Latest Polls and Latest Odds

[O'Kelly Isley III]

8 hours ago, Fullerene said:

It is FPTP that makes England seem more right wing than it really is.  Without it, there would have been no majority government in the last fifty years (let along a whopping one).

(Obviously this assumes everyone votes the same even if the system was changed.)

I take your point that there are lots of people who are too embarrassed to admit they vote Tory.  That is equally true for Reform.

Historically FPTP has allowed the Tories in while the other parties split the vote.  In this election with both Tories and Reform chasing the same voters, the situation will be reversed.

That's fair enough, but I'm still minded that as the election draws nearer a lot of folk tempted to vote Reform will have a 'wait a minute, WTF am I doing' moment and revert to type.

[BFTD]

6 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

That's fair enough, but I'm still minded that as the election draws nearer a lot of folk tempted to vote Reform will have a 'wait a minute, WTF am I doing' moment and revert to type.

I dunno, if you weren't happy with your party and knew they were losing anyway, wouldn't you be more likely to vote for a plucky underdog (with wealthy backing, pretend that's not true) that was pursuing your values better?

The more that the polls say that the Farage Party is drawing level in a distant second place, the more likely it seems to me that Tory voters would register their outrage and feel empowered to switch. The only ones who wouldn't are the people who wouldn't be seen dead associating with dodgy used car dealer spiv types like Our Nigel.

[Granny Danger]

3 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

That's fair enough, but I'm still minded that as the election draws nearer a lot of folk tempted to vote Reform will have a 'wait a minute, WTF am I doing' moment and revert to type.

I think you credit people with a thought process many/most lack.

As someone who took an interest in politics at an early age I have always been astounded how blasé people are about the political and electoral systems and how they are governed.

There are millions of people in Britain who could write a thesis about Coronation Street plots or recite the history of Love Island winners but could not tell you who their MP is or explain what proportional representation is.

 

[Wee-Bey]

 

[Lurkst]

6 minutes ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

 

[scottsdad]

16 minutes ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

Normal Island indeed

[GordonS]

3 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

France, who were squished like a bug on a windscreen in the opening acts of the war, did as much to win WW2 as the USSR, who won the biggest battle in the history of the world and the biggest conflict in the history of the world, with 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian deaths. They suffered more casualties in individual battles 99% of people have never heard of than France lost in the entire war.

6%.

I'm done, lord take me now.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

You lot must have never seen that Maquis documentary 'allo 'allo.

[Granny Danger]

6 hours ago, GordonS said:

France, who were squished like a bug on a windscreen in the opening acts of the war, did as much to win WW2 as the USSR, who won the biggest battle in the history of the world and the biggest conflict in the history of the world, with 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian deaths. They suffered more casualties in individual battles 99% of people have never heard of than France lost in the entire war.

6%.

I'm done, lord take me now.

Im surprised that anyone is surprised at the result of this poll.

[Dunfermline Don]

10 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

I saw similar polls showing the question asked in USA, France and Germany that had a slightly different response. 
From what I remember only the German one had USSR as their top answer  

 

[BFTD]

14 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

I somehow ended up in an argument with my mother about this yesterday. A ton of stuff about WWII popped up on the telly, so our PM fucking off from the D-Day 80th anniversary commemorations came up, and I must have made one of my typically flippant, yet hilarious comments about the Russians handing Ze Germans their arses. Wouldn't have it - Britain had singularly beaten off the Nazis with little help, and had suffered more than any other nation, even the ones who were actually invaded, raped and murdered, and had concentration camps built to exterminate parts of their populace.

She's a history buff and rabid Scottish Nationalist approaching eighty. That must have been some powerful indoctrination the Greatest Generation handed out to their kids.

[Highlandmagar]

16 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

 

f**k me! We would have been creamed without the Americans and Hitler going for Russia instead of us.

[Dunfermline Don]

A lot is always made of the fact that after the fall of France. Britain stood alone against the Nazis (well apart from the rest of the Empire and troops from occupied nations that sought refuge in the UK).
 I think that causes a lot of people to think that we did more than the USA or USSR despite them contributing far more in terms of numbers. 

[scottsdad]

18 hours ago, GordonS said:

France, who were squished like a bug on a windscreen in the opening acts of the war, did as much to win WW2 as the USSR, who won the biggest battle in the history of the world and the biggest conflict in the history of the world, with 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian deaths. They suffered more casualties in individual battles 99% of people have never heard of than France lost in the entire war.

6%.

I'm done, lord take me now.

I read a book on Stalingrad a wee while back.

More German soldiers died trying and failing to take one building (called Chekov's House) than died in the entire invasion of France.

This fact sticks in the mind.

[GordonS]

6 hours ago, Highlandmagar said:

f**k me! We would have been creamed without the Americans and Hitler going for Russia instead of us.

The UK wouldn't have been creamed without the Americans, they would probably have had enough to prevent an invasion of the UK and Ireland. They fought alone(-ish) in North Africa before the yanks showed up. But they'd never have been able to invade continental Europe without the US.

An entirely feasible alternative world without Pearl Harbor is the USSR defeating the Nazis and taking over Europe. But without the huge support they got from the USA that seems unlikely too. Who knows.

If there's one thing gammon twits need to learn about WW2, it's that it was won by an international anti-facist collaboration. 

[Highlandmagar]

9 minutes ago, GordonS said:

The UK wouldn't have been creamed without the Americans, they would probably have had enough to prevent an invasion of the UK and Ireland. They fought alone(-ish) in North Africa before the yanks showed up. But they'd never have been able to invade continental Europe without the US.

An entirely feasible alternative world without Pearl Harbor is the USSR defeating the Nazis and taking over Europe. But without the huge support they got from the USA that seems unlikely too. Who knows.

If there's one thing gammon twits need to learn about WW2, it's that it was won by an international anti-facist collaboration. 

Oh. I think if Hitler hadnt opened up a second front on Russia he would have invaded us. We were on the ropes at Dunkirk

Edited June 8 by Highlandmagar

[GordonS]

52 minutes ago, Highlandmagar said:

Oh. I think if Hitler hadnt opened up a second front on Russia he would have invaded us. We were on the ropes at Dunkirk

Pushing the infantry off the continent is one thing, when all the supply lines are in your favour and against your enemy. Launching by far the biggest amphibious assault in history in the face of the British Navy and the RAF is quite another. 

[HibeeJibee]

Tbf such polls presumably find Americans saying USA and Russians saying USSR in similar proportions. It couldn't have been won without both.

(Hopefully the French do not have the brass neck to say France though... and incidentally everybody forgets the Chinese in context of defeating Japan - after all they had been at it since 1937).

However it couldn't have been won without the British Commonwealth either. For starters from mid-1940 to mid-1941 we stood alone (with the Greeks for a time); we stopped and ultimately beat the Axis in North Africa, preventing them taking the canal and Middle East oilfields; our Arctic convoys were initially important to the Soviets when they were on the ropes (more than half the tanks used in the Battle of Moscow were British supplied... in first 6 months after the eastern war began so were a quarter of Soviet medium + heavy tanks); we represented half - likely more? - of the strategic bomber offensive against Germany; contributed heavily to invasions of Italy and north-western Europe; the atom bomb project; etc. etc.

Without this and the Battle of the Atlantic would a stronger unhindered Axis eastern front have been stopped then driven back by the USSR? or taken far longer? Had we capitulated where could the Americans have invaded Europe from? Without us how much more of central/western Europe would've ended-up behind the Iron Curtain? Some sobering "what ifs" frankly.

Edited June 8 by HibeeJibee

[vikingTON]

http://theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/08/rishi-sunaks-chances-were-always-slim-and-the-numbers-just-get-worse

The 'Government handling of issues' section is absolutely mind-bogging. Surely these are the worst (notional) ratings that any UK government has ever recorded. Practically everyone thinks that the incumbent is utter shite on every issue - including a large number of Tory voters. 

Sunak must have had some indication of this before calling the election. It looks more and more probable that he just wanted to chuck it and slither across to California before the summer ends (can't blame him given the current weather TBF). 

[GordonS]

15 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Tbf such polls presumably find Americans saying USA and Russians saying USSR in similar proportions. It couldn't have been won without either.

(Hopefully the French do not have the brass neck to say France though... and incidentally everybody forgets the Chinese in context of defeating Japan - after all they had been at it since 1937).

However it couldn't have been won without the British Commonwealth either. For starters from mid-1940 to mid-1941 we stood alone (with the Greeks for a time); we stopped and ultimately beat the Axis in North Africa, preventing them taking the canal and Middle East oilfields; our Arctic convoys were important to the Soviets when they were on the ropes; we represented half (likely more?) of the strategic bomber offensive against Germany; contributed heavily to invasions of Italy and north-western Europe; the atom bomb project; etc. etc.

Without this and the Battle of the Atlantic would a stronger unhindered Axis in the eastern front have been stopped then driven back by the USSR? Had we given in where could the Americans have invaded Europe from? Without us how much more of central/western Europe would've ended-up behind the Iron Curtain? Some sobering "what ifs" frankly.

 

That's all absolutely fair, but not completely relevant to the poll, which asked which single country did the most to defeat the Nazis, not who could have done it alone. Maybe people who know more will tell me I'm wrong, but I think this might be one of those questions with an unequivocal right answer.

Incidentally hidden with the stats for the USSR is the more localised suffering - for example, Belarus lost of third of its population. And the vast majority of Poland's deaths are obviously Jews.

China's suffering was unimaginable too because of Japan's genocide and the West's failure to remember that, plus its chumminess with Japan, is one of the reasons they hate us. Plus opium, colonialism...

Meanwhile the gammon are flying Spitfires made of drones and pondering Lest We Forget.