1) I am not noticing any dip in the Conservative vote. Certainly nothing like to justify the colly wobbles on here for the past week.
2) The polls seem to confirm the above. The Tory vote is consistently solid and still not that far off the 'peak' of 49%,. The Tory lead has shrunk because Jeremy is allegedly polling in the mid 30's. If that is the case I'm a Dutch man.
3) There is nothing to give us reason to change our minds on what we know. Jeremy's boys (and girls) don't turn up on the day. Even in the Referendum when it was 'their' future at stake, they couldn't be arsed. He will be doing bloody well to top 28%.
3) The Tory campaign needs it to look and feel close, to motivate the soft Tory (remainer) vote and convert the Liberal leaners into Blues on the day. I doubt the Jolly Swagman will be wholly unhappy with the narrative developing that Jeremy is close to pulling this off (with a little help from Jimmy Crankie).
4) Theresa should be cut some slack. Two years ago we scrapped an unexpected majority (and barely a working one). Between then and now we have had a rancorous referendum which the Conservative party, to all intents and purposes, lost badly and we have jettisoned a PM and half a cabinet. The cupboard is bare and Theresa has bugger all to offer in the way of sweeteners. Yet despite all this, she is polling at Mrs T levels. She's doing fine and looks likely to win a very healthy majority. That is all any Conservative supporter can reasonably ask of a leader.
A week ago children were blown to bits during a night out. May has spent time this last week being briefed by the security services about threats of similar attacks, threats that necessitated a temporary change in rating.
Anyone would be a "glum bucket" after such a week.
I am not a May fan. But, really, a sense of perspective is needed.
For a number of reasons, some personal some political, I think there is an intense dislike of Theresa May on this forum, which is not shared by the public as a whole.
Its called herding.
From an editorial point of view anyone who replaced Cameron and Osborne would always be knifed at every opportunity by TSE, (he is the one after all who constantly goaded about the lack of mandate) and of course OGH as a fervid libdem leaver is always willing to put a boot in against leavers - sometimes with quite nasty venom. The lead is there from the top.
You would think TSE's ire would be more publicly aimed at Gove who betrayed Cameron to pursue his own advancement and then did the same to Boris. In any event we are here because Cameron failed - sadly - failed in his negotiations and failed in his referendum. None of which has anything to do with May.
Ugh. Mrs May was out campaigning for Zac Goldsmith today.
She's not fit for office.
I love you dearly but I fear you wish the Tories to lose this election.
I want us to win this election (think of my bets) but I really really loathe Zac.
Plus I don't want us to become like Venezuela
I want us to win as well, my criticism of her is more because I want this campaign run a lot better. It's been a piss poor campaign, amateur at times.
A Tory activist friend in the Midlands says he feels the same about Nick Timothy that I do when it comes to Mark Reckless.
Am I foolish in hoping he'll fall on his sword after the election? If I were him I would.
I think some people struggle to understand the concept of "spending political capital". The manifesto pledge was definitely a "mistake" in the sense that it probably cost votes and reduced the size of the (assumed) Conservative majority. But ultimately you have to govern and what is put in the manifesto is a major part of that. If the various measures surrounding the elderly were inserted into the manifesto under the belief that they wouldn't have any material electoral effect then there is certainly a case to answer. But firstly the actual outcome of the election needs to be known.
Was the Liberal Democrat pledge on tuition fees in 2010 a mistake? Certainly not if only judged in terms of it's contribution to electoral outcome. Might just have destroyed the party though. If, somehow, Corbyn won a majority it is quite possible to imagine the Labour Party not existing in 5 years time if they actually tried to implement their manifesto.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
Attlee ran a very tight ship fiscally, until the Korean War started.
Ugh. Mrs May was out campaigning for Zac Goldsmith today.
She's not fit for office.
I love you dearly but I fear you wish the Tories to lose this election.
I want us to win this election (think of my bets) but I really really loathe Zac.
Plus I don't want us to become like Venezuela
I want us to win as well, my criticism of her is more because I want this campaign run a lot better. It's been a piss poor campaign, amateur at times.
A Tory activist friend in the Midlands says he feels the same about Nick Timothy that I do when it comes to Mark Reckless.
Am I foolish in hoping he'll fall on his sword after the election? If I were him I would.
I think some people struggle to understand the concept of "spending political capital". The manifesto pledge was definitely a "mistake" in the sense that it probably cost votes and reduced the size of the (assumed) Conservative majority. But ultimately you have to govern and what is put in the manifesto is a major part of that. If the various measures surrounding the elderly were inserted into the manifesto under the belief that they wouldn't have any material electoral effect then there is certainly a case to answer. But firstly the actual outcome of the election needs to be known.
Was the Liberal Democrat pledge on tuition fees in 2010 a mistake? Certainly not if only judged in terms of it's contribution to electoral outcome. Might just have destroyed the party though. If, somehow, Corbyn won a majority it is quite possible to imagine the Labour Party not existing in 5 years time if they actually tried to implement their manifesto.
I do see the point in spending political capital, but the way they did it was so ham-fisted.
A week ago children were blown to bits during a night out. May has spent time this last week being briefed by the security services about threats of similar attacks, threats that necessitated a temporary change in rating.
Anyone would be a "glum bucket" after such a week.
I am not a May fan. But, really, a sense of perspective is needed.
For a number of reasons, some personal some political, I think there is an intense dislike of Theresa May on this forum, which is not shared by the public as a whole.
That's absolutely right and you should join the diplomatic service.
1. She sacked some people in CCHQ, who are friends with people here.
2. She's not Cameron or Osborne.
3. She's not economically dry enough (I agree, but I'll still vote Conservative.)
4. She's " provincial" and lower middle class (like Thatcher).
5. She accepts Brexit.
6. She's a Tory.
A grave chart sheet, indeed.
Thatcher wasn't lower middle class. May definitely isn't. Provincial is fair enough, though.
She was the daughter of a grocer, and town alderman from Lincolnshire - that's lower middle class. She went to Oxford later and had elocution lessons, so she didn't sound it.
Theresa May is a vicar's daughter from Oxforshire, and the granddaughter of grandparents who both worked in domestic service. That's lower middle class.
Although, strictly speaking, in a way only someone English would fully understand, Vicar outranks Greengrocer.
My father was a master mariner, my mother a teacher. I'm a graduate engineer now retired and am married to a graduate pharmacist. Which class am I in and why should I give a ....
Middle class. And you shouldn't.
But it's part of the English disease that we all profess to abhor class distinctions whilst either secretly, or subconsciously, filing everyone into one, as such.
I forgot to mention I was lib dem sandhurst town mayor 1996/7 does that change it?
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
Attlee ran a very tight ship fiscally, until the Korean War started.
Nuttall did well earlier, he's a sitting duck but coped comfortably. Bit disappointed with Neil continually calling UKIP extreme, the death penalty is supported by 65% and even more want immigration reduced significantly.
It will all be in vain but well done Paul Nuttall.
I don't like UKIP and don't think much of Nuttall. I come from the north west but think the Liverpool accent will be doing him no favours - which is quite wrong of course to my northern mind. But in an age where 'image' is supposed to be important I think he loses every time he opens his mouth.
I have not seen any of these interviews but Neil's seem to have been a damp squib, especially when all the experts on here were predicting how brilliant they would be.
Only people who think that curbs on private education are an attack on the middle classes would think that the daughters of provincial vicars and small businessmen are lower middle class.
Vicars are highly educated, but have very low incomes, relative to that education. Most grocers are definitely lower middle class.
The above sentence sounds horribly snobbish, but I can't think of any other way to express it.
Only people who think that curbs on private education are an attack on the middle classes would think that the daughters of provincial vicars and small businessmen are lower middle class.
Vicars are highly educated, but have very low incomes, relative to that education. Most grocers are definitely lower middle class.
The above sentence sounds horribly snobbish, but I can't think of any other way to express it.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
Attlee ran a very tight ship fiscally, until the Korean War started.
I think Corbyn's line on terrorism and foreign policy, including his IRA past, is very good. I just don't think he believes it, and in the IRA case I think it's demonstrably false.
Of course, that only matters if other voters don't believe him too.
I think Corbyn's line on terrorism and foreign policy, including his IRA past, is very good. I just don't think he believes it, and in the IRA case I think it's demonstrably false.
Of course, that only matters if other voters don't believe him too.
Well the bloke in the audience asking the second question is nailing him on specifics, and for my money it's not a good look for Corbyn.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
You wouldn't imagine Attlee spending many billions of pounds though, let alone borrowing billions...
@Concanvasser - which seat are you canvassing, if I can ask.
Not sure what to believe any more re polls/canvas returns.
SW Beds and Luton S.
SW Beds CON Hold
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
SW Beds is utterly safe. Weirdly volatile historically though. In '97 a 21k majority shrunk to 132 for no obvious reason. Would think the majority might go up to the 18-20k mark again.
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
Only people who think that curbs on private education are an attack on the middle classes would think that the daughters of provincial vicars and small businessmen are lower middle class.
Vicars are highly educated, but have very low incomes, relative to that education. Most grocers are definitely lower middle class.
The above sentence sounds horribly snobbish, but I can't think of any other way to express it.
Perhaps the issue in categorisation here is that there are only two types of middle class - upper and lower. If there were a middle middle class then that would sort it
Only people who think that curbs on private education are an attack on the middle classes would think that the daughters of provincial vicars and small businessmen are lower middle class.
Vicars are highly educated, but have very low incomes, relative to that education. Most grocers are definitely lower middle class.
The above sentence sounds horribly snobbish, but I can't think of any other way to express it.
Anglican clergy of 1950s & 60s were somewhat above lower middle class, I would say.
Probably correct.
My dad is the son of a minister of the Kirk (so, roughly similar social standing to a CoE vicar), growing up in the 50s and 60s. His dad was the son of a small businessman, growing up in the 1910s and 20s.
As a child, dad was invited along with his parents to tea with the local gentry. I very much doubt his father, as a child, ever was.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
You wouldn't imagine Attlee spending many billions of pounds though, let alone borrowing billions...
@Concanvasser - which seat are you canvassing, if I can ask.
Not sure what to believe any more re polls/canvas returns.
SW Beds and Luton S.
SW Beds CON Hold
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
SW Beds is utterly safe. Weirdly volatile historically though. In '97 a 21k majority shrunk to 132 for no obvious reason. Would think the majority might go up to the 18-20k mark again.
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
Is there a similar Con effort going in to Luton N?
@Concanvasser - which seat are you canvassing, if I can ask.
Not sure what to believe any more re polls/canvas returns.
SW Beds and Luton S.
SW Beds CON Hold
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
SW Beds is utterly safe. Weirdly volatile historically though. In '97 a 21k majority shrunk to 132 for no obvious reason. Would think the majority might go up to the 18-20k mark again.
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
SW Beds went Labour in 1966, but it's safe now.
I think the Tories will win close to 40% across Luton, but Labour will hold both seats.
1) I am not noticing any dip in the Conservative vote. Certainly nothing like to justify the colly wobbles on here for the past week.
2) The polls seem to confirm the above. The Tory vote is consistently solid and still not that far off the 'peak' of 49%,. The Tory lead has shrunk because Jeremy is allegedly polling in the mid 30's. If that is the case I'm a Dutch man.
3) There is nothing to give us reason to change our minds on what we know. Jeremy's boys (and girls) don't turn up on the day. Even in the Referendum when it was 'their' future at stake, they couldn't be arsed. He will be doing bloody well to top 28%.
3) The Tory campaign needs it to look and feel close, to motivate the soft Tory (remainer) vote and convert the Liberal leaners into Blues on the day. I doubt the Jolly Swagman will be wholly unhappy with the narrative developing that Jeremy is close to pulling this off (with a little help from Jimmy Crankie).
4) Theresa should be cut some slack. Two years ago we scrapped an unexpected majority (and barely a working one). Between then and now we have had a rancorous referendum which the Conservative party, to all intents and purposes, lost badly and we have jettisoned a PM and half a cabinet. The cupboard is bare and Theresa has bugger all to offer in the way of sweeteners. Yet despite all this, she is polling at Mrs T levels. She's doing fine and looks likely to win a very healthy majority. That is all any Conservative supporter can reasonably ask of a leader.
I don't take any notice of this talk about wobbles. Its the media trying to make it interesting and give another angle on the story. The media war/ air war is very different to the ground war. In every election since polling started to gain traction in the post war period we have been subjected to this media bullshit. My favourite media term the infamous "last minute swing" which should be getting dusted down for June 6th, 7th and of course the 8th of next month. Its all bullshit and entirely predictable.
I am not sure whether it is the media and the narrative that change the opinion polls or whether it is the pollsters fiddling about to make a story. Anyway, General Elections whether it is a Tory victory or a Labour one go through the same media narratives every election dependent on who started out on top. No doubt when May wins, it will be a personal victory etc..etc... Very boring and tedious. Where as the results in terms of the votes and seats is the area of real interest. The campaign narrative is all a load of pretentious bullshit for the public to watch and even intelligent people are taken in by it all.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
You wouldn't imagine Attlee spending many billions of pounds though, let alone borrowing billions...
Presumably Attlee inherited a massive deficit, but had plenty of scope for reducing it (even despite all the nationalisation programmes etc)
My main point was that "one billion pounds" then and "one billion pounds" today are very different things, as Rob has been saying rather more clearly, repeatedly, to no avail whatsoever. Should have italicised the word "billion" to make my point clearer.
May could do with a joke writer and/or chuckles consultant.
She's about as joyless as Corbyn, and that's saying something.
Corbyn can be quite witty, and has a little twinkle in his eye when talking to a crowd. He no longer harangues people, but rather demonstrates a very British civility. I recall watching him at the Labour hustings. He knows how to work an audience. One on one with a journalist less so.
Would you care to comment on how he works a police cordon around the Old Bailey during a trial of IRA murders?
Its not working
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
You wouldn't imagine Attlee spending many billions of pounds though, let alone borrowing billions...
Presumably Attlee inherited a massive deficit, but had plenty of scope for reducing it (even despite all the nationalisation programmes etc)
My main point was that "one billion pounds" then and "one billion pounds" today are very different things, as Rob has been saying rather more clearly, repeatedly, to no avail whatsoever. Should have italicised the word "billion" to make my point clearer.
@Concanvasser - which seat are you canvassing, if I can ask.
Not sure what to believe any more re polls/canvas returns.
SW Beds and Luton S.
SW Beds CON Hold
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
SW Beds is utterly safe. Weirdly volatile historically though. In '97 a 21k majority shrunk to 132 for no obvious reason. Would think the majority might go up to the 18-20k mark again.
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
Is there a similar Con effort going in to Luton N?
No. Luton N has approx. double the majority of Luton S. Kelvin is also strong Leaver in a leave seat and a very nice man.
The thing about Corbyn is that he's a good campaigner (as his leadership win shows) but he's a terrible leader (hence the infighting in the labour party).
as such it doesn't surprise me that he's exceeded expectations in this election.
btw I think that May is the opposite, she can lead but isn't a natural campaigner.
My initial hope for the election was that the Lib Dems would replace Labour.
That one seems a longshot now
The Left-leaning LibDems have left for Labour.
To balance that out, we need the remaining Right-leaning LibDems to go to the Tories.
Left leaning lib dems left when they went into coalition with the tories. All hope of a broad centre coalition went out of the window when the party ran scared at this and campaigned against their own govt with more vigour than Corbyn ever managed. The LDs have compounded this error by going all EU friendly after the referendum which has left them appealing to nobody.
As for TV interviews and QT sessions these usually do not change anything and only appeal to the opposing side of whoever is being quizzed. They just rehash whats already there. Does anybody remember the Dembot furore over GW Bush allegedly being prompted answers via an earpiece?
Seriously tell us something positive the Tories are planning
The facts of his behaviour which you are happy to stand behind tell us all we need to know about him his possible government and of course you.
The tories stand for fiscal monetary social and security responsibility, labour stand for spending wastefully and borrowing flagrantly.
Not on average they dont
The Tories have been the biggest borrowers over the last 70years. The documented figures are as follows: The average Tory annual borrowing in their 42 years in office was £22.9 billion compared to Labour’s annual borrowing of £17.4 billion during their 28 years in office. (Data source: The basic data on borrowing came from the House of Commons Library)
And even if it were true its not enough to win big after the main proposals of another 8 yrs of Austerity and House Theft from Granny
I take it that is just the sum of borrowing divided by the number of years, which significantly up-weights the huge deficit left by Labour in 2010.
You would imagine Attlee might have borrowed quite a bit though.
You wouldn't imagine Attlee spending many billions of pounds though, let alone borrowing billions...
Presumably Attlee inherited a massive deficit, but had plenty of scope for reducing it (even despite all the nationalisation programmes etc)
My main point was that "one billion pounds" then and "one billion pounds" today are very different things, as Rob has been saying rather more clearly, repeatedly, to no avail whatsoever. Should have italicised the word "billion" to make my point clearer.
I'm trying my best
You're a hero all the way, Rob, but you're fighting a 386 battle.
(Bet you knew where that link was pointing before you hovered...)
My initial hope for the election was that the Lib Dems would replace Labour.
That one seems a longshot now
The Left-leaning LibDems have left for Labour.
To balance that out, we need the remaining Right-leaning LibDems to go to the Tories.
Left leaning lib dems left when they went into coalition with the tories. All hope of a broad centre coalition went out of the window when the party ran scared at this and campaigned against their own govt with more vigour than Corbyn ever managed. The LDs have compounded this error by going all EU friendly after the referendum which has left them appealing to nobody.
As for TV interviews and QT sessions these usually do not change anything and only appeal to the opposing side of whoever is being quizzed. They just rehash whats already there. Does anybody remember the Dembot furore over GW Bush allegedly being prompted answers via an earpiece?
Wasn't the Cleggasm a real thing due to the debates in 2010?
This was an election in which a party leader with a peculiar voting history, and who was unknown to most of the electorate at large, was supposedly to be tested under fire. Having assumed leadership in a surprise election win, the new leader faced a party shellshocked by recent poll defeats results, ideologically disunited, at risk from extremist insurgent cabals and overall far from sure that it had the right leader at the helm, given current challenges.
The wide expectation was that their leader would fail this litmus test, and most would probably say that this is what has happened.
But that's enough about Theresa May and the Conservatives. How's Corbyn doing? Well, permitted as he has been the luxury of a largely unchallenged manifesto, he's nevertheless blown it almost as badly.
I am still thinking 10 to 12 point Tory lead and 100-seat majority. When push comes to shove people always vote for the most credible leader. In a field of two, Corbyn is not that leader.
@Concanvasser - which seat are you canvassing, if I can ask.
Not sure what to believe any more re polls/canvas returns.
SW Beds and Luton S.
SW Beds CON Hold
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
SW Beds is utterly safe. Weirdly volatile historically though. In '97 a 21k majority shrunk to 132 for no obvious reason. Would think the majority might go up to the 18-20k mark again.
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
Is there a similar Con effort going in to Luton N?
No. Luton N has approx. double the majority of Luton S. Kelvin is also strong Leaver in a leave seat and a very nice man.
Yes, I have had dinner with Kelvin! I couldn't see him being in trouble (even if he did nominate Corbyn!).
Comments
From an editorial point of view anyone who replaced Cameron and Osborne would always be knifed at every opportunity by TSE, (he is the one after all who constantly goaded about the lack of mandate) and of course OGH as a fervid libdem leaver is always willing to put a boot in against leavers - sometimes with quite nasty venom.
The lead is there from the top.
You would think TSE's ire would be more publicly aimed at Gove who betrayed Cameron to pursue his own advancement and then did the same to Boris. In any event we are here because Cameron failed - sadly - failed in his negotiations and failed in his referendum. None of which has anything to do with May.
From a Labour point of view there is a well known misogynistic streak in their approach to women in the party.
https://www.ft.com/content/07b304d4-4698-11e6-8d68-72e9211e86ab
Angels Eagle where are you now - remember her
http://affinitymagazine.us/2016/07/25/is-the-labour-party-inherently-misogynistic/
'Reports of systemic misogyny within the Labour party have been bubbling under the surface for years, but it has been under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn that the situation has reached a peak. ''
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/how-did-labour-become-the-new-nasty-party-for-women-a3300161.html
And who can forget - come on admit it you have - the abuse heaped on Liz Kendall during the first leadership campaign.
So no surprises at comments from PBSocialists
And we are now told that this presider over this labour party mysogeny is appealing to women...
Before that I actually had no issue with him at all.
Was the Liberal Democrat pledge on tuition fees in 2010 a mistake? Certainly not if only judged in terms of it's contribution to electoral outcome. Might just have destroyed the party though. If, somehow, Corbyn won a majority it is quite possible to imagine the Labour Party not existing in 5 years time if they actually tried to implement their manifesto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y60wDzZt8yg
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsTonight/status/869258725600632832
Attlee was a true patriot.
That one seems a longshot now
Luton S LAB Hold
I would predict although the latter would be Con Gain on early polls
I have not seen any of these interviews but Neil's seem to have been a damp squib, especially when all the experts on here were predicting how brilliant they would be.
How the mighty have fallen.
If Corbyn becomes PM after this election - I bet average GDP growth will exceed that of Cameron/May from 2010 - 2017.
If May wins bet is void. Up to maximum of say £50.
As you don't know me I am happy to transfer money in advance to a neutral party if one can be found.
Tempted?
How times change. I remember when Zac was known for his views on the environment.
The above sentence sounds horribly snobbish, but I can't think of any other way to express it.
To balance that out, we need the remaining Right-leaning LibDems to go to the Tories.
Bit brutal for a pacifist, he's gone medieval!
Just asking for a friend ....
Second question from a UDA man?
Of course, that only matters if other voters don't believe him too.
Again decent answer.
Voted for GFA
PBers take note.
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/total_spending_1950UKmn
Luton S is 50/50 imho. Lots of Blue effort going there now which was certainly not going there in '15 or '10.
I suppose supporting the IRA is anti establishment though
My dad is the son of a minister of the Kirk (so, roughly similar social standing to a CoE vicar), growing up in the 50s and 60s. His dad was the son of a small businessman, growing up in the 1910s and 20s.
As a child, dad was invited along with his parents to tea with the local gentry. I very much doubt his father, as a child, ever was.
Wont go down well.
I think the Tories will win close to 40% across Luton, but Labour will hold both seats.
I am not sure whether it is the media and the narrative that change the opinion polls or whether it is the pollsters fiddling about to make a story. Anyway, General Elections whether it is a Tory victory or a Labour one go through the same media narratives every election dependent on who started out on top. No doubt when May wins, it will be a personal victory etc..etc... Very boring and tedious. Where as the results in terms of the votes and seats is the area of real interest. The campaign narrative is all a load of pretentious bullshit for the public to watch and even intelligent people are taken in by it all.
Corbyn said he backed the Good Friday Agreement. But on Corbynanswers, set up by his supporters, it says this. http://www.corbynanswers.com/84/why-did-corbyn-refuse-to-sign-the-good-friday-agreement …
Doing really well with the audience and well rehearsed.
Big no 10 behind his head
as such it doesn't surprise me that he's exceeded expectations in this election.
btw I think that May is the opposite, she can lead but isn't a natural campaigner.
The LDs have compounded this error by going all EU friendly after the referendum which has left them appealing to nobody.
As for TV interviews and QT sessions these usually do not change anything and only appeal to the opposing side of whoever is being quizzed. They just rehash whats already there. Does anybody remember the Dembot furore over GW Bush allegedly being prompted answers via an earpiece?
You don't say!
(Bet you knew where that link was pointing before you hovered...)
The wide expectation was that their leader would fail this litmus test, and most would probably say that this is what has happened.
But that's enough about Theresa May and the Conservatives. How's Corbyn doing? Well, permitted as he has been the luxury of a largely unchallenged manifesto, he's nevertheless blown it almost as badly.
I am still thinking 10 to 12 point Tory lead and 100-seat majority. When push comes to shove people always vote for the most credible leader. In a field of two, Corbyn is not that leader.