|
Pissflaps posted:People have seen more of Corbyn and his approval rating is -18. If your contention is that exposure to Corbyn makes him popular then your own evidence suggests you are wrong. He's saying his popularity has improved from -35 to -18 since the poll in April as people have seen more of Corbyn and his policies. Do you understand how negative numbers work?
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
Pissflaps posted:People have seen more of Corbyn and his approval rating is -18. If your contention is that exposure to Corbyn makes him popular then your own evidence suggests you are wrong. Polling is a snapshot and his approval is still increasing. All I'm saying so far is that his exposure has made him a lot more popular than he was, which is the opposite of what his opponents claimed would happen. Maybe it would be higher if he weren't starting from an artificially low base having had his own party briefing against him for two years.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:There are some which show that Corbyn is now more popular than either Farron or Nuthall, with May dropping down from her height of a few months ago (unsurprising, really). That's the problem with having MI5 keep tabs on all those bastard lefties. You blow your smear-load a few decades too early.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
It helps that Corbyn really, really loves campaigning but hates keeping the party in line in quiet times, which is basically the exact opposite of May. One interesting thing that i've experienced talking to people while campaigning is that quite often when someone says "I've voted Labour all my life, but I could never vote for Corbyn", if you press them it turns out that haven't voted Labour recently, or in fact ever. The Shy Tory effect works in more ways than one.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
i dreamed about this thread last night
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
was i in it and nude?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:i dreamed about this thread last night Have you changed your sheets since then
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:48
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Uhhh, I would be utterly stunned if there is a post-manifesto bounce for the Tories, considering what is inside the loving thing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:50
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:was i in it and nude? theresa may had suddently died and people were posting about it it was one of them lucid dreams
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
Lobster God posted:He's saying his popularity has improved from -35 to -18 since the poll in April as people have seen more of Corbyn and his policies. Yes. That's how I understand that -18 indicates a negative approval rating and unpopularity.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
jabby posted:Polling is a snapshot and his approval is still increasing. All I'm saying so far is that his exposure has made him a lot more popular than he was, which is the opposite of what his opponents claimed would happen. Maybe it would be higher if he weren't starting from an artificially low base having had his own party briefing against him for two years. Latest poll has Labour slipping back, with conservatives at +12, your "approval still increasing" is probably just noise. https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:53
|
|
|
Not So Fast posted:E: This is also basically a post-manifesto bounce, once the IRA spin stories and the Tory manifesto takes effect, we'll probably see the polls dip down again. The IRA spin stories are out and momentum are handling them fairly well door to door (because they're bullshit) The papers are going to reheat some things but Corbyn doesn't actually have any dirt to hide; they're firing blanks
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Latest poll has Labour slipping back, with conservatives at +12, your "approval still increasing" is probably just noise. He's talking about Corbyn's personal unpopularity. It's unquestionable that polling shows hat Corbyn is currently less unpopular and labour is currently less far behind in the polls. Labour is still going to lose and lose badly. It shows how bad things are that the current polling data is considered 'good news'. Spangly A posted:The IRA spin stories are out and momentum are handling them fairly well door to door (because they're bullshit) Are they? In what way? Nobody has been to my door to explain that team Corbyn were not IRA sympathisers.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Latest poll has Labour slipping back, with conservatives at +12, your "approval still increasing" is probably just noise. Different pollsters use different methods, you compare a pollster with itself. Which is, compared to its previous poll, -2 tories and +4 labour.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Yes. That's how I understand that -18 indicates a negative approval rating and unpopularity. And yet you don't appear to comprehend that -35 is worse than -18. Curious.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
Lobster God posted:And yet you don't appear to comprehend that -35 is worse than -18. I fully comprehend that -35 is less than -18. You seem unable to understand that somebody with a -18 approval rating is unpopular.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:theresa may had suddently died and people were posting about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-4FJcnX0i8
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:17
|
|
|
Lobster God posted:He's saying his popularity has improved from -35 to -18 since the poll in April as people have seen more of Corbyn and his policies. You could say the sky is blue right at this very moment where you are now and he'd find a way to pedantically argue that actually sometimes the sky is orange, & red & yellow & grey & black. So we must not engage.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
that was the mood yes
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:You could say the sky is blue right at this very moment where you are now and he'd find a way to pedantically argue that actually sometimes the sky is orange, & red & yellow & grey & black. So we must not engage. Saying that a minus eighteen approval rating indicates unpopularity is 'pedantic'. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
There is no way to reverse entropy, Pissflaps.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Pissflaps is generally wrong but technically correct. The best kind of correct.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
What is the defence used when people point out Corbyn & gang's previous closeness to IRA etc? He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA).
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
Ewan posted:What is the defence used when people point out Corbyn & gang's previous closeness to IRA etc? He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA). He was always supportive of peace in Northern Ireland, and that involves talking to people you don't agree with. The British government was pushing a military solution that was always going to be impossible, while also talking to the IRA in secret. Condemning violence on all sides is far more productive and less divisive than condemning a single group. Basically that sort of stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
The complete collapse of UKIP really is stunning. Just over a month ago they were polling at 13% and now they're hovering at 3%. The country as a whole has had a 5 point swing away from right wing parties, putting them below 50% of the electorate for the first time in quite a while. But because we're in a warped political system, this massive shift will instead result in right wing parties getting a massive boost in political power, and a general perception of consensus.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Ewan posted:What is the defence used when people point out Corbyn & gang's previous closeness to IRA etc? He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA). "If you believe in peace you have to have a dialogue with both sides. History proved that Jeremy was on the right side, because the Good Friday Agreement could never have happened without talking to the IRA & Sinn Fein." Except put better than that probably, but you get the jist. When the alternative is forever war, sitting down with terrorists is in fact not a bad idea, it is a good one. Negotiated settlements only happen if you loving negotiate.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:the sky is orange 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
But-but HE TALKED TO TERRORISTS!!!! Yeah, the media is stupid and will transform "we should probably try to understand terrorists, see them as humans, so we can attack the root causes" into "TERRIST SYMPATHIZER!!!"
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
Ewan posted:What is the defence used when people point out Corbyn & gang's previous closeness to IRA etc? He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA). The dirty little secret is that Britain weren't the good guys in the troubles. Once you accept that, you don't really feel the need to condemn people who supported IRA.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
^^^ Nobody was the good guys in the Troubles. The IRA should be condemned at every turn, this is not exclusive to apologising for the Black and Tans being loving savages. The Independent have analysed the Tory manifesto: quote:And that’s how they’re going to make all our grandparents go on the game. Jedit fucked around with this message at 12:57 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
UKIP were a one issue Party, not really surprising given that the thing they were campaigning for is done with that people are switching back to more normal parties. It's pretty strange to think that in 200 years time UKIP will be seen as the most successful political party of all time though.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
jabby posted:He was always supportive of peace in Northern Ireland, and that involves talking to people you don't agree with. The British government was pushing a military solution that was always going to be impossible, while also talking to the IRA in secret. Condemning violence on all sides is far more productive and less divisive than condemning a single group. And I guess the British Gov solution didn't turn out to be that impossible given that a peace agreement was reached in the end. EDIT: missed an important bit in the first sentence that made it have the opposite meaning Ewan fucked around with this message at 12:58 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:"If you believe in peace you have to have a dialogue with both sides. History proved that Jeremy was on the right side, because the Good Friday Agreement could never have happened without talking to the IRA & Sinn Fein." TheRat posted:The dirty little secret is that Britain weren't the good guys in the troubles. Once you accept that, you don't really feel the need to condemn people who supported IRA.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
Ewan posted:What is the defence used when people point out Corbyn & gang's previous closeness to IRA etc? He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA). Bombing civilians is bad, but for some reason (who knows!) people are only asked to condemn groups that do that who work against the interests of our ruling classes; where are the journalists asking all Tory politicians over and over again to condemn Saudi Arabia, and Israel, and America, and ourselves?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Bombing civilians is bad, but for some reason (who knows!) people are only asked to condemn groups that do that who work against the interests of our ruling classes; where are the journalists asking all Tory politicians over and over again to condemn Saudi Arabia, and Israel, and America, and ourselves?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 12:59
|
|
|
Ewan posted:He literally just refused to condemn the IRA (all he did was constantly condemn bombing when asked outright if he would condemn the IRA). If you're claiming this isn't "condemning the IRA" then that's a Pissflapsian level of irrelevant pedantry.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
Ewan posted:I think it's a bit disingenuous to say he supported peace in Northern Ireland specifically through a United Ireland. I'm not saying that's good or bad - but we can't pretend he was neutral in the matter. If he was just about "talking to people you don't agree with", why was he not also meeting with extreme Loyalists? And why does he to this day refuse to condemn the IRA - an internationally recognised terrorist organisation? I'm not sure why he needed to talk to extreme loyalists when the two sides that needed to reach peace were the IRA and the British government, and he's a member of Parliament. Generally speaking it's more productive to talk to the opposing side in a conflict. And I already said why he doesn't want to condemn the IRA specifically: because it's not helpful to the cause of peace. Condemn the actions themselves and those that took them on all sides. EDIT: I'm beginning to think you're being disingenuous, given you started off asking how something will be defended on the doorstep and then transitioned straight into 'this is indefensible'.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
Ewan posted:I'm not denying that - but whatever side you are on the issue, the IRA (and PIRA etc) were terrorist organisations that used violence and killed civilians, police, etc to reach their aims. Corbyn still refuses to condemn them - that is undefendable. Desperate people do desperate things. They are a 'terrorist organisation' because the people with power named them as such. I would make the bold statement that the British government killed a lot more civilians than IRA did. I will condemn IRA the day Theresa May goes to Belfast and one by one condemns every single politician and official who voted for or otherwise facilitated the armed occupation of Northern Ireland. Deal?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
Ewan posted:This is also bad I agree, but it doesn't make refusing to condemn the IRA OK.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
Ewan posted:This is also bad I agree, but it doesn't make refusing to condemn the IRA OK. He condemned the members of the IRA who bombed or supported bombing civilian targets. May won't condemn the Saudis even on those terms. Who's worse?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 13:04
|
|