Election prediction time

[Unabomber]

What are Reforms actual policies on things such as housing? It seems anyone stupid enough to vote for them is solely doing so because of the racist stuff. Would like to hear a genuine reason that doesn’t involve migrants. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

14 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

It’s great if the tories do get hammered in such a way but for the country, regardless of party, it’s never good to for one to have such a significant majority. Especially one with so many issues itself. It be great to see more Green/LD/Inp seats to hold Starmer and co accountable. He absolutely needs it. And so do we.

[Benguin]

Think we are going to see a clear indicator of why our current electoral system needs changing.

 

Reform will probably get 20% of the popular vote but only 4-5 seats. Labour will get 35-40% but get 400 seats.

 

I find it very concerning that Labour are going to have one of the biggest majority governments ever, when more than half the country haven’t voted for them. 
 

 

 

[when_you're_smiling]

6 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

What are Reforms actual policies on things such as housing? It seems anyone stupid enough to vote for them is solely doing so because of the racist stuff. Would like to hear a genuine reason that doesn’t involve migrants. 

We had a Reform leaflet through and all it said was immigration. Not a single other policy; not even the name of the local candidate. 
 

It was on Facebook but I saw someone challenged about voting Reform and the person asked them a why, particularly about his frequent pro Russia line and links with funding, etc. They responded with ‘I don’t know anything about that, I just like the bloke and I’m voting for him’.

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

1 minute ago, grobyfox1990 said:

@MarshallForEngland before the internet pile on forces you out of here would be genuinely interested in why I suspect you’re going to vote reform, with no judgment in return 

I want there to be at least some semblance of an opposition to the inevitable Labour majority and the Conservatives have shown that they are not going to provide that. Reform at least acknowledge the extent of the immigration problem which is clearly a big issue for many people. The usual weapon of accusing people of being racist for even bringing the topic up has I believe already lost much of its potency, and having Reform MPs speaking in parliament about it will help end the taboo altogether and show that there is a reasonable and wholly non-racist way of discussing it. 
 

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

If sarcasm is your main argumentative weapon here, you don't have much.

What point do you think I am trying to make with my sarcastic remark? Your responses come across as self-aggrandising and condescending. You dismiss Reform voters as gullible fools who have been hoodwinked, adding that you feel “compassion” for them as they don’t have the life experience or level of insight that you do. It doesn’t make you wrong, of course, but have you considered that this feeling of superiority you appear to enjoy might be affecting your ability to think objectively about certain things?  

[Zear0]

2 minutes ago, MarshallForEngland said:

I want there to be at least some semblance of an opposition to the inevitable Labour majority and the Conservatives have shown that they are not going to provide that. Reform at least acknowledge the extent of the immigration problem which is clearly a big issue for many people. The usual weapon of accusing people of being racist for even bringing the topic up has I believe already lost much of its potency, and having Reform MPs speaking in parliament about it will help end the taboo altogether and show that there is a reasonable and wholly non-racist way of discussing it. 
 

What point do you think I am trying to make with my sarcastic remark? Your responses come across as self-aggrandising and condescending. You dismiss Reform voters as gullible fools who have been hoodwinked, adding that you feel “compassion” for them as they don’t have the life experience or level of insight that you do. It doesn’t make you wrong, of course, but have you considered that this feeling of superiority you appear to enjoy might be affecting your ability to think objectively about certain things?  

Equally dismayed by your hero Putin's 89% of the vote then I presume? 

[Mickyblueeyes]

On the QT leaders special, there was quite a telling moment yesterday when Farage was off on one of his rants. He, someone quite careful with his words, chose to point to the audience and say: “You are all poorer because of X policy”. I thought it was quite telling he didn’t say the usual political “we”. He knows he isn’t part if the common man and find it baffling that someone who is of normal working class background would think he in anyway would represent them. 
 

As a reminder, Farage moments after the Liz Truss disaster budget tweeted: “Greatest Tory budget in years”. 

[Alf Bentley]

44 minutes ago, MarshallForEngland said:

Farage says that the man who made racist remarks on the Channel 4 documentary was an actor and presented plausible evidence in support of this, including videos of the man himself discussing the sorts of work he is available for. Has this information affected your view at all? 
 

 

C4 News broadcast video footage of confirmed, identified Reform officials/activists suggesting that the undercover C4 journalist went door-to-door campaigning with the man mentioned - so, it was Reform's suggestion, not C4's.

 

The man mentioned (a Reform volunteer, not a member/official) states that he is mainly a property developer, but does a bit of acting, which explains the videos of him discussing acting work. This is presumably easily verifiable by any competent journalist.

 

The man mentioned said he was just expressing his own genuine views and apologised to Farage/Reform for any embarrassment caused.

 

At least 2 other men in the C4 News undercover footage were shown spewing vile racist and homophobic abuse. Unlike the man mentioned, those two are confirmed Reform members/activists. Farage has now said that he disowns them and doesn't want them involved in his campaign any more. I wonder why their vile views weren't identified before they became party representatives - and how many others are out there unidentified by the chance of an undercover TV expose?

 

If you have an open mind, you'll at least give those points some consideration.....

[StanSP]

3 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

The man mentioned said he was just expressing his own genuine views and apologised to Farage/Reform for any embarrassment caused.

Speaks volumes that he apologises to Farage and Reform but not the people he actually offended. Disgusting man. 

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

 

As a reminder, Farage moments after the Liz Truss disaster budget tweeted: “Greatest Tory budget in years”. 

He’s not an economist 

he’s a simple populist with little depth 

 

he will generally do ‘well’ 

[StanSP]

20 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

What are Reforms actual policies on things such as housing? It seems anyone stupid enough to vote for them is solely doing so because of the racist stuff. Would like to hear a genuine reason that doesn’t involve migrants. 

Or how they are actually costed. 

 

I've not seen Farage give any semblance or coherent responses to valid questions when it comes to other policies or financing them. He may be some great orator as some label him, but that can and will only get him so far. There's only so much finger-pointing someone can do at the two main parties before people get bored. 

 

Reform voters will eventually see it even if they do get any seats. Their 'leader' or reps will find that their rhetoric and super right-wing views will be met appropriately with despair in parliament. And that they won't get anything done beyond immigration. 

[Lako42]

Stop the boats and burn the earth. 

 

Reform UK 

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

30 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1335nj316lo

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-29/uk-election-pro-russian-facebook-pages-coordinating/104038246

 

It is pretty much a matter of fact that effort to boost the profile of Reform UK on social media originating from Russia has been occurring. It's hardly a big intuitive leap to then think that this causes an increase in popularity for them as people are encouraged to share...questionable views that they wouldn't otherwise share and back Reform who are likewise backing those views, including by putting up signs indicating that other people should vote for them.

 

I would be interested in directly seeing what this "evidence" consists of and whether or not it entirely exonerates both Farage and his party from the claims being made, especially as this one man isn't the only one having claims leveled against him.

 

Their stance is anti-migration of most types, and that migration (given simple demographic figures) will be made up of different ehtnicities (and skin colours), which will as a matter of course disadvantage them. The official Reform Party policy is to limit migration in a similar fashion.

 

It's just a bit funny to see the Express going after Reform UK when on this matter their platforms are roughly aligned,

 

NB. It's good to have you around again - even though we disagree on the events of January 6th 2021 in the US being a coup attempt or not.

The first article simply refers to "fake accounts" in general. That there are thousands of them I think is undeniable. But the article doesn't actually make the claim that Russians are responsible for proliferating Reform UK material. In fact it simply says the following:

 

Quote

In the past decade, there have been documented attempts by hostile foreign powers, such as Russia, to sow division and promote particular points of view during Western elections. They have used networks of what social media firms call "inauthentic accounts" and what users call bots or "troll farms". Whether the actions of these accounts changed anyone’s mind is unclear.

An interesting quote from the article too:

 

Quote

The spokesman said some people wrongly believe the only way others could end up supporting Reform UK was if they had been fooled in some way by the internet.

This is what I think a lot of people making your argument don't seem to fully appreciate. It is very patronising to tell people that the reason they think like they do is because they were simply unable to resist propaganda, the implication presumably being that the accuser has somehow managed to avoid such brainwashing themselves. Lots of people disagree with you and it's not because they were tricked by an AI image on a fake Twitter account.

 

The second article actually talks about fake accounts which disseminate information on all the major parties. So it's unclear how this would affect one party more than another.

 

As for the actor, his name is Andrew Parker and that he is an actor is not in doubt. You can see the man himself in Dan Wootton's video here:

 

Daily Mail also reports that he admitted he is an actor but still claims to be a Reform canvasser. In any case, Farage immediately condemned the remarks and said nobody holding those views can be a member of the party. So exactly what is the implication here? That the things this man said are Reform policy?

 

 

[RobHawk]

17 minutes ago, MarshallForEngland said:

The first article simply refers to "fake accounts" in general. That there are thousands of them I think is undeniable. But the article doesn't actually make the claim that Russians are responsible for proliferating Reform UK material. In fact it simply says the following:

 

An interesting quote from the article too:

 

This is what I think a lot of people making your argument don't seem to fully appreciate. It is very patronising to tell people that the reason they think like they do is because they were simply unable to resist propaganda, the implication presumably being that the accuser has somehow managed to avoid such brainwashing themselves. Lots of people disagree with you and it's not because they were tricked by an AI image on a fake Twitter account.

 

The second article actually talks about fake accounts which disseminate information on all the major parties. So it's unclear how this would affect one party more than another.

 

As for the actor, his name is Andrew Parker and that he is an actor is not in doubt. You can see the man himself in Dan Wootton's video here:

 

Daily Mail also reports that he admitted he is an actor but still claims to be a Reform canvasser. In any case, Farage immediately condemned the remarks and said nobody holding those views can be a member of the party. So exactly what is the implication here? That the things this man said are Reform policy?

 

 

The question in last night's debate, which I don't believe farage ever actually answered, is why does his party keep attracted these people with racist views etc? 

 

There's a correlation whether you like it or not.

[grobyfox1990]

40 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

What are Reforms actual policies on things such as housing? It seems anyone stupid enough to vote for them is solely doing so because of the racist stuff. Would like to hear a genuine reason that doesn’t involve migrants. 

There doesn’t need to be. 8 years on from brexit the British public are too arrogant to have learned anything from it. Your post inadvertently sums it up.
If you’re on the fence about voting one way or the other, being called ‘stupid enough’ by another member of the 99% of the world to have achieved nothing remarkable in their life is only gonna entrench your view. People don’t like being preached to, they like being listened to, farage gives that illusion. Unfortunately the holier than thou nature and superiority complex is in the British persona, prob a legacy from when ‘we ruled the waves’ 

 

[kyleolly]

50 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

What are Reforms actual policies on things such as housing? It seems anyone stupid enough to vote for them is solely doing so because of the racist stuff. Would like to hear a genuine reason that doesn’t involve migrants. 

Get rid of the migrants frees up housing problem solved

[Sampson]

12 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

There doesn’t need to be. 8 years on from brexit the British public are too arrogant to have learned anything from it. Your post inadvertently sums it up.
If you’re on the fence about voting one way or the other, being called ‘stupid enough’ by another member of the 99% of the world to have achieved nothing remarkable in their life is only gonna entrench your view. People don’t like being preached to, they like being listened to, farage gives that illusion. Unfortunately the holier than thou nature and superiority complex is in the British persona, prob a legacy from when ‘we ruled the waves’ 

 

Hate this argument tbh. 
 

Plenty of people tried to reason, listen to and give grounded arguments on the benefits of EU membership during the referendum but were met with just “project fear” and “you don’t believe in Britain” over and over again. I remember a Jacob Rees-Mogg speech where he got people cheering by just saying (paraphrasing) “all these experts claiming Brexit will be bad for the UK have no faith. This is the UK of Trafalgar, D-day and Agincourt who always battle against the odds”. It was just blind calls for patriotism.

 

I think the idea that it’s people criticising Reform voters who are the ones at fault for people voting Reform and that we don’t listen to them is a nonsense tbh. Plenty of people listen to them and try to give grounded arguments against voting for Reform but none of it sinks in above 3 word sloganeering and blind calls for patriotism.

Edited 29 June by Sampson

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

22 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

C4 News broadcast video footage of confirmed, identified Reform officials/activists suggesting that the undercover C4 journalist went door-to-door campaigning with the man mentioned - so, it was Reform's suggestion, not C4's.

 

The man mentioned (a Reform volunteer, not a member/official) states that he is mainly a property developer, but does a bit of acting, which explains the videos of him discussing acting work. This is presumably easily verifiable by any competent journalist.

 

The man mentioned said he was just expressing his own genuine views and apologised to Farage/Reform for any embarrassment caused.

 

At least 2 other men in the C4 News undercover footage were shown spewing vile racist and homophobic abuse. Unlike the man mentioned, those two are confirmed Reform members/activists. Farage has now said that he disowns them and doesn't want them involved in his campaign any more. I wonder why their vile views weren't identified before they became party representatives - and how many others are out there unidentified by the chance of an undercover TV expose?

 

If you have an open mind, you'll at least give those points some consideration.....

Again, the reason why somebody disagrees with you might not be because they have an insufficiently open mind. I am open to all possibilities - it is perfectly plausible that this man, an actor who advertises his ability to do undercover work and portray a loutish character with a strong regional accent, is a genuine Reform supporter and used cartoonishly inappropriate language on camera. I have seen crazier things happen. However, I am exercising skepticism here, which I believe is the reasonable position.

 

What you don't seem to realise is that these buzzwords you have locked and loaded (spew, racist, homophobic, vile etc) have been devalued so much through overuse that fewer and fewer people are paying attention to them and they have almost lost all meaning. For some time it has been the MO of the political left to attempt to destroy the reputation of anybody who disagrees with them, especially if they offer credible opposition and have significant support like Farage does. So even if it is established that this man is who he claims to be, it will not change the minds of people who already support the party, and for those who already thought Reform was full of foaming-at-the-mouth neo-Nazis, this is yet further evidence of how right they were.

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

13 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

The question in last night's debate, which I don't believe farage ever actually answered, is why does his party keep attracted these people with racist views etc? 

 

There's a correlation whether you like it or not.

Is there? What is the correlation? I'm not being facetious, I just haven't actually seen the statistics on this. 

[StanSP]

Received 4 leaflets in the post today. 

 

1 goes into a lot of detail (LD) 

2 are just anti-Labour (Workers and Tories) 

The other is Reform which is obviously all anti-immigration 

 

Genuinely if these were the only 4 choices it'd be Lib Dems to vote for. 

 

 

[StanSP]

5 minutes ago, MarshallForEngland said:

What you don't seem to realise is that these buzzwords you have locked and loaded (spew, racist, homophobic, vile etc) have been devalued so much through overuse that fewer and fewer people are paying attention to them

Really? Is that actually correct? 

 

Perhaps if people did spew less racist and homphobic views then it wouldn't have to be so overused? 

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

54 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Equally dismayed by your hero Putin's 89% of the vote then I presume? 

Yes, the fact that the Dear Leader did not achieve 100% of the vote or more is an affront to democracy. I blame election interference from fake profiles on vkontakte.

[FoxesDeb]

12 minutes ago, MarshallForEngland said:

Again, the reason why somebody disagrees with you might not be because they have an insufficiently open mind. I am open to all possibilities - it is perfectly plausible that this man, an actor who advertises his ability to do undercover work and portray a loutish character with a strong regional accent, is a genuine Reform supporter and used cartoonishly inappropriate language on camera. I have seen crazier things happen. However, I am exercising skepticism here, which I believe is the reasonable position.

 

What you don't seem to realise is that these buzzwords you have locked and loaded (spew, racist, homophobic, vile etc) have been devalued so much through overuse that fewer and fewer people are paying attention to them and they have almost lost all meaning. For some time it has been the MO of the political left to attempt to destroy the reputation of anybody who disagrees with them, especially if they offer credible opposition and have significant support like Farage does. So even if it is established that this man is who he claims to be, it will not change the minds of people who already support the party, and for those who already thought Reform was full of foaming-at-the-mouth neo-Nazis, this is yet further evidence of how right they were.

None of those words are buzzwords, they are just words. 

[grobyfox1990]

10 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Hate this argument tbh. 
 

Plenty of people tried to reason, listen to and give grounded arguments on the benefits of EU membership during the referendum but were met with just “project fear” and “you don’t believe in Britain” over and over again. I remember a Jacob Rees-Mogg speech where he got people cheering by just saying (paraphrasing) “all these experts claiming Brexit will be bad for the UK have no faith. This is the UK of Trafalgar, D-day and Agincourt who always battle against the odds”. It was just blind calls for patriotism.

 

I think the idea that it’s people criticising Reform voters who are the ones at fault for people voting Reform and that we don’t listen to them is a nonsense tbh. Plenty of people listen to them and try to give grounded arguments against voting for Reform but none of it sinks in above 3 word sloganeering and blind calls for patriotism.

The brexit vote of 2016 was a personality vote, no doubt about that. Plenty of people may have tried to reason but they did a terrible job, it was an overwhelmingly and materially an ‘us against them’ argument to the average man. If you were met with project fear arguments in 2016, meet them back with your grounded arguments? If enough people did this, it wouldn’t have turned into a reality contest. The arrogance of brits does not allow us to stick to grounded arguments. It will always turn to emotion and mudslinging. 

This thread is presumably a microcosm of many threads happening now. Reform = stupid. Arrogance and superiority complexes are at the heart of the average British personality, imo due to empire thinking. No one has thought that ‘none of it sinks in’ because you’re presenting a sh1t and weak argument? 

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

5 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Really? Is that actually correct? 

 

Perhaps if people did spew less racist and homphobic views then it wouldn't have to be so overused? 

They are used as a cudgel to quash dissent. The reason why those words had so much power to begin with is that we lived in a society which was tolerant and civil enough to see racism and homophobia as punishable transgressions. The words had so much potency precisely because it was socially unacceptable to behave that way towards others. The effectiveness of the accusation inevitably led to its overuse and now it is simply used to damage reputations, silence or smear political opponents, and end discussions. When I read your question above, it looks no different than a religious person advancing a doctrine and accusing non-believers of being sinful heretics.