Maybe I am becoming like King Canute* or something, but I just refuse to believe these Labour numbers. Just refuse. Corbyn is pure poison as far as i can see to vast swathes of the electorate and particularly C and D class voters.
Where are these 32%? Not in marginal seats.
The only explanation that makes any sense is he is piling them up in Bootle.
* Canute as popularly imagined. Yes I know what really happened - no need to trouble PB with that again.
The trick is not to mind the polls. At all. The pollsters go away from a disaster like 2015 vowing to adjust their adjustments and get things right next time, but it's like Ptolemy and the geocentric universe: you pile on the epicycles to make the movements of the planets conform to theory, and non-conformation to theory simply means you have not yet added enough epicycles. If your basic theory is simply wrong, tweaking doesn't help.
Why polling has stopped working I don't know, but it has. Thirty years ago if a well-spoken bloke rang you up and asked you questions, you felt obliged to be polite and honest. Nowadays you (or at least, I) immediately think "do I troll this f---er, or do I just tell him to f--- off?"
I'd imagine the MSM have their leaders written for the week run in to the GE. I'm thinking not so much vote Jeremy amongst them
Vote to save labour/limit Tory domination probably will, and the public know that means vote labour, not ld, judging by the polls.
Indeed that is what is happening. Labour people reluctantly backing Corbyn to keep the party in contention as a political force. My worry is that sympathy votes will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. That all said, if the Tories run home with a majority of 80+, I doubt even he will withstand the pressure to quit. The naive millennial who support him are too young to remember the 1980s - they need to taste defeat.
If Corbyn gets 30% or so then even if May gets a majority of around 100 I think the membership would re elect him
Unlikely, but possible. The key thing is that he looks like losing most of his union support.
This latest YouGov has UKIP doubling its vote share. I am not sure that has really happened.
It's always important to remember that the polls in 2015 systematically overstated the Labour vote. Miliband was generally getting more than 32% vote shares in the run-up to polling day.
I think we may be heading for yet another polling disaster.
I wonder why pollsters overestimated Labour in 2015/may be doing so now......
I'd imagine the MSM have their leaders written for the week run in to the GE. I'm thinking not so much vote Jeremy amongst them
Vote to save labour/limit Tory domination probably will, and the public know that means vote labour, not ld, judging by the polls.
Indeed that is what is happening. Labour people reluctantly backing Corbyn to keep the party in contention as a political force. My worry is that sympathy votes will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. That all said, if the Tories run home with a majority of 80+, I doubt even he will withstand the pressure to quit. The naive millennial who support him are too young to remember the 1980s - they need to taste defeat.
If Corbyn gets 30% or so then even if May gets a majority of around 100 I think the membership would re elect him
Unlikely, but possible. The key thing is that he looks like losing most of his union support.
I'd imagine the MSM have their leaders written for the week run in to the GE. I'm thinking not so much vote Jeremy amongst them
Vote to save labour/limit Tory domination probably will, and the public know that means vote labour, not ld, judging by the polls.
Indeed that is what is happening. Labour people reluctantly backing Corbyn to keep the party in contention as a political force. My worry is that sympathy votes will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. That all said, if the Tories run home with a majority of 80+, I doubt even he will withstand the pressure to quit. The naive millennial who support him are too young to remember the 1980s - they need to taste defeat.
If Corbyn gets 30% or so then even if May gets a majority of around 100 I think the membership would re elect him
Unlikely, but possible. The key thing is that he looks like losing most of his union support.
After they wrote his manifesto, and after he may have beaten Ed Miliband's level of national support with it?
It wouldn't actually surprise me. The issue with means-tested FSM is that a lot of people don't claim them. I used to work at a school in South Wales where about 20% were entitled to them - but barely half the cohort actually did claim them. ... I've always been in favour of UFSM after that, but the snag is they're not cheap and it's hard to see how to pay for them at present (Labour's proposal on the subject may be politely described as Fascist nonsense put forward by someone with no grasp of the real situation, the intellectual capacity of a particularly dense moron and a deep loathing of anyone slightly richer than they are). It is, counterintuitively, one of the reasons I am such a hawk on deficits. If we weren't sending tens of billions a year to rich oil sheikhs and bankers in interest payments we could spend that money feeding our children instead.
I bow to your hands on experience but I really struggle to understand why there was a reluctance to claim FSMs.
I think you underestimate how much of a stigma it still comes with in some areas. The town was working in had only just lost its steelworks and work, and self-reliance, was still seen as very important. Seeking help was seen as shameful. Some on minimum wage jobs didn't even realise that help didn't just come to the unemployed. Cannock is very similar.
Had I been teaching in Merthyr I expect it would have been different!
Edit - and to answer your last question yes, I think it would. Good food is more important than textbooks or iBoards. But it's not seen that way.
You don't have to tell anyone you're claiming!
a few years ago we would regularly get letters from school telling us to PLEASE claim for free meals if we were entitled as it also got the school other linked funding, and it explained how to do it fully confidentially
If people still don't do it, well it's hard to know how to help those who won't help themselves :-/
Taxpayers funding free meals for people who can perfectly well afford it is a waste of money. Ditto universal winter fuel payments. Rightly ditched.
Except that interventions made early in life have the greatest effect, and the greatest benefit. "Hard to know how to help those who won't help themselves " - indeed it is, but the FSM policy is intended to help not them, but their children. The comparison with winter fuel payments is ridiculous.
Inadequate parenting is a massive long term problem for society, and primary schools are on the front line dealing with it.
There was some evidence that Universal Free School Meals helped overall performance but this always struck me as surprising. Why does poor Jonny do better at school because rich Frank is not paying for his lunch anymore and does Frank not insist on Mummy providing a packed lunch with his fois gras anyway? It will be interesting to see if the evidence has moved on from the pilots. [da snippety]
Have there been any schoolkids called Frank in the last 50 years?
3256 new "Frank"s named from 2015 to 1996
So rare, but they do exist.
I don't know anyone called Frank under the age of 68.
Not a football fan then?
I know nothing about football whatosever, and can't stand the sport.
I don't feel my life is any poorer for it.
If you know nothing about it, how do you know you can't stand it?
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
This happened at the end of the 1983 campaign, where Labour came in a couple of % above expectations, almost certainly due to a late swing back to them.
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
But will it transfer to votes? Will people, in the booth, really vote in numbers for massive debt increases and hackneyed Marxism? I think a lot will be decided by how toxic a vote for Corbyn is made to seem
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There's nothing wrong with healthy scepticism where polls are concerned and it's easy to be seduced by them and by ludicrous local reporting to believing a meme or mantra and extrapolate that nationally to get the result you want/fear (delete as appropriate).
Elections are complex animals and this will be no different. I'm in one of Labour's safest seats and I see no evidence of a Conservative landslide - I don't see (please provide suitable collective name) of Conservative activists knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. That doesn't mean it won't happen.
This Forum is for example predominantly pro-Conservative - it wasn't always so but in terms of the number of posts (as distinct from the number of posters) it has a strong Conservative bias however couched in dispassionate "objective" analytically-driven punter-friendly analysis it might seem.
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
An alternative view might be the more people think about the notion of five years of Theresa May surrounded by her legion of braying acolytes guiding the nation into an uncertain future with virtually no accountability, the more they might stop and think the existence of a strong Opposition might not be a bad thing.
The problem is, that Opposition is currently led by Jeremy Corbyn,
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
From the Downing Street confidential files, 18th May 2017:
TM: So, Agent Corbyn, I assume you know why I've called you in?
JC: (trembling) No, ma'am.
TM: Really? Are you that much of a fool? You are failing. Or rather, you're succeeding.
JC: I can still lose, ma'am.
TM: YOUR JOB IS NOT TO LOSE! Your job is to destroy the Labour party! Just losing is not good enough. Any fool can lose an election as Labour leader, and many fools have. My predecessors had great hope for you, and now it seems all that faith - all that investment - might have been for naught.
JC: I might still -
TM: SILENCE! We've supported you for over three decades and put up with the rubbish you've spouted. International socialism. Your support for Venezuela and for terrorists. We put up with it because the sainted Margaret - (both clasp their hands and look up to the ceiling) - had a plan for you. And now you are betraying her memory!
JC: But I don't know what else I can do! Have you seen our manifesto? It's ridiculous: billions of spending with no way of raising the money. Nationalise everything. Increased power for unions. Remove tuition fees without reducing numbers of students. I've even got someone to say that borrowing isn't spending! Yet people seem to like it! I've even tried to upset my MP's again, but they're just swallowing every word. Only a few councillors in Scotland are showing any backbone, ma'am.
TM: I don't want to hear your excuses! You're their leader, and you can't even lead them into defeat! Just look at them, a bunch of snivelling, idiotic cowards! A crowd of sycophantic lunatics! If they'd had any sense they'd have got rid of you after a few days, but no. Yet you're telling me you can't even lead this bunch of feral fools into a catastrophic defeat?
JC: (whispers): But ma'am ...
TM: YES ?
JC: Ir's just, ma'am, well...
TM: WELL WHAT?
JC: (mumbles): It appears that the policies might be popular.
TM: WHAT! (she takes off a shoe and wields the sharpened kitten heel). WHAT ?
JC: The public appear to like my manifesto. It's all rubbish, of course, but they like it. Not everyone - there aren't that many fools in the country - but enough. We won't win the election, but we might save many of my MPs.
TM: (leans forward, holding the heel a few inches from his face): Let me make this clear, Agent Corbyn. You will lose this election. You will destroy the Labour Party. It will cease to exist. It will become a memory, a fable told by parents to scare children at night. And if not ...
JC: (crying) Yes, ma'am?
TM: (leans back in chair) Well, I'll just leave that as a surprise.
Oh god oh god oh god. I agree with the measures proposed.
Why should Alan Sugar get a winter fuel allowance? Why should Simon Cowell's son get free school meals? Why shouldn't people who own houses use some of that wealth to pay for their own well-being? Why shouldn't there be a nudge to find home-grown talent?
It is realistic and hard-headed (not hearted). And right for the times we are in. Asking why it wasn't done earlier is conceding its merit.
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
This happened at the end of the 1983 campaign, where Labour came in a couple of % above expectations, almost certainly due to a late swing back to them.
I'm not convinced there was any measurable swing back to Labour in 83. The polls in the week or so leading up to the vote were pretty stable. More likely that there was a systematic error than a swing back after the last poll.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
This happened at the end of the 1983 campaign, where Labour came in a couple of % above expectations, almost certainly due to a late swing back to them.
I'm not convinced there was any measurable swing back to Labour in 83. The polls in the week or so leading up to the vote were pretty stable. More likely that there was a systematic error than a swing back after the last poll.
Except that with hindsight the consensus view amongst pollsters was that the general error made in 1980s polling was underestimating the Tories and overestimating Labour.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
I'm an optimistic Tory but really can't see the Beast going, even if he's done no canvassing for two decades. Hillarious that Labour are putting resources into seats this far down the list though, it means they're not putting them into the marginals.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
I'm an optimistic Tory but really can't see the Beast going, even if he's done no canvassing for two decades. Hillarious that Labour are putting resources into seats this far down the list though, it means they're not putting them into the marginals.
I'd say it's only in play on a 20 point lead with differential swing but both sides seem to think it is...........
There's nothing wrong with healthy scepticism where polls are concerned and it's easy to be seduced by them and by ludicrous local reporting to believing a meme or mantra and extrapolate that nationally to get the result you want/fear (delete as appropriate).
Elections are complex animals and this will be no different. I'm in one of Labour's safest seats and I see no evidence of a Conservative landslide - I don't see (please provide suitable collective name) of Conservative activists knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. That doesn't mean it won't happen.
This Forum is for example predominantly pro-Conservative - it wasn't always so but in terms of the number of posts (as distinct from the number of posters) it has a strong Conservative bias however couched in dispassionate "objective" analytically-driven punter-friendly analysis it might seem.
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
An alternative view might be the more people think about the notion of five years of Theresa May surrounded by her legion of braying acolytes guiding the nation into an uncertain future with virtually no accountability, the more they might stop and think the existence of a strong Opposition might not be a bad thing.
The problem is, that Opposition is currently led by Jeremy Corbyn,
Mr. Saddo, Corbyn remaining in place is bad for British democracy.
The PLP needs to either oust him or form a new party for people who are left wing, but not far left.
Edited extra bit: moderated my language a touch.
I don't disagree on the democracy front, just thinking about it purely from May's position.
The best democratic outcome is the hard left stalinists manifesto gets completely smashed by the electorate and Corbyn and Co return to the SWP fringe they came from. As has been said elsewhere, just imagine what would be said if the Tories campaign was being run by a BNP Stalin apologist.
I remember when John Major announced the 1997 election, and congratulated Skinner on his imminent retirement,. Skinner had said he wouldn't stand past 65 as it would be stealing a job from a youngster. Twenty years later and he's still stealing a job ...
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
This happened at the end of the 1983 campaign, where Labour came in a couple of % above expectations, almost certainly due to a late swing back to them.
Labour were in the mid 30's three weeks before polling 27% in 1983.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
I'm an optimistic Tory but really can't see the Beast going, even if he's done no canvassing for two decades. Hillarious that Labour are putting resources into seats this far down the list though, it means they're not putting them into the marginals.
I'd say it's only in play on a 20 point lead with differential swing but both sides seem to think it is...........
Skinner got 51% last time, the UKIP and Con vote added together was still more than 3k short, and UKIP are standing there this time. It would be still be a massive shock to see such a safe seat overturned.
That said, the Tory candidate is a prominent local Leave campaigner and seems to have a team of eager helpers. One to watch.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
If it looks bad for Labour in 3 weeks time, what is it going to look like post-boundary changes for 2020?
With a radically different political geography, and the possibility of a re-started review using new data (and new criteria, and possibly a return to 650 seats) , it doesn't automatically follow that the Tories will have the same advantage from redrawing the boundaries that they would have got during this decade.
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There's nothing wrong with healthy scepticism where polls are concerned and it's easy to be seduced by them and by ludicrous local reporting to believing a meme or mantra and extrapolate that nationally to get the result you want/fear (delete as appropriate).
Elections are complex animals and this will be no different. I'm in one of Labour's safest seats and I see no evidence of a Conservative landslide - I don't see (please provide suitable collective name) of Conservative activists knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. That doesn't mean it won't happen.
This Forum is for example predominantly pro-Conservative - it wasn't always so but in terms of the number of posts (as distinct from the number of posters) it has a strong Conservative bias however couched in dispassionate "objective" analytically-driven punter-friendly analysis it might seem.
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
An alternative view might be the more people think about the notion of five years of Theresa May surrounded by her legion of braying acolytes guiding the nation into an uncertain future with virtually no accountability, the more they might stop and think the existence of a strong Opposition might not be a bad thing.
The problem is, that Opposition is currently led by Jeremy Corbyn,
If it looks bad for Labour in 3 weeks time, what is it going to look like post-boundary changes for 2020?
With a radically different political geography, and the possibility of a re-started review using new data (and new criteria, and possibly a return to 650 seats) , it doesn't automatically follow that the Tories will have the same advantage from redrawing the boundaries that they would have got during this decade.
I agree. In fact, it should provide food for thought for anyone in the PLP thinking about options if we have a continuity-Corbyn Labour Party.
I'd imagine the MSM have their leaders written for the week run in to the GE. I'm thinking not so much vote Jeremy amongst them
Vote to save labour/limit Tory domination probably will, and the public know that means vote labour, not ld, judging by the polls.
Except in seats like Bath, Richmond Park, Twickenham and Lewes which the LDs may win through tactical voting
That's right. I suspect LibDems in Con/Lab seats are now saying they will vote Labour (and Labs in Con/LibDem seats saying they will vote LibDem). There are many more of the former than the latter.
The result is an increase in the Labour national share (and decrease in the LibDem share) but the practical result is more Lab, more LibDem wins, and fewer Tory wins.
I'm on the Tories getting a 75-99 majority, - available on Betfair at 8.4, though it has shortened from 15.
I imagine that Martin Boon and ICM have looked at what has happened in every election for the last forty years and concluded that whatever the numbers say about Labour, they are doing much worse.
The pattern of overstatement three weeks out seems to hold as an absolute truth in the Thatcher and post Thatcher periods.
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
I doubt they've ever thought about campaigning there in recent years!
They may mind out just what happens when you take your whole support base for granted.
As Labour found out in Scotland two years ago! It's not impossible, if seats like Bolsover are genuinely in play, that whole swather of Labour seats in the North could go.
There will be some fantastic odds out there for anyone braver than I, as there were north of the border in 2015.
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
That's why it's good to head over to CiF; a substantial minority have exactly the same view of Jezza as is overwhelmingly to be found on here. And as on here, the most vituperative comments are from Lab supporters.
The problem I have is that with means testing is that there has to be a cut off point: I earn £99pw and get free school meals, you earn £100pw and don't, hence you're worse off despite earning more.
Similarly, a couple on £30k each take home more than a couple where one earns £65k and the other doesn't work.
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
This happened at the end of the 1983 campaign, where Labour came in a couple of % above expectations, almost certainly due to a late swing back to them.
Labour were in the mid 30's three weeks before polling 27% in 1983.
Their outturn was closer to 29% on a GB ex NI basis comparable with most polls. And Labour support did clearly drop away during what was a shambolic and divided campaign, only to uptick in the last few days as judged from the final result, which was my original point.
What is different this time is that it feels now as if we ought to be at the end of a standard-length campaign, yet they've got to keep it all going for another three weeks.
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
How on earth else is care to be paid for? If Lab's sums added up that would be one thing - then everyone could vote for higher taxes, better healthcare, schools, etc. But we know that they don't add up and hence will increase the deficit dramatically, eating up valuable resources to service the debt.
So that leaves...what? How would you pay for healthcare. I get the cancer vs dementia thing but I still don't see how it is easily solved. Should a dementia sufferer be subsidised by a cancer sufferer?
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
How on earth else is care to be paid for? If Lab's sums added up that would be one thing - then everyone could vote for higher taxes, better healthcare, schools, etc. But we know that they don't add up and hence will increase the deficit dramatically, eating up valuable resources to service the debt.
So that leaves...what? How would you pay for healthcare. I get the cancer vs dementia thing but I still don't see how it is easily solved. Should a dementia sufferer be subsidised by a cancer sufferer?
Taxes are going up whoever wins. The question is how honest and transparent each of the parties is prepared to be about it in advance of our getting to vote.
From the Downing Street confidential files, 18th May 2017:
TM: So, Agent Corbyn, I assume you know why I've called you in?
JC: (trembling) No, ma'am.
TM: Really? Are you that much of a fool? You are failing. Or rather, you're succeeding.
JC: I can still lose, ma'am.
TM: YOUR JOB IS NOT TO LOSE! Your job is to destroy the Labour party! Just losing is not good enough. Any fool can lose an election as Labour leader, and many fools have. My predecessors had great hope for you, and now it seems all that faith - all that investment - might have been for naught.
JC: I might still -
TM: SILENCE! We've supported you for over three decades and put up with the rubbish you've spouted. International socialism. Your support for Venezuela and for terrorists. We put up with it because the sainted Margaret - (both clasp their hands and look up to the ceiling) - had a plan for you. And now you are betraying her memory!
JC: But I don't know what else I can do! Have you seen our manifesto? It's ridiculous: billions of spending with no way of raising the money. Nationalise everything. Increased power for unions. Remove tuition fees without reducing numbers of students. I've even got someone to say that borrowing isn't spending! Yet people seem to like it! I've even tried to upset my MP's again, but they're just swallowing every word. Only a few councillors in Scotland are showing any backbone, ma'am.
TM: I don't want to hear your excuses! You're their leader, and you can't even lead them into defeat! Just look at them, a bunch of snivelling, idiotic cowards! A crowd of sycophantic lunatics! If they'd had any sense they'd have got rid of you after a few days, but no. Yet you're telling me you can't even lead this bunch of feral fools into a catastrophic defeat?
JC: (whispers): But ma'am ...
TM: YES ?
JC: Ir's just, ma'am, well...
TM: WELL WHAT?
JC: (mumbles): It appears that the policies might be popular.
TM: WHAT! (she takes off a shoe and wields the sharpened kitten heel). WHAT ?
JC: The public appear to like my manifesto. It's all rubbish, of course, but they like it. Not everyone - there aren't that many fools in the country - but enough. We won't win the election, but we might save many of my MPs.
TM: (leans forward, holding the heel a few inches from his face): Let me make this clear, Agent Corbyn. You will lose this election. You will destroy the Labour Party. It will cease to exist. It will become a memory, a fable told by parents to scare children at night. And if not ...
JC: (crying) Yes, ma'am?
TM: (leans back in chair) Well, I'll just leave that as a surprise.
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
That's why it's good to head over to CiF; a substantial minority have exactly the same view of Jezza as is overwhelmingly to be found on here. And as on here, the most vituperative comments are from Lab supporters.
CiF is hilarious. Commentators are either hailing Corbyn as the messiah or supporting Le Pen.
Still, the Spectator comments section is also something else.
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
That's why it's good to head over to CiF; a substantial minority have exactly the same view of Jezza as is overwhelmingly to be found on here. And as on here, the most vituperative comments are from Lab supporters.
Yes but this Site has the punting USP, Topping.
Even the most exuberant ideologists tend to get reined in by the reality of the betting markets. Betfair's odds on Labour taking 30/35% of the vote have tightened a little. I reckon there's still a touch of value in there at 3.05.
"On Sky News Adam Boulton says he has seen the set from the hall in Halifax, where the Tory manifesto is being launched at 11.15. He says there is no mention of Theresa May or “strong and stable leadership” on the branding, which he says represents a new approach."
Just a thought, is Teresa not coming across as well as expected? With 3 weeks to go are the voters going to get fed up with her and perhaps stay at home?
"On Sky News Adam Boulton says he has seen the set from the hall in Halifax, where the Tory manifesto is being launched at 11.15. He says there is no mention of Theresa May or “strong and stable leadership” on the branding, which he says represents a new approach."
Just a thought, is Teresa not coming across as well as expected? With 3 weeks to go are the voters going to get fed up with her and perhaps stay at home?
No its the step change in the campaign that was always planned for. The candidates in a lot of areas now need to get some name recognition built on the foundation of the last 4 weeks.
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
How on earth else is care to be paid for? If Lab's sums added up that would be one thing - then everyone could vote for higher taxes, better healthcare, schools, etc. But we know that they don't add up and hence will increase the deficit dramatically, eating up valuable resources to service the debt.
So that leaves...what? How would you pay for healthcare. I get the cancer vs dementia thing but I still don't see how it is easily solved. Should a dementia sufferer be subsidised by a cancer sufferer?
Taxes are going up whoever wins. The question is how honest and transparent each of the parties is prepared to be about it in advance of our getting to vote.
Lab's taxes seem to be behavioural. ie private schools charity thing will force many to go to the state sector; corporation tax increase will also affect behaviour.
Cons' are inescapable short of a level of estate planning that 98% of the population are unlikely to undertake.
It's curious, very curious. The VI suggested by the latest polling doesn't match the anecdata or mood music. Are we seeing the British trend of flocking (relatively) to the underdog/oppressed?
I reckon it's the country's natural reflex against giving any party/PM a massive majority.
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
But will it transfer to votes? Will people, in the booth, really vote in numbers for massive debt increases and hackneyed Marxism? I think a lot will be decided by how toxic a vote for Corbyn is made to seem
The far left are intolerant, self righteous, and want everyone to think the same as them (Marxist).
The far right are intolerant, angry, and want everyone to look the same as them (anti-immigration).
But the far right, as well as being angry, make the mistake of thinking that everyone has the same opinion of Corbyn that they have.
And the centrists, (like me) are tolerant and elitist and will be back in charge before long.
May appears to be gambling that she can poke the over 65s very hard and they still turn out for her in order to shore up the WWC vote. This is Blairite territory she's moving into, this is a centrist manifesto, she's banking on the right flank holding for 3 weeks.
"On Sky News Adam Boulton says he has seen the set from the hall in Halifax, where the Tory manifesto is being launched at 11.15. He says there is no mention of Theresa May or “strong and stable leadership” on the branding, which he says represents a new approach."
Just a thought, is Teresa not coming across as well as expected? With 3 weeks to go are the voters going to get fed up with her and perhaps stay at home?
Phase I was Theresa Phase II will be Conservatives Phase III will be the hit job on Corbyn.
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
Brexit has to be paid for somehow.
You sound like Tim Farron, how are things for him at the moment?
The lonely dumped husbands are still at the bar of the local telling anyone who'll listen
"You wait til she cant afford go to the Algarve this year and doesn't get those nice shoes for Christmas.. then she'll love me again and wish she'd never left"
"On Sky News Adam Boulton says he has seen the set from the hall in Halifax, where the Tory manifesto is being launched at 11.15. He says there is no mention of Theresa May or “strong and stable leadership” on the branding, which he says represents a new approach."
Just a thought, is Teresa not coming across as well as expected? With 3 weeks to go are the voters going to get fed up with her and perhaps stay at home?
I think strong and stable has been hammered enough and now it is on to a new sound bite. Always been the plan.
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
That's why it's good to head over to CiF; a substantial minority have exactly the same view of Jezza as is overwhelmingly to be found on here. And as on here, the most vituperative comments are from Lab supporters.
Yes but this Site has the punting USP, Topping.
Even the most exuberant ideologists tend to get reined in by the reality of the betting markets. Betfair's odds on Labour taking 30/35% of the vote have tightened a little. I reckon there's still a touch of value in there at 3.05.
What say you?
I say that as we all know very very well on this site, the betting markets reflect a world that is far from reality (I give you 10pm - 2am June 23rd/24th 2016 as my first exhibit).
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
Brexit has to be paid for somehow.
You sound like Tim Farron, how are things for him at the moment?
The lonely dumped husbands are still at the bar of the local telling anyone who'll listen
"You wait til she cant afford go to the Algarve this year and doesn't get those nice shoes for Christmas.. then she'll love me again and wish she'd never left"
Car crash Brexit will be good for the Conservatives, though disastrous for the country.
At least the Conservatives are proposing to make those who voted for this disaster pay, which is a start of sorts.
May appears to be gambling that she can poke the over 65s very hard and they still turn out for her in order to shore up the WWC vote. This is Blairite territory she's moving into, this is a centrist manifesto, she's banking on the right flank holding for 3 weeks.
Where else do they go - and to be honest guaranteeing £100,000 estate up from £23,250 is for many a big improvement
I guess I am not being very scientific, in not believing polls. But personally I cannot see Labour getting above 25. No way on God's green earth.
One explanation is possibly that voters are disregarding Corbyn as they know he will not be PM and so are starting to be persuaded by their local Lab MP saying - "I'm a decent guy, I've done good things, don't blame me for Corbyn' etc etc.
The other (and the one I am inclined to go for) is that the polls are (obviously) just telling us what people might do. When faced with an actual ballot box and the prospect of Corbyn then they will desert on masse. A bit like '92.
Mind you I was completely wrong on Trump and Le Pen so DYOR :-)
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
That's why it's good to head over to CiF; a substantial minority have exactly the same view of Jezza as is overwhelmingly to be found on here. And as on here, the most vituperative comments are from Lab supporters.
CiF is hilarious. Commentators are either hailing Corbyn as the messiah or supporting Le Pen.
Still, the Spectator comments section is also something else.
Try OrderOrder. Beyond belief sometimes how sweary, angry and nasty some people can get when online. Just about everyone vaguely 'left' or even one nation tory is a total c*** who should be shot etc etc. Do they behave like this down the pub?
There was some evidence that Universal Free School Meals helped overall performance but this always struck me as surprising. Why does poor Jonny do better at school because rich Frank is not paying for his lunch anymore and does Frank not insist on Mummy providing a packed lunch with his fois gras anyway? It will be interesting to see if the evidence has moved on from the pilots. [da snippety]
Have there been any schoolkids called Frank in the last 50 years?
3256 new "Frank"s named from 2015 to 1996
So rare, but they do exist.
I don't know anyone called Frank under the age of 68.
Not a football fan then?
I know nothing about football whatosever, and can't stand the sport.
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
Brexit has to be paid for somehow.
You sound like Tim Farron, how are things for him at the moment?
The lonely dumped husbands are still at the bar of the local telling anyone who'll listen
"You wait til she cant afford go to the Algarve this year and doesn't get those nice shoes for Christmas.. then she'll love me again and wish she'd never left"
Car crash Brexit will be good for the Conservatives, though disastrous for the country.
At least the Conservatives are proposing to make those who voted for this disaster pay, which is a start of sorts.
The people who voted for it have been paying in advance for over a decade
Report from Bolsover on the VoteUK forum from a Lab supporter:
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
Comments
Simply casting the tea leaves over the runes whilst gazing at my crystal ball.
Why polling has stopped working I don't know, but it has. Thirty years ago if a well-spoken bloke rang you up and asked you questions, you felt obliged to be polite and honest. Nowadays you (or at least, I) immediately think "do I troll this f---er, or do I just tell him to f--- off?"
I wonder why pollsters overestimated Labour in 2015/may be doing so now......
I'll believe it when I see it.
"Hard to know how to help those who won't help themselves " - indeed it is, but the FSM policy is intended to help not them, but their children. The comparison with winter fuel payments is ridiculous.
Inadequate parenting is a massive long term problem for society, and primary schools are on the front line dealing with it.
"We have the same number of MPs... oh, shit"
Massive majorities can lead to things like the Iraq War and the poll tax.
" Why is the Church against birth control? Because they’ll run out of children to molest"
http://www.sconews.co.uk/news/53123/conservatives-suspend-councillor-after-sco-report-into-bigoted-comments/
Elections are complex animals and this will be no different. I'm in one of Labour's safest seats and I see no evidence of a Conservative landslide - I don't see (please provide suitable collective name) of Conservative activists knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. That doesn't mean it won't happen.
This Forum is for example predominantly pro-Conservative - it wasn't always so but in terms of the number of posts (as distinct from the number of posters) it has a strong Conservative bias however couched in dispassionate "objective" analytically-driven punter-friendly analysis it might seem.
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
An alternative view might be the more people think about the notion of five years of Theresa May surrounded by her legion of braying acolytes guiding the nation into an uncertain future with virtually no accountability, the more they might stop and think the existence of a strong Opposition might not be a bad thing.
The problem is, that Opposition is currently led by Jeremy Corbyn,
"Worrying reports from the Labour campaign here. Shadow cabinet minister went to campaign in Bolsover due to concerns it may be at risk. Discovered that no Voter ID has been done, contact rate is officially 0%. We have absolutely no idea who our voters are, who has changed their vote or anything really."
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/post/517263/thread
TM: So, Agent Corbyn, I assume you know why I've called you in?
JC: (trembling) No, ma'am.
TM: Really? Are you that much of a fool? You are failing. Or rather, you're succeeding.
JC: I can still lose, ma'am.
TM: YOUR JOB IS NOT TO LOSE! Your job is to destroy the Labour party! Just losing is not good enough. Any fool can lose an election as Labour leader, and many fools have. My predecessors had great hope for you, and now it seems all that faith - all that investment - might have been for naught.
JC: I might still -
TM: SILENCE! We've supported you for over three decades and put up with the rubbish you've spouted. International socialism. Your support for Venezuela and for terrorists. We put up with it because the sainted Margaret - (both clasp their hands and look up to the ceiling) - had a plan for you. And now you are betraying her memory!
JC: But I don't know what else I can do! Have you seen our manifesto? It's ridiculous: billions of spending with no way of raising the money. Nationalise everything. Increased power for unions. Remove tuition fees without reducing numbers of students. I've even got someone to say that borrowing isn't spending! Yet people seem to like it! I've even tried to upset my MP's again, but they're just swallowing every word. Only a few councillors in Scotland are showing any backbone, ma'am.
TM: I don't want to hear your excuses! You're their leader, and you can't even lead them into defeat! Just look at them, a bunch of snivelling, idiotic cowards! A crowd of sycophantic lunatics! If they'd had any sense they'd have got rid of you after a few days, but no. Yet you're telling me you can't even lead this bunch of feral fools into a catastrophic defeat?
JC: (whispers): But ma'am ...
TM: YES ?
JC: Ir's just, ma'am, well...
TM: WELL WHAT?
JC: (mumbles): It appears that the policies might be popular.
TM: WHAT! (she takes off a shoe and wields the sharpened kitten heel). WHAT ?
JC: The public appear to like my manifesto. It's all rubbish, of course, but they like it. Not everyone - there aren't that many fools in the country - but enough. We won't win the election, but we might save many of my MPs.
TM: (leans forward, holding the heel a few inches from his face): Let me make this clear, Agent Corbyn. You will lose this election. You will destroy the Labour Party. It will cease to exist. It will become a memory, a fable told by parents to scare children at night. And if not ...
JC: (crying) Yes, ma'am?
TM: (leans back in chair) Well, I'll just leave that as a surprise.
#VisitToHRComingUpIFear
I'll go 18.5 5/6 either side to start it off
Mr. Jessop, that's rather good.
I'm an optimistic Tory but really can't see the Beast going, even if he's done no canvassing for two decades. Hillarious that Labour are putting resources into seats this far down the list though, it means they're not putting them into the marginals.
Elections are complex animals and this will be no different. I'm in one of Labour's safest seats and I see no evidence of a Conservative landslide - I don't see (please provide suitable collective name) of Conservative activists knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. That doesn't mean it won't happen.
This Forum is for example predominantly pro-Conservative - it wasn't always so but in terms of the number of posts (as distinct from the number of posters) it has a strong Conservative bias however couched in dispassionate "objective" analytically-driven punter-friendly analysis it might seem.
There are therefore plenty of people arguing from dawn to dusk how crap Corbyn is and how badly Labour are going to do. It becomes an echo chamber for those either hoping or wanting Labour to do badly. If that's a view you hold, you can come on here and soon find posts to re-enforce that view.
An alternative view might be the more people think about the notion of five years of Theresa May surrounded by her legion of braying acolytes guiding the nation into an uncertain future with virtually no accountability, the more they might stop and think the existence of a strong Opposition might not be a bad thing.
The problem is, that Opposition is currently led by Jeremy Corbyn,
Good post. Enjoyed reading that.
The best democratic outcome is the hard left stalinists manifesto gets completely smashed by the electorate and Corbyn and Co return to the SWP fringe they came from. As has been said elsewhere, just imagine what would be said if the Tories campaign was being run by a BNP Stalin apologist.
Libs 10 Kippers 4 Green 3 Nats 6, Others 2 would leave 75 so 46-29?
Sounds about ball park
I remember when John Major announced the 1997 election, and congratulated Skinner on his imminent retirement,. Skinner had said he wouldn't stand past 65 as it would be stealing a job from a youngster. Twenty years later and he's still stealing a job ...
That said, the Tory candidate is a prominent local Leave campaigner and seems to have a team of eager helpers. One to watch.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolsover_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/alex-bell/429005/alex-bell-snps-10-years-power-looking-like-lost-decade/
The result is an increase in the Labour national share (and decrease in the LibDem share) but the practical result is more Lab, more LibDem wins, and fewer Tory wins.
I'm on the Tories getting a 75-99 majority, - available on Betfair at 8.4, though it has shortened from 15.
https://twitter.com/RuthDavidsonMSP/status/865131044797915137
The pattern of overstatement three weeks out seems to hold as an absolute truth in the Thatcher and post Thatcher periods.
There will be some fantastic odds out there for anyone braver than I, as there were north of the border in 2015.
The Bow Group have called the Tory manifesto the biggest stealth tax increases in history.
What is different this time is that it feels now as if we ought to be at the end of a standard-length campaign, yet they've got to keep it all going for another three weeks.
So that leaves...what? How would you pay for healthcare. I get the cancer vs dementia thing but I still don't see how it is easily solved. Should a dementia sufferer be subsidised by a cancer sufferer?
Looks like Theresa has followed your advice.
Still, the Spectator comments section is also something else.
Even the most exuberant ideologists tend to get reined in by the reality of the betting markets. Betfair's odds on Labour taking 30/35% of the vote have tightened a little. I reckon there's still a touch of value in there at 3.05.
What say you?
Just a thought, is Teresa not coming across as well as expected? With 3 weeks to go are the voters going to get fed up with her and perhaps stay at home?
Cons' are inescapable short of a level of estate planning that 98% of the population are unlikely to undertake.
That is a difference.
The far right are intolerant, angry, and want everyone to look the same as them (anti-immigration).
But the far right, as well as being angry, make the mistake of thinking that everyone has the same opinion of Corbyn that they have.
And the centrists, (like me) are tolerant and elitist and will be back in charge before long.
Phase II will be Conservatives
Phase III will be the hit job on Corbyn.
"You wait til she cant afford go to the Algarve this year and doesn't get those nice shoes for Christmas.. then she'll love me again and wish she'd never left"
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/865134987162595328
At least the Conservatives are proposing to make those who voted for this disaster pay, which is a start of sorts.
mystified by it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39957879