Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Ashcroft phone poll, like Populus this morning, has CON

124»

Comments

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    taffys said:

    Latest forecast update: Con 283, Lab 284, LD 24, SNP 33, UKIP 4

    Election forecast UK have just forecast this (via twitter).

    That looks like an ideal result to me. Complete gridlock, which will result in no further spending cuts being able to get through.
    You seem to view spending cuts as a policy choice, rather than a necessity.

    What do you say to the fact out national debt is approaching £1.5tn and increasing at almost £100bn a year?

    Do you think we should raise taxes? Ignore it? Renege on it?
    I think we should prioritise helping OUR schools and OUR health service and OUR poor people, rather than thinking the main priority is paying random dudes on trading floors in Shanghai.
    I'm sure most people would agree with you. It still doesn't answer the question of how we will pay for it.

    Burying your head in the sand, and refusing to face reality, isn't going to make the problem go away.
    We can pay for it the same way as now. I'm not actually proposing INCREASES in spending, just maintaining at the levels we have now. If we can be running a deficit of this size now without the sky falling in and the bailiffs coming round to declare us bankrupt, we can self-evidently continue to do so.
    We are only a few years off the interest payment on our debt being larger than the deficit. Just imagine all those lovely nurses, schools and aircraft carriers that we could have if we had run sound finances.

    I wonder how much longer until the interest bill is larger than the NHS budget.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,790
    edited November 2014

    Alanbrooke.

    just total bollocks.

    If the structural deficit were down we'd be in surplus as this is the up side of the cycle.

    I think that really gets to the heart of the matter. This government came in to power promising to eliminate the deficit, and they haven't. That has been due to declining tax revenues (as well as a failure to take on such unnecessary spend such as the whole panoply of OAP benefits). Instead we have had tax cuts at both ends of the scale (for the rich who already vote Con, and for the poor who'll probably vote either Lab or Ukip). The pensioners who've escaped the cuts aren't showing their gratitude either, as they head off into the arms of Farage. If they'd gone for genuine austerity, they'd have a coherent message to put across, and could in fact be doing a lot better than they are.

    We shouldn't yet be in surplus - the economy is only been expanding for about 18 months. Even so, the deficit should ideally be about £40-50bn less than it is. Taking the decisions to have brought that about however would have probably pushed the economy back into recession in 2010-11, which wouldn't necessarily have been the wrong thing to do but would have been a very tight call. What it does mean is that significant spending reductions have to happen in the next 2-3 years to get things back on an even keel before the next global slowdown happens - if we have that long.
    I told you a while back I pointed out there was likely to be another recession in from 2016 onwards; its good to see that you've lost your complacency on the issue.

    Let me tell you something else - there is NO chance of significant spending reductions in the next few years. Instead all we'll get is magic money tree shaking and promises of yet more magic money tree shaking.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Alanbrooke.

    just total bollocks.

    If the structural deficit were down we'd be in surplus as this is the up side of the cycle.

    I think that really gets to the heart of the matter. This government came in to power promising to eliminate the deficit, and they haven't. That has been due to declining tax revenues (as well as a failure to take on such unnecessary spend such as the whole panoply of OAP benefits). Instead we have had tax cuts at both ends of the scale (for the rich who already vote Con, and for the poor who'll probably vote either Lab or Ukip). The pensioners who've escaped the cuts aren't showing their gratitude either, as they head off into the arms of Farage. If they'd gone for genuine austerity, they'd have a coherent message to put across, and could in fact be doing a lot better than they are.
    We shouldn't yet be in surplus - the economy is only been expanding for about 18 months. Even so, the deficit should ideally be about £40-50bn less than it is. Taking the decisions to have brought that about however would have probably pushed the economy back into recession in 2010-11, which wouldn't necessarily have been the wrong thing to do but would have been a very tight call. What it does mean is that significant spending reductions have to happen in the next 2-3 years to get things back on an even keel before the next global slowdown happens - if we have that long.

    .
    The tories promised to abolish the structural deficit not the cyclical one. Osborne extended the period because of the eurozone crisis and because he did not want to make more cuts against a background of eurorecession. The govt have in fact made good progress in cutting the structural deficit.
  • I've noticed a few comments here recently along the lines:

    'A house in London now worth £1m will be worth £2m in a few years time and so the poor owners will have to pay the mansion tax and will have no money left for food'.

    Hmmm

    I remember the days when getting a million quid tax free capital gain was something to rejoice in not bewail.

    Perhaps it still is outside of PB world.


  • I think that really gets to the heart of the matter. This government came in to power promising to eliminate the deficit, and they haven't. That has been due to declining tax revenues (as well as a failure to take on such unnecessary spend such as the whole panoply of OAP benefits). Instead we have had tax cuts at both ends of the scale (for the rich who already vote Con, and for the poor who'll probably vote either Lab or Ukip). The pensioners who've escaped the cuts aren't showing their gratitude either, as they head off into the arms of Farage. If they'd gone for genuine austerity, they'd have a coherent message to put across, and could in fact be doing a lot better than they are.

    We shouldn't yet be in surplus - the economy is only been expanding for about 18 months. Even so, the deficit should ideally be about £40-50bn less than it is. Taking the decisions to have brought that about however would have probably pushed the economy back into recession in 2010-11, which wouldn't necessarily have been the wrong thing to do but would have been a very tight call. What it does mean is that significant spending reductions have to happen in the next 2-3 years to get things back on an even keel before the next global slowdown happens - if we have that long.
    .
    The tories promised to abolish the structural deficit not the cyclical one. Osborne extended the period because of the eurozone crisis and because he did not want to make more cuts against a background of eurorecession. The govt have in fact made good progress in cutting the structural deficit.
    Progress has been made but there is still a long way to go before the structural deficit is eliminated. That's why I said that this year's deficit should really be more in the order of £50-60bn.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115

    Fenster said:

    Christ,the Tories need a good YouGov poll from tonight.

    What the Tories need more than anything else is for Ed Miliband to stay in charge of Labour.

    UKIP aren't going away, they'll win nowt in Scotland, little in Wales and the economy is looking a bit flaky again. But even despite all that, with Ed MIliband in charge they have a great chance.

    And the tories need also is no more defections,with bad polls like this,will some MP's be having second thoughts ?

    More defections would be bad, and there may be some. But I doubt there'll be more than another one or two, if that.

    Most Tory MPs will know that the GE campaign will squeeze UKIP out of the media and that the UKIP vote will dwindle (by how much is the killer question) when protesting stops being an option.

    They'll also know that Cameron will likely crush Miliband during the election campaign, purely by dint of the fact that Cameron looks like someone who could meet the Putins and the Obamas of this world and Miliband, well.....

  • I'm totally shocked by this, shocked.

    The architect of Phil Woolas' make the white folks angry campaign is planning to stand as a UKIP candidate in Oldham next year.

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/former-agent-shamed-labour-mp-8153294
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited November 2014

    I'm totally shocked by this, shocked. The architect of Phil Woolas' make the white folks angry campaign is planning to stand as a UKIP candidate in Oldham next year. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/former-agent-shamed-labour-mp-8153294

    Its what Keir Hardie would do. According to Hardie, the Lithuanian migrant workers in the mining industry had “filthy habits”, they lived off “garlic and oil”, and they were carriers of “the Black Death”.


  • I think that really gets to the heart of the matter. This government came in to power promising to eliminate the deficit, and they haven't. That has been due to declining tax revenues (as well as a failure to take on such unnecessary spend such as the whole panoply of OAP benefits). Instead we have had tax cuts at both ends of the scale (for the rich who already vote Con, and for the poor who'll probably vote either Lab or Ukip). The pensioners who've escaped the cuts aren't showing their gratitude either, as they head off into the arms of Farage. If they'd gone for genuine austerity, they'd have a coherent message to put across, and could in fact be doing a lot better than they are.

    We shouldn't yet be in surplus - the economy is only been expanding for about 18 months. Even so, the deficit should ideally be about £40-50bn less than it is. Taking the decisions to have brought that about however would have probably pushed the economy back into recession in 2010-11, which wouldn't necessarily have been the wrong thing to do but would have been a very tight call. What it does mean is that significant spending reductions have to happen in the next 2-3 years to get things back on an even keel before the next global slowdown happens - if we have that long.
    .
    The tories promised to abolish the structural deficit not the cyclical one. Osborne extended the period because of the eurozone crisis and because he did not want to make more cuts against a background of eurorecession. The govt have in fact made good progress in cutting the structural deficit.
    Progress has been made but there is still a long way to go before the structural deficit is eliminated. That's why I said that this year's deficit should really be more in the order of £50-60bn.
    Whatever happened to 'fixing the roof while the sun was shining' ?

    Perhaps the roofer was too busy giving the magic money tree another shake.
  • I don't know about Black Friday this week, today looks like the blackest of black Mondays for the Tories ..... they really need a very good poll later this evening from The Sun/YouGov to lift their spirits.
  • Oliver_PBOliver_PB Posts: 397
    edited November 2014
    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest single tax increase in decades?

    That VAT increase was said to be a way to increase tax revenue to reduce the deficit. Instead, the government was financially irresponsible and frittered all the revenue away.

    Of course, one might argue that it was always an ideological restructuring of the tax system rather than being a sincere way of increasing the amount of tax revenue.
  • (previous posts deleted for space)

    We shouldn't yet be in surplus - the economy is only been expanding for about 18 months. Even so, the deficit should ideally be about £40-50bn less than it is. Taking the decisions to have brought that about however would have probably pushed the economy back into recession in 2010-11, which wouldn't necessarily have been the wrong thing to do but would have been a very tight call. What it does mean is that significant spending reductions have to happen in the next 2-3 years to get things back on an even keel before the next global slowdown happens - if we have that long.

    I told you a while back I pointed out there was likely to be another recession in from 2016 onwards; its good to see that you've lost your complacency on the issue.

    Let me tell you something else - there is NO chance of significant spending reductions in the next few years. Instead all we'll get is magic money tree shaking and promises of yet more magic money tree shaking.
    I don't remember who said it but my objection to the prediction of a recession next year was because the reasoning given was that 'they happen on average every 7 years so we're due one soon', which is an epic logical failure. Recessions happen for all sorts of reasons but clockwork timing isn't one (there is, as has long been noted, a business cycle which has a rhythm of sorts and its own natural dynamics but there is nothing inherent about the timings of its upswings and downturns; at one time it was believed to be linked to sun-spot activity!).

    But yes, I am nervous about the global situation which will inevitably impact on the UK. I'm concerned about the imbalances in China, the on-going failure of the Eurozone to get out of recession, similarly Japan; I'm concerned about Britain's over-inflated housing market and to a lesser extent, financial markets; and there are other uncertainties, never mind unknown-unknowns such as wars, epidemics, acts of God and the like.

    I disagree that there is no chance of further cuts. I don't think there's an option. One of the main reasons I'm so worried as things are is that the foot is still flat to the floor - QE, 0.5% interest rates, £100bn+ deficits - which leaves no space for meaningful action if things do go bad.
  • Labour supporters are desperate for Cameron to go as Con Leader before the election

    Tory supporters are desperate for Ed to stay as Labour leader.

    I think infer from the above which party has the worst leader since Michael Foot.

    He's worse than Foot: Foot could make a speech.

  • Whatever happened to 'fixing the roof while the sun was shining' ?

    Perhaps the roofer was too busy giving the magic money tree another shake.

    Eh? You think the sun is shining?

    May I suggest you read up a bit on world economic conditions. You could start here:

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2846465/UK-businesses-optimistic-overseas-rivals-finds-Markit-report.html

    It is true that the UK, under Osborne, is doing quite extraordinarily well compared with most of the rest of the developed world, but overall world conditions are dire, especially in our biggest markets in the Eurozone.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Oliver_PB said:

    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest tax single increase in decades?

    That VAT increase was defended as a way to increase tax revenue to reduce the deficit. Instead, the government was financially irresponsible and frittered it all away.

    VAT is optional.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    He's worse than Foot: Foot could make a speech.

    If Ed was really as cr8p as you say, wouldn't labour 5% behind the tories in the polls, rather than 5% ahead??
  • I'm totally shocked by this, shocked.

    The architect of Phil Woolas' make the white folks angry campaign is planning to stand as a UKIP candidate in Oldham next year.

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/former-agent-shamed-labour-mp-8153294

    They certainly get some odd candidates but that is part of the anti-establishment attraction.

    I suggest he gets AveryLP as his agent to help with the abuse.
  • Oliver_PB said:

    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest tax single increase in decades?

    If you want to talk about 'selectively avoiding mentioning' this tax increase, perhaps you should point out that it was the biggest tax increase since Darling's bigger VAT increase a year and a bit earlier.
  • Labour supporters are desperate for Cameron to go as Con Leader before the election

    Tory supporters are desperate for Ed to stay as Labour leader.

    I think infer from the above which party has the worst leader since Michael Foot.

    He's worse than Foot: Foot could make a speech.
    The most fascinating bit of polling in the last month I discovered in the last month, Ed's net ratings this month, are only 2% better than Thatcher's net ratings in November 1990
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251

    I don't know about Black Friday this week, today looks like the blackest of black Mondays for the Tories ..... they really need a very good poll later this evening from The Sun/YouGov to lift their spirits.

    Not good but personally I'd see how the rest of the week pans out before getting overly concerned.

    Being a moderately eurosceptic but pragmatic Tory myself it does seem we are being battered on all sides by our numerous opponents. I have faith we'll get there in the end but we need to be less distracted by the silly chiff-chaff of politics as we are then playing our opponents game.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited November 2014
    It's always good to know that the nuclear deterrent is in safe hands...

    the former #2 in US nuclear force played poker in a casino and used fake chips.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/24/admiral-denies-role-in-counterfeiting-casino-chips/

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:



    If I win Islington S and Finsbury, will I be your MP?

    No (Jeremy Corbyn is), but you'd be the MP for my current workplace. So if I lose and you win I might write you letters about animal experiments. Maybe you'd be SeanT's. I wouldn't get your hopes too far up, though - Emily is popular locally, judging by the reception when I've helped in by-elections.

    Have you already been selected, or are you just going for it?


    The times they are a changin'

    Havent been selected yet, 8th Jan is D-Day
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    51 years ago today Jack Ruby shot and killed Lee Harvey Oswald.
  • Oliver_PB said:

    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest tax single increase in decades?

    If you want to talk about 'selectively avoiding mentioning' this tax increase, perhaps you should point out that it was the biggest tax increase since Darling's bigger VAT increase a year and a bit earlier.
    The VAT rise was one of the best things this government has done.

    With a country borrowing to overconsume as the UK does then increasing tax on imported consumer tat is an excellent idea.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    new thread!
  • Oliver_PBOliver_PB Posts: 397
    edited November 2014

    Oliver_PB said:

    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest tax single increase in decades?

    If you want to talk about 'selectively avoiding mentioning' this tax increase, perhaps you should point out that it was the biggest tax increase since Darling's bigger VAT increase a year and a bit earlier.
    In terms of revenue, the VAT increase dwarfed the top rate of income tax.

    ...not that I'd selectively avoid mentioning the 50% tax band when it's a policy I'm in agreement with.

    Of course, the right ideologically believe that the poorest should pay more tax while the richest should pay less.
  • Oliver_PB said:

    When talking about the deficit, why do Conservative supporters selectively avoid mentioning 2.5% VAT increase, the biggest tax single increase in decades?

    If you want to talk about 'selectively avoiding mentioning' this tax increase, perhaps you should point out that it was the biggest tax increase since Darling's bigger VAT increase a year and a bit earlier.
    The VAT rise was one of the best things this government has done.

    With a country borrowing to overconsume as the UK does then increasing tax on imported consumer tat is an excellent idea.
    Yes, I agree. Darling's dropping of VAT was an incredibly wasteful and untargeted way of buying a smidgen of extra consumer-led growth. He was right to reverse the reduction, and Osborne was right to increase it again.

    My point was more to point out the Labour hypocrisy of 'Labour VAT increases good, Tory VAT increases bad'.
  • taffys said:

    He's worse than Foot: Foot could make a speech.

    If Ed was really as cr8p as you say, wouldn't labour 5% behind the tories in the polls, rather than 5% ahead??

    Labour was polling 45% earlier this parliament. Give it time, they will be 5% behind.

    In any case, those two 5% polls are out of line with the majority of other recent ones. Either there's been a big sudden swing for no obvious reason, or we've just had a coincidence of two Labour-favourable polls released together.

    Oh, and even with the SDP defections, Foot's Labour outpolled Thatcher's Tories through until the Falklands War.

  • Whatever happened to 'fixing the roof while the sun was shining' ?

    Perhaps the roofer was too busy giving the magic money tree another shake.

    Eh? You think the sun is shining?

    May I suggest you read up a bit on world economic conditions. You could start here:

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2846465/UK-businesses-optimistic-overseas-rivals-finds-Markit-report.html

    It is true that the UK, under Osborne, is doing quite extraordinarily well compared with most of the rest of the developed world, but overall world conditions are dire, especially in our biggest markets in the Eurozone.
    I must have got the impression that the sun was shining after reading all those comments about the news 'keeps on getting better and better' etc.

    Perhaps though if the weather is dull and deteriorating we should stop shaking the magic money tree and stop making promises of more shaking of the magic money tree and instead make a start of repairing the roof.

    As you seem to have facts on hand would you be so good as to let us have the government deficits of all the EU countries. I'm sure we'd all like to see how extraordinarily well Osborne is doing compared to the other EU countries.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,566
    CD13 said:

    Nick P,

    I had an interesting weekend in Copenhagen.

    As always, very quiet and very un-citylike, but they have a strong NOTA group which is growing, and more right wing than Ukip, despite the Scandinavian background.

    Although feminism is much less strident because the battle was won decades ago.

    High taxes, high cost of living and high benefits, but they're doing something right. And yet ... just the beginnings of an irritation with the status quo.

    Fair summary IMO. Denmark has always been less firmly ideological than Sweden - basically they just think social democracy sort of works so they're sort of relaxed about it (even when the government is nominally centre-right), but if things went really pear-shaped they wouldn't carry on regardless.

    But it's still, on the whole, a healthy society (in my view).
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,566
    Fenster said:



    They'll also know that Cameron will likely crush Miliband during the election campaign, purely by dint of the fact that Cameron looks like someone who could meet the Putins and the Obamas of this world and Miliband, well.....

    Still in "attacking Miliband will deliver us victory" mode? Going well, isn't it?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Ashcroft Sample

    2010 Lab Voters 236
    2010 Con Voters 209
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Ashcroft Sample

    2010 Lab Voters 236
    2010 Con Voters 209
This discussion has been closed.