maybe it is time to ban opinion polls during election campaigns. They are actually affecting the results of elections e.g. Labour stuck with Miliband under the impression he was ahead/level pegging for 5 years. Polls like this Yougov one might encourage all manner of turnout oddities despite possibly being total nonsense.
May should do the debate tomorrow because it won't cost her anything.
It's a far easier format than C4 yesterday or BBC1 QT on Friday.
Seven people giving one minute soundbites with minimal debate or interaction.
Slow paced, nobody gets the chance to build any momentum as you don't get to talk for long enough.
Agreed.
Not sure, she's so ponderous and flat footed and waffly she might make things worse. Tories should have sent Ruth Davidson. She's quick thinking and an excellent speaker.
Surely though with Corbyn gaining in the polls she has to go for it. What is the alternative, giving Corbyn and the also rans prime time publicity? Ok this is only one poll but the trend is clear, and if it continues a Conervative majority is no longer certain.
I see what you're thinking but if she performed anything like as woodenly as she did on the channel 4 thing she'd struggle to get a word in edgeways and flounder if she did. It's not her strength. Her best strategy is to keep campaigning and hope the anti Corbyn vote saves her bacon. It's disappointing to be dragged down to that level but she has nothing else to offer.
Shame really it was nice being able to vote Conservative for positive reasons at the last 2 elections.
This. We can bang on about everything but to my mind it boils down to this: the Tory manifesto got precisely no one excited. There was nothing in it to motivate the Tory vote and bring others over. You can't really polish a turd and Tezza doing more TV ain't going to make a difference at this stage. She just needs to sail on above the fray hoping she looks PM-like and that's what voters will be thinking about when their pencil's hovering over the ballot, and put her trust in Crosby that hammering away on Corbyn's past will have some impact. The course is set: suddenly turning up at TV shows will declare PANIC in capital letters and another u-turn. One more u-turn from May would be fatal.
Crosby hasn't worked any magic yet.
Whether he has or not will only become clear June 9th onward.
Retaining 50 seats would be a stonkingly good figure for them really.
That is also wrong as even on their own figures on Sunday Yougov had SNP 40%, Tories 30% in Scotland which would see 10 SNP seats go to the Tories leaving the SNP on 46 seats, so it looks like Yougov haven't even bothered to include their own Scottish figures properly in their overall calculation
A lot depends on whether the Scottish Tactical vote is anti Con or anti SNP. The Tories assume the latter, but could it be the former? Left wing unionists may not be that bothered voting against SNP now that Indyref2 has been kicked into touch by Nicola.
Um Nicola has certainly not kicked Indref2 into touch,she was demanding it is held before Brexit is enacted in her speech earlier today at their manifesto launch. As for the Anti-SNP vote it is pretty strong from what I can gather but whilst there are 50% of Scots who won't vote for the Nats there are probably 60% of Scots would never vote for the Tories. The SNP are therefore only likely to lose seats where they start with less than 45% of the vote or are being challenged by Labour or the LDs.
I asked this question some two weeks back. I cannot imagine a left person [ even a unionist ] voting Tory. I would rather be dead than vote Tory.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Dave is IIRC a Brasenose man.
Is there a little historical rivalry between Balliol and Brasenose ?
Not sure. But Bozza is a Balliol man, and my hosts were highly entertained by the rough ride he got when he returned last week.
Weren't you talking about houses in northern marginal constituencies costing £450k last week ?
Now you casually talk about £180k as if its a pittance.
Do you live in London by any chance ?
Lol.
The example I used last week, referred to a best case scenario of a working class family who had started on the property ladder in the early 80s and traded up to the point they were now living in a prime property.
Something like this 4 bed semi in Newcastle at 425k would do the trick
My theory was that with such a family, other than their pension it would be their only major asset and therefore the ony thing they were able to pass on to their kids / grandkids. They would feel disproportionately hit by the tax as they would not have other assets they were able to liquidate in their old age they could use to help their kids.
I'm well aware of how much houses cost. And I certainly don't see 180k as a pittance.
My theory is that the dementia tax disproportionately worries those people whose major asset is their home and who have few liquid assets they can easily dispose of in their old age to help their kids.
On that basis, the dementia tax is a terrible own goal because it worries precisely the sort of hard working middle class voter in marginal constituencies the Tories should be targeting.
That was my point then and remains my point now.
That house is in the most exclusive area within the Newcastle city boundary - footballers live there. Anyone with a house there should not be recieving state support. Where does it stop?
Retaining 50 seats would be a stonkingly good figure for them really.
That is also wrong as even on their own figures on Sunday Yougov had SNP 40%, Tories 30% in Scotland which would see 10 SNP seats go to the Tories leaving the SNP on 46 seats, so it looks like Yougov haven't even bothered to include their own Scottish figures properly in their overall calculation
A lot depends on whether the Scottish Tactical vote is anti Con or anti SNP. The Tories assume the latter, but could it be the former? Left wing unionists may not be that bothered voting against SNP now that Indyref2 has been kicked into touch by Nicola.
Um Nicola has certainly not kicked Indref2 into touch,she was demanding it is held before Brexit is enacted in her speech earlier today at their manifesto launch. As for the Anti-SNP vote it is pretty strong from what I can gather but whilst there are 50% of Scots who won't vote for the Nats there are probably 60% of Scots would never vote for the Tories. The SNP are therefore only likely to lose seats where they start with less than 45% of the vote or are being challenged by Labour or the LDs.
I asked this question some two weeks back. I cannot imagine a left person [ even a unionist ] voting Tory. I would rather be dead than vote Tory.
Centre left and Centre right are not that far from each other. Given that, refusal to consider one , even favouring far left and far right on occasion,which are often further away than the centre-alternative, is just pure tribalism, and little to do with ideology at all.
Does any other country has the ridiculous generational gap we have in terms of politics ?
No matter what you think it is desperately, desperately unhealthy.
I vaguely recall a BBC drama and discussion program about 15 years ago re this scenario - they did a series of them about potential future issues, one was about an energy crisis.
I can also remember arguing with DavidL back in 2011 and telling him that government encouragement of rising house prices and household debt would result in a massive transfer of wealth from the young to the old.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Dave is IIRC a Brasenose man.
Is there a little historical rivalry between Balliol and Brasenose ?
If TM does blow the election, the DC wwould be the only Tory Leader to have won an election in a quarter century.
OK - so I suppose the claimed validation is just based on the national totals from the referendum campaign. It seems a biggish step from that to claim validation for the variations between constituencies too, which is a vital part of the seat number model.
But in that case the question is whether the other YouGov polls published to date have been based on the same turnout model or not.
Does any other country has the ridiculous generational gap we have in terms of politics ?
No matter what you think it is desperately, desperately unhealthy.
Does any other country - actual dictatorships aside - have an education system in which systemic political bias and the fostering of groupthink is so entrenched?
That is the primary cause of the generational discrepancy and it takes bigger balls than most youngsters sport to even question the received diktat, let alone actively rebel against it. Schools and universities provide the conditioning. Conformity dressed up as rebellion. A strawman 'Establishment'. It's as old as the hills.
I voted (and campaigned) Tory in the 1990s as a teenager. I was the literally only one from my school to do so; despite it being one of the largest in London.
Terrifying to think that it's probably even worse 20 years later.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Dave is IIRC a Brasenose man.
Is there a little historical rivalry between Balliol and Brasenose ?
If TM does blow the election, the DC wwould be the only Tory Leader to have won an election in a quarter century.
Does any other country has the ridiculous generational gap we have in terms of politics ?
No matter what you think it is desperately, desperately unhealthy.
Does any other country - actual dictatorships aside - have an education system in which systemic political bias and the fostering of groupthink is so entrenched?
That is the primary cause of the generational discrepancy and it takes bigger balls than most youngsters sport to even question the received diktat, let alone actively rebel against it. Schools and universities provide the conditioning. Conformity dressed up as rebellion. A strawman 'Establishment'. It's as old as the hills.
I voted (and campaigned) Tory in the 1990s as a teenager. I was the literally only one from my school to do so; despite it being one of the largest in London.
Terrifying to think that it's probably even worse 20 years later.
Which constituency were you in at that time? Just interested.
Retaining 50 seats would be a stonkingly good figure for them really.
That is also wrong as even on their own figures on Sunday Yougov had SNP 40%, Tories 30% in Scotland which would see 10 SNP seats go to the Tories leaving the SNP on 46 seats, so it looks like Yougov haven't even bothered to include their own Scottish figures properly in their overall calculation
Retaining 50 seats would be a stonkingly good figure for them really.
That is also wrong as even on their own figures on Sunday Yougov had SNP 40%, Tories 30% in Scotland which would see 10 SNP seats go to the Tories leaving the SNP on 46 seats, so it looks like Yougov haven't even bothered to include their own Scottish figures properly in their overall calculation
All this reliance on UNS is a big mistake !!!
UNS might be broken, but it's not broken enough for a Tory share of 43%+ to fail to yield a majority.
Does any other country has the ridiculous generational gap we have in terms of politics ?
No matter what you think it is desperately, desperately unhealthy.
I'm not convinced it's any worse than it was in the 1970s.
To answer your question, I think Spain has a pretty big generational divide.
I vaguely remember reading that in 1987 the Conservatives had a bigger lead among first time voters than in the country as a whole.
And that the only age group Labour won in 1987 were those in their sixties ie the first time voters of 1945.
Of course the first time voters of 1987 weren't threatened with £50k student debts and were far more likely to be able to buy a house.
There weren't any student debts because the percentage going to university was much lower. Also the number of people even considering buying their own house was probably much lower then. The majority of people just assumed they'd have a council house or would rent a small flat.
Does any other country has the ridiculous generational gap we have in terms of politics ?
No matter what you think it is desperately, desperately unhealthy.
I'm not convinced it's any worse than it was in the 1970s.
To answer your question, I think Spain has a pretty big generational divide.
I vaguely remember reading that in 1987 the Conservatives had a bigger lead among first time voters than in the country as a whole.
And that the only age group Labour won in 1987 were those in their sixties ie the first time voters of 1945.
Of course the first time voters of 1987 weren't threatened with £50k student debts and were far more likely to be able to buy a house.
There weren't any student debts because the percentage going to university was much lower. Also the number of people even considering buying their own house was probably much lower then. The majority of people just assumed they'd have a council house or would rent a small flat.
I think home ownership in 1987 was higher than it is now and it had been growing for decades so people did have expectations they would be able to buy a house:
Whereas now home ownership has been falling for nearly 15 years - and the largest falls are in cities. Which also have the highest concentrations of young people.
The extra students is an important issue - lots of graduates have near worthless degrees and inflated expectations but no real prospects and huge debts.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Dave is IIRC a Brasenose man.
Is there a little historical rivalry between Balliol and Brasenose ?
If TM does blow the election, the DC wwould be the only Tory Leader to have won an election in a quarter century.
He would be strutting like a peacock.
Hahaha. Not going to happen.
Hubris did for Cameron. Oh and insulting his natural supporters for nigh on a decade...
Weren't you talking about houses in northern marginal constituencies costing £450k last week ?
Now you casually talk about £180k as if its a pittance.
Do you live in London by any chance ?
Lol.
The example I used last week, referred to a best case scenario of a working class family who had started on the property ladder in the early 80s and traded up to the point they were now living in a prime property.
Something like this 4 bed semi in Newcastle at 425k would do the trick
My theory was that with such a family, other than their pension it would be their only major asset and therefore the ony thing they were able to pass on to their kids / grandkids. They would feel disproportionately hit by the tax as they would not have other assets they were able to liquidate in their old age they could use to help their kids.
I'm well aware of how much houses cost. And I certainly don't see 180k as a pittance.
My theory is that the dementia tax disproportionately worries those people whose major asset is their home and who have few liquid assets they can easily dispose of in their old age to help their kids.
On that basis, the dementia tax is a terrible own goal because it worries precisely the sort of hard working middle class voter in marginal constituencies the Tories should be targeting.
That was my point then and remains my point now.
That house is in the most exclusive area within the Newcastle city boundary - footballers live there. Anyone with a house there should not be recieving state support. Where does it stop?
Here's one in Tynemouth, a constituency that was blue until 1997 and many people thought was in play just two weeks ago when Theresa May visited.
That house would have cost maybe 150-190k in the mid 90s. Well within reach of a middle aged couple with a joint income of 40-50k who had done well for themselves and traded up throughout the 80s and 90s.
Fast forward twenty years and it is probably their only nest egg. Unlike the truly wealthy, who have investment portfolios and liquid assets they can dip into to give little Tarquin or Jemimah 20k to help with tuition fees or 50k to help them on the property ladder there, their house is all they've got, and their offspring will have to wait until they are gone before they can pass it along.
I have always felt that the dementia tax fear is disproportionately great for the type of family whose only major asset is their house, and those are precisely the sort of voters - elderly, middle class, marginal constituencies - that the Tories should have been targeting. And that for me is why the dementia tax was such a stunning own goal.
There is simply no way on God's green earth that remain-leave polarisation of the vote favours Labour. Leave won over 400 seats, the Tories are well up with leave voters.
Almost no-one is voting on Brexit. Only the swivel-eyed on both camps. That is why Labour were so wise in ignoring it. Brexit election , my arse! That was settled last year.
Perhaps someone should have mentioned that to the PM.
Turnout simply must be up from 2015 btw. This election feels utterly critical.
Considering that the Tories have given zero reasons to vote for them apart from Jeremy not being their leader, I can see their support not turning out quite as well as they hope. Corbyn on the other hand has at least enthused a lot of people, whether they turnout to vote is probably going to go along way to determining whether Yougov or ICM got their polling right.
Maybe I need to have a break from this place. The end of world is nigh because one projection showed a hung parliament. One. Can't wait to here what Southam has to say about this poll.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Well, the politicians can blame the voters. I assume that MPs will do just that. Otherwise they would'nt've voted Brexit through after the referendum with so little fuss. And you're right that Cameron's role was execrable (though he must have some Conservative brownie points for making the state a tiny bit smaller through Austerity), but what about May's role in all of this? Here's a woman who believes that Brexit is not in the UK's best interests, who lied year after year about immigration, who oversaw huge reductions in policing, now touting herself as the only person qualified to take Britain out of the EU.
That house is in the most exclusive area within the Newcastle city boundary - footballers live there. Anyone with a house there should not be recieving state support. Where does it stop?
Here's one in Tynemouth, a constituency that was blue until 1997 and many people thought was in play just two weeks ago when Theresa May visited.
That house would have cost maybe 150-190k in the mid 90s. Well within reach of a middle aged couple with a joint income of 40-50k who had done well for themselves and traded up throughout the 80s and 90s.
Fast forward twenty years and it is probably their only nest egg. Unlike the truly wealthy, who have investment portfolios and liquid assets they can dip into to give little Tarquin or Jemimah 20k to help with tuition fees or 50k to help them on the property ladder there, their house is all they've got, and their offspring will have to wait until they are gone before they can pass it along.
I have always felt that the dementia tax fear is disproportionately great for the type of family whose only major asset is their house, and those are precisely the sort of voters - elderly, middle class, marginal constituencies - that the Tories should have been targeting. And that for me is why the dementia tax was such a stunning own goal.
Trying to be perfectly neutral I sensed no such movement to Lab last weekend when out and about politicking - in fact slightly the opposite if anything. That is not to say It could not of course still happen in the next few days but ICM feels more on the money right now.
Turnout simply must be up from 2015 btw. This election feels utterly critical.
How high does it have to go from EU Ref before the 18-34 year olds vote in large enough numbers to actually save Labour seats? This is labour's problem, if turnout does rise many of them might be DNV's who voted in EUREf but not in GE 2015, and they lean hugely Brexit.
That house would have cost maybe 150-190k in the mid 90s. Well within reach of a middle aged couple with a joint income of 40-50k who had done well for themselves and traded up throughout the 80s and 90s.
I hate to keep banging on on this, but it would have been nearer to £100-120K in the mid 90's[1], and would have been half that in 1985. Although a couple in 1995 on 40-50K is plausible: one thirtysomething manager on ~28K, one one row down on about 18K.
You are pointing to somebody who has leveraged a 60K house up to an asking price of £410K. But this is not remotely typical, it's a best-case scenario: most elderly people did not do this or even close, despite also being hard-working. The example encapsulates all that's wrong with this country: huge accumulation of wealth in the elderly and a generation of people hoping their parents will die soon so they can inherit.
Trying to be perfectly neutral I sensed no such movement to Lab last weekend when out and about politicking - in fact slightly the opposite if anything. That is not to say It could not of course still happen in the next few days but ICM feels more on the money right now.
This isn't very different to what I was saying yesterday:
1. ICM say that their model would show a lead very similar to Survation's (6 points) without ICM's adjustment based on past voting patterns rather than current claims to be certain to vote.
2. The previous poll was taken at a time when attention was entirely understandably focused on Mrs May. It's not unnatural that there has been a small shift to Labour since normal debate resumed, especially as ICM's own figure showed 7% of Tory voters saying they were more inclined to votew Labour as a result on the campin.
3. Tory efforts have been focused almost entirely on attack. Friends who live in Tory marginals tell me that the Tory local effort is barely visible - they seem to be relying on the national campaign and sending their helpers to Labour seats. Labour's effort has been more evenly divided, as it has to be for us to have a shot at winning.
The two polls are NOT out of line in terms of raw data. The question remains whether ICM's assumpions are correct or not. My guess is that the truth is somewhere in the middle and the true Tory lead is 7ish, but that's pure guesswork.
ICM gives the Tories a lead of 44% to 39% in Labour marginals with a Labour majority of less than 15% and the Tories lead in Tory seats with a majority of less than 10% by 39% to 38%. Labour lead in Labour seats with a majority of more than 15% by 50% to 33% and the Tories in Tory seats with a majority of more than 10% by 59% to 25% so the Yougov figures look rather dubious to me https://www.icmunlimited.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2017_guardian_poll8_may26-29.pdf
ICM actually shows Labour ahead in Tory marginals, though you get the 39-38 figures after adjusting for certainty to vote. A 1-point lead in constituencies which were all won by the Tories last time does suggest a sewing to Labour, again supporting YouGov's dtheory. But it's a small subsample and you know what we think of those.
1) The BBC1 QT Special on Sunday with Farron and Sturgeon has been pulled forward from 6pm to 5pm as BBC is showing the Manchester concert live.
Bound to depress even further what would be a low rating. Bad news for LDs. Not really such an important programme for Sturgeon anyway (as she has no shortage of coverage in Scotland which is all that really matters for her).
2) The Julie Etchingham ITV Tonight interview / feature programme with May is now on Tuesday 6 June at 7.30pm - just 36 hours before the polls open.
It won't be a big rater but even so I think that's good news for May as it'll be the last "long form" appearance by any of the leaders and it's in a middling format between light and heavy.
Will give May the last "long form" word for anyone watching that programme. I'm actually a bit surprised ITV is putting this so near polling day - it does seem a little unfair - though of course it was originally scheduled much earlier but delayed due to Manchester bombing.
@MikeL.. any update on who is going to the debate tomorrow? Have Labour actually announced anyone?
I don't think so - but strong rumour is that Corbyn will do it.
Given TV schedules + weather forecast, I don't actually think it's that big a deal as it is only going to rate about 3m and he isn't maximising the "May not turning up" narrative.
He should have made a big announcement on Sun or Mon that he was going and challenged May - this would then have created a big narrative re May not turning up.
Just turning up on the day will still make a good point but it'll have far less impact than if he had announced on Sun or Mon.
(Irrelevant anecdote and name dropping alert....) I have just got back from a dinner at Balliol. One of the more amusing conversations was how long it would be before Dave Cameron was recognised as the worst Prime Minister since Anthony Eden, and probably worse even than him.
And did the discussion come to an agreement ?
Basically, in about 6 weeks. Mrs May wins, everyone realises that the Brexit negotiations are a series of circles that cannot be squared, the Nats kick off again, and the Historians, economists, political commentators and assorted academics dust off their word processors and knock out a 15,000 word paper showing that Dave really was crap. I paraphrase, but the view is that he is going to have to carry the can for destroying both the European and domestic Unions. There is no-one else to blame (or praise, if that's your particular bent.)
Dave is IIRC a Brasenose man.
Is there a little historical rivalry between Balliol and Brasenose ?
If TM does blow the election, the DC would be the only Tory Leader to have won an election in a quarter century.
And the only one to have proposed and lost a referendum.....ever.....
A legal challenge in the Irish courts aimed at preventing the UK’s departure from the EU has been abandoned, bringing to an end one of the most tenacious rearguard actions outside the UK against Brexit.
Jolyon Maugham QC, a British barrister, had brought a case to the High Court in Dublin seeking to establish that Brexit could be halted even after the triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
The bulk of most parties MPs are not unreasonable people, and the Tories would have a new leader. The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. It would unify the country.
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
I am really surprised that Yougov are risking trashing their remaining reputation like this. If they are as far out as ICM think they are they are finished. And vice versa of course. But I know where my money is.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
You think politics will have failed if people vote for the party you don't like? Not sure you have quite got the idea of democracy there.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
The bulk of most parties MPs are not unreasonable people, and the Tories would have a new leader. The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. It would unify the country.
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
"The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. "
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
The bulk of most parties MPs are not unreasonable people, and the Tories would have a new leader. The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. It would unify the country.
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
And who is this new Tory leader who is going to do all this unifying, on the back of no electoral mandate? Are Brexit negotiations going to have to be delayed for another 4 months whilst a leadership election is conducted? And who is going to be Prime Minister in the mean time? Opposition leaders have the luxury of being able to resign post election and let caretakers be put in place. That is not an option for the party in Government.
That house would have cost maybe 150-190k in the mid 90s. Well within reach of a middle aged couple with a joint income of 40-50k who had done well for themselves and traded up throughout the 80s and 90s.
I hate to keep banging on on this, but it would have been nearer to £100-120K in the mid 90's[1], and would have been half that in 1985. Although a couple in 1995 on 40-50K is plausible: one thirtysomething manager on ~28K, one one row down on about 18K.
You are pointing to somebody who has leveraged a 60K house up to an asking price of £410K. But this is not remotely typical, it's a best-case scenario: most elderly people did not do this or even close, despite also being hard-working. The example encapsulates all that's wrong with this country: huge accumulation of wealth in the elderly and a generation of people hoping their parents will die soon so they can inherit.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
The bulk of most parties MPs are not unreasonable people, and the Tories would have a new leader. The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. It would unify the country.
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
And who is this new Tory leader who is going to do all this unifying, on the back of no electoral mandate? Are Brexit negotiations going to have to be delayed for another 4 months whilst a leadership election is conducted? And who is going to be Prime Minister in the mean time? Opposition leaders have the luxury of being able to resign post election and let caretakers be put in place. That is not an option for the party in Government.
No Prime Minister is better than a bad Prime Minister.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
You think politics will have failed if people vote for the party you don't like? Not sure you have quite got the idea of democracy there.
I don't think that's the point. The argument is that politics has failed if the country elects somebody standing on a political platform unchanged in its essentials from that on offer 30 years ago. It would mean that 30 years of political "progress" has essentially been rejected as a mistake.
@DecrepitJohnL if Britain is to go through Brexit, I want its negotiating position to be brokered rather than imposed by an insane hard right (or hard left). A hung Parliament which requires a Conservative party to rule as a minority will do me very nicely.
Surely, the key point there is "always" had Leave ahead?
This is the first time it's shown the Conservatives behind the winning post, and up until a few weeks ago showed very solid leads.
An awful lot of Yougov panellists have either changed their minds, or firmed up, very very rapidly.
Wild Theories, all the (now former) DNVs are Labour DNVs who wanted Corbyn to lose big time to get him out. But now as the polls narrow they know he'll stay so the only option is to clinch the win and pay him registered in power. This snowball effect and crushing Labour victory.
I live in Cardiff North and voted Conservative at the last election. I know the lib dem candidate very well and was going to vote for him just so my friend would have support.
This is now not going to happen. I've filled in my postal vote for the Tories and will post it on the way into work. I just can't stomach a Jeremy Corbyn Government and I feel voting for anyone but Theresa May now is a tacit endorsement of the man.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
Where's Jason? He'll calm the PB Tories and anto-Corbynites down.
He might have a novel and untried strategy that involves mentioning the IRA.
Could it be that the Tory strategy of concentrating on Jezza is actually helping his brand? and that the more people see him, the more charmed they are?
He should go to the debate tommorow.
I thought that about Milliband in 2015 where the Tory attacks painted him as a smooth political operator who was a bit with the ladies.
I was wrong and the Favourability ratings were right.
Think I'm more depressed about the ICM figures showing only a tiny 1 point Tory lead in the marginals they hold, and only after adjustment, than I am by the YouGov dodgy extrapolations. They should be miles ahead in those seats and that can only point to Labour gains in many seats with wafer thin Tory majorities that none of us expected them to win 2 years ago.
If true, then it's game over. It's not just TM losing her majority it's very possibly JC in number 10.
I think the blues have blown it. Folk have been voting for a week already too.....
Have the polls ever been so all over the place before? First the Tories have a massive lead (unlikely though that is) now it's been cut in days and they are losing seats? How close were yougov in 2010, 2015 and brexit does anyone know?
Think I'm more depressed about the ICM figures showing only a tiny 1 point Tory lead in the marginals they hold, and only after adjustment, than I am by the YouGov dodgy extrapolations. They should be miles ahead in those seats and that can only point to Labour gains in many seats with wafer thin Tory majorities that none of us expected them to win 2 years ago.
If true, then it's game over. It's not just TM losing her majority it's very possibly JC in number 10.
I think the blues have blown it. Folk have been voting for a week already too.....
Yet the Tories are 5% ahead in the Labour marginals. Sample sizes are very small, so take those numbers with a pinch of salt.
Morning all. Away with work all last week so was trying to keep up from afar. Having been out canvassing through the weekend my gut feel is that the undercurrent of people saying "screw this" to the Tories and endless Austerity is real, is visceral, and seems to be building its own momentum. Too many people saying they are voting Labour who are down as non-voters or undecided, the "always Labour but not this time" anti-Jeremy protests have gone away as well.
To coin a new old phrase "Its the Manifeso, Stupid". Had the Tories put forward a manifesto written for people, one that assumed they needed to positively make a choice to vote Tory, then we wouldn't be here.
Instead we have the Stupidest Suicide Note in History. A Tory manifesto that says "bollocks to your hopes and ambitions but TINA as Jeremy loves Terrorism" and proceeds to take a big dump not only on families with kids but families with an elderly relative is a new kind of stupid. They must have assumed the Labour manifesto would have been "free puppies" so didn't need policies never mind costed ones, and besides Jeremy loves Terrorism.
From an assumption that the Tories would win a landslide we've dropped to the Tories will win comfortably to the Tories will a small majority to the Tories largest party in a hung parliament to.... We've all witnessed that despite the slogan St Theresa is nothing like Strong and Stable, and because of that neither is the Tory lead.
Whatever happens there is an important lesson. You cannot assume that "the opposition are shit, so we can do anything we like and you will vote for us" works any more. Because it doesn't.
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
I fear you are looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. It would be chaos. The gulf between Labour and Conservative policies are just too wide, without even considering the role the SNP will play.
The bulk of most parties MPs are not unreasonable people, and the Tories would have a new leader. The sane wings of all the parties would have to act together. It would unify the country.
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
And who is this new Tory leader who is going to do all this unifying, on the back of no electoral mandate? Are Brexit negotiations going to have to be delayed for another 4 months whilst a leadership election is conducted? And who is going to be Prime Minister in the mean time? Opposition leaders have the luxury of being able to resign post election and let caretakers be put in place. That is not an option for the party in Government.
No Prime Minister is better than a bad Prime Minister.
If there really is this surge of support for Corbyn's Labour, why didn't they show up for the council elections a few weeks ago?
Exactly.
Because that was weeks ago and the Tories were 20 points ahead at the time?
Of course the national projections based on the local results were much closer but those were dismissed. Now I'm not sure....
The national projection based on the 2015 locals was a 1.0% lead for the Tories. In the GE on the same day the gap was 6.6%. That's not to say there hasn't been a shift since the locals, of course, just pointing out that the projected national share on its own is a poor indicator.
@DecrepitJohnL if Britain is to go through Brexit, I want its negotiating position to be brokered rather than imposed by an insane hard right (or hard left). A hung Parliament which requires a Conservative party to rule as a minority will do me very nicely.
Who will lead that party, though. Surely Maybe won’t be able to hang on if, having had a majority and not needing to call an election, she did so and lost it.
Corbyn has united the Left vote. Greens only on one per cent in the YouWhat!? poll.
May has united the anti-Tory vote. It is Tory share versus the rest. But a lot of the Tory votes are in safe Tory seats whereas the anti-Tory votes are more tactically distributed. National shares of LibDems and Greens are almost meaningless in this tactical battle.
@DecrepitJohnL if Britain is to go through Brexit, I want its negotiating position to be brokered rather than imposed by an insane hard right (or hard left). A hung Parliament which requires a Conservative party to rule as a minority will do me very nicely.
I think a hung Parliament would lead to one of two outcomes. No Brexit or no deal brexit. That is why you like it - you're taking a gamble on the former. God knows what it would do for civil strife in this country. UKIP might win the next election.
It continues to amaze me how many people seem to know what May's preferred Brexit outcome is, completely mistaking a negotiating position for a preferred outcome. The UK is in a much stronger negotiating position if the EU thinks they might walk away, than if they think they might come back. Why would the EU bother to negotiate seriously at all if the latter were the case (and they were ok with that)?
Basically if the UK's publicly stated minimum acceptable outcome is something out of their control, then the EU has no reason to give anything.
Morning all. Away with work all last week so was trying to keep up from afar. Having been out canvassing through the weekend my gut feel is that the undercurrent of people saying "screw this" to the Tories and endless Austerity is real, is visceral, and seems to be building its own momentum. Too many people saying they are voting Labour who are down as non-voters or undecided, the "always Labour but not this time" anti-Jeremy protests have gone away as well.
To coin a new old phrase "Its the Manifeso, Stupid". Had the Tories put forward a manifesto written for people, one that assumed they needed to positively make a choice to vote Tory, then we wouldn't be here.
Instead we have the Stupidest Suicide Note in History. A Tory manifesto that says "bollocks to your hopes and ambitions but TINA as Jeremy loves Terrorism" and proceeds to take a big dump not only on families with kids but families with an elderly relative is a new kind of stupid. They must have assumed the Labour manifesto would have been "free puppies" so didn't need policies never mind costed ones, and besides Jeremy loves Terrorism.
From an assumption that the Tories would win a landslide we've dropped to the Tories will win comfortably to the Tories will a small majority to the Tories largest party in a hung parliament to.... We've all witnessed that despite the slogan St Theresa is nothing like Strong and Stable, and because of that neither is the Tory lead.
Whatever happens there is an important lesson. You cannot assume that "the opposition are shit, so we can do anything we like and you will vote for us" works any more. Because it doesn't.
A lot of wisdom in that. And people say manifestos don't matter.
Morning all. Away with work all last week so was trying to keep up from afar. Having been out canvassing through the weekend my gut feel is that the undercurrent of people saying "screw this" to the Tories and endless Austerity is real, is visceral, and seems to be building its own momentum. Too many people saying they are voting Labour who are down as non-voters or undecided, the "always Labour but not this time" anti-Jeremy protests have gone away as well.
To coin a new old phrase "Its the Manifeso, Stupid". Had the Tories put forward a manifesto written for people, one that assumed they needed to positively make a choice to vote Tory, then we wouldn't be here.
Instead we have the Stupidest Suicide Note in History. A Tory manifesto that says "bollocks to your hopes and ambitions but TINA as Jeremy loves Terrorism" and proceeds to take a big dump not only on families with kids but families with an elderly relative is a new kind of stupid. They must have assumed the Labour manifesto would have been "free puppies" so didn't need policies never mind costed ones, and besides Jeremy loves Terrorism.
From an assumption that the Tories would win a landslide we've dropped to the Tories will win comfortably to the Tories will a small majority to the Tories largest party in a hung parliament to.... We've all witnessed that despite the slogan St Theresa is nothing like Strong and Stable, and because of that neither is the Tory lead.
Whatever happens there is an important lesson. You cannot assume that "the opposition are shit, so we can do anything we like and you will vote for us" works any more. Because it doesn't.
I think that you sense the zeitgeist. People do not like the Tory sense of entitlement.
Alternatively, the Tories are trying to dodge the Brexit bullet by losing...
If I was a disinterested observer, this would be absolutely hilarious.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
A parliament with NOC would probably mean a Tory minority government.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
If the YouGov prediction of Con 310, Lab 257, SNP 50, PC 3 occurred, the Tories would not be able to form a viable minority administration easily, as 257+50+3=310. Each vote would be dependent on minor party (LD/NI) support.
I think that this prediction is baloney, but it will help to motivate Tory voters to turn out on 8/6.
Comments
To answer your question, I think Spain has a pretty big generational divide.
Musing... TSE MP...
I can also remember arguing with DavidL back in 2011 and telling him that government encouragement of rising house prices and household debt would result in a massive transfer of wealth from the young to the old.
He would be strutting like a peacock.
But in that case the question is whether the other YouGov polls published to date have been based on the same turnout model or not.
That is the primary cause of the generational discrepancy and it takes bigger balls than most youngsters sport to even question the received diktat, let alone actively rebel against it. Schools and universities provide the conditioning. Conformity dressed up as rebellion. A strawman 'Establishment'. It's as old as the hills.
I voted (and campaigned) Tory in the 1990s as a teenager. I was the literally only one from my school to do so; despite it being one of the largest in London.
Terrifying to think that it's probably even worse 20 years later.
And that the only age group Labour won in 1987 were those in their sixties ie the first time voters of 1945.
Of course the first time voters of 1987 weren't threatened with £50k student debts and were far more likely to be able to buy a house.
FPT
Musing... TSE MP...
Things which are guaranteed to shift wealth away from the young.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/02/home-ownership-in-england-at-lowest-level-in-30-years-as-housing-crisis-grows
Whereas now home ownership has been falling for nearly 15 years - and the largest falls are in cities. Which also have the highest concentrations of young people.
The extra students is an important issue - lots of graduates have near worthless degrees and inflated expectations but no real prospects and huge debts.
This election feels utterly critical.
Hubris did for Cameron.
Oh and insulting his natural supporters for nigh on a decade...
Here's one in Tynemouth, a constituency that was blue until 1997 and many people thought was in play just two weeks ago when Theresa May visited.
That house would have cost maybe 150-190k in the mid 90s. Well within reach of a middle aged couple with a joint income of 40-50k who had done well for themselves and traded up throughout the 80s and 90s.
Fast forward twenty years and it is probably their only nest egg. Unlike the truly wealthy, who have investment portfolios and liquid assets they can dip into to give little Tarquin or Jemimah 20k to help with tuition fees or 50k to help them on the property ladder there, their house is all they've got, and their offspring will have to wait until they are gone before they can pass it along.
I have always felt that the dementia tax fear is disproportionately great for the type of family whose only major asset is their house, and those are precisely the sort of voters - elderly, middle class, marginal constituencies - that the Tories should have been targeting. And that for me is why the dementia tax was such a stunning own goal.
Corbyn on the other hand has at least enthused a lot of people, whether they turnout to vote is probably going to go along way to determining whether Yougov or ICM got their polling right.
This site is so overdramatic.
Maybe I need to have a break from this place. The end of world is nigh because one projection showed a hung parliament. One. Can't wait to here what Southam has to say about this poll.
http://www.incontinencechoice.co.uk/incontinence-pants/disposable-all-in-ones.html?gclid=CKzssdnvmNQCFYsy0wodF58JPA
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?searchType=SALE&locationIdentifier=REGION^406&insId=1&radius=0.0&minPrice=&maxPrice=150000&minBedrooms=&maxBedrooms=&displayPropertyType=&maxDaysSinceAdded=&_includeSSTC=on&sortByPriceDescending=&primaryDisplayPropertyType=&secondaryDisplayPropertyType=&oldDisplayPropertyType=&oldPrimaryDisplayPropertyType=&newHome=&auction=false
Houses for sale for under £100k in Hartlepool:
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?searchType=SALE&locationIdentifier=REGION^601&insId=2&radius=0.0&minPrice=&maxPrice=100000&minBedrooms=&maxBedrooms=&displayPropertyType=&maxDaysSinceAdded=&_includeSSTC=on&sortByPriceDescending=&primaryDisplayPropertyType=&secondaryDisplayPropertyType=&oldDisplayPropertyType=&oldPrimaryDisplayPropertyType=&newHome=&auction=false
People with £400k+ house in the North-East are nowhere close to being of average wealth.
You are pointing to somebody who has leveraged a 60K house up to an asking price of £410K. But this is not remotely typical, it's a best-case scenario: most elderly people did not do this or even close, despite also being hard-working. The example encapsulates all that's wrong with this country: huge accumulation of wealth in the elderly and a generation of people hoping their parents will die soon so they can inherit.
[1] https://houseprices.io/?q=Millview+Drive,+Tynemouth,+Tyne+And+Wear
On that basis a debate without May is going to struggle to get more than 3m.
The One Show will provide the lead-in and that got 2.76m last night.
1. ICM say that their model would show a lead very similar to Survation's (6 points) without ICM's adjustment based on past voting patterns rather than current claims to be certain to vote.
2. The previous poll was taken at a time when attention was entirely understandably focused on Mrs May. It's not unnatural that there has been a small shift to Labour since normal debate resumed, especially as ICM's own figure showed 7% of Tory voters saying they were more inclined to votew Labour as a result on the campin.
3. Tory efforts have been focused almost entirely on attack. Friends who live in Tory marginals tell me that the Tory local effort is barely visible - they seem to be relying on the national campaign and sending their helpers to Labour seats. Labour's effort has been more evenly divided, as it has to be for us to have a shot at winning.
The two polls are NOT out of line in terms of raw data. The question remains whether ICM's assumpions are correct or not. My guess is that the truth is somewhere in the middle and the true Tory lead is 7ish, but that's pure guesswork.
1) The BBC1 QT Special on Sunday with Farron and Sturgeon has been pulled forward from 6pm to 5pm as BBC is showing the Manchester concert live.
Bound to depress even further what would be a low rating. Bad news for LDs. Not really such an important programme for Sturgeon anyway (as she has no shortage of coverage in Scotland which is all that really matters for her).
2) The Julie Etchingham ITV Tonight interview / feature programme with May is now on Tuesday 6 June at 7.30pm - just 36 hours before the polls open.
It won't be a big rater but even so I think that's good news for May as it'll be the last "long form" appearance by any of the leaders and it's in a middling format between light and heavy.
Will give May the last "long form" word for anyone watching that programme. I'm actually a bit surprised ITV is putting this so near polling day - it does seem a little unfair - though of course it was originally scheduled much earlier but delayed due to Manchester bombing.
Given TV schedules + weather forecast, I don't actually think it's that big a deal as it is only going to rate about 3m and he isn't maximising the "May not turning up" narrative.
He should have made a big announcement on Sun or Mon that he was going and challenged May - this would then have created a big narrative re May not turning up.
Just turning up on the day will still make a good point but it'll have far less impact than if he had announced on Sun or Mon.
So looks like Corbyn or Thornberry.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/30/jeremy-corbyn-to-decide-on-tv-election-debate-appearance
A legal challenge in the Irish courts aimed at preventing the UK’s departure from the EU has been abandoned, bringing to an end one of the most tenacious rearguard actions outside the UK against Brexit.
Jolyon Maugham QC, a British barrister, had brought a case to the High Court in Dublin seeking to establish that Brexit could be halted even after the triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty.
https://www.ft.com/content/6100aa8e-4483-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996
2) Why do the figures above show NI gaining 10 seats?
EDIT: presumably 2 is just a typo
Much of the UKIP to Con vote transfer could be entirely wasted in running up larger majorites in the east and south.
It's all going to come to efficiency of voter distribution, hopefully the Yougov will shine a light on this.
Unfortunately, unlike many on here, I don't have the opportunity to leave the country if this result happens and the chaos hits.
On the other hand, I cannot see this as being right. I've said in the past that Corbyn's shown some amazing sticking power an ability to defeat his enemies within his party, but I still find it incredible that so many of the Great British Public might actually vote for him and his policies.
And if they do vote for him, then it's a sign of the utter failure of the politics of the last thirty years.
Bearing in mind that A50 passed with a substantial majority it would not stop Brexit, but it would mean that wider interests in the country, such as the issues around Scotland and NI would get the attention that they deserve. The Tories could not ram through their narrow form of Brexit.
In terms of domestic policy, they would have to convince MPs rather than bully them. It would restore the primacy of parliament over the executive. It would be what the people want.
According to YouGov ....
Con GAIN Bolsover ....
It would be multiparty democracy, not an elected dictatorship. About time too.
Though I would like this as an outcome, I am still forecasting a slightly larger Tory majority of 76.
That is where your idea falls down ...
This is now not going to happen. I've filled in my postal vote for the Tories and will post it on the way into work. I just can't stomach a Jeremy Corbyn Government and I feel voting for anyone but Theresa May now is a tacit endorsement of the man.
I was wrong and the Favourability ratings were right.
If true, then it's game over. It's not just TM losing her majority it's very possibly JC in number 10.
I think the blues have blown it. Folk have been voting for a week already too.....
How close were yougov in 2010, 2015 and brexit does anyone know?
To coin a new old phrase "Its the Manifeso, Stupid". Had the Tories put forward a manifesto written for people, one that assumed they needed to positively make a choice to vote Tory, then we wouldn't be here.
Instead we have the Stupidest Suicide Note in History. A Tory manifesto that says "bollocks to your hopes and ambitions but TINA as Jeremy loves Terrorism" and proceeds to take a big dump not only on families with kids but families with an elderly relative is a new kind of stupid. They must have assumed the Labour manifesto would have been "free puppies" so didn't need policies never mind costed ones, and besides Jeremy loves Terrorism.
From an assumption that the Tories would win a landslide we've dropped to the Tories will win comfortably to the Tories will a small majority to the Tories largest party in a hung parliament to.... We've all witnessed that despite the slogan St Theresa is nothing like Strong and Stable, and because of that neither is the Tory lead.
Whatever happens there is an important lesson. You cannot assume that "the opposition are shit, so we can do anything we like and you will vote for us" works any more. Because it doesn't.
Of course the national projections based on the local results were much closer but those were dismissed. Now I'm not sure....
It continues to amaze me how many people seem to know what May's preferred Brexit outcome is, completely mistaking a negotiating position for a preferred outcome. The UK is in a much stronger negotiating position if the EU thinks they might walk away, than if they think they might come back. Why would the EU bother to negotiate seriously at all if the latter were the case (and they were ok with that)?
Basically if the UK's publicly stated minimum acceptable outcome is something out of their control, then the EU has no reason to give anything.
We'll see who is right next week.
Alternatively, the Tories are trying to dodge the Brexit bullet by losing...
I think that this prediction is baloney, but it will help to motivate Tory voters to turn out on 8/6.