I got things back to front. They paid chicken scratch to run the service in the first few years, then when the cost ramped up they fucked off. My point stands.
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#562917
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:18 pm
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:58 am
Have the last few years taught you nothing about opinion polling? They mean jack shit outside of crunch time. Labour benefits massively from election broadcast rules since it stops 95% of the media simply being a Conservative political party broadcast.
So basically your entire argument is based on something which nobody predicted happening happening exactly the same way again because reasons.

What the last few years have taught me is that people who don't like what the polls tell them find excuses not to believe them, even when they've been basically right, and that loads of people have absolutely no idea what a "margin of error" is.

Let's go through this...

2017 General Election - polls showed it narrowing but none of them showed Labour winning - acurate
2016 EU referendum - polls showed an incredibly tight race - result within margin of error
2015 General Election - polls underestimated Tory support but the race was still tight and the polls were right about that
Do you just not see the big upswing in labour share of the vote when actual broadcast rules come into play? Polling this far out of a GE is utterly pointless because most people tune out of politics.
 
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
#562918
I'd love to know if these ardent Corbyn supporters had such strong views against the EU before Corbyn was on the scene. Anecdotal evidence suggests not and they literally waited for Corbyn to tell them what to think.

In fact, when they actually believed Corbyn was a Remainer and was going to fight for Remain I'd be surprised if they criticised him on this based due to their apparent scepticism of the EU which they're suddenly so vocal about.
 
By bluebellnutter
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#562919
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:21 pm
Do you just not see the big upswing in labour share of the vote when actual broadcast rules come into play? Polling this far out of a GE is utterly pointless because most people tune out of politics.
I see it. I don't see any reason to expect it to happen again. It hasn't happened previously.

So good to see you're now admitting a GE isn't going to happen. Once Uncle Jez cottons onto this fact maybe he might get off his arse to do something which avoids increasing hardship and poverty for people?
lord_kobel, oboogie liked this
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562922
There's always more of these Corbynite goons, isn't there? This chap is Young Labour International Officer.



1) Macron isn't "privatizing trains". He's trying to get the hugely indebted SNCF into shape where it can face up to competition that's mandated from 2023. Italy, by the way, already has privatized trains running and the nationalized operator welcomes them as helping improve their own performance.
2) The CGT are a minority trade union body, of whom there's no equivalent in the UK.
3) "Reform agenda" means having an actual plan to reduce long term debt. France has one that addresses its weakenesses, like 30 years of high unemployment, Italy is handing out a lot more money to pensioners while its young leave.
4) The reason France has a deficit of 3.2% is that an unholy alliance (not least the CGT) went apeshit at petrol taxes going up and its hard to replace that income.
5) France's debt is way, way lower than Italy, and its debt interest costs about a quarter.
6) The UK isn't in the Euro, so it's not going to have any of the same tests.
Last edited by Tubby Isaacs on Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562926
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:20 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:06 pm
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:01 pm


That'd be the contract Virgin terminated early as the money was front-loaded, so they got a massive wad of cash from the taxpayer then fucked off.

What I love most about the private sector is that it guarantees the most effective use of resources.
What "wad off cash"? That's just complete rubbish. The franchise payments were backloaded, not front loaded.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... gin-trains

You're right sorry I got things back to front. They paid chicken scratch to run the service in the first few years, then when the cost ramped up they fucked off. My point stands.
Why might the contract have been structured in that way, do you think? I'll tell you. There were big upgrades supposed to be happening to increase capacity and allow a lot more lucrative peak time trains to be run. They didn't get done. What they did pay was more than what East Coast made back in any case.

Where's this wad of cash? Still can't see it. I can see somebody losing a lot of money on the first few years and paying a lot more to exercise a break in the contract.
Boiler liked this
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#562928
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:21 pm
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:18 pm
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:58 am
Have the last few years taught you nothing about opinion polling? They mean jack shit outside of crunch time. Labour benefits massively from election broadcast rules since it stops 95% of the media simply being a Conservative political party broadcast.
So basically your entire argument is based on something which nobody predicted happening happening exactly the same way again because reasons.

What the last few years have taught me is that people who don't like what the polls tell them find excuses not to believe them, even when they've been basically right, and that loads of people have absolutely no idea what a "margin of error" is.

Let's go through this...

2017 General Election - polls showed it narrowing but none of them showed Labour winning - acurate
2016 EU referendum - polls showed an incredibly tight race - result within margin of error
2015 General Election - polls underestimated Tory support but the race was still tight and the polls were right about that
Do you just not see the big upswing in labour share of the vote when actual broadcast rules come into play? Polling this far out of a GE is utterly pointless because most people tune out of politics.
I also see a big upsurge when the campaign started and May fell to bits, started talking about foxhunting, taking people's houses away and put out a manifesto with no costings in it (which nullified the Tory perennial attack line about Labour plans not adding up).
oboogie liked this
 
By crabcakes_windermere
Membership Days Posts
#562941
It doesn’t matter one jot whether the polls are 1% or 99% accurate. The Tories will not vote themselves out of office and the DUP will not vote with Corbyn. The new GE option is off the table, and makes a no confidence vote in the govt. nothing but a waste of time and pointless gesturing at best.

The Tories will also not elect a new leader who will take a different path and go to the public with a GE. That choice is off the table for a year because of Mogg’s limp-wristed failed coup.

May has no shame and is clearly all about clinging on to power regardless. She will not resign and open up that option.

The ONLY choices remaining are therefore to vote for May’s terrible deal, to be utterly spineless and abstain, or to vote it down and then push for a new referendum. And if Corbyn is remotely genuine about wanting to help people then he has to push for that vote to include a vote to remain. Then, when that is won, perhaps he can form the next govt. on the basis he pushed for what his party and the people wanted while respecting the original vote up to the point where it was clearly no longer relevant (and to be honest, we’re WELL past when that would be a legitimate position to take anyway).

That is Corbyn’s single feasible path to No. 10 that doesn’t involve unicorns, actual deaths or a number of Tories suddenly changing the behaviours of a lifetime.

The issue is, it requires him to compromise on the EU and accept we are overwhelmingly and unarguably better off in, which he very clearly does not want to do. Which is lovely for him to have the luxury to do, but for people worrying about their jobs, loved ones and health every day he delays is another day he makes himself more unelectable by his apparent indifference.
  • 1
  • 704
  • 705
  • 706
  • 707
  • 708
  • 745
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Not that Vienna bollocks again. Could obscure[…]

The Sun

I discovered I know little about the parliamen[…]

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/james-godda[…]

Jeremy Corbyn.

https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/110804014838[…]