Off Topic Brexiterrs vote today

Made perfect sense to me, the audience , Fiona Bruce, the MP and the panel, summed the issue up in a simple question.

 

Really … will have to go down load QT and make sure the programme was real!

 

Depends your viewpoint on it. Yes it was very good but also pretty poor at the same time. Good if you are anti Tory but poor because when you look at the details, it only takes into consideration that he had 3 apples and is being given 2 more. It doesn't take into consideration that he was going to lose the 3 he already had.

Here is the real sum after including all the relevant details.....

He had 3 apples. He then lost these apples (after leaving them on the bus ) 3 - 3 = 0 apples.

He then took action to retain these 3 apples (contacted the bus company ) 0 + 3 = 3 apples.

He was then given 2 new apples. 3 + 2 = 5 apples.

So he had 3 apples. If he took no action to keep these 3 apples he would of lost them forever and would just have the 2 new apples. But he took the relevant action to retain the missing 3 apples. And gained the other 2 new apples in the process. Meaning, after taking action, he has 5 more apples that he would have had if he took no action at all.

Same about the nurses. If the government take no action, they will lose many more nurses. If they take the relevant action, they would retain them. Retaining them is part of the 50k more nurses.

Again, this could have all been avoided if they just said in the beginning they want to recruit 32k new nurses and gain a further 18k nurses by recruiting former nurses who have left and sort out the retention to keep existing nurses that are planning to leave the NHS. Doing it the way they did just makes them look stupid and untrustworthy as it looks like they are hiding details. But that question about apples is to me just as stupid as its not taken into consideration of the details.

 

A bit too long winded m8, original q was too the point and didn’t take 10 mins to explain, besides yours assumes numbers of leavers without knowing for sure and also assumed they’d be retained - all conjecture.

 

Long winded maybe but politics is just that. Original question was indeed to the point. A pointless point because it misses the details in between. But im sure you know that already That question was only used to take a hit at the Tories. Nothing more, nothing less. And it was effective in that regard as it made the Tories look rather stupid. But again, it could have been avoided if it was just explained properly in the first place, instead of inflating themselves. It's the Tories numbers as they are the ones making the assumptions on the amount that can be retained and the numbers who they will re-recruit back into the NHS. You are correct, it is all conjecture and that's what the voters have to think about who they trust to make the numbers work. Corbyn or Boris

Personally, I trust neither of them. Years or BS from all politicians, none are worthy of my vote. But I have to vote for either Tory or Brexit party based on my belief in democracy that a referendum was made with the promise of implementing that decision. Parliamentary losers consent allows democracy to work. These parliamentary losers need to understand that and they will never get my vote.

 

Here you change the rules and completely destroy the basis of your previous argument as an example of the nurses situation!

Also it is a supposition that x number of nurses are going to leave [ x is an unknown quantity based on past trend/s ] Reasoning is that by increasing the number with new may alter the path of any who thought it was to much, where they currently work, change their mind and not leave increase in staff. This [leaving or not] would not be therefore be a consequence of say a pay rise! We also do not know how the figures of leavers are made up as some may simply, due to outside influence [ family partner job movement] or promotion, change of skills actually leave one hospital and go another!
Another influence on nurse numbers is 6 new hospitals that in itself will create in excess of 6000 jobs .. it is not all nurses of course but if you have say 20 wards per unit that's around 350 nurses minimum to deal with that side .. look at the supply chain and likely another 1000 jobs? +
What you have to appreciate that "if they came clean on every aspect" then they would need a manifest in about 6 volumnes.
We vote in a party and hope/rely on what they say in the briefest of detail is fully worked out1 80% of the electorate are politically ignorant [ I don't mean that nastily at all ] you hear it on street interviews an tv progs .. they often only have one thing [ subject ] on their mind. Like season tickets for trains the majority of those probably don't care about voting/ or for whom [ usually only 6 in 10 peeps vote anyway ] told they are getting £x00 off their season ticket would likely vote for the MP whose party promised it .. How many pensioners would make the effort if boris suddenly said 2 days before the vote I am going to increase the £10 Christmas gift to all pensioners to £500 and the heating allowance from £200 to £500 for over 70's from 25th December 2019!!!!! ….

 

I think the person presenting was the one looked stupid, maybe not in the 5 min window of the programme but certainly afterward

It is amazing how the number of lib un dem's and Labour voters last time [ as interviewed on 6 /630pm news programmes ] come out with staunch democracy comments "wont vote for them," I VOTED REMAIN AND THE COUNTRY VOTED LEAVE" they wont get my vote this time or "I WONT BE VOTING THIS TIME!"

 

I have no idea how I changed any rules. What rules are these? And how have I destroyed my previous argument? I've been consistent with my opinions.

I have said all along that politicians take people for fools. I trust none of them. They all lie in elections and referendums. They all promise the world to seek your vote. Im not a fan of none of the leaders. I'm not keen on Farage but he is a strong leader that we need though.
I have said I understand the 50k nurses breakdown.
I have said it was stupid of the Tories to originally say 50k more nurses as it implies it will be on top of what we have now. They still keeping using this figure but it is misleading.
I have said the government should have just said 32k more nurses and will be trying to rehire as many former nurses as possible and will be improving retention, avoiding the issue they caused with misleading the numbers with inflating themselves.
I have said the apple question was stupid and pointless because the breakdown of the numbers were already made public, so the questioner would have been already aware of the breakdown.
I have said the apple question was just used to attack the Tories to make them look stupid. It worked because the following questions were all around not trusting politicians.
I have made the point how the apple question wasn't spot on and to the point, as claimed by AshtonRed, as it missed middle details. I then showed the equations to show an example of the middle details missing in the apple question and then related it to the nurses.
I have also made the point that the numbers used from the Tories about the 18k from retention and rehiring are the numbers, not mine. Its their assumptions, not mine. It is all conjecture. I just understand their numbers and where the Tories are coming from. Doesn't mean I agree with them because they should have worded it better to avoid this situation, instead of adding to the opinion of there being so much distrust.

And not sure what rules I have changed and what argument of my own that I have destroyed.

 

Ffs guys come on no room for arguments in here

 

The final countdown who going to win

 

Sounds like a prediction thread coming up @Red Robin. I'm unfortunately going for a 40 seat Tory majority with Brexit Party getting 0 seats.

 

It is nothing to do with your " I have's..... ! " nothing at all... can see your points and reasoning and to why you don't understand but find out why you don't so that you do

You made a comment

which was quite interesting and a feasible way "to explain it" ….apples. But then you swap apples for nurses viz ...[ "Same about the nurses. If the government take no action ……etc ….. " ] but the rules you were following with the apples do not follow / apply to that of the nurses. The nurses are never all lost [ = zero,/ all gone, there are none in any hospital not even just for 1 iota ] ..

 

I agree most likely a Tory majority, I think maybe not so large as you predict though , could even be hung again , I hope not , I hope someone wins because otherwise we’ll have to face more of the same.

 

I reckon it will be closer than that, I can see a majority of about 4 …. had the election been 10 days ago It would likely have been in double figures.
tonight my missus came home and said a group of the women she works with/ knows are voting labour ...they want the money for their pension loss... she would get it she was just 2 weeks from retiring date … Not sure how it would work, a sliding scale I guess going back to zero to those 6 years away? or just a payment for those a year away?

 

PollsterSample %
.......................................................COMPANY & sample number...........................CON..LAB.....LuD....BRX..GRN..SNP..UKIP..PC ..TIGfC
--3 December 2019, ComRes ---2,041 ------------------------42--- 32 ---12 ---3 ---2--- 4
3 December 2019, YouGov---1,699 --------------------------42 ---33--- 12 ---4 ---4--- 5
2 December 2019, ICM ---2,0292 ----------------------------42 ---35 ---13 ---3 ---2--- 3----- 0--- 0
2 December 2019, Kantar---1,096 ---------------------------44 ---32 ---15 ---2 ---3 ---3 ------0 -----1 ---0
30 November 2019, Survation---1,065 ----------------------42--- 33 ---11 ---3 ---4 ---3
30 November 2019, Deltapoll---1,528 -----------------------45 ---32 ---15---- 3--- 1--- 3 -----0--- 0
29 November 2019, YouGov---1,680 -------------------------43 ---34 ---13 ---2 ---3 ---4
29 November 2019, Opinium---2,018----------------------- 46- --31--- 13--- 2 ---2 ---4 ------0--- 0
29 November 2019, BMG---1,630 -----------------------------39 ---33 ---13 ---4 ---5 ---4------ 0--- 0--- 0
28 November 2019, ComRes---2,025------------------------ 43 ---33 ---13 ---4 ---3 ---3
28 November 2019, Panelbase---2,010--------------------- 42--- 34 ---13--- 4 ---3--- 3

 

Played a bit of a game on QT .. fast forwarded @ x12 speed and gave my self 3 chances to spot the apple man / woman as soon as he came on screen hit the button first time … listened to his presentation and watched the reaction … 3 or 4 times consulted some of my Friday coffee mates today and agreement was the audience thought it was hilarious as did the presenter and the greens woman said we should not treat such things as a joke … consensus was it doesn't add up .. poor way to put it ….end of ...

 

All entitled to our own opinion, I thought he nailed it , as CJS pointed out it wasn’t accurate, but still made the point that was intended, that the Tories tried to hoodwink us.

 

I still have no idea what you are talking about and it was just an example FFS

 

Agree They tried to "hoodwink us" and as a result, it backfired and now being used by the Tory rivals as more reasons to distrust the Tories and being used to mock the Tories with the comments like the apples. They put themselves in this position and even though they have since broken down the figures, the distrust is already there by how they tried to "hoodwink" and as a result no one is listening to the breakdown, especially as already pointed out by yourself - which even I agreed with - is based on assumptions! Silly Tories!

 

Another question time show - another 3 remainers vs 2 leavers.