8 June

[Earl Aelfheah]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It is going to be raining all day tomorrow.

Oh dear. That could be enough to undo any slim chance Labour might have.

[robbin]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> robbin Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rendelharris Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > It's true Corbyn hasn't said

> > > he'll ban all young Muslims from leaving the

> > > country, and ban any who do (even if they're

> > > British born and bred)

> >

> > No, that trio have been more up for banning MI5

> > and armed Police, or did you choose to 'forget'

> > that abject insanity?

>

> Can you point me to anywhere Corbyn said he'd ban

> armed police or Mi5 please Robbin, because Google

> doesn't come up with anything.

As you well know, Rendel he hasn't - which presumably is why you chose to single him out. As you equally well know, his closest two supporters and until today Shadow Cabinet members (the would be Chancellor and the would be Home Secretary in charge of Police and MI5) both supported disbanding MI5 and armed Police.

Corbyn belongs to the same group as them and with full knowledge of their views promoted them to the highest possible positions of potential power in this country. Corbyn clearly is not at all concerned with their stance and in fact has refused to disagree with it or condemn it. He clearly sympathised with them or he would never have contemplated putting them where they are (although obviously passing over your ex-mistress could, I appreciate, be a bit difficult).

So, Rendel, you may pick away all you like but you and I and everyone else who is not being purposely intellectually dishonest. knows the point I was making. Until a few months ago (as countless posts of yours show) you would have agreed with me they are a bad bunch to be in power. For some reason, like our would be PM Theresa (who, by the way I do not support) you appear to be happy to make some pretty surprising u-turns when it suits you.

[robbin]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the postal votes are neither here nor there - even

> in the unlikely event they've been peaked at. They

> are about as biased a sample of votes as you can

> get - young people don't need them (or even know

> about them).

>

> its like quoting the Spectator for reasoned

> insights into the election, or thinking the Daily

> Mail is informative or amusing.

>

> but I know i'm clutching at straws :-(

C'mon Jaywalker - don't go all flaccid on us now!

[robbin]

robbin Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

He clearly sympathised with them or he would never

> have contemplated putting them where they are

> (although obviously passing over your ex-mistress

> could, I appreciate, be a bit difficult).

>

Sorry Rendel, just to be clear - I was not suggesting Diane Abbott is your ex-mistress. I could never be that mean.

[red devil]

I thought it was a typo and that you had got mixed up with Trump...

[rendelharris]

robbin, I don't deny that I was not and still am not a fan of Corbyn, for various reasons. I haven't changed my opinion and had May not called this ridiculous opportunist election (to get a mandate for Brexit, which seems to have barely been mentioned) I would have been very happy for him to be deposed before the scheduled 2020 election. However, as he's the one representing Labour I will support him, as I support the manifesto and truly believe more Tory government will destroy many of the things I care most deeply about. Even had I previously been so agin him that I was not going to vote Labour just because of him, people are allowed to change their minds. I was wavering between three parties until recently, now I've made my decision, that's not a U-turn, that's just thinking and making an informed choice, which is sort of the point of the whole shebang.

[jaywalker]

Well the betting markets are stabilising around an expectation of a Tory majority of between 75 and 100 seats. I have money on the majority being greater than this. I think the 'surprise' of this election may (unfortunately) be that the overall majority is a LOT higher than this.

It is all fairly straightforward, and VERY depressing.

- intergenerational failure (why should we care about young people)

- island self-inwardness and cultural in-breeding

- ressentiment of the lower middle-classes (who certainly have had to put up with a lot)

- dominance of atomistic individualism (shopping equals choice)

- the illusion that I did well by hard work and intelligence, so why can't they?

- failure to understand any economic principles separating real and nominal values

- mercantilist notions of trade (fill up the container with gold, we will be better off having nothing to do with foreigners)

- rejection of all compromise in negotiation (the attack on Corbyn over Ireland)

- a disgraceful and contemptible national press

- a willingness by the Conservative party to pander to xenophobia (to put it gently)

Yet we (living in the cosmopolis, reading this forum) know that over the next five years the economy will implode and those voting for this will be very badly disillusioned. A new and enlightened party or coalition will arise from the ashes. Perhaps we just have to go through this.

[????]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> jaywalker Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It is going to be raining all day tomorrow.

>

> Oh dear. That could be enough to undo any slim

> chance Labour might have.

I doubt it.

1) Rain story a bit of a myth and last happened ages ago so not really much contemporary data - and i'm not sure if any data supports it

2) Many working classes - who allegedly can't be arsed to vote when it rains - going to vote May

3) Older people less mobile and probably more likely to be stopped by rain - massively skewed towards tory voters

Sounds like one of those patronising stories middle-class lefties make up about the working classes - see also Sheep led by papers, mainly racists, etc etc

[Green Goose]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well the betting markets are stabilising around an

> expectation of a Tory majority of between 75 and

> 100 seats. I have money on the majority being

> greater than this. I think the 'surprise' of this

> election may (unfortunately) be that the overall

> majority is a LOT higher than this.

>

> It is all fairly straightforward, and VERY

> depressing.

>

> - intergenerational failure (why should we care

> about young people)

> - island self-inwardness and cultural in-breeding

> - ressentiment of the lower middle-classes (who

> certainly have had to put up with a lot)

> - dominance of atomistic individualism (shopping

> equals choice)

> - the illusion that I did well by hard work and

> intelligence, so why can't they?

> - failure to understand any economic principles

> separating real and nominal values

> - mercantilist notions of trade (fill up the

> container with gold, we will be better off having

> nothing to do with foreigners)

> - rejection of all compromise in negotiation (the

> attack on Corbyn over Ireland)

> - a disgraceful and contemptible national press

> - a willingness by the Conservative party to

> pander to xenophobia (to put it gently)

I reckon you will lose your bet. It will be much closer to, if not, a hung parliament. The young (naive & idealistic) voters are highly motivated this time and will be a major factor.

The ten points you make seem to conform to that same naive idealistic mindset.

And, for the sake of good order, your ressentiment normally appears as resentment.

[jaywalker]

I do hope you are right GG.

As for ressentiment, there was no misspelling.

The great thing is that there is hope even for you. You do not have to be able to afford to buy the Genealogy of Morals, you could just look on Wikepedia under ressentiment (if you do, please make a donation to that excellent site in penance).

The trouble you have is that people (here a German philosopher writing in the C19th) are so far ahead of you that you don't even know that you are behind.

[Green Goose]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do hope you are right GG.

>

> As for ressentiment, there was no misspelling.

>

> The great thing is that there is hope even for

> you. You do not have to be able to afford to buy

> the Genealogy of Morals, you could just look on

> Wikepedia under ressentiment (if you do, please

> make a donation to that excellent site in

> penance).

>

I raised the point, as I said, "for the sake of good order" as the normal protocol, when using foreign words, is to use italics or inverted comments. The "resentment" spelling is good enough for most of us without you having to underline your assumed intellectual/educational superiority.

You have much in common with RH and his use of divertissement.

[rendelharris]

For your information, Mr.Goose, divertissement, while obviously derived from the French as is so much of our language, is listed in the Oxford English Dictionary as an English word with its first recorded usage as such noted as 1719. Therefore only an ignoramus would think that it should be italicized or placed in inverted comments [sic]. I'm sorry if you don't like these here foreign words coming over and invading our language, perhaps you could have them tattooed on their forearms and sent elsewhere?

[red devil]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A new and enlightened party or coalition will arise from the

> ashes. Perhaps we just have to go through this.

I've thought that all along, winning this election is a poisoned chalice because of Brexit, whoever wins is going to have to deal with the economic equivalent of a bag of shite. Better the Tories screw up, at least that way a new moderate Labour leader, or if it's still run by the Momentum loons, a new progressive centrist party, has a good chance of winning the next GE, maybe even with a view to rejoining the EU. With Macron at the helm in France the EU might, just might, undergo necessary reforms.

As for this GE, not sure what it equates to in seats, but I think the Tories will win by about 12%, perhaps as high as 15%. Get ready to batten down the hatches...

[steveo]

Jay, it's great that you translate some of your stuff these days but had you considered that the obfuscatory cleverness stands in the way of you garnering a larger audience and doesn't really need to be there in the first place, unless of course you're just showing off, which I'm sure can't be the case.

[DaveR]

I, even though living in the 'cosmopolis' have serious doubts about whether, for example, the economy will implode following a May victory, and even graver doubts about the assistance we can draw from Nietzsche in explaining Jeremy Corbyn's (likely) failure to triumph in this election. In all likelihood life will go undramatically on and Corbyn will eventually shuffle off back to his former life of instinctive protest and political and economic unreality.

[Green Goose]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> For your information, Mr.Goose, divertissement,

> while obviously derived from the French as is so

> much of our language, is listed in the Oxford

> English Dictionary as an English word with its

> first recorded usage as such noted as 1719.

> Therefore only an ignoramus would think that it

> should be italicized or placed in inverted

> comments .

RH, had you used it in the context of music it would have been appropriate but your actual words were...

Quote "dealing with you is anything other than a minor divertissment in my teabreak"

Unquote

Like JayW, you were just showing off.

[Louisa]

red devil Wrote:

------------------------------------------------------

> As for this GE, not sure what it equates to in

> seats, but I think the Tories will win by about

> 12%, perhaps as high as 15%. Get ready to batten

> down the hatches...

Some of the final polls suggest similar. Though they're still all over the place. In terms of seats, you're probably looking at a 70 plus majority, which would not be enough to stop the Tory vultures circling May, unless it's in excess of 100 seats. Still possible, if those numbers materialise.

Louisa.

[rendelharris]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > For your information, Mr.Goose, divertissement,

> > while obviously derived from the French as is

> so

> > much of our language, is listed in the Oxford

> > English Dictionary as an English word with its

> > first recorded usage as such noted as 1719.

> > Therefore only an ignoramus would think that it

> > should be italicized or placed in inverted

> > comments .

>

> RH, had you used it in the context of music it

> would have been appropriate but your actual words

> were...

>

> Quote "dealing with you is anything other than a

> minor divertissment in my teabreak"

> Unquote

>

> Like JayW, you were just showing off.

Nope, wrong again, the meaning is recorded in the OED as "A minor entertainment or diversion." It does have another meaning specific to music, of a short ballet irrelevant to the plot, but that was not the sense in which I was employing it. I know you want to have Muslims tattooed then deported, but you do not, as yet, have the right to police how people choose to use language.

[jaywalker]

Well, it used to be 'virtue signalling' now it is 'showing off'.

I guess that if you think that core ideas of C19th thought are "obfuscatory cleverness" that you will remain in the dark. You suggest a 'translation' to a populism. But that is what those ideas are against. All you have to do is buy the books and see if (just perhaps?) someone had thought of things you had not? They are not expensive or all that difficult to read?

It is true that I feel very uneasy about writing about this - my class privilege is such that I have time to read and to think (and to discuss, given where I work). Yet without such a move (away from what we all take for granted as our commonsense insights) there seems to be only stupidity.

[jaywalker]

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I, even though living in the 'cosmopolis' have

> serious doubts about whether, for example, the

> economy will implode following a May victory, and

> even graver doubts about the assistance we can

> draw from Nietzsche in explaining Jeremy Corbyn's

> (likely) failure to triumph in this election. In

> all likelihood life will go undramatically on and

> Corbyn will eventually shuffle off back to his

> former life of instinctive protest and political

> and economic unreality.

glad you are so optimistic about the economy - certainly if we all were then there would be less danger. but I am not, and not by a long chalk.

but I do not understand your comment about Nietzsche. I guess to make this clear to me, you would have to say why the themes that constitute the self-legitimising narratives of voters in this election are outside of his compass. We have the spectre of millions of UKIP voters turning to the Tories, votes that May has eagerly sought and seduced - and this is true for not a few labour voters too. You think this is nothing to do with ressentiment?

[Lordship 516]

Just trying to extrapolate from the detail of the polls [such as they are].

YouGov - their national sample is a reasonable sample but their methodology is largely untested & the individual constituency samples are much too small to give a any representative result.

The other polls have their own limitations as they poll too few on a daily basis.

The poll of polls is interesting but it only illustrates daily trends [& daily bias]

Having a punt by trying to extract common data from all the polls...

If Sinn F?in continue to abstain from taking their seats in parliament then the total number of sitting MPs will likely be 644 [sinn F?in to gain 2 seats] leaving the requirement for a majority at 321 [speaker & assistants also excluded].

Conservatives - 335/355 [plus 8 NI Unionists]

Labour - 220/235 [plus 2 NI SDLP] - might lose some, win some with probably no net gain or loss

SNP - 42/47 - unlikely to hold 2015 position,

LibDem - 6/8 not enough data - but expect possible losses but little chance of gains.

May to win but not with such a great majority as some polls have predicted.

I've placed a bet on the total Tory seat projection [25 to 49 seats] - lets see if we can get a good night out on my winnings..!

[Jenny1]

In direct contrast to my behaviour twenty years ago ('Were you up for Portillo?'), I'm going to see how long I can go tomorrow without finding out the election result. Something along the lines of the Likely Lads Football Score episode. My aim is to reach 17:00 without having a clue as to the result. It'll be difficult - but not impossible, I think.

[uncleglen]

I see your favourite newspaper is trying to sway votes today on the Yahoo newsfeed...

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/prison-population-soars-nearly-40-075337574.html

[JoeLeg]

When I click that link I get something about the prison population of Australia? Are you trying to tell us something about your opinion of Guardian journalists UG?

Quite how you think that could sway votes is beyond me. Care to explain once you've restocked on tin foil?

[maxxi]

900 (it's a point of view)