Labour have had a bad weekend. The IRA stuff has been badly handled, despite the fact they knew it was coming. No change in my forecast: Tory majority of 95.
Have we ever seen Mrs Corbyn? I wonder if she turns up to The One Show with him on Tuesday
No, she wants to stay completely out of the game - and that is fair enough to my mind.
Tuesday on the egregious one show sofa? Oh I know they all do it but I am glad I will be winging away on my holidays. Postal vote not arrived BTW - but I live where they weigh the tory vote. Still I wonder of the lefties in the council know its half term here and tories will be winging away this week.
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
Labour have had a bad weekend. The IRA stuff has been badly handled, despite the fact they knew it was coming. No change in my forecast: Tory majority of 95.
Labour have had a bad weekend. The IRA stuff has been badly handled, despite the fact they knew it was coming. No change in my forecast: Tory majority of 95.
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
The Tories have always done badly with 18-24 year olds. When they get older they start voting Conservative. At the 1974 elections the Tories came third behind the Liberals with the youngest age groups.
It's not Baby Boomers v Gen X v Millennials though. 18 to 24 is extremely different to 25 to 49 which are quite similar to 50 to 64. 65 plus is then very different again.
Basically the difference is between those young enough to have little real world experience of working, those old enough to have retired and those who are working are in the middle.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
It's not Baby Boomers v Gen X v Millennials though. 18 to 24 is extremely different to 25 to 49 which are quite similar to 50 to 64. 65 plus is then very different again.
Basically the difference is between those young enough to have little real world experience of working, those old enough to have retired and those who are working are in the middle.
If the vote was restricted to those not collecting a pension, then Jezza would be in number 10.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
Wisdom is not only to be found in the elderly. People can be wise beyond their years, and some elderly fools.
I'm not advocating removing the vote from people at a certain age for all sorts of reasons though.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
I'll come and remind you of this post when you are 70.
Alternatively, we give the vote to people over 40 - you know, those who know something about how the world really works, and are not dumb enough to purchase the first moon on a stick they get offered....
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
Well come on, he's offering the triple lock and winter fuel allowance, what more do they want?
The last Yougov before the election was called had 18-24s as 38 Lab 32 Con.
In fact strangely the percentage of this age group that says it will vote Conservative (before removing don't knows) has almost halved...
Safe to say its wrong, or the young have really bought into that free tuition fees pledge.
Anyone over 21 isnt going to be happy that their 45k+ debts will remain but everyone from now on gets it for free. That is unless they don't know the details.
It's not Baby Boomers v Gen X v Millennials though. 18 to 24 is extremely different to 25 to 49 which are quite similar to 50 to 64. 65 plus is then very different again.
Basically the difference is between those young enough to have little real world experience of working, those old enough to have retired and those who are working are in the middle.
If the vote was restricted to those not collecting a pension, then Jezza would be in number 10.
And Corbyn would not qualify for election. Surely that would be the logic.
Its a funny kind of democracy that some lefties have. I suppose lefties could be generous and offer Euthanasia on the NHS.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
How about we restrict suffrage to taxpayers? After all, they are the ones paying for everything.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
How about we restrict suffrage to taxpayers? After all, they are the ones paying for everything.
And older people have built up the biggest back catalog of taxes so should have at least 2 votes.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
I'll come and remind you of this post when you are 70.
Alternatively, we give the vote to people over 40 - you know, those who know something about how the world really works, and are not dumb enough to purchase the first moon on a stick they get offered....
Rather than all this complex disenfranchising rich/poor/old/young/black people stuff, wouldn't it just be much simpler to introduce 1-man-1-vote? And I am that man....
It's not Baby Boomers v Gen X v Millennials though. 18 to 24 is extremely different to 25 to 49 which are quite similar to 50 to 64. 65 plus is then very different again.
Basically the difference is between those young enough to have little real world experience of working, those old enough to have retired and those who are working are in the middle.
If the vote was restricted to those not collecting a pension, then Jezza would be in number 10.
If the vote was restricted to those who work for a living or have earned worked long enough to earn a pension then Jezza would be further away than ever.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
How about we restrict suffrage to taxpayers? After all, they are the ones paying for everything.
And older people have built up the biggest back catalog of taxes so should have at least 2 votes.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
I'll come and remind you of this post when you are 70.
Alternatively, we give the vote to people over 40 - you know, those who know something about how the world really works, and are not dumb enough to purchase the first moon on a stick they get offered....
Rather than all this complex disenfranchising rich/poor/old/young/black people stuff, wouldn't it just be much simpler to introduce 1-man-1-vote? And I am that man....
Yes but I am holding your vote.
I think the ignorant young should sell their votes to the wealthy toffs to fund their drinking, sorry, tuition fees
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
How about we restrict suffrage to taxpayers? After all, they are the ones paying for everything.
And older people have built up the biggest back catalog of taxes so should have at least 2 votes.
? I don't understand how a woman's chest can "make the semis". I feel I must be lacking info.
The word "semi" has two meanings here.
* "semi" being shorthand for the "Britain's Got Talent" semifinal, at which Amanda will be a judge * "semi" being slang for a nearly-but-not-fully-erect penis.
By conflating the two meanings, the Sun can smuggle in a rude observation.
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
Well come on, he's offering the triple lock and winter fuel allowance, what more do they want?
Patriotism and sanity valued more than cheap bribes from the look of it.
? I don't understand how a woman's chest can "make the semis". I feel I must be lacking info.
The word "semi" has two meanings here.
* "semi" being shorthand for the "Britain's Got Talent" semifinal, at which Amanda will be a judge * "semi" being slang for a nearly-but-not-fully-erect penis.
By conflating the two meanings, the Sun can smuggle in a rude observation.
I'd have thought it was the double meaning of "nips" that was the issue here.
? I don't understand how a woman's chest can "make the semis". I feel I must be lacking info.
The word "semi" has two meanings here.
* "semi" being shorthand for the "Britain's Got Talent" semifinal, at which Amanda will be a judge * "semi" being slang for a nearly-but-not-fully-erect penis.
By conflating the two meanings, the Sun can smuggle in a rude observation.
I'd have thought it was the double meaning of "nips" that was the issue here.
Whilst the tory fb ad's will firm up the Tory share, it will do nothiing to reverse the Labour surge as that has been driven by middle aged women who like Labour's policies. Tories actually have 3 of the top 5 most popular policies in their manifesto but know one knows about them. To win back some of these women and achieve a resut above par the tories must quickly bring some of these policies to the forefront.
NHS for example is seen as one of the top priority by voters but how many know the Tories plan to spen £8 billion on it? Very few.
? I don't understand how a woman's chest can "make the semis". I feel I must be lacking info.
The word "semi" has two meanings here.
* "semi" being shorthand for the "Britain's Got Talent" semifinal, at which Amanda will be a judge * "semi" being slang for a nearly-but-not-fully-erect penis.
By conflating the two meanings, the Sun can smuggle in a rude observation.
I'd have thought it was the double meaning of "nips" that was the issue here.
Spoil-sports should have left it as the Northern Ireland Police Service....
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
No longer. When I was canvassing during the referendum I found older folk didn't care about their future but more about 'settling scores'. That opened my mind to the generational divide so, even though I am classed as a "senior citizen", I'd rather support those who will follow me rather than those of my age. Frankly, my experience suggests older people do not display much wisdom and I am happy to let younger people live and learn.
Tory-Torygraph-MI5 smears in the billionaire-owned media against Jeremy Corbyn are exceeding anything thrown at Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. They are more vicious than any campaign by a major party since the Zinoviev letter. The Daily Mail has literally called Corbyn "the terrorists' friend".
Apparently he is "a shameless apologist for the world's men of evil" and he has been for decades. Doubtless he only needs to think of Daesh headchoppers and he jumps for joy, chanting "Trotsky and Kim Jong-Un forever!" Every time he hears of a terrorist attack in Britain he punches the air and says "Yeah!" and "Today nailbombs, tomorrow sarin, followed by nukes!"
And this is going to get worse. The front pages of the Sunday Times next Sunday and the Sun the following Tuesday and Wednesday will be classics. I won't be at all surprised if the Sun prints photos of wounded people at the Manchester Arena with a headline such as "Corbyn Praises ISIS Terror Attacks". Tories have no morals.
But there's a problem. First, if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. All it will take is two hits, perhaps even one hit, against a leading Tory cabinet minister (May or Johnson probably) and we could be on our way to a Labour landslide. You cannot "Sun-crap" all of the people all the time in every election. Especially when the Tories have got fuck-all in the way of any policies that many people in the country could actually be keen about. Brexit is a total yawn, and anyway, everyone knows the Tories don't have a clue what they're doing.
Second, they aren't going to get much support against Corbyn from pro-Trident creeps among Labour's parliamentary candidates. From Blair, maybe, or Mandelson. But who listens to them?
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
How about we restrict suffrage to taxpayers? After all, they are the ones paying for everything.
And older people have built up the biggest back catalog of taxes so should have at least 2 votes.
Thank you. Its not a Nevil Shute I was aware of. I know about On the Beach but I did not have him for something slightly Orwellian.
I could handle 7 votes. I think. It might require PR though...
I was born in Belfast. Multiple votes are a birth right!
Talking of the Shiners... I always loved this one - the Northern Ireland branch of the electoral commision did a clear out of the electoral roll. Removing the dead etc. About 100K Shiner voters turned out to have existence problems. The Chuckle brothers went on TV, issued their usual snide threats - we-are-men-of-peace-but-people-we-don't-know-aren't etc..
The head of the electoral commission held a press conference where he gave out his office number and said that if anyone had been disenfranchised, he would personally fix the issue.
The sound of silence can be deafening.... Now *that* is courage.
Whilst the tory fb ad's will firm up the Tory share, it will do nothiing to reverse the Labour surge as that has been driven by middle aged women who like Labour's policies. Tories actually have 3 of the top 5 most popular policies in their manifesto but know one knows about them. To win back some of these women and achieve a resut above par the tories must quickly bring some of these policies to the forefront.
NHS for example is seen as one of the top priority by voters but how many know the Tories plan to spen £8 billion on it? Very few.
In 2015 they promised £8bn more per year. In 2017 they promise £8bn over five years. Labour promise £11.6bn more.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
Above a certain age people tend to get stuck in their ways and lose touch with how the world is changing. Look at all the elderly still using cheque books for example. Experience of the world as it once was isn't much help in deciding how it should be in the future
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
Tory-Torygraph-MI5 smears in the billionaire-owned media against Jeremy Corbyn are exceeding anything thrown at Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. They are more vicious than any campaign by a major party since the Zinoviev letter. The Daily Mail has literally called Corbyn "the terrorists' friend".
Corbyn has literally called terrorists his friends so why should the Daily Mail not call him that?
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
Above a certain age people tend to get stuck in their ways and lose touch with how the world is changing. Look at all the elderly still using cheque books for example. Experience of the world as it once was isn't much help in deciding how it should be in the future
Older people tend to have a better understanding of the meaning of debt.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
Above a certain age people tend to get stuck in their ways and lose touch with how the world is changing. Look at all the elderly still using cheque books for example. Experience of the world as it once was isn't much help in deciding how it should be in the future
Older people tend to have a better understanding of the meaning of debt.
They certainly understand unearned wealth given the generous pensions and house price inflation they've.benrfited from. Today's young facing tuition debts of £45k probably have better understanding of debt though.
The generational split is worrying. Baby Boom vs Gen X and Millennials. Brexit divide again. It can't end well.
It just confirms my view that once you reach 'a certain age' you shouldn't have a vote. we can debate what age that might be, I'll suggest 70 for starters. During the Brexit debate I spoke to several "old" people who were voting No because they didn't consider the (potentially negative as they saw it) outcome would affect them due to their age but they didn't like the Tories, Europe, etc.
You don't believe in the concept of wisdom? That older people might just have a better idea about life than younger people?
Above a certain age people tend to get stuck in their ways and lose touch with how the world is changing. Look at all the elderly still using cheque books for example. Experience of the world as it once was isn't much help in deciding how it should be in the future
To put it a little more kindly, older people have built up a large repository of experience and tend to use this to guide to their actions, whereas younger people are better at thinking on their feet and can therefore quickly acclimatise to changing conditions. This, I guess, is why older people prefer parties who will maintain the status quo or even wind the clock back, while younger people will be happier to throw the dice in the air and react to whatever happens.
Tory-Torygraph-MI5 smears in the billionaire-owned media against Jeremy Corbyn are exceeding anything thrown at Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. They are more vicious than any campaign by a major party since the Zinoviev letter. The Daily Mail has literally called Corbyn "the terrorists' friend".
Apparently he is "a shameless apologist for the world's men of evil" and he has been for decades. Doubtless he only needs to think of Daesh headchoppers and he jumps for joy, chanting "Trotsky and Kim Jong-Un forever!" Every time he hears of a terrorist attack in Britain he punches the air and says "Yeah!" and "Today nailbombs, tomorrow sarin, followed by nukes!"
And this is going to get worse. The front pages of the Sunday Times next Sunday and the Sun the following Tuesday and Wednesday will be classics. I won't be at all surprised if the Sun prints photos of wounded people at the Manchester Arena with a headline such as "Corbyn Praises ISIS Terror Attacks". Tories have no morals.
But there's a problem. First, if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. All it will take is two hits, perhaps even one hit, against a leading Tory cabinet minister (May or Johnson probably) and we could be on our way to a Labour landslide. You cannot "Sun-crap" all of the people all the time in every election. Especially when the Tories have got fuck-all in the way of any policies that many people in the country could actually be keen about. Brexit is a total yawn, and anyway, everyone knows the Tories don't have a clue what they're doing.
Second, they aren't going to get much support against Corbyn from pro-Trident creeps among Labour's parliamentary candidates. From Blair, maybe, or Mandelson. But who listens to them?
oh no we have a Corbynista amongst us predicting a Labour landslide lol
Tory-Torygraph-MI5 smears in the billionaire-owned media against Jeremy Corbyn are exceeding anything thrown at Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. They are more vicious than any campaign by a major party since the Zinoviev letter. The Daily Mail has literally called Corbyn "the terrorists' friend".
Corbyn has literally called terrorists his friends so why should the Daily Mail not call him that?
Here's the thing , the British people are sensible enough not to elect a troskyite carrot munching vegan pacifist terrorist loving economically illiterate E grader
Tory-Torygraph-MI5 smears in the billionaire-owned media against Jeremy Corbyn are exceeding anything thrown at Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. They are more vicious than any campaign by a major party since the Zinoviev letter. The Daily Mail has literally called Corbyn "the terrorists' friend".
Corbyn has literally called terrorists his friends so why should the Daily Mail not call him that?
Here's the thing , the British people are sensible enough not to elect a troskyite carrot munching vegan pacifist terrorist loving economically illiterate E grader
Corbyn video closing on 2.5 million views, Abbott will beat a quarter of a million in a couple of hours....
I have a question. Does anybody know where I can find an archive of leader ratings? If it was polling intention I could get it from Wikipedia or Anthony Wells's site, but I don'y know where to look for leader ratings
Whilst the tory fb ad's will firm up the Tory share, it will do nothiing to reverse the Labour surge as that has been driven by middle aged women who like Labour's policies. Tories actually have 3 of the top 5 most popular policies in their manifesto but know one knows about them. To win back some of these women and achieve a resut above par the tories must quickly bring some of these policies to the forefront.
NHS for example is seen as one of the top priority by voters but how many know the Tories plan to spen £8 billion on it? Very few.
In 2015 they promised £8bn more per year. In 2017 they promise £8bn over five years. Labour promise £11.6bn more.
No the 2015 manifesto promised 8 billion per year by 2020, ie over 5 years. This was for NHS England and was what the head of NHS England said was required.
We have had 2 years of that and so its being extended by another 2 years. Charges for migrants are being tripled BTW
Its strange to think that in 2010 Gordon Brown said that the NHS now had all the funding it needed and could embark on a 20 billion efficiency drive.
Anyway I am changing my policy on PB dickheads so I am going out for a haircut tomorrow.
This is very interesting and should be taken very seriously. I do think that, as with the Brexit and 2015 election, most commentary is driven by expectations rather than facts. The betting markets have been completely unreliable as a predictor because they simply reflect the sentiments of the engaged and a large element of group think is present.
I certainly find it very hard to believe that 38% of the British voters would vote for a total idiots such as Corbin, or that May could end up with NOM. But the facts are that, if the turnout modelling and expectations are wrong, this could well happen.
Remember, the assumptions about turnout effect in the EU referendum were completely wrong.
I find it really bizarre that Lab are so popular with the young and Con so popular with the old. The general trend I get, but to such extremes, it is incredible. Seriously, less than 15% of 18-24 yr olds support Tories? Fewer than 20% over 65s Labour? Christ.
It really is not good for the country. Not sure what can be done about it, other than an incoming Tory Govt adversely affecting its core vote...look how well that has gone so far.
Well, here's a radical idea: Labour could try putting forward a potential leader who those over 40 don't think is a bat-shit crazy IRA-loving old Trot...?
Well come on, he's offering the triple lock and winter fuel allowance, what more do they want?
This is the thing, Labour have got the worst of both worlds: They've got a leader hardly any of the high-turnout demographics will vote for, pushing a regressive manifesto that tilts the field even further against the young. It's basically the exact opposite of New Labour, which was designed to reassure centrist voters while achieving progressive outcomes bt stealth.
Basically saying the polls are all over the place but there has been a trend toward labour, the differences are down to weighting, and the pollsters are really nervous as this was supposed to be a test drive election with an inevitable outcome they could test their new methods to fix the unrepresentative sample problem without getting the winner wrong, but the 5 pt lead in one poll complicates things again.
Tories should be working on the unlikely asumption Labour actually are on 38%. They probably aren't and there might not be a youth surge.....but there might be. With all the errors over the last few years in polling the Tories have to be conservative.
Basically saying the polls are all over the place but there has been a trend toward labour, the differences are down to weighting, and the pollsters are really nervous as this was supposed to be a test drive election with an inevitable outcome they could test their new methods to fix the unrepresentative sample problem without getting the winner wrong, but the 5 pt lead in one poll complicates things again.
As Martin Boon says: "Here’s a quick walk-through of changes that have been made to the Guardian/ICM poll since 2015: we’ve switched from phone to online data collection; doubled our sample size; introduced a range of new quotas and weights; radically overhauled our turnout modelling; and introduced a post-data adjustment, that reallocates people who we know nothing about politically.
It’s a pretty radical set of methods.
But there’s a catch; one which relates to that penultimate change. For were it not for the particularly strong turnout model employed, we too would be showing something very close to YouGov’s 5-pointer, rather than the 14-pointer we have."
So, it would seem, it's all down to the need for and accuracy of ICM's "particularly strong turnout model employed" If they've called this right then they'll truly have shown themselves as being the Gold Standard. If not ..... oh dearie me! No need for us mere mortals to attend a conference of academics like OGH, it's all reasonably clear, at least in outline, and to put in a nutshell, it's a fight to the death as I see things between YouGov and ICM. Well, maybe not quite that dramatic, but something fairly close.
In numerical terms, the difference between the two firms is a Tory Majority of 126 with the Blue team winning 388 seats from ICM and one of around 40 from YouGov, with the Tories winning just 345 seats. In fact the spread-betting firms' current quotes are very much closer to the ICM forecast with Tory seats remaining stubbornly just above the 380 level. Subject only to awaiting Survation's numbers which are due out later today, this has convinced me that now is probably around the time to cash in my remaining chips on my Tory sell position at 402, having closed half my bet early yesterday.
One comment in Bagehot that struck me was on May's lack of business experience - who was the last PM who did? Baldwin? It's been professional politicians and lawyers in the main....
Rob - Until I read the piece by Martin Boon I really had no idea that ICM's methodology had changed so dramatically since the May 2015 GE. Doubtless other firms, incl YouGov, have changed too, but who will come out on top? If I were a betting man (ha ha), then I'd have to go with ICM. But in terms of the actual result on 8 June, there's still plenty of time for underlying public opinion to change significantly, even allowing for the fact that most of us 6 million+ postal voters have already made our decision. I've never known a previous General Election where it seems quite possible for the result to be one where the winning party will have a majority of anywhere between, say, 40 seats - 180 seats. Copping out, I suppose I'm expecting it to be somewhere in the middle of this range, i.e. a Tory majority of around 100 - 120 seats.
Rob - Until I read the piece by Martin Boon I really had no idea that ICM's methodology had changed so dramatically since the May 2015 GE. Doubtless other firms, incl YouGov, have changed too, but who will come out on top? If I were a betting man (ha ha), then I'd have to go with ICM. But in terms of the actual result on 8 June, there's still plenty of time for underlying public opinion to change significantly, even allowing for the fact that most of us 6 million+ postal voters have already made our decision. I've never known a previous General Election where it seems quite possible for the result to be one where the winning party will have a majority of anywhere between, say, 40 seats - 180 seats. Copping out, I suppose I'm expecting it to be somewhere in the middle of this range, i.e. a Tory majority of around 100 - 120 seats.
The adjustments being made after pollsters have got their raw results are significant and untested, and must place a big question mark over their accuracy. The old practice of trying to get a balanced sample and then taking the results from this as representative, without mathematical manipulation, appears to have be been abandoned for UK VI. It is notable that in the French election (which on the face of it was more complicated) was polled with remarkable accuracy whereas in the UK the various pollsters are all over the place.
On postal votes, my guess is that about 10% of total votes have already been cast. Now there will be drips ans drabs coming back to ROs each day, there is always a last minute peak in postal returns and it is becoming increasingly common for people to take PVs down to the polling station and hand them in on the day. And of course something like 3% will be ruled incorrectly verified and about 15%-20% won't come back at all. All of these people continue to be polled normally, as far as I know.
P.s. In particular some pollsters are making some pretty big calls, as it says downthread, about who will and won't vote, in some cases using demographic data to override individual responses to questions about interest and likelihood to vote. Typically this will, for example, down-weight young people in the poll. Yet, if there came along a candidate with an unusually strong appeal to younger voters, this obviously makes such historically-derived adjustments immediately inaccurate? People who say they are keen and definite to vote are assumed to be lying.
P.s. In particular some pollsters are making some pretty big calls, as it says downthread, about who will and won't vote, in some cases using demographic data to override individual responses to questions about interest and likelihood to vote. Typically this will, for example, down-weight young people in the poll. Yet, if there came along a candidate with an unusually strong appeal to younger voters, this obviously makes such historically-derived adjustments immediately inaccurate? People who say they are keen and definite to vote are assumed to be lying.
I think a lot more young voters will vote this time round, even tho abolition of tuition fees won't happen as Labour cannot win with Corbyn Abbott and McDonnell. Its like asking sensible voters to eat a sarni with their three most disliked fillings all in the same sarni.. .
The speed controls on YouTube are very useful when you've only got 2 minutes to watch a 4 minute video.
@scrapheap_as_was will be delighted to hear that. No longer does he have to spend 10 hours watching the 2015 election coverage.. he can watch it all at 100x speed
Comments
Postal vote not arrived BTW - but I live where they weigh the tory vote. Still I wonder of the lefties in the council know its half term here and tories will be winging away this week.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/868896505800908802
Average - last 7polls/post-Manchester
Con 44.4
Lab 35.6
LD 7.8
Ukip 4.6
Con lead 8.8 <- wd be highest since '87"
Basically the difference is between those young enough to have little real world experience of working, those old enough to have retired and those who are working are in the middle.
In fact strangely the percentage of this age group that says it will vote Conservative (before removing don't knows) has almost halved...
"Burying Thatcher’s Legacy
by Theodore Dalrymple"
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/05/23/burying-thatchers-legacy/
I'm not advocating removing the vote from people at a certain age for all sorts of reasons though.
Alternatively, we give the vote to people over 40 - you know, those who know something about how the world really works, and are not dumb enough to purchase the first moon on a stick they get offered....
Its a funny kind of democracy that some lefties have. I suppose lefties could be generous and offer Euthanasia on the NHS.
I would say Labour leads 60% to 30% in that age group, something like that.
I think the ignorant young should sell their votes to the wealthy toffs to fund their drinking, sorry, tuition fees
I could handle 7 votes. I think. It might require PR though...
* "semi" being shorthand for the "Britain's Got Talent" semifinal, at which Amanda will be a judge
* "semi" being slang for a nearly-but-not-fully-erect penis.
By conflating the two meanings, the Sun can smuggle in a rude observation.
Tories actually have 3 of the top 5 most popular policies in their manifesto but know one knows about them. To win back some of these women and achieve a resut above par the tories must quickly bring some of these policies to the forefront.
NHS for example is seen as one of the top priority by voters but how many know the Tories plan to spen £8 billion on it? Very few.
Apparently he is "a shameless apologist for the world's men of evil" and he has been for decades. Doubtless he only needs to think of Daesh headchoppers and he jumps for joy, chanting "Trotsky and Kim Jong-Un forever!" Every time he hears of a terrorist attack in Britain he punches the air and says "Yeah!" and "Today nailbombs, tomorrow sarin, followed by nukes!"
And this is going to get worse. The front pages of the Sunday Times next Sunday and the Sun the following Tuesday and Wednesday will be classics. I won't be at all surprised if the Sun prints photos of wounded people at the Manchester Arena with a headline such as "Corbyn Praises ISIS Terror Attacks". Tories have no morals.
But there's a problem. First, if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. All it will take is two hits, perhaps even one hit, against a leading Tory cabinet minister (May or Johnson probably) and we could be on our way to a Labour landslide. You cannot "Sun-crap" all of the people all the time in every election. Especially when the Tories have got fuck-all in the way of any policies that many people in the country could actually be keen about. Brexit is a total yawn, and anyway, everyone knows the Tories don't have a clue what they're doing.
Second, they aren't going to get much support against Corbyn from pro-Trident creeps among Labour's parliamentary candidates. From Blair, maybe, or Mandelson. But who listens to them?
Talking of the Shiners... I always loved this one - the Northern Ireland branch of the electoral commision did a clear out of the electoral roll. Removing the dead etc. About 100K Shiner voters turned out to have existence problems. The Chuckle brothers went on TV, issued their usual snide threats - we-are-men-of-peace-but-people-we-don't-know-aren't etc..
The head of the electoral commission held a press conference where he gave out his office number and said that if anyone had been disenfranchised, he would personally fix the issue.
The sound of silence can be deafening.... Now *that* is courage.
We have had 2 years of that and so its being extended by another 2 years. Charges for migrants are being tripled BTW
Its strange to think that in 2010 Gordon Brown said that the NHS now had all the funding it needed and could embark on a 20 billion efficiency drive.
Anyway I am changing my policy on PB dickheads so I am going out for a haircut tomorrow.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/whats-really-happening-with-labour-in-the-polls
I certainly find it very hard to believe that 38% of the British voters would vote for a total idiots such as Corbin, or that May could end up with NOM. But the facts are that, if the turnout modelling and expectations are wrong, this could well happen.
Remember, the assumptions about turnout effect in the EU referendum were completely wrong.
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21722681-two-prime-ministers-were-display-weekone-thoroughly-competent-other-less-so-two?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/bagehotthetwotheresamays
Well, makes a nice change after Cameroons.....
"Here’s a quick walk-through of changes that have been made to the Guardian/ICM poll since 2015: we’ve switched from phone to online data collection; doubled our sample size; introduced a range of new quotas and weights; radically overhauled our turnout modelling; and introduced a post-data adjustment, that reallocates people who we know nothing about politically.
It’s a pretty radical set of methods.
But there’s a catch; one which relates to that penultimate change. For were it not for the particularly strong turnout model employed, we too would be showing something very close to YouGov’s 5-pointer, rather than the 14-pointer we have."
So, it would seem, it's all down to the need for and accuracy of ICM's "particularly strong turnout model employed" If they've called this right then they'll truly have shown themselves as being the Gold Standard. If not ..... oh dearie me!
No need for us mere mortals to attend a conference of academics like OGH, it's all reasonably clear, at least in outline, and to put in a nutshell, it's a fight to the death as I see things between YouGov and ICM. Well, maybe not quite that dramatic, but something fairly close.
In numerical terms, the difference between the two firms is a Tory Majority of 126 with the Blue team winning 388 seats from ICM and one of around 40 from YouGov, with the Tories winning just 345 seats.
In fact the spread-betting firms' current quotes are very much closer to the ICM forecast with Tory seats remaining stubbornly just above the 380 level. Subject only to awaiting Survation's numbers which are due out later today, this has convinced me that now is probably around the time to cash in my remaining chips on my Tory sell position at 402, having closed half my bet early yesterday.
I hope it's the former...
Until I read the piece by Martin Boon I really had no idea that ICM's methodology had changed so dramatically since the May 2015 GE. Doubtless other firms, incl YouGov, have changed too, but who will come out on top? If I were a betting man (ha ha), then I'd have to go with ICM. But in terms of the actual result on 8 June, there's still plenty of time for underlying public opinion to change significantly, even allowing for the fact that most of us 6 million+ postal voters have already made our decision.
I've never known a previous General Election where it seems quite possible for the result to be one where the winning party will have a majority of anywhere between, say, 40 seats - 180 seats. Copping out, I suppose I'm expecting it to be somewhere in the middle of this range, i.e. a Tory majority of around 100 - 120 seats.
On postal votes, my guess is that about 10% of total votes have already been cast. Now there will be drips ans drabs coming back to ROs each day, there is always a last minute peak in postal returns and it is becoming increasingly common for people to take PVs down to the polling station and hand them in on the day. And of course something like 3% will be ruled incorrectly verified and about 15%-20% won't come back at all. All of these people continue to be polled normally, as far as I know.