Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Ah, I remember the free hospital parking (or any other non-means tested benefits) are a giveaway to the middle class argument from back in the day when Pissflaps would use it endlessly in the Scotpol thread. He'd say free tuition and free prescriptions just helped posh people because poor people get these things for free anyway.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

That poll recently that said 50% of UK voters base their voting decision on green issues had a big impact on both Labour and the Tories I guess.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

I agree with all the Lib Dems who are saying the top three Westminster party leaders should have a debate on tv.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Blackford, I’d spare Nicola debate time with bojo.

OK I’ll be generous and make it the top four party leaders (I’m counting the independents as the fourth party)

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Guavanaut posted:

Johnson, Corbyn, Blackford, Gapes. Would watch.

No I mean the actual independents who aren't affiliated with a party, not the pathetic CUKTIG losers or the so-called Independent Group who aren't even on this list I'm looking at. Not sure if they are still a thing.


I think the funniest independent MP for this job, with excellent remainer credentials, would be Mr John Bercow.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

RottenK posted:

dear lord in heaven please let jo swindon lose her seat again so we all can see the takes from people who unironically believe that she can be the PM

yes this

I'm glad you said "lost her seat again" because many people forget she already lost it once already, which is a shame because it was very funny

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

This is my favourite Jo Swinson video

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jo-swinson-close-tears-loses-5657653

Anyone have the full version? This is the best I could find, shame not to have her full reaction.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Angepain posted:

As a general heads-up for people looking for old declarations, the full election night coverages for I think every year is findable on youtube, so coupled with the expected declaration times for East Dunbartonshire I found this. It has some more of the lead-in, though it still cuts off at the same time.

Haha fantastic, thank you. Inject that poo poo directly into my veins. Hoping so much for a sequel.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

What is the deal with Milne? From the media I understand he's a Stalinist brexiteer who whispers in old king Corbyn's ear like wormtongue.

How much of that is true? I'm pretty sure he's probably not actually a Stalinist, but he definitely seems to be pro-Brexit?

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

I was behind a million posts but Tom Watson is gone??? WHat's happening?

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Does this mean Watson thinks the election will bring in enough left wing Labour MPs to get rid of him as deputy?

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

feedmegin posted:

I had the opposite at my wife's family reunion. 200 odd people, the only white people there were the waiters and myself :shobon: the group photo from the event has strong 'where's Waldo' energy

Waldo?!?!? what is this the USMT?

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

I despair about the future a fair amount but I'm ok with people saying that's a bad thing to do. I just wish nobody would say "blackpilled" because I have to take a second to remember which colour pill means what in stupid internet politics talk. Red pill, blue pill, dog pill, black pill loving hell

Guavanaut posted:

Bin Laden
Lin Baden
Lib Naden
Lib Denna
Lib Dema
a Lib Dem

:mason::tinfoil:

That explains this fawning article in the independent

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...in-1465715.html

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

I've been too addicted to Death Stranding to watch debates or read this thread, how was the debate? My impression from the media is that Boris won? And that the crowd groaned when Corbyn talked about the impact of climate change on the world's poorest people, sounds about right.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Yeah people ITT are too dismissive of polling. Looking at the movement of polls is useful even if the weighting is off. And even if they are like 20, 30, 40% off that's still far too many tories.


It's fun to see the kind of people who dismissed people as conspiracy nuts for saying the BBC was biased in the indyref now getting in on the action attacking the beeb over brexit.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

OwlFancier posted:

What are you going to do if the polling is perfectly representative? Kill yourself? Whether it's right or wrong does not change the necessary course of action, it can only possibly serve to demoralize you or make you complacent.

It is not useful information.

What's not useful about it. I think knowing how the parties are doing is pretty useful, especially if you are looking to vote to keep the tories out. Like if my seat was a three way tie with SNP Labour and Tories I'd probably look at polling to see who is better placed to beat the tories.

VideoGames posted:

I dismiss the polls easily for one reason: they were proven last time to be wrong.

They are owned by the guys who want us to lose, so I see no reason to pay attention to them.

That's a very big generalisation. Some polls were wrong, sure. Some were pretty much dead on.


Braggart posted:

Your spoilered conspiracy theory would have zero or negligible effect I think. (I know you don't actually think that ;) )

Being risk averse could lead them to hesitate to throw out received wisdom. And the received wisdom on this at present is bollocks because the people giving it to us are liars.

Bookies are fallible too ;)

Didn't the bookies pay out on Hillary winning lol

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Captain Fargle posted:

In 2017 the polls said we would face the biggest wipeout Labour had ever seen, we played an extremely defensive campaign and not only did we scalp Clegg we flipped a seat to red that's been Blue ever since it was created 80 years ago.

We're not playing defence this time.

They said that at the start of the campaign and then the tory lead narrowed a lot, they weren't that wrong right before the election

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

OwlFancier posted:

Because as I said, it really only serves to demoralize or make people complacent.

As a human being you're not capable of just taking in all information and processing it dispassionately, what you expose yourself to determines what you think, how you feel, what you do. So expose yourself only to information which elicits reactions you want to have.

The alternative to you deciding what infromation you're exposed to and thus the perception of the world you will have and the actions you will take, is simply handing that control over to media companies, and they are not capable of acting in your best interests.

This doesn't sound like a healthy attitude to me.

Braggart posted:

I agree, relative movement in the numbers produced by individual polling companies is worth looking at for trends. I don't think anyone was disputing that. We are saying that the headline numbers are bullshit :)

Well fair enough if true, that's not the way I read what people have been posting.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

ronya posted:

one of the interesting points raised by DataPraxis: leading Brexiteers like Johnson and Raab and Baker are, for whatever reason, choosing to stand in unsafe seats

a hilarious outcome of a CON majority that promptly tears itself apart as the chief ERGers disappear from the Commons is still possible

Boris not defending his original seat would be such a show of weakness that even the most lead poisoned brexiteer would laugh at him

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Braggart posted:

I agree, relative movement in the numbers produced by individual polling companies is worth looking at for trends. I don't think anyone was disputing that. We are saying that the headline numbers are bullshit :)

Braggart posted:

That is my view, and it is the conclusion that these discussions always come to ITT :)

What's with the smiles, don't patronise me

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Braggart posted:

Absolutely not my intention. I do that sometimes to try to indicate that I am not being at all hostile.

I am autistic. I have plenty of experience with people taking what I say in a more hostile manner than I intended.

Sorry, interpreting smiley faces as some kind of dig probably say more about me than it does about you.

Also I haven't had any sleep.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Dabir posted:

you'll understand if it might make people hesitant to engage with you when your response to posts like this is just "no"

polls do influence opinion, this is a fact. the people who own many of the pollsters have an incentive to influence opinion against Labour, this is also a fact. the polls are producing results which don't seem to line up with how actual people are responding to the parties, this is subjective but about as close to a fact as you can subjectively get.

does this prove, incontrovertibly, that pollsters are trying to influence opinion more than they are to reflect it? of course not

but it's a pretty suggestive set of facts huh

I don't dispute that polls are used to influence opinion, that's obvious, I was taking issue with Owlfancier saying "expose yourself only to information which elicits reactions you want to have"

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Braggart posted:

Nah, don't worry about it. I understand.

If anything your feedback is useful to me, because other people may have thought the same at times. I simply would not know unless they tell me, because autism.

I'm extremely literal, and what I say is exactly what I mean. If anyone is wondering whether I'm trying to insinuate something, please ask me. The answer is probably no.

Hope you can catch up on your sleep tonight :glomp:

Thanks :unsmith:

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Angepain posted:

Now I know this news will utterly shock and astound you, but the conservative manifesto contains no reference to transgender issues.

It contains two references to the term "LGBT", once in their intention to have an international conference for marginalised groups in the developing world, and once in this glorious paragraph:


Note who is strangely excluded from the first sentence! I'm sure this is just an accidental slip up.

That's actually kind of surprising in a good way, given the rumours that Boris was thinking about doing some anti-trans policies as part of a US style culture war campaign

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Doccykins posted:

this is the only mention of the word 'fire' in the conservative manifesto







e: mea culpa - Grenfell is also there



(but my original point was that with all the bungs going to police and NHS staff fire services are not mentioned at all)

The perils of inbreeding, look at the state of it. Parents were probably brother and sister, or uncle and niece. Also as well as the tory manifesto there is a picture of a Dalmatian.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:

[*]We will make it easier for British expats to vote in Parliamentary elections, and get rid of the arbitrary 15-year limit on their voting rights.

Lol imagine if they had done this before the brexit vote

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

OwlFancier posted:

I appreciate that it runs contrary to the conventional wisdom of "keeping informed" but the problem is that there is no such thing as a neutral source of information, nor is there such a thing as impartial information either. Again what you expose yourself to affects how you think, you aren't capable of reading things without internalizing them to some degree, so your only real choice is in what you read.

It would, of course, be nice if there was such a thing as an impartial, objective source, but there isn't. So ultimately you're left with someone else's narrative or one you choose. And in that instance I think the one you choose is far more likely to be good for you and others than one of the pre-packaged ones available, or any mix of them.

I don't see how it follows that the narrative you choose is better or healthier than someone else's. Plenty of people spend their time absorbing stupid garbage that's a waste of their lives. I mean look at us, reading and posting in this thread.

Is this why you don't watch any movies or tv shows? (That was you right, the guy who admitted ITT to have only seen The Hobbit and the Mummy?)

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

In 2017, Lib Dems were a distant fourth in my constituency, even losing their deposit. But I have had double the leaflets from them compared to any of the other parties. Guess they are getting plenty of big business money now that the tories are promising to destroy the economy.

feedmegin posted:

I mean obviously they knew you were an antifa supersoldier, no point engaging, on to look for a floating voter. Makes sense tbh :shrug:

Yeah if you want to sabotage canvassers you need to pretend you might vote for them and waste tons of their time

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Raab is a colossal moron and also bad for the normal Tory reasons. He’s exceptionally poo poo by the standards of the Cameron and May cabinets, less exceptional for the Johnson cabinet.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply