It pulled NI and Scotland out of the EU against their wishes and has dragged NI in particular through the ringer. I'd argue that if British governments generally gave more of a shit about NI then it would probably remain for the foreseeable future, but that's a separate issue.Not at all, far from breaking up the Union, Brexit was implicitly saved it. The nationalists in Scotland and Wales can’t credibly argue that they’ll join the EU because that would mean hard borders with England. Which is just not realistic.
NI will probably be lost, with or without Brexit.
It pulled NI and Scotland out of the EU against their wishes and has dragged NI in particular through the ringer. I'd argue that if British governments generally gave more of a shit about NI then it would probably remain for the foreseeable future, but that's a separate issue.
All Brexit has done is have more small c conservative voters in England drag half of the home nations out of Europe against their will. It was a gift wrapped present for Sinn Fein and the SNP in particular. One of the big arguments leading to the Scottish referendum was that independence would take Scotland out of Europe and it'd have to reapply. It wasn't the argument I preferred to use on the doorstep but it was one we were encouraged to go with. Then 2 years later it's dragged out anyway when it voted strongly in favour of remaining.
Do you think using his full name somehow makes him a better or worse politician? We can play the same game with Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and George Gideon Oliver Osborne if you wish.Of course one thing is for certain. If Sir Anthony Charles Lynton Blair was PM he’d be sucking up to The Donald like no tomorrow.
You only have to look how he dribbled over George Dubya Bush to agree with that. Two brain cells meet and unite.
Do you think using his full name somehow makes him a better or worse politician? We can play the same game with Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson if you wish.
It pulled NI and Scotland out of the EU against their wishes and has dragged NI in particular through the ringer. I'd argue that if British governments generally gave more of a shit about NI then it would probably remain for the foreseeable future, but that's a separate issue.
All Brexit has done is have more small c conservative voters in England drag half of the home nations out of Europe against their will. It was a gift wrapped present for Sinn Fein and the SNP in particular. One of the big arguments leading to the Scottish referendum was that independence would take Scotland out of Europe and it'd have to reapply. It wasn't the argument I preferred to use on the doorstep but it was one we were encouraged to go with. Then 2 years later it's dragged out anyway when it voted strongly in favour of remaining.
By percentages the SNP usually collect about half of the Scottish vote, but 62% voted to remain in the EU. My wife's constituency was one of the highest Leave-voting areas in Scotland but still didn't get more than half even there.Didn’t more Scottish people vote to leave the EU than voted for the SNP?
By percentages the SNP usually collect about half of the Scottish vote, but 62% voted to remain in the EU. My wife's constituency was one of the highest Leave-voting areas in Scotland but still didn't get more than half even there.
It is fair to say however that the SNP's traditional heartlands pretty much all kicked them out over their Brexit stance. Some recovery since.
For the 2017 election about 40,000 fewer votes for the SNP than Brexit in 2016. When you compare the 2015 election, there were about 450,000 more votes for the SNP than Brexit 2016.That’s not what I asked?
Not sniggering just smile emoticonPete may be sniggering but Reeves is viewed as a disaster - no business big or small has any confidence in her whatsoever- she is pitifully out of her depth
Not sniggering just smile emoticon
There's more options in elections and lower turnout.Didn’t more Scottish people vote to leave the EU than voted for the SNP?
In 2015 450,000 more voted for the SNP anyway. Hence he’s gone a bit quietThere's more options in elections and lower turnout.
In 2015 450,000 more voted for the SNP anyway. Hence he’s gone a bit quiet
this is quite an interesting read
Who supports Reform and why? The charts that show who favours Farage’s party
Based on largest poll of supporters, these charts and maps show five distinct groups that could hand Reform a majoritywww.theguardian.com
Find it interesting to see the divide between those who prioritise cost of living and immigration.The ‘working right’ sound like old school traditional Labour voters to me
Do you think maybe we ought to start looking at the real world record of the economics put forward over the last few decades and suggest that the main proponents behind them ( like PPE and LSE Economics) are actually at best massively flawed and at worst rubbish.The problem with Reeves is that she only sees the economy through the eyes of the city and / or her Thatcherite philosophy on government spending.
She has no clue about the real world impact of any decisions on people or businesses.
These are the people that are in competition with low income migrants so they’ve put 2+2 together and made the link between mass immigration and cost of living.Find it interesting to see the divide between those who prioritise cost of living and immigration.
Indeed. The Labour Party and indeed wider trade union movement had generally been “right wing” on immigration by today’s standards. Blair changed that fabric and social liberalism is so entrenched in the party it’s chased away of working class voters.The ‘working right’ sound like old school traditional Labour voters to me
No, my point was some have a top priority of cost of living and for others it’s immigration. Low income migrants aren’t the reason behind high living costs anyway, but that’s the Reform grift summed up quite neatly anyway.These are the people that are in competition with low income migrants so they’ve put 2+2 together and made the link between mass immigration and cost of living.
Agreed. However, there is one massive exception where immigration is absolutely increasing costs: housing provision.No, my point was some have a top priority of cost of living and for others it’s immigration. Low income migrants aren’t the reason behind high living costs anyway, but that’s the Reform grift summed up quite neatly anyway.
Guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree really, I just see the people in charge of Reform as snake oil selling charlatans.Agreed. However, there is one massive exception where immigration is absolutely increasing costs: housing provision.
The average cost of a house is 9x the average salary. You’d have to go back to the 19th century to find a time it was less expensive.
It’s not all about immigration, but when housebuilding targets are premised on 300k net migration and not only are the targets not met, net migration is significantly higher than 300k.
Reform isn’t grifting the electorate. The Tories and Labour grifted the electorate when continually promising to lower migration but delivering the exact opposite. The Greens don’t have a winning message imo, but they are unashamedly pro-immigration and don’t see a need to reduce migration.
Reform isn’t grifting the electorate.
Labour have significantly reduced immigrationAgreed. However, there is one massive exception where immigration is absolutely increasing costs: housing provision.
The average cost of a house is 9x the average salary. You’d have to go back to the 19th century to find a time it was less expensive.
It’s not all about immigration, but when housebuilding targets are premised on 300k net migration and not only are the targets not met, net migration is significantly higher than 300k.
Reform isn’t grifting the electorate. The Tories and Labour grifted the electorate when continually promising to lower migration but delivering the exact opposite. The Greens don’t have a winning message imo, but they are unashamedly pro-immigration and don’t see a need to reduce migration.
Effective thougha platform which amounts to 'the foreigners are the problem' and a leader that spreads stories about immigrants killing and eating swans from Royal parks instead of talking about how they'll get houses built, services and infrastructure sorted and long term quality jobs secured feels like a bit of a grift to me.
You're talking about a party selling Reform football kits while dodging VAT, with a track record of focusing their hours in office on making and maintaining alliances with far right nutters around the world and paving the way for their rich pals to stay rich and get more rich. Oh, and flags. I forgot flags.
That isn’t their platform at all. The polling data shared on here shows that they cut through on other issues.a platform which amounts to 'the foreigners are the problem' and a leader that spreads stories about immigrants killing and eating swans from Royal parks instead of talking about how they'll get houses built, services and infrastructure sorted and long term quality jobs secured feels like a bit of a grift to me.
You're talking about a party selling Reform football kits while dodging VAT, with a track record of focusing their hours in office on making and maintaining alliances with far right nutters around the world and paving the way for their rich pals to stay rich and get more rich. Oh, and flags. I forgot flags.
Have they? What policies have they implemented that have had an impact?Labour have significantly reduced immigration
Interesting. See, I wouldn’t call Polanski a “snake oil selling charlatan”, his ideas are just wrong and wouldn’t benefit the country.Guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree really, I just see the people in charge of Reform as snake oil selling charlatans.
The problem with Reeves is that she only sees the economy through the eyes of the city and / or her Thatcherite philosophy on government spending.
She has no clue about the real world impact of any decisions on people or businesses.
I nearly spat out my coffee seeing Rachel Reeves described as “Thatcherite”. Ultimately, this government is in a mess because it’s massively increased spending and borrowing without a plan to pay for it. The tax rises in the last budget was highest tax raids in decades and it’s still not enough.Thatcherite spending philosophy?! What, trying to grow the economy? (Not sure that’s working so far) Come on FD. They’re already borrowing and taxing £70bn more per year over the parliament (let’s say £300-350bn). I’d imagine tax will increase further this budget. As the party hasnt shown any semblance of ability in even minimising spending increases, we’re already probably paying billions more in servicing debt.
Let’s hope the government spends all this extra cash wisely
ps nobody’s moving to MMT any time soon so let’s not go round all that again
CluelessI nearly spat out my coffee seeing Rachel Reeves described as “Thatcherite”. Ultimately, this government is in a mess because it’s massively increased spending and borrowing without a plan to pay for it. The tax rises in the last budget was highest tax raids in decades and it’s still not enough.
The gilts are spiking already over the budget because they don’t view UK government spending as sustainable. What FP proposes is fantasy land and the UK would be punished by financial markets.
That isn’t their platform at all. The polling data shared on here shows that they cut through on other issues.
Comments like yours show just how disconnected many people on the left are in relation to understanding why people support Reform.
Have they? What policies have they implemented that have had an impact?
The last figures were 400k and that was mostly a continuation of the last governments policy. Besides, the electorate consistently wants immigration at 0-100k and that’s been the case since 2010.
Interesting. See, I wouldn’t call Polanski a “snake oil selling charlatan”, his ideas are just wrong and wouldn’t benefit the country.
You know and iirc, have posted about the difficulties of running a household, just how expensive it is to rent/own a home. For the vast majority of people, the highest outgoing is easily their housing costs and there’s significant evidence that immigration has driven us up. For the best part of a decade or two, house building has not kept up with net migration.
There are other economic issues at play, QE has had the unintended impact of transferring assets to wealthy individuals/companies. Home ownership is down 5% from 10-20 years ago which is sad.
I’m enjoying that you’re saying this with no irony whatsoever.Clueless
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?