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.
But thinking we have been going in the wrong direction and wanting to change it back to a previous model is a valid democratic choice surely?
@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.
Mrs May called the election to get a mandate for her vision of Brexit, but will not reveal what that vision is.
She wants a blank cheque. People dont like that, they prefer their politicians on a short leash.
I think we can say one thing with some certainty now. Theresa May will not lead the Tories into an election campaign again. She must be desperate to get back to the desk and start governing again without all this pesky democracy stuff. Of course there just might be a flaw in that plan...
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.
I lived for many years in Cardiff North and voted in 5 GEs there. It is a bellweather seat, having always voted for the winning party since the boundaries were revised in 1983. I predict a Tory hold there and a Tory majority government.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
A lot of wisdom in that. And people say manifestos don't matter.
We'll see who is right next week.
I still expect a Tory win. Because having being doing this for 20 years parties do not come from 25 points behind in the polls to win. But then again for all things there is a first time...
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.
But thinking we have been going in the wrong direction and wanting to change it back to a previous model is a valid democratic choice surely?
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
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.
They have given plenty of reasons, they have merely prioritised the corbyn message.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I think like Ed Miliband, Cameron & Osborne's time is gone.
@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.
I don't want No Brexit now. It would be chaotic both in Britain and the EU. Britain has to flush the insular xenophobic virus out of its system before it could consider rejoining the EU. That will take many years.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
After the way he has campaigned via the Evening Standard, I wonder how his final editorial is going to justify backing the Conservatives?
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I think like Ed Miliband, Cameron & Osborne's time is gone.
A lot of wisdom in that. And people say manifestos don't matter.
We'll see who is right next week.
I still expect a Tory win. Because having being doing this for 20 years parties do not come from 25 points behind in the polls to win. But then again for all things there is a first time...
Indeed, but even assuming 25 was an outlier, as you say that many people don't switch so quickly.
@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.
I don't want No Brexit now. It would be chaotic both in Britain and the EU. Britain has to flush the insular xenophobic virus out of its system before it could consider rejoining the EU. That will take many years.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
That requires politicians to put Country first and form a government of national unity. Unfortunately I do not see the calibre of politicians for that in our next Parliament
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
My forecast is a 76 seat Tory majority, but I am thinking of downgrading it.
I think we can say one thing with some certainty now. Theresa May will not lead the Tories into an election campaign again. She must be desperate to get back to the desk and start governing again without all this pesky democracy stuff. Of course there just might be a flaw in that plan...
No election is better than a bad election!
No mandate is better than a bad mandate!
How stupid does her "No deal is better than a bad deal" look now?
Mrs May called the election to get a mandate for her vision of Brexit, but will not reveal what that vision is.
She wants a blank cheque. People dont like that, they prefer their politicians on a short leash.
Not really sure why you say that. In fact I think that one of the reasons that Brexit has not had anything like the traction that the Tories had hoped is that it has largely been parked as an area of dispute. Both of the main parties want tariff free trade with the EU, both want some sort of customs deal to minimise interference with trade, both want to control the import of low skilled immigration, both recognise that freedom of movement remains important for the more skilled, both want to co-operate with the EU in a range of matters including security... I could go on but I think we are very clear what the UK political establishment want. Whether they can get it may be another issue.
PB Tories will be pleased I have decided to officially join their ranks, at least for June 8th. May is crap but the tory offer is attainable and I cannot validate not indicating that is preferable to a Corbyn win.
I think we can say one thing with some certainty now. Theresa May will not lead the Tories into an election campaign again. She must be desperate to get back to the desk and start governing again without all this pesky democracy stuff. Of course there just might be a flaw in that plan...
No election is better than a bad election!
No mandate is better than a bad mandate!
How stupid does her "No deal is better than a bad deal" look now?
That depends if ICM is right or not. If they right , then politically not stupid at all.
PB Tories will be pleased I have decided to officially join their ranks, at least for June 8th. May is crap but the tory offer is attainable and I cannot validate not indicating that is preferable to a Corbyn win.
Your twenty additional ballot papers will be delivered forthwith.
I think we can say one thing with some certainty now. Theresa May will not lead the Tories into an election campaign again. She must be desperate to get back to the desk and start governing again without all this pesky democracy stuff. Of course there just might be a flaw in that plan...
No election is better than a bad election!
No mandate is better than a bad mandate!
How stupid does her "No deal is better than a bad deal" look now?
I don't think it is. The ability to walk away is key to any sensible negotiation.
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
Morning all,
Seems shares in Pampers will be rising this morning.
@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.
I don't want No Brexit now. It would be chaotic both in Britain and the EU. Britain has to flush the insular xenophobic virus out of its system before it could consider rejoining the EU. That will take many years.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
You're not going to "flush the insular xenophobic virus out of the system" by seeking to negotiate a Brexit settlement which ignores it. Especially when the main recent outlet for that 'virus' (ie. UKIP) is completely excluded. It would be pointed out that Parliament (which was overwhelmingly for Remain, is just trying to deliver Remain in practice.
Another observation - the "how will Labour afford it" line doesn't work any more. We've had 7 years of grinding austerity with every front line service visibly cut to the bone. At the same time Osbrown added £700bn on debt to the pile. A 70% increase in debt as services disappear through lack of money is Mugabe-esqe levels of financial stupidity.
And so people now ask "how can we afford not to" fund the police or schools or front line NHS or elderly care or childcare or the council bin collection or basic human decency towards the sick and disabled. The Tories are saying we can't afford these things but can't guarantee no tax rises. Labour say we have to afford these things and can pay for them by means of being one of the richest countries in the world.
Its the austerity election. You've seen you and yours kicked in the knackers these last few years and the people doing the kicking have just had the billionaire class buy them some new steel toecapped DMs. You have to vote for that because not to vote for it would mean chaos.
Theresa is an abysmal negotiator. She has given us the "russian front" close - offer two scenarios where one is so bad (being sent to the Russian front) that the other, however unpleasant, is the least worst option. When you close off a deal with this one you aren't supposed to be the russian front...
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
After the way he has campaigned via the Evening Standard, I wonder how his final editorial is going to justify backing the Conservatives?
Who says it will? He might just say 'the choice is clear, but we leave that to you'
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
My forecast is a 76 seat Tory majority, but I am thinking of downgrading it.
Using Electoral Calculus and my exponentially weighted moving average of the polls for GB and Scotland and no tactical effect, I get a 66 seat Tory majority (with 3 LibDems).
Oddly, if I put in reasonable tactical fractions for Lab and LibDem, I get a 92 seat Tory majority! Something wrong with the way Electoral Calculus handles tactical voting.
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
Morning all,
Seems shares in Pampers will be rising this morning.
This projection is too unbelievable to cause a panic. If it is right, then everyone else is so wrong it is impossible to recognise it as a worry. Paul mason didn't believe it for crying out loud.
@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.
I don't want No Brexit now. It would be chaotic both in Britain and the EU. Britain has to flush the insular xenophobic virus out of its system before it could consider rejoining the EU. That will take many years.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
You're not going to "flush the insular xenophobic virus out of the system" by seeking to negotiate a Brexit settlement which ignores it. Especially when the main recent outlet for that 'virus' (ie. UKIP) is completely excluded. It would be pointed out that Parliament (which was overwhelmingly for Remain, is just trying to deliver Remain in practice.
UKIP has plenty of surrogates on the right of the Conservative party. That's why UKIP is imploding now. Its role is complete.
Any Brexit settlement is going to have to honour the (small-minded, frightened, insular) spirit of the vote as well as the letter. But it can be tempered with a hefty dose of realism that to date the Conservatives have shown no glimmerings of recognising on a host of related matters.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
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.
Totally agree with the last paragraph.For people whose only major asset is their house the policy says to many the state is doing me over .
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
After the way he has campaigned via the Evening Standard, I wonder how his final editorial is going to justify backing the Conservatives?
Who says it will? He might just say 'the choice is clear, but we leave that to you'
The impression is that Osborne has been running a personal campaign against May, possibly combined with a desire to show "independence" in his new editorial role. But he can't possibly believe that letting Corbyn anywhere near power is a good thing.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
After the way he has campaigned via the Evening Standard, I wonder how his final editorial is going to justify backing the Conservatives?
Who says it will? He might just say 'the choice is clear, but we leave that to you'
The impression is that Osborne has been running a personal campaign against May, possibly combined with a desire to show "independence" in his new editorial role. But he can't possibly believe that letting Corbyn anywhere near power is a good thing.
Hence saying the choice is clear. But despite its analysis of the manifestos, there'd be little credibility formally backing con now after tearing them down so much.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
Richmond Park is not a near certain loss. If you think it is, you can get 8/11 on the Tories at Ladbrokes.
National share for LibDems is an almost useless indicator in this tactical battle.
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...
And if a landslide does occur, your sense of the zeitgeist will be a nonsense. I thought the zeitgeist was against the tories 2 years ago. Maybe thus time it is, although it is a rather sudden zeitgeist given the locals.
My forecast is a 76 seat Tory majority, but I am thinking of downgrading it.
Who knows ? I don't think the range of possible outcomes has been matched by any election in the last few decades. And what a depressing campaign is it. On the one side, one of relentless negativity, lacking in imagination and inspiration; on the other, one of untrammelled utopianism and equivalent mendacity. And in the centre, hardly any campaign at all.... I listened to the eminently sensible Norman Lamb on the radio this morning, and contemplated the prospect of his losing his seat.
@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.
I don't want No Brexit now. It would be chaotic both in Britain and the EU. Britain has to flush the insular xenophobic virus out of its system before it could consider rejoining the EU. That will take many years.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
That requires politicians to put Country first and form a government of national unity. Unfortunately I do not see the calibre of politicians for that in our next Parliament
Lol. "Sitting around the table for Ms Rudd's first cabinet meeting as PM were the Deputy Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn, Chancellor Michael Gove, Health Secretary John McDonnell, the new under-secretary for administrative affairs Tim Farron, and a pig who'd just landed at Heathrow."
Morning all. Just catching up on yesterday, at every election there's always a politician who comes across an unexpectedly well prepared journalist, when he was expecting a soft-soap interview from a TV or radio 'presenter'.
Well done to Emma Barnett, and not well done to whoever sent Corbyn in to an interview without a simple 'cheat sheet' on the policy he was supposedly launching that day!
I'm reminded of David Cameron going everywhere with a list of prices for bread, milk, petrol etc. along with recent statistics for inflation, unemployment, current account deficit etc. because he knew that someone would try and catch him out in an interview.
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.
Thirty eight years.
This discussion's been had on here before, but I don't think Thatcher's politics in her first term were very much like what came after. Also, up to 1983 Labour were still in insane mode: in 1983 people had a choice to vote hard left.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
With SNP on 50 as well the scope is limited.
I suppose they could still (at bounds of believability) pickup 4 in Scotland and Cons 2?
No doubt this was debated late last night, but this YouGov poll suggests Lab gain 28 seats.
Where on God's green earth are these supposed to be?
London, Bristol, Wales gets a few. Hard to see 28.
They might get a few more in Scotland, but that will require the SNP to be falling - which gives the Tories more gains than Labour I would suggest. So I don't see it is as being there.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
Maybe they are not as certain losses as you imagine!
The LDs biggest problem was being buried by a Tory surge of 48%ish. A Tory percentage in the low forties, coupled with some tactical voting can save them.
I am becoming more optomistic for my party. The anti-austerity meme and feeling of intergenerational unfairness must play well across much of the SW.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
@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.
Theresa May would be in a stronger position if the Conservatives got 310 than 330. Too many factions to juggle in a hung Parliament.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
I was just thinking that Osborne must be reflecting that he may have been a bit premature. Whilst being an ignored back bencher in a large May majority would have been a bore there is an increasing chance that he would have had a lot of influence, even if only as kingmaker.
After the way he has campaigned via the Evening Standard, I wonder how his final editorial is going to justify backing the Conservatives?
Who says it will? He might just say 'the choice is clear, but we leave that to you'
The impression is that Osborne has been running a personal campaign against May, possibly combined with a desire to show "independence" in his new editorial role. But he can't possibly believe that letting Corbyn anywhere near power is a good thing.
Hence saying the choice is clear. But despite its analysis of the manifestos, there'd be little credibility formally backing con now after tearing them down so much.
He is part of this new pro eu grouping and is no doubt hoping to play a role in a new pro EU party post 8th June. If he endorses anyone expect it will be the Lib Dems
Ladbrokes seats market suspended, though I suspect the time will have arrived for me to back 375-399 (and lay the corresponding double-sized market on Betfair.
Mr. Borough, indeed.
On-topic, again: this was going to be a safe election for pollsters to moderate their models and refine them, with an easy Conservative victory. Now we have wildly divergent polls, someone's going to look Delphic, and someone's going to look rubbish.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
Maybe they are not as certain losses as you imagine!
The LDs biggest problem was being buried by a Tory surge of 48%ish. A Tory percentage in the low forties, coupled with some tactical voting can save them.
I am becoming more optomistic for my party. The anti-austerity meme and feeling of intergenerational unfairness must play well across much of the SW.
Ladbrokes seats market suspended, though I suspect the time will have arrived for me to back 375-399 (and lay the corresponding double-sized market on Betfair.
Mr. Borough, indeed.
On-topic, again: this was going to be a safe election for pollsters to moderate their models and refine them, with an easy Conservative victory. Now we have wildly divergent polls, someone's going to look Delphic, and someone's going to look rubbish.
Indeed. The stakes for the pollsters seem to be getting higher each day.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
2 of Corbyns wives are Latin American.Since he married them the immigration laws as regards UK citizens marrying non-eu citizens has been made much much tougher.Not noticed anybody ask Corbyn if he intends to go back to making it much easier to marry non-eu citizens
I have been re-reading this article by Anthony Wells over at UK Polling Report. Can't help wondering if YouGov are placing too much faith in their ability to construct a representative sample from their panel.
One thing Mrs Thatcher always said, never under-estimate the socialists they never give up, they don't go away and it's true whether it be Corbyn, Burnham, McDonnell or my local candidate Williamson, they get knocked out they come back for another.
May or Crosby or whoever set the tactics have got them horribly wrong, they need a good last week or we will all pay and pay big. For certain it is the rich who will be best placed to avoid paying, it will be the normal working, council tax paying, motor car owning person who will pay and pay big.
That message needs getting out, all that said here in the East Midlands the experts are predicting the Conservatives to consolidate the 2015 showing, losing seats is unlikely, North East Derbyshire looks positive, maybe other gains are possible if the right message is sent out.
Out of all this mess hopefully a proper Liberal party can be set free after this election, rather than the Social/Democrat/Labour without the Unions mess we have now. At least there would be better choice available in that case. With Farron in charge having Liberal in the title is a contradiction, big state control is not liberal.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Secirity of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
Therefore she must be a crap politician.
How else do you square "good policy" with "hugely unpopular"?
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
It is a better policy than today's. Not sure it is a "good" policy. As I have said before my problem is personally I had planned for a cap and I believe we should have a system more like Dilnott proposed. One of the things May has done is allowed many of us to see how crap the present system is.
The politics are crap though. And partly because the Tories made such as fuss about a Death Tax in the past. Did it not occur to the Brains Trust that this would come back on them?
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.....
Thanks Bob.
You are an excellent political weather vane for the Conservatives winning a landslide. I grant you not quite in the Rogerdamus league but certainly worthy of a honourable mention in dispatches.
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.
Interesting, I accept that I overestimated how much a house up there might have cost in the 90s, but it further reinforces my point about how a house now worth 400k or more in a northern constituency that the Tories were targeting a scant two weeks ago would be perfectly within reach of an ordinary 45 year old couple in 1997 who are now at retirement age.
A property like this is likely to be their main asset and it is a windfall they hope to pass on to their kids or grandkids to help them get on the absurd property ladder that has led to houses like that being worth 410k.
I'm not for one minute trying to defend the example,.
I agree with you, it encapsulates a lot of what is wrong with the country.
But for me it also goes a long way to explaining why the dementia tax went down disproportionately badly in marginal constituencies.
The elderly in situations like this were banking on leaving their houses to their kids and their kdis were banking on inheriting them, because it's the only way to stay on the absurd merry-go-round.
Now the Tories have made it clear they'd love to get their hands on that nest egg if they can,I reckon a fair few, probably in marginal constituencies, have gone, 'well stuff the Tories, might as well vote for Corbyn. At least that way my kids get their tuition fees paid, etc.'
As RochdalePioneers has so brilliantly put it, the zeitgeist is to say bollocks to 'TINA'.
The British people have been offered up a turd sandwich by the Tories after a decade or three of turd sandwiches from all the major parties, and been told to eat it, because TINA.
F1: Alonso's said he won't go to Red Bull, but will consider all other teams that don't have a great long term driver pairing who are probably under absolutely airtight contracts.
Paul Mason is being stupid. A lot of people will jump at the chance of getting Boris.
I don't think so. But he is being stupid nevertheless, because his post could equally be taken as an argument for a bigger rather than small majority.
The Tories must have paid YouGov (its Mr S who has been defending the poll being a known Tory), since the poll is perfect for them.
After the big majority comes, those downthread who have been panicked into switching to the Tories will be wondering how they came to be suckered for the second time running.
I have been re-reading this article by Anthony Wells over at UK Polling Report. Can't help wondering if YouGov are placing too much faith in their ability to construct a representative sample from their panel.
I think the last election showed Labour activists are all over their polls, it doesn't look like they can find a model to counteract that.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
Maybe they are not as certain losses as you imagine!
The LDs biggest problem was being buried by a Tory surge of 48%ish. A Tory percentage in the low forties, coupled with some tactical voting can save them.
I am becoming more optomistic for my party. The anti-austerity meme and feeling of intergenerational unfairness must play well across much of the SW.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Secirity of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
Therefore she must be a crap politician.
How else do you square "good policy" with "hugely unpopular"?
Comes down to the lack of awareness by the public of the present system which causes distress and pain for those caught up in it.
The policy was and is right but the presentation and initial lack of a cap, was bad politics
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
A lot of people with their only asset been their house, are not as trusting as you.They are not told what the cap will be so are wary
Paul Mason is being stupid. A lot of people will jump at the chance of getting Boris.
I don't think so. But he is being stupid nevertheless, because his post could equally be taken as an argument for a bigger rather than small majority.
The Tories must have paid YouGov (its Mr S who has been defending the poll being a known Tory), since the poll is perfect for them.
After the big majority comes, those downthread who have been panicked into switching to the Tories will be wondering how they came to be suckered for the second time running.
I was voting tory or ld anyway, and the ld vote was part predicated on knowing the candidate. May is crap, but of the two options for government she still came ahead before this projection made it clear, even if wrong as I think, it's not worth risking being seen to assume Corbyn is the better option.
I find it fascinating that YouGov has the LDs losing share relative to both Conservatives and Labour, and yet picking up a seat. Given Carshalton & Wallington, Southport and Richmond Park are near certain losses, where does it reckon the gains will come from?
With SNP on 50 as well the scope is limited.
I suppose they could still (at bounds of believability) pickup 4 in Scotland and Cons 2?
My guess is that they have the LDs picking up Twickenham (which is more affected by Heathrow, as anyone living in St Margarets will tell you, than Richmond) from the Tories.
Say, -2 net to the Tories (as above), +3 from the SNP, flat against Labour/Plaid?
Not implausible.
I will be very sad if Vince Cable is returned to Parliament while Norman Lamb loses his seat.
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.....
I notice you neglect to mention that same ICM has the Conservatives ahead by 5% in Labour marginal - a swing of 6% since 2015.
I suppose that doesn't fit into the "we're doomed" mantra of the man who predicted Gordon Brown would win in 2010.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
A lot of people with their only asset been their house, are not as trusting as you.They are not told what the cap will be so are wary
I have had years of experience in this field and it is dreadfully complicated. At present your house asset is under threat until the base is reached of £23,250 and neither labour or the lib dems have any idea how to address the magnitude of the cost, labour saying they will seek concensus but that is kicking it into the long grass.
If TM does not implement this expect to use your house assets for the rest of this Parliament
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.
Paul Mason is being stupid. A lot of people will jump at the chance of getting Boris.
I don't think so. But he is being stupid nevertheless, because his post could equally be taken as an argument for a bigger rather than small majority.
The Tories must have paid YouGov (its Mr S who has been defending the poll being a known Tory), since the poll is perfect for them.
After the big majority comes, those downthread who have been panicked into switching to the Tories will be wondering how they came to be suckered for the second time running.
I was voting tory or ld anyway, and the ld vote was part predicated on knowing the candidate. May is crap, but of the two options for government she still came ahead before this projection made it clear, even if wrong as I think, it's not worth risking being seen to assume Corbyn is the better option.
Nevertheless there were a fair few people in 2015 thinking of voting for their great local MP who switched to the Tories panicked that Miliband and Sturgeon were about to sweep into Downing Street. In the event Miliband didn't get anywhere near and those people simply saw their favoured candidate lose. Falling for it a second time around (when the evidence of Corbyn being anywhere near gains is almost non existent) would be foolish.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
Yes but those of us who were aware of the problem assumed the Cameron cap of about £70k was our risk and avast improvement to all but £23.5k. The new policy without committing to a cap is the really stupid part of it and assumes we forgot about Dave's proposal.
Paul Mason is being stupid. A lot of people will jump at the chance of getting Boris.
I don't think so. But he is being stupid nevertheless, because his post could equally be taken as an argument for a bigger rather than small majority.
The Tories must have paid YouGov (its Mr S who has been defending the poll being a known Tory), since the poll is perfect for them.
After the big majority comes, those downthread who have been panicked into switching to the Tories will be wondering how they came to be suckered for the second time running.
I was voting tory or ld anyway, and the ld vote was part predicated on knowing the candidate. May is crap, but of the two options for government she still came ahead before this projection made it clear, even if wrong as I think, it's not worth risking being seen to assume Corbyn is the better option.
Nevertheless there were a fair few people in 2015 thinking of voting for their great local MP who switched to the Tories panicked that Miliband and Sturgeon were about to sweep into Downing Street. In the event Miliband didn't get anywhere near and those people simply saw their favoured candidate lose. Falling for it a second time around (when the evidence of Corbyn being anywhere near gains is almost non existent) would be foolish.
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.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
You realise 80% of people in Social Care currently keep their house full stop as it is not counted as an asset. Tories appealing to the few not the many.
Comments
She wants a blank cheque. People dont like that, they prefer their politicians on a short leash.
As to who else could do the job, the ideal candidate would be a Conservative capable of reaching out across party boundaries and working constructively with those of another hue, who wears his or her ideology lightly and is more concerned about the country's practical interests than in following a particular vision.
The obvious candidate left Parliament last year. The next obvious candidate left Parliament last month.
But a good start could be made - against all the odds - if the Brexit settlement can be drawn up with input from as many different strands of opinion as possible. That needs a hung Parliament.
You need a heart of stone not to laugh.
No mandate is better than a bad mandate!
How stupid does her "No deal is better than a bad deal" look now?
Seems shares in Pampers will be rising this morning.
And so people now ask "how can we afford not to" fund the police or schools or front line NHS or elderly care or childcare or the council bin collection or basic human decency towards the sick and disabled. The Tories are saying we can't afford these things but can't guarantee no tax rises. Labour say we have to afford these things and can pay for them by means of being one of the richest countries in the world.
Its the austerity election. You've seen you and yours kicked in the knackers these last few years and the people doing the kicking have just had the billionaire class buy them some new steel toecapped DMs. You have to vote for that because not to vote for it would mean chaos.
Theresa is an abysmal negotiator. She has given us the "russian front" close - offer two scenarios where one is so bad (being sent to the Russian front) that the other, however unpleasant, is the least worst option. When you close off a deal with this one you aren't supposed to be the russian front...
Bluffing with an empty hand is not sensible negotiation.
If you do vote for Clegg, why should you be surprised that SLAB voters would rather vote SNP than SCON.
Oddly, if I put in reasonable tactical fractions for Lab and LibDem, I get a 92 seat Tory majority! Something wrong with the way Electoral Calculus handles tactical voting.
I have given up following the twists and turns.. I suspect there will be a few pollsters who will want to forget this GE..
Any Brexit settlement is going to have to honour the (small-minded, frightened, insular) spirit of the vote as well as the letter. But it can be tempered with a hefty dose of realism that to date the Conservatives have shown no glimmerings of recognising on a host of related matters.
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
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-66250469.html
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?
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-65026268.html
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.
Totally agree with the last paragraph.For people whose only major asset is their house the policy says to many the state is doing me over .
National share for LibDems is an almost useless indicator in this tactical battle.
Where on God's green earth are these supposed to be?
And what a depressing campaign is it. On the one side, one of relentless negativity, lacking in imagination and inspiration; on the other, one of untrammelled utopianism and equivalent mendacity.
And in the centre, hardly any campaign at all.... I listened to the eminently sensible Norman Lamb on the radio this morning, and contemplated the prospect of his losing his seat.
Well done to Emma Barnett, and not well done to whoever sent Corbyn in to an interview without a simple 'cheat sheet' on the policy he was supposedly launching that day!
I'm reminded of David Cameron going everywhere with a list of prices for bread, milk, petrol etc. along with recent statistics for inflation, unemployment, current account deficit etc. because he knew that someone would try and catch him out in an interview.
I suppose they could still (at bounds of believability) pickup 4 in Scotland and Cons 2?
The LDs biggest problem was being buried by a Tory surge of 48%ish. A Tory percentage in the low forties, coupled with some tactical voting can save them.
I am becoming more optomistic for my party. The anti-austerity meme and feeling of intergenerational unfairness must play well across much of the SW.
I think Lamb sounds increasingly safe too:
https://twitter.com/Albiestar/status/869634646094512130
This is not the Brexit election they were looking for!
What a class-A clanger.
Ladbrokes seats market suspended, though I suspect the time will have arrived for me to back 375-399 (and lay the corresponding double-sized market on Betfair.
Mr. Borough, indeed.
On-topic, again: this was going to be a safe election for pollsters to moderate their models and refine them, with an easy Conservative victory. Now we have wildly divergent polls, someone's going to look Delphic, and someone's going to look rubbish.
Maybe now there should be a rule about not letting a poll you don't like to drive you into utter panic...
Amazing but true.
https://twitter.com/IainDale/status/869809299547140096
I have been re-reading this article by Anthony Wells over at UK Polling Report. Can't help wondering if YouGov are placing too much faith in their ability to construct a representative sample from their panel.
May or Crosby or whoever set the tactics have got them horribly wrong, they need a good last week or we will all pay and pay big. For certain it is the rich who will be best placed to avoid paying, it will be the normal working, council tax paying, motor car owning person who will pay and pay big.
That message needs getting out, all that said here in the East Midlands the experts are predicting the Conservatives to consolidate the 2015 showing, losing seats is unlikely, North East Derbyshire looks positive, maybe other gains are possible if the right message is sent out.
Out of all this mess hopefully a proper Liberal party can be set free after this election, rather than the Social/Democrat/Labour without the Unions mess we have now. At least there would be better choice available in that case. With Farron in charge having Liberal in the title is a contradiction, big state control is not liberal.
How else do you square "good policy" with "hugely unpopular"?
The politics are crap though. And partly because the Tories made such as fuss about a Death Tax in the past. Did it not occur to the Brains Trust that this would come back on them?
You are an excellent political weather vane for the Conservatives winning a landslide. I grant you not quite in the Rogerdamus league but certainly worthy of a honourable mention in dispatches.
A property like this is likely to be their main asset and it is a windfall they hope to pass on to their kids or grandkids to help them get on the absurd property ladder that has led to houses like that being worth 410k.
I'm not for one minute trying to defend the example,.
I agree with you, it encapsulates a lot of what is wrong with the country.
But for me it also goes a long way to explaining why the dementia tax went down disproportionately badly in marginal constituencies.
The elderly in situations like this were banking on leaving their houses to their kids and their kdis were banking on inheriting them, because it's the only way to stay on the absurd merry-go-round.
Now the Tories have made it clear they'd love to get their hands on that nest egg if they can,I reckon a fair few, probably in marginal constituencies, have gone, 'well stuff the Tories, might as well vote for Corbyn. At least that way my kids get their tuition fees paid, etc.'
As RochdalePioneers has so brilliantly put it, the zeitgeist is to say bollocks to 'TINA'.
The British people have been offered up a turd sandwich by the Tories after a decade or three of turd sandwiches from all the major parties, and been told to eat it, because TINA.
Instead they're choosing Votey McVoteface.
The Tories must have paid YouGov (its Mr S who has been defending the poll being a known Tory), since the poll is perfect for them.
After the big majority comes, those downthread who have been panicked into switching to the Tories will be wondering how they came to be suckered for the second time running.
The policy was and is right but the presentation and initial lack of a cap, was bad politics
yougov poll has not moved it much (if at all)
Say, -2 net to the Tories (as above), +3 from the SNP, flat against Labour/Plaid?
Not implausible.
I will be very sad if Vince Cable is returned to Parliament while Norman Lamb loses his seat.
I suppose that doesn't fit into the "we're doomed" mantra of the man who predicted Gordon Brown would win in 2010.
If TM does not implement this expect to use your house assets for the rest of this Parliament
With 42-38-9-4, which this poll is, even UNS gives:
Lab gain - Brighton Pavilion, Carmarthen, Cardiff North, Croydon Central, Gower, Leeds NW, Plymouth MW, Plymouth S&D, Sheffield Hallam, Vale of Clwyd
Is it that the poll which has Lab doing worst is the one most like to be accurate, or is that from OGH?
If Osborne had stuck around instead of embarking upon his vendetta as an editor, he'd be a shoo-in (shoe-in?).
No change there then.