[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Things You Thought Today - kurtster - Jul 20, 2024 - 12:52am
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 19, 2024 - 8:50pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 8:42pm
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 8:40pm
 
The Human Condition - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 7:43pm
 
favorite love songs - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 7:38pm
 
2024 Elections! - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:40pm
 
The Republican Convention - Red_Dragon - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:37pm
 
COVID-19 - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:35pm
 
Name My Band - haresfur - Jul 19, 2024 - 5:41pm
 
What makes you smile? - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 5:02pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 4:50pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 4:45pm
 
July 2024 Photo Theme - Summer - Isabeau - Jul 19, 2024 - 3:17pm
 
Russia - R_P - Jul 19, 2024 - 2:49pm
 
Trump - Isabeau - Jul 19, 2024 - 12:54pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Jul 19, 2024 - 12:03pm
 
The Obituary Page - GeneP59 - Jul 19, 2024 - 12:00pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - RPnate1 - Jul 19, 2024 - 11:34am
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Jul 19, 2024 - 10:19am
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Jul 19, 2024 - 10:14am
 
NY Times Strands - geoff_morphini - Jul 19, 2024 - 9:57am
 
Israel - R_P - Jul 19, 2024 - 9:49am
 
Song of the Day - buddy - Jul 19, 2024 - 9:29am
 
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy - sunybuny - Jul 19, 2024 - 7:02am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - hialtidude - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:58am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:07am
 
Republican Party - thisbody - Jul 18, 2024 - 11:03pm
 
Europe - thisbody - Jul 18, 2024 - 10:59pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:43pm
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:40pm
 
Living in America - black321 - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:14pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Jul 18, 2024 - 11:13am
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 10:28am
 
Jon Stewart interview - Steely_D - Jul 18, 2024 - 7:36am
 
Gardeners Photos - Beaker - Jul 18, 2024 - 5:43am
 
Project 2025 - Beaker - Jul 18, 2024 - 5:09am
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - kurtster - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:45pm
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Jul 17, 2024 - 2:04pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:51am
 
Best Song Comments. - q4Fry - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:32am
 
Rhetorical questions - sunybuny - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:29am
 
Musky Mythology - Red_Dragon - Jul 17, 2024 - 5:47am
 
What questions would you like to answer for the world? - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2024 - 5:43pm
 
Democratic Party - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 4:48pm
 
Race in America - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:53pm
 
Live Music - skyguy - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:44pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:43pm
 
New Music - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 2:26pm
 
Gimmie 5 Kurt! - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 12:30pm
 
China - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 12:05pm
 
Acoustic Guitar - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 11:08am
 
Bear! - Beaker - Jul 16, 2024 - 6:43am
 
Favorite Quotes - Isabeau - Jul 15, 2024 - 3:43pm
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - Isabeau - Jul 15, 2024 - 12:25pm
 
The Truth About (Modern) Popular Music - Proclivities - Jul 15, 2024 - 8:18am
 
Please don't ban me, but: Taylor Swift... - sunybuny - Jul 15, 2024 - 4:55am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Beaker - Jul 14, 2024 - 3:51pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jul 14, 2024 - 12:52pm
 
Media Bias - Beaker - Jul 14, 2024 - 9:46am
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Jul 14, 2024 - 7:51am
 
AH! There's an elephant in the room! - Red_Dragon - Jul 13, 2024 - 3:42pm
 
Outstanding Covers - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jul 13, 2024 - 12:49pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jul 13, 2024 - 10:34am
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2024 - 10:23am
 
RP on Mac Just Stopped Working - tourtelot - Jul 12, 2024 - 9:35pm
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - Manbird - Jul 12, 2024 - 2:51pm
 
Tech & Science - Manbird - Jul 12, 2024 - 2:46pm
 
Classic TV Curiosities - Proclivities - Jul 12, 2024 - 12:50pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jul 12, 2024 - 10:48am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Jul 12, 2024 - 7:05am
 
Regarding Birds - Jiggz - Jul 12, 2024 - 1:41am
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - thisbody - Jul 11, 2024 - 10:36pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2024 - 2:05pm
 
Record Store Day - Proclivities - Jul 11, 2024 - 8:18am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1171, 1172, 1173  Next
Post to this Topic
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 3:14pm

 rotekz wrote:
The part you quoted was not from the conclusion section and cannot be described as the conclusion of the report. Also crucial part of your quoted section is as follows:
There is no evidence that BAME support is shifting decisively in the direction of a different political party. Rather, many BAME voters are now as unsure about which way to vote as the rest of the electorate.
It is a prediction of INDECISIVENESS and nothing more.

There is no evidence or data to show that migrants now prefer to vote Tory.
 
You're right, it was from patterns and intentions, just before the conclusion. I didn't say they preferred Tory, merely that the Tories won and that migrants were moving away from Labour. Indecisiveness, along with the rest of the electorate, would have to mean less loyalty to Labour on their part, no?
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 3:09pm

 RichardPrins wrote:

No, I already pointed out that the report reached a different conclusion then you did. I did not and would not say they no longer vote for Labour. The majority probably still does, but the report, once again, makes the case that the trend is away from Labour. The tables (as well as the list of minority MPs) already showed there is some (limited) variety.

Well, the BBC does make up stuff on occasion, but that's not really relevant here.

 
The part you quoted was not from the conclusion section and cannot be described as the conclusion of the report. Also the crucial part of your quoted section is as follows:
There is no evidence that BAME support is shifting decisively in the direction of a different political party. Rather, many BAME voters are now as unsure about which way to vote as the rest of the electorate.
It is a prediction of INDECISIVENESS and nothing more.

There is no evidence or data to show that migrants now prefer to vote Tory. 


R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:52pm

 rotekz wrote:
The first two sets of data were from the report that YOU linked. Are you trying to say your report is no good? The BBC report used 2010 election data. Do you accuse the BBC of making stuff up? The fourth set of data came from the electoral commission after the 2005 election. Again are you trying to say they got it wrong? This smacks of desperation.

Now. Produce 2015 data that shows migrants no longer vote Labour. Until you do the figures that we have are those of the 2005 and 2010 general election that show migrants overwhelmingly voting for Labour. If you are going to say they no longer do you have to back it up with figures that show it.
 
No, I already pointed out that the report reached a different conclusion then you did. I did not and would not say they no longer vote for Labour. The majority probably still does, but the report, once again, makes the case that the trend is away from Labour. The tables (as well as the list of minority MPs) already showed there is some (limited) variety.

Well, the BBC does make up stuff on occasion, but that's not really relevant here.
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:44pm

 aflanigan wrote:

So you consider a single photo which may well have been photoshopped as comprehensive data to establish the voting habits of a certain class of people?

EDIT: Richard caught this as well.{#Arrowu}
 
They were screenshots of the report that Richard himself linked in the first place. Read it.
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:44pm

 RichardPrins wrote:

I might have missed it, but what was your (cold) hard data? Surely not the article by "Migrant Watch"? Or, for that matter, the tables from the report that conclude that there is a trend away from Labour among migrants?

The main winners in the elections were UKIP (like Trump, not likely to be supported by migrants) and the SNP. Big losers: LibDems, and Labour in Scotland (likely due to the SNP).

Until we have data for 2015, your air is as hot as mine.

 
The first two sets of data were from the report that YOU linked. Are you trying to say your report is no good? The BBC report used 2010 election data. Do you accuse the BBC of making stuff up? The fourth set of data came from the electoral commission after the 2005 election. Again are you trying to say they got it wrong? This smacks of desperation.

Now. Produce 2015 data that shows migrants no longer vote Labour. Until you do the figures that we have are those of the 2005 and 2010 general election that show migrants overwhelmingly voting for Labour. If you are going to say they no longer do you have to back it up with figures that show it.

 
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:31pm

 rotekz wrote:

I am the only person using actual data. 
 
So you consider a single photo which may well have been photoshopped as comprehensive data to establish the voting habits of a certain class of people?

EDIT: Richard caught this as well.{#Arrowu}

R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:28pm

 rotekz wrote:
I am the only person using actual data. You are talking about a theoretical trend for indecisiveness. It amounts to nothing whilst all the voting data shows overwhelming support for Labour. You have nothing to show that migrants changed their previous propensity to vote Labour. Produce voting figures to show migrants no longer favour Labour.
 
I might have missed it, but what was your (cold) hard data? Surely not the article by "Migrant Watch"? Or, for that matter, the tables from the report that conclude that there is a trend away from Labour among migrants?

The main winners in the elections were UKIP (like Trump, not likely to be supported by migrants) and the SNP. Big losers: LibDems, and Labour in Scotland (likely due to the SNP).

Until we have data for 2015, your air is as hot as mine.
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:17pm

 RichardPrins wrote:

The report already showed the trend based on a study up to 2015 (you would need to look at the cited study).

I don't know if there's concrete data for 2015 post-election w.r.t. minorities/migrants. More data will likely not convince you anyway.

And that's based on the trend of your previous posts. {#Wink}.

 
I am the only person using actual data. You are talking about a theoretical trend for indecisiveness. It amounts to nothing whilst all the voting data shows overwhelming support for Labour. You have nothing to show that migrants changed their previous propensity to vote Labour. Produce voting figures to show migrants no longer favour Labour.
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:10pm

 rotekz wrote:
Please provide figures that show migrants no longer overwhelmingly vote Labour. Actual data. Until you do it's all hot air.

This is a presumption and is not followed up with any data. Hard data is needed. All previous data shows overwhelming migrant support for Labour.
 
The report already showed the trend based on a study up to 2015 (you would need to look at the cited study).

I don't know if there's concrete data for 2015 post-election w.r.t. minorities/migrants. More data will likely not convince you anyway.

And that's based on the trend of your previous posts. {#Wink}
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 2:07pm

 RichardPrins wrote:
There is no evidence that BAME support is shifting decisively in the direction of a different political party. Rather, many BAME voters are now as unsure about which way to vote as the rest of the electorate.
.............................................................

And you ended up with Tories again... 

This is a presumption and is not followed up with any data. All data produced so far shows overwhelming migrant support for Labour. 

Saying they were unsure who to vote for before the 2015 election does not in any way mean they were going to vote Conservative. 
 


rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 1:58pm

 RichardPrins wrote:
 rotekz wrote:
Was Mass Immigration a Conspiracy?

Election 2015: Migrant voters 'could be decisive'

The first article talks about what happened before 2005 (in conspiratorial terms no less). That was addressed in the earlier report. A different trend with regards to voting has been apparent.

It's no secret that migrants were and are allowed to migrate to European countries. It's been happening since the 60s. It was, and still is, relatively cheap labour. That's fine by most when the economy is doing well (and certain jobs, often low-paid, can't be filled easily). It then becomes a problem when this is no longer the case.

The second article said their vote might be decisive, and it turned out to be either false (if you counted on them to vote Labour) or true (if they decided to vote something else esp. Tory).

As mentioned earlier, the Tories won anyway (and if I remember correctly most polls got it wrong).

 
Please provide figures that show migrants no longer overwhelmingly vote Labour. Actual data. Until you do it's all hot air.
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 1:54pm

 rotekz wrote:
Was Mass Immigration a Conspiracy?

Election 2015: Migrant voters 'could be decisive'

The first article talks about what happened before 2005 (in conspiratorial terms no less). That was addressed in the earlier report. A different trend with regards to voting has been apparent.

It's no secret that migrants were and are allowed to migrate to European countries. It's been happening since the 60s. It was, and still is, relatively cheap labour. That's fine by most when the economy is doing well (and certain jobs, often low-paid, can't be filled easily). It then becomes a problem when this is no longer the case.

The second article said their vote might be decisive, and it turned out to be either false (if you counted on them to vote Labour) or true (if they decided to vote something else esp. Tory).

As mentioned earlier, the Tories won anyway (and if I remember correctly most polls got it wrong).
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 1:33pm

 kurtster wrote:

I break the law and get caught, I will have to be held accountable.  Simple enough.

Get caught being here illegally, then I expect the same for that person as well.

Its so simple really ... don't get caught.  Cuz if you do  ...

 
So I take it that you will not mind us all referring to you as an illegal American?


rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 1:33pm

 RichardPrins wrote:

It mentions it is one particular district in Birmingham, and that is was organized by a young Muslim female councillor (along with another councillor). We can't know if they are all (recent) migrants either.

However, despite that you can still come up with a massive generalization, despite a report that claims a different trend? A list of ethnic political representatives shows more variety as well.

 
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/pressArticle/83

Was Mass Immigration a Conspiracy?


Mass immigration is an entirely different matter. The question now is how did it happen and what can be done about it. Was it all a Labour conspiracy? Was it sheer incompetence in government? Or was it wholesale retreat in front of the race relations lobby?

Landmark

The strongest evidence for conspiracy comes from one of Labour’s own. Andrew Neather, a previously unheard-of speechwriter for Blair, Straw and Blunkett, popped up with an article in the Evening Standard in October 2009 which gave the game away.

Immigration, he wrote, ‘didn’t just happen; the  deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000…was to open up the UK to mass immigration’.

He was at the heart of policy in September 2001, drafting the landmark speech by the then Immigration Minister Barbara Roche, and he reported ‘coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if this wasn’t its main purpose - to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

That seemed, even to him, a manoeuvre too far.

The result is now plain for all to see. Even Blair’s favourite think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), commented recently: ‘It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.’

It is not hard to see why Labour’s own apparatchiks supported the policy. Provided that the white working class didn’t cotton on, there were votes in it.

Research into voting patterns conducted for the Electoral Commission after the 2005 general election found that 80 per cent of Caribbean and African voters had voted Labour, while only about 3 per cent had voted Conservative and roughly 8 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.

The Asian vote was split about 50 per cent for Labour, 10 per cent Conservatives  and 15 per cent Liberal Democrats.
 



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31062699

Election 2015: Migrant voters 'could be decisive'


The report highlighted a challenge for the Conservatives, particularly over migrant voters.

At the 2010 election, 16% of black and ethnic minority voters chose the Tories; 68% voted Labour.

Generations of migrants had formed an image of Labour as the party that "protects migrant and minority interests, in contrast to the Conservatives", the study said.

Conservative chairman Grant Shapps acknowledged there was a "big challenge" ahead for his party, but stressed "things were changing".

"I am the first to accept that people don't necessarily move to this country and immediately think of voting Conservative.




R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 1:06pm

 rotekz wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11585886/Better-Labour-meetings-are-segregated-than-men-only-says-Harriet-Harman.html

Here is a picture of a Labour party rally in Birmingham last year.  What are the two things that jump out at you?



Not only is the audience 99% muslim but they are gender segregated as well. In the UK!

Labour has the migrant vote sown up.
 
It mentions it is one particular district in Birmingham, and that is was organized by a young Muslim female councillor (along with another councillor). We can't know if they are all (recent) migrants either.

However, despite that you can still come up with a massive generalization, despite a report that claims a different trend? A list of ethnic political representatives shows more variety as well.
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 12:46pm

 kurtster wrote:




 
and DAT'S the name of dat tune!
 
bokey

bokey Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 12:45pm

 Prodigal_SOB wrote:

     22st?
 
 

 

 I used to have a friend who according to the signage lived on E. 2th (tooth?) St.

 
East Saint Louis Toothaloo?
Prodigal_SOB

Prodigal_SOB Avatar

Location: Back Home Again in Indiana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 12:32pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

For more information please reread.

 
Well after that the font gets too difficult for us old timers to read.   It is still January though isn't it?   I know there's no baseball yet.
 

 
  
rotekz

rotekz Avatar



Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 12:27pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11585886/Better-Labour-meetings-are-segregated-than-men-only-says-Harriet-Harman.html

Here is a picture of a Labour party rally in Birmingham last year.  What are the two things that jump out at you?



Not only is the audience 99% muslim but they are gender segregated as well. In the UK!

Labour has the migrant vote sown up.
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 14, 2016 - 12:22pm

 rotekz wrote:
 RichardPrins wrote:
That's but one partial view (and from 2010).

How about migrant heavy constituencies outside London then?

Even worse - 1/20 voted Tory.
 
See my previous answer. It still applies regardless of individual snapshots.

There are several of those views in the report and it's summed up at the end, which was used in my first post that referenced this report. From 2005 on, the overall trend is changing, i.e. away from Labour.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1171, 1172, 1173  Next