Labour's platform of wealth taxes, higher other taxes on those over £70k and the Ozil law. Totally anti-aspiarational.
And that's just for starters as it won't cover all their crazy spending plans.
Corbyn isn't just an old plonker, his ideas are dangerous.
It is certainly more Melenchon than Macron
I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if he proposed a 4 day or max 30hr week. Probably with some bonkers you definitely have to have Monday off if you work for even an hour on Sunday.
The defining image of the current state of Labour is perhaps the picture of the Corbyn brothers on the Telegraphs front page this morning. Reminds me of a Quentin Blake illustration of The Twits...
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Britain is a nation of entrepreneurs. We don't have massive natural resources; we are successful by going out there and trying stuff. If you tell the 5% of successful people that they will be punished for that success then they will not try the same, which means less jobs created and then more tax on everyone else.
It's a short-sighted envy-driven self-defeating policy.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Hammond's proposed minor NI rise affected even fewer and people went spare.
I don't think they really did. The Tories freaked but did the country? And that did break a promise and hit a more politically popular group?
If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.
I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.
The best constituency bets are likely to be in Labour held seats with a strong vote for both Con and UKIP. I have just had a punt on Tories take Dagenham on Sportsbook. 11/4 seemed good odds.
I backed Labour at 1/2!
Is Cruddas standing again ?
If he's standing down the 11-4 is well worth it, no bet for me if he runs.
24% may yet be a giddy aspiration for Labour come 8 June.
Would it really make a difference? They may not know about his past but they surely already know he's a dishonest bully with a very limited intellect. If they're still willing to vote for him with that cleared up, then surely the rest will just be shrugged at?
I'd be more worried, if I were Labour, that his policy offerings on tax, housing and public spending will spook potential voters fearing an imminent Fourth Great Depression (while we're still stuck in number 3).
I think you are showing your bias. Corbyn isn't popular but it's certainly not his domestic policies dragging him down.... But i think tax rises for those over 70k is probably a very well chosen figure. Will inspire outrage in those above the number... And the big fuss they make will be good press.
How much does an MP earn? To make it personal - if they could just include them in the tax rise that would be smart politics i reckon.
Not that it matters. Electorate has formed a view on Corbyn and think it will be hard to shift that.
That's a policy that might be moderately popular from a sane leader. His policies on VAT, of which private school fees were just the start, might be rather less so.
Similarly his policy on rail nationalisation might be popular, his threats to ban petrol cars much less so.
Overall, even allowing for his poor quality and personal unpleasantness, it is his policy offering that will sink him. The problem is that the Labour left are too grossly unselfaware to realise this.
Hmm... Certainly agree on cars. Its what 7% in private schools - i can see that being popular actually.
I don't know what his policy is on VAT otherwise... I think the idea that tax take will remain constant is pretty clever.
Maybe it would be better for labour if good ideas didn't get proposed and then tarred with the label that Corbyn said that!
Thatcher was wrong to prioritise the establishment of the Single Market, was she?
You are doing it again. How can you look at a single graph that dramatically over simplifies something as complicated as trade and then attribute growth to one factor? The are hundreds of things that affect trade, many of them outside the remit of government.
Saying EU membership is responsible for UK trade growth is like saying the Merlin engine is why we won the Second World War.
Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.
I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.
I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal US
She is not forgetting it at all. She is merely pointing out that humanism/atheism (a belief in loving your fellow human, rather than a cloud in the sky) is growing. Which it is. She makes a good point.
Though still very much a minority view globally and of course plenty of hospitals, hostels and schools worldwide are still provided by religious bodies
Yes, but that wasn't the point she was making, so your self-appointed role of PB Policeman wasn't needed here!
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Britain is a nation of entrepreneurs. We don't have massive natural resources; we are successful by going out there and trying stuff. If you tell the 5% of successful people that they will be punished for that success then they will not try the same, which means less jobs and then more tax on everyone else.
It's a short-sighted envy-driven self-defeating policy.
Which is presumably why Corbyn and McD love it.
If the election turns into this argument vs. Labour saying we will tax those over 70k - Labour will do a lot better than people think.
Thatcher was wrong to prioritise the establishment of the Single Market, was she?
You are doing it again. How can you look at a single graph that dramatically over simplifies something as complicated as trade and then attribute growth to one factor? The are hundreds of things that affect trade, many of them outside the remit of government.
Saying EU membership is responsible for UK trade growth is like saying the Merlin engine is why we won the Second World War.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I imagine very few media journalists are on £70k+. Perhaps a select few with with side income/publishing royalties etc, but i'd guess 99% of journos are on somewhere between 15k and 50k.
Bet all those you see on screen with the Beeb are over £70k
Perhaps we should spend a bit more money on the NHS and a bit less on overpaid BBC presenters ? Do they add value ? I'd have been happy for them to give Clarkson a £30 million contract (Top Gear was an international cash cow) but £150k for a common or garden newsreader is too much.
I suspect someone in the South East on £70-80k would by no means think they were rich, or that their neighbours would think they were so.
Go up to the North East or North West, or indeed much of Wales and the South West and I think things might seem different.
Even in areas of the country which are poorer I would be quite surprised if people consider a wage of £70k makes someone rich. Very well off maybe, but actually rich? £70k is well below the threshold for the "1%". I'm not even against people paying more tax, it's the definition of rich that I'm disagreeing with.
TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.
I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.
I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.
Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP
Hard for them to lose any to SNP given they have so few.
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Hammond's proposed minor NI rise affected even fewer and people went spare.
And that was quite a reasonable measure to address a growing unfairness in NI.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I imagine very few media journalists are on £70k+. Perhaps a select few with with side income/publishing royalties etc, but i'd guess 99% of journos are on somewhere between 15k and 50k.
Bet all those you see on screen with the Beeb are over £70k
Perhaps we should spend a bit more money on the NHS and a bit less on overpaid BBC presenters ? Do they add value ? I'd have been happy for them to give Clarkson a £30 million contract (Top Gear was an international cash cow) but £150k for a common or garden newsreader is too much.
It irritates me that the BBC makes people famous and then pays them big money for making them famous.
What could possibly have happened in 1973 that gave a big and long-lasting boost to the UK economy?
Are you attributing that to one thing? Because that would be truly economically illiterate.
Over the last few decades global trade barriers have come down, currencies are now generally free floating, telecommunications advances have made a huge difference to trade, containerisation and ever larger ships have dramatically cut costs, and labour costs in developing economies are tiny.
I would put EU membership quite far down the list of significant changes to UK trade.
As a manufacturer of goods, I agree global trading of goods is much easier these days. I export outside EC a third of goods I make. My technical service sales are 90% UK based and 10% EC based. Brexit is not a big deal for UK manufacturers but could be a bad day for technical services such as banking, lawyers, consultants etc.
You mean bad for the Tories chums so stuff the rest
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
I earn under 30 grand a year. Obviously, I'm aware of people around me such as doctors and solicitors who are high earners, but no-one I know well earns anything like 70k a year. A few friends are in the construction trades and they're doing well, but not 70 grand well. I'm not the sort to be jealous and demand that the rich get squeezed until they squeak, I've made my choices in life and live comfortably enough so far, but PB.com does seem to be a bit out of touch with earnings and wealth. 70 grand would be life changing for the vast majority of the population!
There's no way VAT on schools would put two thirds out of business. Either parents would pay more, schools would cut costs or some combination of the two.
FFS.
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
Most parents who pay for private schooling have to live right on the margins in order to do so. In Bristol, at Redland school where I used to do a lot of work in music, it was extremely rare to see a parent with a car less than four years old, and about half of all holidays were spent camping in Devon. Do you think they could afford a 20% rise? Could they heck. And remember if even half of them can't, the school shuts.
There are five significant private schools in this area plus one very small one which probably wouldn't be affected - Chase Grammar in Cannock, Stafford Grammar, Abbots Bromley, Lichfield Cathedral and Denstone in Uttoxeter. The effect of this policy would in my judgement be to shut the first three overnight, and place severe pressure on Lichfield. Denstone has a different model and would probably be unaffected. That's a cool 1500 extra school places needed in the state system here in just one term. The state system is already at breaking point. This policy with its concomitant vast rise in costs would smash it entirely. Classes of 75 would appear possible. Thanks a bunch for wishing that on me.
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?
Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.
I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.
I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal US
She is not forgetting it at all. She is merely pointing out that humanism/atheism (a belief in loving your fellow human, rather than a cloud in the sky) is growing. Which it is. She makes a good point.
Though still very much a minority view globally and of course plenty of hospitals, hostels and schools worldwide are still provided by religious bodies
Yes, but that wasn't the point she was making, so your self-appointed role of PB Policeman wasn't needed here!
Her point that religious thinking was now a minority view was wrong on a global perspective
If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.
I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.
The best constituency bets are likely to be in Labour held seats with a strong vote for both Con and UKIP. I have just had a punt on Tories take Dagenham on Sportsbook. 11/4 seemed good odds.
I backed Labour at 1/2!
Is Cruddas standing again ?
If he's standing down the 11-4 is well worth it, no bet for me if he runs.
Not sure actually. I reckon he will run. It's 2/5 now
Labour surely can't lose Dagenham? That would be something.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
I earn under 30 grand a year. Obviously, I'm aware of people around me such as doctors and solicitors who are high earners, but no-one I know well earns anything like 70k a year. A few friends are in the construction trades and they're doing well, but not 70 grand well. I'm not the sort to be jealous and demand that the rich get squeezed until they squeak, I've made my choices in life and live comfortably enough so far, but PB.com does seem to be a bit out of touch with earnings and wealth. 70 grand would be life changing for the vast majority of the population!
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
I was going to say that, but I could not believe that anyone prepared to call other posters "economically illiterate" would fail to realise it. Has he posted the wrong graph, or does he have less graph-fu than the average 8 year old?
It was almost flat at the beginning and big upturn coincided with EU, methinks it is you and cyclefree in your pomposity that are the illiterate idiots. Neither are quite as smart as you think you are , by a long way.
Indeed the LDs are closer to Macron than Corbyn Labour
Farron's positioning on this is interesting. Despite the Conservative propaganda, the notion of an anti-Conservative pact of Sturgeon, Corbyn and Farron is about as likely as believing the Bogeyman will carry off your children in the night if you don't vote Conservative.
It's propaganda but has much less validity than the 2015 equivalent.
Even though some on here claim the LDs have shifted to the Left under Farron, the truth is there is no constituency for working with a minority Labour Government led by Corbyn. It may sound hard to believe for some but you don't have to run off to the Conservatives to find Corbyn and his policies impossible to support.
As for the Conservatives, they've stacked the cards so they have to hold a winning hand by which I mean IF May's electoral gamble fails, the consequences are unpleasant and hard to resolve. Would May survive such a failure - the events of February 1974 fatally wounded Heath albeit it took another defeat to get the rebels moving - ?
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
Islington South could be one to watch. Both teams have a very good ground game; Thornberry isn't as hard working an MP herself as her colleague over the border, and given her character she has to be high up the league table for potential gaffe-of-the-campaign. Islington is very Remain and Labour's stance won't have gone down well. One handicap for the LibDems may be the need to send activists to nearby target seats, however.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think. To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
I earn under 30 grand a year. Obviously, I'm aware of people around me such as doctors and solicitors who are high earners, but no-one I know well earns anything like 70k a year. A few friends are in the construction trades and they're doing well, but not 70 grand well. I'm not the sort to be jealous and demand that the rich get squeezed until they squeak, I've made my choices in life and live comfortably enough so far, but PB.com does seem to be a bit out of touch with earnings and wealth. 70 grand would be life changing for the vast majority of the population!
targetting the rich is fair game but that 70k figure should be 100k. 100k is a good figure to run with...
It's arbitrary, but it just feels like a good cut off if we try to define rich - I'd double and then some my wages if I was on 70k, I'd consider it very well off, but possibly not rich, but I odn't know that anyone could claim to be merely well off if on 6 figures.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
In some ways it's a bit worse than the figures alone. Yesterday on Radio 4 McDonnell was invited to define the rich — because he wanted them to pay a lot more tax — and he gave a figure of £70k to £80k as the level of income where someone becomes rich. Now I would certainly agree that they are well off, but I doubt many people on £70k consider themselves rich. And many people earning less than £70k will think "if that's rich, I must be well off and they will be coming for me next".
I suspect someone in the South East on £70-80k would by no means think they were rich, or that their neighbours would think they were so.
Go up to the North East or North West, or indeed much of Wales and the South West and I think things might seem different.
Ken Livingstone made this point when analysing Labour's surprise defeat in 1992 -- that thresholds needed to take account of people's aspirations as well as their current situations.
TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.
I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.
I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.
Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP
Unfortunately that does not really speak to the longer term chances of the union. They did better than coukd have been dreamed last time, losing a handful of seats doesn't make them not the most popular party in Scotland and a few percentage points from victory.
If the SNP lose any seats though May will use that as an excuse to ignore Sturgeon's indyref2 demands for the foreseeable future
I'm glad you see it as a mere excuse.
A pretty poor one too. There were good, sound reasons for delaying the demands before the GE was called, but they don't look sustainable anymore, claiming the qualitative difference between a GE and an IndyRef is so significant as to make one ok and the other not does not stack up in my view.
Regarding Cat Smith in Lancaster... in 2015 the student vote made the difference, there are two universities in the town and the sitting MP, Eric Ollerenshaw, had seemingly gone out of his way to antagonise the student unions over tuition fees and rises in university accommodation fees... there was a big registration and GOTV effort for Smith on campus.
Look out for similar this time around, it may be that the absence of Eric, the short timescales and the fact that exams will be over for some or underway for others should hit the student turn out. Added to which, there are likely to be student defections to the Greens and LDs as a result of Smith supporting Corbyn on the A50 votes.
A solid, local Tory candidate with the right Brexit credentials should be favourite. The odds look about right.
Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.
I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.
I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal US
She is not forgetting it at all. She is merely pointing out that humanism/atheism (a belief in loving your fellow human, rather than a cloud in the sky) is growing. Which it is. She makes a good point.
Though still very much a minority view globally and of course plenty of hospitals, hostels and schools worldwide are still provided by religious bodies
Yes, but that wasn't the point she was making, so your self-appointed role of PB Policeman wasn't needed here!
Her point that religious thinking was now a minority view was wrong on a global perspective
If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.
I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.
The best constituency bets are likely to be in Labour held seats with a strong vote for both Con and UKIP. I have just had a punt on Tories take Dagenham on Sportsbook. 11/4 seemed good odds.
I backed Labour at 1/2!
Is Cruddas standing again ?
If he's standing down the 11-4 is well worth it, no bet for me if he runs.
Not sure actually. I reckon he will run. It's 2/5 now
Labour surely can't lose Dagenham? That would be something.
Probably not, but betting on Labour feels all kind of wrong !
Labour more votes than Lib Dems @ 1.2 is the only positive bet I have on Lab at this GE. Think there was more value in the mayorals - bloody Gorton could be voided though.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
If the ball comes lose from the scrum and all that. If you go for it, then good luck to you.
Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.
I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.
I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal US
I'm not forgetting - I'm well aware of what many countries in Africa and the Middle East think about homosexuality, contraception etc. However as a western country, the US should arguably be far more closer to Western views on these matters than non Western countries.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
That's a lazy argument from Naughtie on the basis that MLP's main attraction is that she's on the right, rather than that she's anti-establishment.
You're quite right that MLP's best chance is against the uber-establishment candidate with the corruption charges hanging over him.
If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.
I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.
The best constituency bets are likely to be in Labour held seats with a strong vote for both Con and UKIP. I have just had a punt on Tories take Dagenham on Sportsbook. 11/4 seemed good odds.
I appreciate that I have a huge vested interest in it as the constituency's Conservative Association's chairman but let me mention Hemsworth. This used to be absolutely rock-solid Labour - it had a 70% Lab share in 1997 and as high as 85% in the 1960s - but times have changed. Trickett only won 51% in 2015, with Con and UKIP in the low 20s a piece. It was heavily Leave and ticks the boxes matching the other demographics that have seen disproportional swings since the last GE. I'm not saying it'll be a gain. It probably won't be a target and will have such activist support as is willing asked to help out in Wakefield, Dewsbury and Morley & Outwood. But it's the sort of seat which if the 20+ poll leads remain, might come onto the radar.
You're years behind DH.
I mentioned in 2009 that Hemsworth was trending Conservatives and would be winnable one day.
And got a derisive response from a certain Bradford Conservative who's name I forget.
I remember driving through the constituency in 2015 and being struck by the number of new housing developments - is that still happening ?
Further thought to Hemsworth.
It is adjacent to Doncaster North and in the constituencies around there Labour did significantly better than average in 2015.
Was there an EdM factor (party leaders always have an effect to some extent) and how much will it hurt Labour now that it no longer applies.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
There's no way VAT on schools would put two thirds out of business. Either parents would pay more, schools would cut costs or some combination of the two.
FFS.
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
Most parents who pay for private schooling have to live right on the margins in order to do so. In Bristol, at Redland school where I used to do a lot of work in music, it was extremely rare to see a parent with a car less than four years old, and about half of all holidays were spent camping in Devon. Do you think they could afford a 20% rise? Could they heck. And remember if even half of them can't, the school shuts.
There are five significant private schools in this area plus one very small one which probably wouldn't be affected - Chase Grammar in Cannock, Stafford Grammar, Abbots Bromley, Lichfield Cathedral and Denstone in Uttoxeter. The effect of this policy would in my judgement be to shut the first three overnight, and place severe pressure on Lichfield. Denstone has a different model and would probably be unaffected. That's a cool 1500 extra school places needed in the state system here in just one term. The state system is already at breaking point. This policy with its concomitant vast rise in costs would smash it entirely. Classes of 75 would appear possible. Thanks a bunch for wishing that on me.
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?
Hear Hear , Labour are just crap. Much as I hate the Tories , how could anyone vote for these labour dullards.
Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.
I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.
I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal US
Parts of Eastern Europe are strongly athiestic. Supposedly the Czech Republic is the European country with the most identifying as Athiest.
Remarkeably considering its illegality, the same percentage of Saudis identify as Athiests than Americans, 5%.
John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
In some ways it's a bit worse than the figures alone. Yesterday on Radio 4 McDonnell was invited to define the rich — because he wanted them to pay a lot more tax — and he gave a figure of £70k to £80k as the level of income where someone becomes rich. Now I would certainly agree that they are well off, but I doubt many people on £70k consider themselves rich. And many people earning less than £70k will think "if that's rich, I must be well off and they will be coming for me next".
I suspect someone in the South East on £70-80k would by no means think they were rich, or that their neighbours would think they were so.
Go up to the North East or North West, or indeed much of Wales and the South West and I think things might seem different.
Ken Livingstone made this point when analysing Labour's surprise defeat in 1992 -- that thresholds needed to take account of people's aspirations as well as their current situations.
Gods teeth, am I on the same side as the newt fancier! Seriously, though it was always an issue in the NHS when I was working, and now my grandchildren are facing it as teachers.
“Why don’t you move up North, Jack (and fiancee, both teachers)? You’ll easily get a place there,’ Routine family phrase lately.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
Mr. Urquhart, a shame, but unsurprising. Neil and Raworth would be much better. I suspect we'll end up with Huw Edwards once Dimbleby stops doing it.
Nah the 2125 election will be fronted by Dimbleby's head in a jar.
That's not entirely impossible.
By then someone could create an AI bot that provides the likely responses someone could have made, especially if there's a lot of raw material to work from (as there is in his case).
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
Will there be a high profile Labour scalp? There will be scalps but most of the people you name aren't high profile in their own kitchens. That's the failure of Labour since 2010 -- no-one knows, or cares, who they are. Dianne Abbot is more famous than that lot, barring Ed Miliband.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
Compared to the disastrous result you look set for, World War III would have been considerably less destructive to Labour. There might have been survivors of that. If my interlocutor this morning is typical, a pig-headed refusal to face reality coupled with unworkable policies designed to make some obscure character point are giving you a real chance of a complete wipeout.
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Corbyn would probably fold the royal even if he had it.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
Well that's made my morning... Good luck Dr Palmer.
I would be really enjoying the total destruction of the Corbyn left if it did not involve the coronation of Theresa May. It's a shame that she is the price we must pay for the humiliation of the far left.
Always amuses me that the CPS in recent years charged and oversaw the conviction of several sitting MPs, including a cabinet minister, the DPP at the time is now a prominent shadow cabinet minister.
Glad you've downgraded from "convicted" to "oversaw the conviction" but they didn't really. That's the judge's role. The CPS is naught but the state prosecutor.
Clue's in the name...
They prosecute but they also make the charging decision.
Yes, but that's not "overseeing the conviction" - don't forget my mother and Keir Starmer had a number of run ins on the role and purpose of the CPS...!
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
Despite some heavy mistrading my spreadsheet tells me my book is worth £228 this morning:
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
Would be fun to see Ed Miliband and Owen Who booted out...
TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.
I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.
I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.
Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP
Unfortunately that does not really speak to the longer term chances of the union. They did better than coukd have been dreamed last time, losing a handful of seats doesn't make them not the most popular party in Scotland and a few percentage points from victory.
If the SNP lose any seats though May will use that as an excuse to ignore Sturgeon's indyref2 demands for the foreseeable future
I'm glad you see it as a mere excuse.
A pretty poor one too. There were good, sound reasons for delaying the demands before the GE was called, but they don't look sustainable anymore, claiming the qualitative difference between a GE and an IndyRef is so significant as to make one ok and the other not does not stack up in my view.
Just so. I look forward to certain parties on here quantifying exactly what constitutes a decisive, strong mandate that allows a leader and her party to to follow through on their stated aims. I strongly suspect that the figures will differ south and north of the Tweed.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
I think undecideds are more likely to break for the inoffensive Macron than anywhere else.
Good luck to him. If only we had such a sane centrist here with a chance of winning.
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Corbyn would probably fold the royal even if he had it.
He is a republican - it's outrageous royal cards are worth more than the hard working underclass cards, not even permitted names but numbered instead.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
James is just wrong. It's Macron who is best placed by a clear margin (66-34), presumably because he's more transfer-friendly than Fillon (58-42 vs Le Pen). Melanchon vs Le Pen is 60-40.
Macron seems to be breaking away from the pack and should probably be odds-on again.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
I would be really enjoying the total destruction of the Corbyn left if it did not involve the coronation of Theresa May. It's a shame that she is the price we must pay for the humiliation of the far left.
You have to destroy to rebuild. Ten years from now we'll probably be talking about an imminent Labour landslide,
There's no way VAT on schools would put two thirds out of business. Either parents would pay more, schools would cut costs or some combination of the two.
FFS.
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
Most parents who pay for private schooling have to live right on the margins in order to do so. In Bristol, at Redland school where I used to do a lot of work in music, it was extremely rare to see a parent with a car less than four years old, and about half of all holidays were spent camping in Devon. Do you think they could afford a 20% rise? Could they heck. And remember if even half of them can't, the school shuts.
There are five significant private schools in this area plus one very small one which probably wouldn't be affected - Chase Grammar in Cannock, Stafford Grammar, Abbots Bromley, Lichfield Cathedral and Denstone in Uttoxeter. The effect of this policy would in my judgement be to shut the first three overnight, and place severe pressure on Lichfield. Denstone has a different model and would probably be unaffected. That's a cool 1500 extra school places needed in the state system here in just one term. The state system is already at breaking point. This policy with its concomitant vast rise in costs would smash it entirely. Classes of 75 would appear possible. Thanks a bunch for wishing that on me.
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?
Hear Hear , Labour are just crap. Much as I hate the Tories , how could anyone vote for these labour dullards.
I wish I could vote SNP down here in London! The only progressive party with any credibility at the moment.
Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
If the ball comes lose from the scrum and all that. If you go for it, then good luck to you.
Perhaps but if you can do nothing useful with it, then you're only going to be flattened.
TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.
I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.
I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.
Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP
Unfortunately that does not really speak to the longer term chances of the union. They did better than coukd have been dreamed last time, losing a handful of seats doesn't make them not the most popular party in Scotland and a few percentage points from victory.
If the SNP lose any seats though May will use that as an excuse to ignore Sturgeon's indyref2 demands for the foreseeable future
I'm glad you see it as a mere excuse.
A pretty poor one too. There were good, sound reasons for delaying the demands before the GE was called, but they don't look sustainable anymore, claiming the qualitative difference between a GE and an IndyRef is so significant as to make one ok and the other not does not stack up in my view.
Just so. I look forward to certain parties on here quantifying exactly what constitutes a decisive, strong mandate that allows a leader and her party to to follow through on their stated aims. I strongly suspect that the figures will differ south and north of the Tweed.
Simple.
50%+ of the vote for separatist parties. That's an unanswerable demand for a second referendum.
You managed it handsomely last time - around 51.5%. Are you saying you are not confident of doing as well again?
The high probability of that figure being reached plus torpedoing her own argument that a referendum would be too disruptive is one of the reasons I am very surprised May went for an election.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
James is just wrong. It's Macron who is best placed by a clear margin (66-34), presumably because he's more transfer-friendly than Fillon (58-42 vs Le Pen). Melanchon vs Le Pen is 60-40.
Macron seems to be breaking away from the pack and should probably be odds-on again.
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Corbyn would probably fold the royal even if he had it.
He is a republican - it's outrageous royal cards are worth more than the hard working underclass cards, not even permitted names but numbered instead.
The Ace is not royalty, and is named, and is the most powerful card in the pack.
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
Will there be a high profile Labour scalp? There will be scalps but most of the people you name aren't high profile in their own kitchens. That's the failure of Labour since 2010 -- no-one knows, or cares, who they are. Dianne Abbot is more famous than that lot, barring Ed Miliband.
Labour's failure since 2010 is more based on policy than people. Even though there are credible left-wing policies that would be supported by many, Labour has completely failed to articulate them.
This is as true of Ed Miliband (who I blame for Labour's plight) as of Corbyn (who I see more as a victim of an impossible set of circumstances).
The steel trap has been sprung by Teresa May and it is Corbyn in the trap. But it is vacuous, ambitious Ed Miliband who should be, so I hope the Portillo moment awaits him.
I would be really enjoying the total destruction of the Corbyn left if it did not involve the coronation of Theresa May. It's a shame that she is the price we must pay for the humiliation of the far left.
You have to destroy to rebuild. Ten years from now we'll probably be talking about an imminent Labour landslide,
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
James is just wrong. It's Macron who is best placed by a clear margin (66-34), presumably because he's more transfer-friendly than Fillon (58-42 vs Le Pen). Melanchon vs Le Pen is 60-40.
Macron seems to be breaking away from the pack and should probably be odds-on again.
On the £70k vs £100k thing, the point is that as soon as you get embroiled in a "who is rich?" debate, you're onto a loser.
The line has to be, "If you're doing well by doing good, that's great - we're happy for you, and you're our kind of person. We're all about people who work hard (or want to but are on zero-hours contracts, disabled, thrown out of work by heartless bosses etc) whether that hard work gives them £10k or £250k. We want everyone to pay and do their fair share, regardless of income. But some people aren't, and if you're tax dodging, or stealing benefits, or treating employees appallingly, you should indeed be worried about a Labour Government..."
It's a bit motherhood and apple pie, but "who exactly are the rich people you plan to screw?" is just a toxic conversation to get into - you can't win with it.
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Corbyn would probably fold the royal even if he had it.
Yes, he held a high full house earlier this week with the No Confidence option and mucked it.
Catching the top of the hour sky news with jezza in full on rant mode, I have a headache after 2 minutes of it, let alone 2 months. He sounds like the nutters you get at speakers corner.
Still can't get over that ludicrous poll last night. Labour on 24%? Who could believe that?
and thats when all the Con voters are supposedly on hols skiing or sunning themselves
Surely they are back by now?
I mentioned to my wife that it looks like I would be spending time up in Blairgowrie again this election as it is a target Tory seat. She suggested I pop into the High School and teach some maths whilst I was there. The High School in John Swinney's seat (Minister for Education) wrote to parents asking if they could help as the exams approached as they didn't have enough maths teachers. Not sure about Salmond but the SNP's obsession with constitutional matters, as opposed to, you know, running the country, just might bite them this time.
we.re still on hols in the Midlands
Ive a bet with malc and JPJ2 re Salmond. More on the "brave" end of the spectrum but should provide 7 weeks of crack as I try to get malc to cough up early :-)
Pity TGOHF was not as good at putting his money where his mouth is, he ran away when asked to back his position.
malc - if you could stop being an utter cockwomble for 5 minutes you would see I replied in the original thread.
If you want to frame something around over/under 50 SNPs MPs post the GE then would be delighted to have a sporting wager.
I would be really enjoying the total destruction of the Corbyn left if it did not involve the coronation of Theresa May. It's a shame that she is the price we must pay for the humiliation of the far left.
The far left do not humiliate that easily. The media will be blamed for poisoning the message of socialist purity and they will simply have to entrench and continue the battle, etc, etc, dribble, dribble, eyes swivelling in sockets ....
The high probability of that figure being reached plus torpedoing her own argument that a referendum would be too disruptive is one of the reasons I am very surprised May went for an election.
Perhaps you're misreading her bottom line. Besides, if, reluctantly and with a heavy heart, she conceded that now is the the time and lost, it would also give her a get-out clause for all the cast-iron Brexit promises she's about to make.
Macron appears to be edging towards the presidency.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
James Naughtie on R4 this am was pushing the odd line that Fillon v MLP in the last round was the best chance for MLP getting beaten. Not a great expert, but from what I've gathered on here that would be the best scenario for MLP?
Have said for some time that MLP is not the certainty to reach the runoff, as has been thought. She has lost about 5% of her support in the polls in the past month and I am pretty sure that there will be at least 2-3% of shy Fillon supporters.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
James is just wrong. It's Macron who is best placed by a clear margin (66-34), presumably because he's more transfer-friendly than Fillon (58-42 vs Le Pen). Melanchon vs Le Pen is 60-40.
Macron seems to be breaking away from the pack and should probably be odds-on again.
targetting the rich is fair game but that 70k figure should be 100k. 100k is a good figure to run with...
It's arbitrary, but it just feels like a good cut off if we try to define rich - I'd double and then some my wages if I was on 70k, I'd consider it very well off, but possibly not rich, but I odn't know that anyone could claim to be merely well off if on 6 figures.
£70k in London is far from rich, I can assure you of that.
Catching the top of the hour sky news with jezza in full on rant mode, I have a headache after 2 minutes of it, let alone 2 months. He sounds like the nutters you get at speakers corner.
He IS one of the nutters you get at speakers corner.
I would be really enjoying the total destruction of the Corbyn left if it did not involve the coronation of Theresa May. It's a shame that she is the price we must pay for the humiliation of the far left.
You have to destroy to rebuild. Ten years from now we'll probably be talking about an imminent Labour landslide,
Ten years from now the Tories will have been in Downing Street for just 1 year less than they were 79-97. Who would have imagine that we would be seriously considering that when they failed to win a majority in 2010 or were speaking about EICIPIM?
Comments
Reminds me of a Quentin Blake illustration of The Twits...
Theresa May gains her highest ever "best Prime Minister" rating at 54% - Jeremy Corbyn on 15%, don't know 31% https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/04/20/voting-intention-conservatives-48-labour-24-18-19-/ …
I think we're starting to see Labour's 'floor'... yee gads. This is like Walter the Softie going up against Mike Tyson.
Britain is a nation of entrepreneurs. We don't have massive natural resources; we are successful by going out there and trying stuff. If you tell the 5% of successful people that they will be punished for that success then they will not try the same, which means less jobs created and then more tax on everyone else.
It's a short-sighted envy-driven self-defeating policy.
Which is presumably why Corbyn and McD love it.
And that did break a promise and hit a more politically popular group?
If he's standing down the 11-4 is well worth it, no bet for me if he runs.
TM is smarter than that though.
Do they add value ?
I'd have been happy for them to give Clarkson a £30 million contract (Top Gear was an international cash cow) but £150k for a common or garden newsreader is too much.
If he makes the runoff, he wins.
Chris Bryant is very vulnerable, if Leanne Wood fights him (she's still thinking about it).
Owen Smith in Pontypridd only has a circa 8000 majority & is not popular locally.
Could Emily Thornberry fall in Remainer Central ? A LibDem/Labour marginal before 2015.
Might Ed Miliband be engulfed in Doncaster North (70 per cent Leave) ?
Or the Beast get bitten in Bolsover (another huge Leave vote)
Of course, most of these won't happen, but there will be a Portillo/Balls moment. For whom does the spectacle of "eating a bucketload of shit in public" await?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4427202/David-Dimbleby-BBC-election-coverage.html
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
Most parents who pay for private schooling have to live right on the margins in order to do so. In Bristol, at Redland school where I used to do a lot of work in music, it was extremely rare to see a parent with a car less than four years old, and about half of all holidays were spent camping in Devon. Do you think they could afford a 20% rise? Could they heck. And remember if even half of them can't, the school shuts.
There are five significant private schools in this area plus one very small one which probably wouldn't be affected - Chase Grammar in Cannock, Stafford Grammar, Abbots Bromley, Lichfield Cathedral and Denstone in Uttoxeter. The effect of this policy would in my judgement be to shut the first three overnight, and place severe pressure on Lichfield. Denstone has a different model and would probably be unaffected. That's a cool 1500 extra school places needed in the state system here in just one term. The state system is already at breaking point. This policy with its concomitant vast rise in costs would smash it entirely. Classes of 75 would appear possible. Thanks a bunch for wishing that on me.
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?
BBC should give it to Andrew Neil.
Labour surely can't lose Dagenham? That would be something.
It's propaganda but has much less validity than the 2015 equivalent.
Even though some on here claim the LDs have shifted to the Left under Farron, the truth is there is no constituency for working with a minority Labour Government led by Corbyn. It may sound hard to believe for some but you don't have to run off to the Conservatives to find Corbyn and his policies impossible to support.
As for the Conservatives, they've stacked the cards so they have to hold a winning hand by which I mean IF May's electoral gamble fails, the consequences are unpleasant and hard to resolve. Would May survive such a failure - the events of February 1974 fatally wounded Heath albeit it took another defeat to get the rebels moving - ?
May is sitting holding a Straight Flush - I mean what are the chances of anyone holding a Royal Flush ? Surely, you'd bet it all - wouldn't you ? In effect, that's what she's done.
Look out for similar this time around, it may be that the absence of Eric, the short timescales and the fact that exams will be over for some or underway for others should hit the student turn out. Added to which, there are likely to be student defections to the Greens and LDs as a result of Smith supporting Corbyn on the A50 votes.
A solid, local Tory candidate with the right Brexit credentials should be favourite. The odds look about right.
Labour more votes than Lib Dems @ 1.2 is the only positive bet I have on Lab at this GE. Think there was more value in the mayorals - bloody Gorton could be voided though.
You're quite right that MLP's best chance is against the uber-establishment candidate with the corruption charges hanging over him.
It is adjacent to Doncaster North and in the constituencies around there Labour did significantly better than average in 2015.
Was there an EdM factor (party leaders always have an effect to some extent) and how much will it hurt Labour now that it no longer applies.
http://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/statement-on-the-general-election/
Remarkeably considering its illegality, the same percentage of Saudis identify as Athiests than Americans, 5%.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Saudi_Arabia
As a general rule in countries and indeed within countries, religiosity is inversely related to income and education.
“Why don’t you move up North, Jack (and fiancee, both teachers)? You’ll easily get a place there,’
Routine family phrase lately.
Latest poll from Harris shows Macron with a 3 point lead over MLP - his biggest lead yet.
That's not entirely impossible.
By then someone could create an AI bot that provides the likely responses someone could have made, especially if there's a lot of raw material to work from (as there is in his case).
"Now let's see what the Dimblebot thinks..."
-38 LP
+22 Macron
-10 Fillon
0 Melenchon
I look forward to certain parties on here quantifying exactly what constitutes a decisive, strong mandate that allows a leader and her party to to follow through on their stated aims. I strongly suspect that the figures will differ south and north of the Tweed.
Good luck to him. If only we had such a sane centrist here with a chance of winning.
Macron seems to be breaking away from the pack and should probably be odds-on again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017
Soubry cannot have the Leaver vote sewn up!
50%+ of the vote for separatist parties. That's an unanswerable demand for a second referendum.
You managed it handsomely last time - around 51.5%. Are you saying you are not confident of doing as well again?
The high probability of that figure being reached plus torpedoing her own argument that a referendum would be too disruptive is one of the reasons I am very surprised May went for an election.
This is as true of Ed Miliband (who I blame for Labour's plight) as of Corbyn (who I see more as a victim of an impossible set of circumstances).
The steel trap has been sprung by Teresa May and it is Corbyn in the trap. But it is vacuous, ambitious Ed Miliband who should be, so I hope the Portillo moment awaits him.
The line has to be, "If you're doing well by doing good, that's great - we're happy for you, and you're our kind of person. We're all about people who work hard (or want to but are on zero-hours contracts, disabled, thrown out of work by heartless bosses etc) whether that hard work gives them £10k or £250k. We want everyone to pay and do their fair share, regardless of income. But some people aren't, and if you're tax dodging, or stealing benefits, or treating employees appallingly, you should indeed be worried about a Labour Government..."
It's a bit motherhood and apple pie, but "who exactly are the rich people you plan to screw?" is just a toxic conversation to get into - you can't win with it.
Yes, he held a high full house earlier this week with the No Confidence option and mucked it.
If you want to frame something around over/under 50 SNPs MPs post the GE then would be delighted to have a sporting wager.
Though evidently JN doesn't look at the polls anyway!
Trump's state visit to Pm Corbyn.
Let's make it happen.
Burnham not standing.