Brent Central (Lab gain from LD) Hendon (Lab gain from Con) Hornsey & Wood Green (Lab gain from Con) Brentford & Isleworth (Lab gain from Con) Enfield North (Lab gain from Con) Ealing Central (Lab gain from Con) Old Southwark & Bermondsey (Lab gain from LD) Harrow East (Lab gain from Con) Enfield Southgate (Lab gain from Con) Ilford North (Lab gain from Con).
Better for the Tories the further out from London you go. Bit of an incumbency bonus showing through here for first time?
Yes not bad for the Cons those polls - difficult to see Labour making those 50+ blue gains they need.
agreed. Of the 4 they are losing 3 are within Labour's top 25 Tory targets and the other Harrow is going to be different due to London factors. At the same time Pudsey is within the top 25 and isn't going Labour's way. 30ish Lab gains from Tories could be the ceiling at the moment.
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
How will real people benefit by the Treasury losing money from this Non Dom change?
Its student union politics of making noise based on buzzwords without trying to be serious whatsoever.
It's even more student union tripe if you just loudly shout down any benefit. I have not heard a convincing argument with any substance to suggest any real people will suffer. Just loud shouting from the same people who signed the letter as they didnt want their Yachts sold to pay for normal families
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
They are all utter bollocks, all three of them.
The Energy Price freeze is the quickest way to higher prices, the non dom thing has proved to be a fiasco within 24 hours and combined with the 50p tax hike will reduce the tax take, thus making less available for Labour to waste on the NHS.
If you want to punish people for getting on in life then vote for Ed, if you don't want to reduce the tax take then vote for anyone else.
Nothing will lock in higher energy prices than lashing ourselves to fossil fuels, the policy of UKIP.
Outside the tiny Guido clique the non dom policy is a universal hit.
And the 50p rate will certainly raise revenues, when it is given a chance to do so rather than having its abolition conveniently pre-announced.
So that's 0/3 there - good going.
None of those policies are coherent, workable and in the case of the last two they will probably lower the tax take.
I only score 0/3 if you want to punish people, I score 3/3 if you put country before party.
How can Labour salvage the nondomnishambles? Rewrite history
@politicshome: Ed Balls tells BBC News his January non-dom comments about "people coming here for short periods of time", eg students and businesspeople.
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
How will real people benefit by the Treasury losing money from this Non Dom change?
Its student union politics of making noise based on buzzwords without trying to be serious whatsoever.
It's even more student union tripe if you just loudly shout down any benefit. I have not heard a convincing argument with any substance to suggest any real people will suffer. Just loud shouting from the same people who signed the letter as they didnt want their Yachts sold to pay for normal families
"It will cost money" - That is a convincing and substantial cost.
Didn't realise Ed Balls didn't want his Yacht sold.
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
They are all utter bollocks, all three of them.
The Energy Price freeze is the quickest way to higher prices, the non dom thing has proved to be a fiasco within 24 hours and combined with the 50p tax hike will reduce the tax take, thus making less available for Labour to waste on the NHS.
If you want to punish people for getting on in life then vote for Ed, if you don't want to reduce the tax take then vote for anyone else.
Nothing will lock in higher energy prices than lashing ourselves to fossil fuels, the policy of UKIP.
Increasing the price of energy is the _objective_ of HMG energy policy, under both the current government and the previous Labour gov't.
The theory is that higher prices will change behaviour towards using less energy.
Brent Central (Lab gain from LD) Hendon (Lab gain from Con) Hornsey & Wood Green (Lab gain from Con) Brentford & Isleworth (Lab gain from Con) Enfield North (Lab gain from Con) Ealing Central (Lab gain from Con) Old Southwark & Bermondsey (Lab gain from LD) Harrow East (Lab gain from Con) Enfield Southgate (Lab gain from Con) Ilford North (Lab gain from Con).
This might sound a bit like aftertiming but I'm not surprised to see Morecambe and Lunesdale go back Labour - the NW is a strong area for them, think I'm on Blackpool and Stockton here but idk...
I'm avoiding Morecambe personally.
Probably wise. Still cold at this time of year!
I must say Ed’s steady series of “ideas" is, IMHO, making things unnecessarily difficult for himself. They often SOUND good, but a little thought ......
Brent Central (Lab gain from LD) Hendon (Lab gain from Con) Hornsey & Wood Green (Lab gain from Con) Brentford & Isleworth (Lab gain from Con) Enfield North (Lab gain from Con) Ealing Central (Lab gain from Con) Old Southwark & Bermondsey (Lab gain from LD) Harrow East (Lab gain from Con) Enfield Southgate (Lab gain from Con) Ilford North (Lab gain from Con).
Con Holds: Finchley & Golders Green; Battersea.
I'd expect the Conservatives to hold both Southgate and Ilford North. I think Harrow East and Bermondsey are TCTC.
How can Labour salvage the nondomnishambles? Rewrite history
@politicshome: Ed Balls tells BBC News his January non-dom comments about "people coming here for short periods of time", eg students and businesspeople.
Eh? Students don't tend to have oversea's income, so non-dom doesn't impact upon them at all.
How can Labour salvage the nondomnishambles? Rewrite history
@politicshome: Ed Balls tells BBC News his January non-dom comments about "people coming here for short periods of time", eg students and businesspeople.
He's such a prick.
How long would someone last in a job outside politics, with such an unerring ability to mangle reality?
Brent Central (Lab gain from LD) Hendon (Lab gain from Con) Hornsey & Wood Green (Lab gain from Con) Brentford & Isleworth (Lab gain from Con) Enfield North (Lab gain from Con) Ealing Central (Lab gain from Con) Old Southwark & Bermondsey (Lab gain from LD) Harrow East (Lab gain from Con) Enfield Southgate (Lab gain from Con) Ilford North (Lab gain from Con).
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
They are all utter bollocks, all three of them.
The Energy Price freeze is the quickest way to higher prices, the non dom thing has proved to be a fiasco within 24 hours and combined with the 50p tax hike will reduce the tax take, thus making less available for Labour to waste on the NHS.
If you want to punish people for getting on in life then vote for Ed, if you don't want to reduce the tax take then vote for anyone else.
Nothing will lock in higher energy prices than lashing ourselves to fossil fuels, the policy of UKIP.
Outside the tiny Guido clique the non dom policy is a universal hit.
And the 50p rate will certainly raise revenues, when it is given a chance to do so rather than having its abolition conveniently pre-announced.
So that's 0/3 there - good going.
None of those policies are coherent, workable and in the case of the last two they will probably lower the tax take.
I only score 0/3 if you want to punish people, I score 3/3 if you put country before party.
They don't have to be workable or coherent, they have to look good for 48 hours. In substance here is little between government policy and Ed's comments about a review (rather than the headline grabbing "abolition") - David Gauke spoke of a reassessment and the levy came from the then Shadow Chancellor GO...
Mr. Bets, the freezing of commodity prices was known to be foolishness which could lead to shortages or even famine in the 4th century AD (Ammianus Marcellinus lambasted Julian the Apostate, of whom he was generally in favour, for just such a policy).
Mr Dancer, energy companies take the piss, ask the electorate in all the marginals if that is true and they will say yes. Your irrelevant quote of ancient socioeconomics merely proves you live in a river punting lacrosse loving fantasy world.
The people voting and suffering in this election do not find this important, they worry about take home pay and outgoing expenses.
Energy Price freeze, non dom tax crackdown, 50p rate of income tax
No wonder the Tories are thrashing about, Dave's same old line of keep it steady Ed's a bit of a drip is looking painfully exposed.
Labour are causing some serious ruptions which will appeal to everyday people in those grass root wards Labour need to win and the Tories know it.
S Thanet, Thurrock, Ilford N, Ipswich, Dudley's, Norwich
Cut away the Tory jeers and these are real policies for real people.
They are all utter bollocks, all three of them.
The Energy Price freeze is the quickest way to higher prices, the non dom thing has proved to be a fiasco within 24 hours and combined with the 50p tax hike will reduce the tax take, thus making less available for Labour to waste on the NHS.
If you want to punish people for getting on in life then vote for Ed, if you don't want to reduce the tax take then vote for anyone else.
Nothing will lock in higher energy prices than lashing ourselves to fossil fuels, the policy of UKIP.
Outside the tiny Guido clique the non dom policy is a universal hit.
And the 50p rate will certainly raise revenues, when it is given a chance to do so rather than having its abolition conveniently pre-announced.
So that's 0/3 there - good going.
None of those policies are coherent, workable and in the case of the last two they will probably lower the tax take.
I only score 0/3 if you want to punish people, I score 3/3 if you put country before party.
They don't have to be workable or coherent, they have to look good for 48 hours. In substance here is little between government policy and Ed's comments about a review (rather than the headline grabbing "abolition") - David Gauke spoke of a reassessment and the levy came from the then Shadow Chancellor GO...
The non dom bollocks didn't look good for 48 minutes
How can Labour salvage the nondomnishambles? Rewrite history
@politicshome: Ed Balls tells BBC News his January non-dom comments about "people coming here for short periods of time", eg students and businesspeople.
He's such a prick.
How long would someone last in a job outside politics, with such an unerring ability to mangle reality?
He'd be a perfect marketeer.
Anyone who refers to him/her-self as a 'marketeer' should be the first against the wall.
I've had someone say this to me: "I'm not a salesman! I'm a marketeer!"
Of this I am certain; by the end of the day, this will have cost the Tories votes. And they will be votes they can ill afford to lose.
Is that the Tom Brady who a few weeks ago said Dave's third term pledge would cost him votes and was the greatest strategic blunder since Carthage put Hannibal in charge of a large military force ?
That Tom Bradby?
Bradby has committed heresy by attacking the tribe.
Comments
(and is actually my dad's given name)
Further down the list = More likely to drop.
Brent Central (Lab gain from LD)
Hendon (Lab gain from Con)
Hornsey & Wood Green (Lab gain from Con)
Brentford & Isleworth (Lab gain from Con)
Enfield North (Lab gain from Con)
Ealing Central (Lab gain from Con)
Old Southwark & Bermondsey (Lab gain from LD)
Harrow East (Lab gain from Con)
Enfield Southgate (Lab gain from Con)
Ilford North (Lab gain from Con).
Con Holds: Finchley & Golders Green; Battersea.
Just loud shouting from the same people who signed the letter as they didnt want their Yachts sold to pay for normal families
I only score 0/3 if you want to punish people, I score 3/3 if you put country before party.
@politicshome: Ed Balls tells BBC News his January non-dom comments about "people coming here for short periods of time", eg students and businesspeople.
According to nominative determinism, you should be a cheerful Conservative.
Didn't realise Ed Balls didn't want his Yacht sold.
Con 190
Lab 180
Labour seem to need first timers and 'couldn't be bothered in 2010' to turn up.
The theory is that higher prices will change behaviour towards using less energy.
If you look at ashcroft on whether people have been contacted by one party or the other, Labour are ahead in every constituency.
Given their available cash, the tories might be planning a very big, very late push. Or they are just inefficient/lazy...
Progressive forces > 323...
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/537044601065197569
Probably wise. Still cold at this time of year!
I must say Ed’s steady series of “ideas" is, IMHO, making things unnecessarily difficult for himself. They often SOUND good, but a little thought ......
Taxing non-doms is probably the least bad.
How long would someone last in a job outside politics, with such an unerring ability to mangle reality?
As I said before, this is a poor set of marginal polls for Labour...
"The Conservatives won (in aggregate) the wards making up Ilford North in the Redbridge Council local elections last year!"
The people voting and suffering in this election do not find this important, they worry about take home pay and outgoing expenses.
In a lot of the other seats Labour's advantage over the Tories in picking up 2010 Lib Dems is much narrower.
Kippers must be spitting bricks being shown to be part of the LibLabConKip.
Anyone who refers to him/her-self as a 'marketeer' should be the first against the wall.
I've had someone say this to me:
"I'm not a salesman! I'm a marketeer!"