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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
YouGov is asking people about voting in particular seats, but with a 7000 sample they can only afford to "group" such seats into fairly crude categories before they lose the accuracy. Eleven people in each seat is obviously going to tell them nothing useful about how particular local contests are going.
The theories that a lot of momentum folk have signed up as sleepers to YG's panel begins to look a bit more plausible, given how out of line they are with other polls. A shame they are simply playing into the Tories' hands.
Can someone please remind me of John0's Dictum as pressed upon us last night by TSE?
Is it that the poll which has Lab doing worst is the one most like to be accurate, or is that from OGH?
There are 3 JohnO dicta :
1. Planned railway destinations are for plebs. 2. Hersham Conservatives do it better with Jacobite/Milano allies. 3. The worst Labour poll is better than the final result.
Tory campaign has been unbelievably piss poor, May has been outed as wooden and inept - they have given voters no good reason to vote for them other than they are not a Corbyn led Labour party.
Still can't believe they will lose to Corbyn and his fellow travellers, but this election presents the least appealing choice in my lifetime.
NOTA would win by a landslide. Next 5 years going to be grim for the tories and labour odds-on next time round surely.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
@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.
George Osborne is the high priest of intergenerational unfairness.
He's the advocator and implementer of increased student debt, subsidised house prices, triple lock pensions and uncontrolled immigration.
Ha, ha, ha - I wish I had been on here when the news of this first came out. It must have been pant-wettingly hilarious. Of course, YouGov are going to be proved humiliatingly wrong, but what giggles in the meantime. What insults were stalwart PB Brexiteers throwing at the previously doughty, noble, left-behind voters?
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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
The idea is probably the best of the plausible options - however the marketing was beyond dire... The reality is that for most people they are just a stroke away from leaving / inheriting £23,000 and their home - this is an improvement on that and should have been sold as such...
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.
Tory campaign has been unbelievably piss poor, May has been outed as wooden and inept - they have given voters no good reason to vote for them other than they are not a Corbyn led Labour party.
Still can't believe they will lose to Corbyn and his fellow travellers, but this election presents the least appealing choice in my lifetime.
NOTA would win by a landslide. Next 5 years going to be grim for the tories and labour odds-on next time round surely.
No, not necessarily at all. In 1987 Kinnock closes to within 4 points of Thatcher and in 1992 led Major in most polls, in both elections the Tories won in the end and we are at the equivalent stage in the electoral cycle. Though if Corbyn does not become PM as Yougov suggests is possible he will have increased his voteshare even if you look at ICM so should have secured his position as leader
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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
Yes exactly my father a strong conservative told me on the phone yesterday evening he is not voting because of it.He goes to the local pub for quiz night every week and his elderly friends it is their main concern.
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
This. Most of those criticising about 'losing their house' don't understand the current policy. In fact, most people don't understand the current policy unless they get caught up in it.
The problem was the poor presentation, and some very quick opportunistic language from those in favour of a government-funded solution to the problems of social care.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
TH hung Parliament scenario is IMO miles away from the true position. ICM looks closer. 9 pts lead I reckon. TMICIPM increased majority.
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.
Not sure it's that perfect to be headline news that Corbyn is doing so well that from being a no hoper 3 weeks ago he's now set to deprive the Tories of a majority. Momentum and all that....
Closing the gap is one thing, closing in on crossover is quite another!
The Times has rightly been critical of the lacklustre Tory campaign from the get go. I can see how a shock poll to focus minds is just what the doctor ordered from their perspective.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
As I understand it the model is not based on constituency sampling but on modelling constituencies by social types and sampling those social types. It seems an entirely plausible method to me.
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.
No change there then.
Big J is right that harmonisation of how costs are met for residential and domiciliary care does have both advantages and attractions. But people have a huge level of ignorance; those untouched by it have no idea what is involved or what the costs and likely timescales are. The reality is that residential care is hugely expensive and can eat up the property equity even of a wealthy person quite quickly; the flip side is that cases of people needing it for more than a year or two are the tiny minority. Domiciliary care is much less costly (many folk only need a short daily visit) but, because it involves so many more people, represents a significant and growing pressure on local councils. And can be required for years, but is still unlikely to eat up equity due to the lower costs involved. £100k protected is a massively better situation for most ordinary people than £23k.
The Tories are idiots not to have thought through the detail first, got people on board, tested the reactions, and started the explaining well in advance of an election, ideally with some consensus (plenty of Labour councils are desperate for a solution). And not to have realised they haven't helped themselves with their previous hyperbolic reaction to Labour's earlier proposal.
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
Dilnot believed a market could be created in insurance if there was a cap.
May's cap will disappear in a puff of smoke on 9th June. We will be back to her original proposal before you can say 'dementia'. She is happy to lie and has demonstrated that in her interview with Brillo.
YouGov is asking people about voting in particular seats, but with a 7000 sample they can only afford to "group" such seats into fairly crude categories before they lose the accuracy. Eleven people in each seat is obviously going to tell them nothing useful about how particular local contests are going.
The theories that a lot of momentum folk have signed up as sleepers to YG's panel begins to look a bit more plausible, given how out of line they are with other polls. A shame they are simply playing into the Tories' hands.
Isn't this sample 7000 per day for seven days and demographically chosen across the constituencies? It is too big of panel to suffer significant entryism.
Paul Mason is being stupid. A lot of people will jump at the chance of getting Boris.
Boris is perhaps the most ridiculous figure ever to have held major office in the UK. He is genuinely detested in Europe and disdained in most other parts of the world. He is absolutely not PM material and would significantly harm UK interests if he were.
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.
No change there then.
Can you provide your link for that 80%.
In this area it is more like 80% in care homes
There are 4 times as many people receiving home care than in a care home in England
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
I agree that there are no current proposals available from any party that solve the basic problem of affordability. The people want a solution that someone else pays for and see no reason why thier asserts built up over their lives should pay for something others, who they consider less prudent etc etc, should get it for free. Understandable but what is the solution?
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.
The clanger was assuming people knew the current policy. But they didn't, so they didn't recognise it for the more generous improvement that it was. Massively inept from the Tories.
The other utterly wrong assumption was to think nobody could seriously countenance Corbyn as PM. Astonishingly, it seems many people can.
Any fool can see the first one was a wholly avoidable blunder.
The second one I am still really struggling to understand
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.
Yes ICM points to clear net Tory gains in marginals, the Tories may only be 1% ahead in Tory marginals but they are 5% ahead in Labour marginals
Before many elections, bellwether seats are often mentioned: seats that have voted the way of the winner for x elections.
What're the current seat to look at in this respect, and how far back have they elected an MP from the winning party?
Cardiff North is a contender. From 1983 onwards, after the boundaries were changed, it has always elected an MP for the governing party at Westminster.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
TH hung Parliament scenario is IMO miles away from the true position. ICM looks closer. 9 pts lead I reckon. TMICIPM increased majority.
I agree still think 150 Maj for the Conservatives .Hard to understand the angst.Having said that I remember many Labour people concerned they would win in 97.They had an excuse I guess after so many defeats.Labour very rarely etc an upside election result , the last one I think was Feb 74.
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
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.
I have already left the UK but the thought of May or Corbyn becoming PM scares the proverbial out of me. The only hope for the UK is a hung parliament.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
As I understand it the model is not based on constituency sampling but on modelling constituencies by social types and sampling those social types. It seems an entirely plausible method to me.
It all hangs on:
- representativeness of the sample (as self-selected YouGov at least deserves to be asked more Qs) - honesty of the sample, especially about whether people will actually vote - integrity of the data, after all the pollsters' adjusting and massaging the outcome
One loser from this election appears already identified; once again the polling industry isn't coming out of this well. And with so many different adjustment models, who is to say that whoever comes nearest wasn't just lucky, rather than right?
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.
No change there then.
Big J is right that harmonisation of how costs are met for residential and domiciliary care does have both advantages and attractions. But people have a huge level of ignorance; those untouched by it have no idea what is involved or what the costs and likely timescales are. The reality is that residential care is hugely expensive and can eat up the property equity even of a wealthy person quite quickly; the flip side is that cases of people needing it for more than a year or two are the tiny minority. Domiciliary care is much less costly (many folk only need a short daily visit) but, because it involves so many more people, represents a significant and growing pressure on local councils. And can be required for years, but is still unlikely to eat up equity due to the lower costs involved. £100k protected is a massively better situation for most ordinary people than £23k.
The Tories are idiots not to have thought through the detail first, got people on board, tested the reactions, and started the explaining well in advance of an election, ideally with some consensus (plenty of Labour councils are desperate for a solution). And not to have realised they haven't helped themselves with their previous hyperbolic reaction to Labour's earlier proposal.
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?
On Yougov latest Scottish figures SNP should be on about 46 not 50
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 suspect we will hear a lot about last-minute swing again.
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
This. Most of those criticising about 'losing their house' don't understand the current policy. In fact, most people don't understand the current policy unless they get caught up in it.
The problem was the poor presentation, and some very quick opportunistic language from those in favour of a government-funded solution to the problems of social care.
Tory manifetso writers effectively allowed May to get the blame for the crap system that exists already, but nobody was aware of who hadn't been in the system.
Can someone please remind me of John0's Dictum as pressed upon us last night by TSE?
Is it that the poll which has Lab doing worst is the one most like to be accurate, or is that from OGH?
There are 3 JohnO dicta :
1. Planned railway destinations are for plebs. 2. Hersham Conservatives do it better with Jacobite/Milano allies. 3. The worst Labour poll is better than the final result.
When the GE was called, I was a NOTA. Now I find I'm being joined by a few other people. It's an old demographic that I know, so the Jezzarites haven't increased - he's still toxic to the them, they've seen it all before. But the few Tories I know have gone wobbly. However I suspect they'll still vote Blue when push comes to shove.
The kiddies like Corbyn because he seems new and sparkly, and has managed to keep his temper, so he comes over as an amiable uncle. And this socialism lark has never been tried before, has it? He may be barmy but he's honest.
For them, May is dull and grey and looks like a time-server. The UK Clinton vs Trump..
But we're not America.
A 65 majority for the Conservatives, with the SNP mischief about a coalition playing into their hands.
Before many elections, bellwether seats are often mentioned: seats that have voted the way of the winner for x elections.
What're the current seat to look at in this respect, and how far back have they elected an MP from the winning party?
Cardiff North is a contender. From 1983 onwards, after the boundaries were changed, it has always elected an MP for the governing party at Westminster.
Thanks. Not an answer I was expecting, and not one I'd instinctively have looked at.
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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
The idea is probably the best of the plausible options - however the marketing was beyond dire... The reality is that for most people they are just a stroke away from leaving / inheriting £23,000 and their home - this is an improvement on that and should have been sold as such...
I support the scheme, provided there is a cap that covers catastrophic care need.
Which is pretty much what the LDs tried to introduce while in government.
I have said it before, but with hindsight the Coalition will be seen as a golden period of good government. Policies were properly thrashed out behind closed doors*, not sprung on an unsuspecting public.
*tuition fees being a rare, but significant exception.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
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.
No change there then.
Can you provide your link for that 80%.
In this area it is more like 80% in care homes
There are 4 times as many people receiving home care than in a care home in England
And it costs a fraction of the amount for a care home. Plus a very large number of those people are already paying for private provision for home help as the public provision is so poor.
Didn't there used to be a rule about not dismissing a poll to u don't like as a rogue?
Maybe now there should be a rule about not letting a poll you don't like to drive you into utter panic...
No one's panicked on this one.
Have you read this thread? There's a strong whiff of panic running through it...
There's an even stronger whiff of WTF??? have YouGov done here? It just smacks of "How the hell can we make this inevitable coronation of Theresa May interesting? I know...."
And I think they may discover after the election they have a serious infestation of Momentum in their panel....
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Well even if 650 constituencies are taken into account, that is almost 80 per constituency.
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
I agree that there are no current proposals available from any party that solve the basic problem of affordability. The people want a solution that someone else pays for and see no reason why thier asserts built up over their lives should pay for something others, who they consider less prudent etc etc, should get it for free. Understandable but what is the solution?
May at least attempts to address the problem but the public do not understand the vast sums involved. If you can find out the number in care, their average time in care, and multiply it by at least £40,000 pa you should arrive at the figure
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Well even if 650 constituencies are taken into account, that is almost 80 per constituency.
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
I believe they are asking the same 7,000 people each day for seven days.
Remember - it was Cameron and Osborne that caused May's troubles on social care for the elderly. They torpedoed an emerging cross-party consensus on funding back in 2010 for short-term political advantage. It would be very amusing if the Death Tax now came back to bite the Tories hard.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
As I understand it the model is not based on constituency sampling but on modelling constituencies by social types and sampling those social types. It seems an entirely plausible method to me.
A problem I can see with that approach is that marginals, which by definition are the ones that will decide the result, are likely to be more volatile. I suspect you would be better taking bigger samples in a representative set of marginals and modelling from there. Even better if you can canvas voters- how did they vote last time, how do they expect to vote this time?
Remember - it was Cameron and Osborne that caused May's troubles on social care for the elderly. They torpedoed an emerging cross-party consensus on funding back in 2010 for short-term political advantage. It would be very amusing if the Death Tax now came back to bite the Tories hard.
May took the tough decision, Cameron and Osborne gave been gone almost a year
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
There will be a cap now too
The cap is reassurance for the small minority of residential care cases (around 10% I believe) that extend for years, and it's an even smaller minority when tenants without savings and the many people with property equity not much above £100k, who won't have to pay anyway, are excluded.
It would appear to be another mistake by the Tory manifesto to have left out any reference to a cap - people reasonably in the know like IDS insist it was always supposed to be there; others suggest the "new" Tory policy was supposed to be a replacement. Who knows? Despite all the conspiracy theories the truth is probably more mundane: Mr T or whoever wrote the manifesto either forgot, and/or isn't an expert on the detail himself.
Can someone please remind me of John0's Dictum as pressed upon us last night by TSE?
Is it that the poll which has Lab doing worst is the one most like to be accurate, or is that from OGH?
There are 3 JohnO dicta :
1. Planned railway destinations are for plebs. 2. Hersham Conservatives do it better with Jacobite/Milano allies. 3. The worst Labour poll is better than the final result.
Hmm. Ladbrokes has also, perhaps obviously, suspended the under/over market for Con seats. Was at 380.5. If it declines, as seems likely, I might back the over. It's either that, or back 375-399 and lay on Betfair.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Well even if 650 constituencies are taken into account, that is almost 80 per constituency.
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
I believe they are asking the same 7,000 people each day for seven days.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Well even if 650 constituencies are taken into account, that is almost 80 per constituency.
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
I believe they are asking the same 7,000 people each day for seven days.
That is ~ 49000 sample.
Yes, but it can't be 300 per constituency for 150-200 constituencies if they are only talking to 7,000 people
When the GE was called, I was a NOTA. Now I find I'm being joined by a few other people. It's an old demographic that I know, so the Jezzarites haven't increased - he's still toxic to the them, they've seen it all before. But the few Tories I know have gone wobbly. However I suspect they'll still vote Blue when push comes to shove.
The kiddies like Corbyn because he seems new and sparkly, and has managed to keep his temper, so he comes over as an amiable uncle. And this socialism lark has never been tried before, has it? He may be barmy but he's honest.
For them, May is dull and grey and looks like a time-server. The UK Clinton vs Trump..
But we're not America.
A 65 majority for the Conservatives, with the SNP mischief about a coalition playing into their hands.
This is not Clinton v Trump, this is Clinton v Sanders, Clinton v Trump would be May v Farage though policy wise May is equidistant between Trump and Clinton
Good morrow travellers in an antique land. Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this? We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Well even if 650 constituencies are taken into account, that is almost 80 per constituency.
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
I believe they are asking the same 7,000 people each day for seven days.
Sorry ! I was not aware of that. Depends on how many seats they cover.
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.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
There will be a cap now too
The cap is reassurance for the small minority of residential care cases (around 10% I believe) that extend for years, and it's an even smaller minority when tenants without savings and the many people with property equity not much above £100k, who won't have to pay anyway, are excluded.
It would appear to be another mistake by the Tory manifesto to have left out any reference to a cap - people reasonably in the know like IDS insist it was always supposed to be there; others suggest the "new" Tory policy was supposed to be a replacement. Who knows? Despite all the conspiracy theories the truth is probably more mundane: Mr T or whoever wrote the manifesto either forgot, and/or isn't an expert on the detail himself.
I have assumed if one structures your wills correctly and the property is held as joint tenants then we can preserve £200 k for our children, am I right?
One thing - perhaps the number of people who actually would be ok seeing AN Other Labour leader in power and not Jez is really quite small. The British electorate simply is tribal beyond all reason ?
Does anyone know how much money the dementia tax is supposed to raise?
I don't think so not even the government and as I read it in the case of residential care nil and cost the state more it's the extension to home care where it may raise money
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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
The idea is probably the best of the plausible options - however the marketing was beyond dire... The reality is that for most people they are just a stroke away from leaving / inheriting £23,000 and their home - this is an improvement on that and should have been sold as such...
I support the scheme, provided there is a cap that covers catastrophic care need.
Which is pretty much what the LDs tried to introduce while in government.
I have said it before, but with hindsight the Coalition will be seen as a golden period of good government. Policies were properly thrashed out behind closed doors*, not sprung on an unsuspecting public.
*tuition fees being a rare, but significant exception.
Jeez, the spread on Sporting Index just leapt up to 197/203 Labour Seats. What's going on?
Don't the guys at Sporting listen to Woman's Hour?
Do many women listen to "Women's Hour"?
It has a loyal audience amongst middle class female Radio Four listeners. About 3 million people at peak audience (live and podcast), average age about 55. So probably not too many Corbyn fans to begin with?
Tory campaign has been unbelievably piss poor, May has been outed as wooden and inept - they have given voters no good reason to vote for them other than they are not a Corbyn led Labour party.
Still can't believe they will lose to Corbyn and his fellow travellers, but this election presents the least appealing choice in my lifetime.
NOTA would win by a landslide. Next 5 years going to be grim for the tories and labour odds-on next time round surely.
No, not necessarily at all. In 1987 Kinnock closes to within 4 points of Thatcher and in 1992 led Major in most polls, in both elections the Tories won in the end and we are at the equivalent stage in the electoral cycle. Though if Corbyn does not become PM as Yougov suggests is possible he will have increased his voteshare even if you look at ICM so should have secured his position as leader
My thinking was that May appears to be fairly rubbish, much less able than I would have said a couple of months ago. Add in Brexit and 2022 looks like much less favourable territory than today (I also assume a new, slightly less bonkers Labour leader and team)
But you are right of course that she could be ousted and replaced by someone good, plus 5 years is a long time.
Jack, my last post actually said LOL and thank you re JohnO but bloody Vanilla truncated my post YET AGAIN & chopped off the most important part. So - thank you!
A tale of two countries - one of which has incessant whining about 'austerity':
' According to provisional data turnover in retail trade in April 2017 was in real terms 0.9% smaller and in nominal terms 0.6% larger than that in April 2016. '
' In April 2017, the quantity bought in the retail industry increased by 2.3% compared with March 2017 and by 4.0% compared with April 2016. '
Jeez, the spread on Sporting Index just leapt up to 197/203 Labour Seats. What's going on?
Don't the guys at Sporting listen to Woman's Hour?
I think Sporting Index think "Woman's Hour" is the sixty minutes Diane Abbott has been given to calculate how long is the piece of string attached to the Labour magic money tree.
At 12 hours 45 minutes Hackney North's finest gave the correct Labour Party answer of :
"I'll have a look at my iPAD .... can I get back to you on that one? ..."
Worth saying that I have a friend who's on this Yougov panel. He only does it because he gets paid and given that he no longer works due to ill health, it's worth his time to do it. Obviously his vote is worth as much as anyone else's but I do wonder about this approach.
Hopefully there is no last minute herding next week.
Jeez, the spread on Sporting Index just leapt up to 197/203 Labour Seats. What's going on?
Don't the guys at Sporting listen to Woman's Hour?
Do many women listen to "Women's Hour"?
It has a loyal audience amongst middle class female Radio Four listeners. About 3 million people at peak audience (live and podcast), average age about 55. So probably not too many Corbyn fans to begin with?
That's more than I thought. Have occasionally had it on in the background.
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.
The clanger was assuming people knew the current policy. But they didn't, so they didn't recognise it for the more generous improvement that it was. Massively inept from the Tories.
The other utterly wrong assumption was to think nobody could seriously countenance Corbyn as PM. Astonishingly, it seems many people can.
Any fool can see the first one was a wholly avoidable blunder.
The second one I am still really struggling to understand
Surely two sides of the same coin... the population is way less informed than PB nerds (and Tory manifesto writers) expect or give credit for.
Given the lack of knowledge about one of THE key political/economic issues of our era - funding of elderly care - the fact people increasingly like Cuddly Uncle Jez over Shaggy-Haired IRA Sympathiser Jez from three and a half decades back shouldn't come as a surprise.
Good morrow travellers in an antique land. Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this? We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
Does anyone know how much money the dementia tax is supposed to raise?
IF have a document, but I don't think it comes up with a final figure.
IFS says there are 228,000 in residential care, with average cost of £553 a week.
10% of 65 year olds can expect to spend more than £100K on social care.
"64% of local authority spending on care for the over-65s is for residential care, with the remainder spent on home care. The Conservative plans would tip this balance towards a greater fraction of spending on residential care – increasing public funding for residential care (by raising the asset threshold) but decreasing public funding for home care (by including housing wealth in the asset test).
It is not possible to be confident whether the change would increase or decrease overall spending relative to the current system on care on the basis of publically available data. What is clear is that the proposal is less generous than the version of the Dilnot commission’s recommendations that have already been put into law"
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
After utterly deriding Pollsters for herding it is a bit rum to criticise ones who diverge.
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
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
Yes exactly my father a strong conservative told me on the phone yesterday evening he is not voting because of it.He goes to the local pub for quiz night every week and his elderly friends it is their main concern.
Shooting themselves in the foot is hardly an adequate phrase to describe what the tories have done.
Your father and his friends were not aware of the current policy, all the tories have done is publicise something which was (a) unknown and (b) massively unpopular. the fact that the new policy is more generous and does not force people to sell their homes in their lifetimes has been lost in the chaos.
What a complete unmitigated disaster. All they needed to do was announce that they would have a review with serious grown up sounding words, job done. And now we risk a bunch of fiscally incontinent jokers coming in and causing economic carnage
It is a very poor choice. However, how do you think a Hung Parliament would help?
Thank-you for your welcome. I would hope a hung parliament will cause the politicians to consider the national interest. BREXIT is going to cause chaos as is Corbynism. Your only hope is a stalemate!
Comments
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
The theories that a lot of momentum folk have signed up as sleepers to YG's panel begins to look a bit more plausible, given how out of line they are with other polls. A shame they are simply playing into the Tories' hands.
1. Planned railway destinations are for plebs.
2. Hersham Conservatives do it better with Jacobite/Milano allies.
3. The worst Labour poll is better than the final result.
Still can't believe they will lose to Corbyn and his fellow travellers, but this election presents the least appealing choice in my lifetime.
NOTA would win by a landslide. Next 5 years going to be grim for the tories and labour odds-on next time round surely.
My new avatar when I get home....
What're the current seat to look at in this respect, and how far back have they elected an MP from the winning party?
He's the advocator and implementer of increased student debt, subsidised house prices, triple lock pensions and uncontrolled immigration.
In this area it is more like 80% in care homes
The problem was the poor presentation, and some very quick opportunistic language from those in favour of a government-funded solution to the problems of social care.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
Betfair
Con greater than 365 5/6
Bet365
Con less than 383 5/6
A Conservative majority of between 92 and 114 wins on both.
Closing the gap is one thing, closing in on crossover is quite another!
The Times has rightly been critical of the lacklustre Tory campaign from the get go. I can see how a shock poll to focus minds is just what the doctor ordered from their perspective.
The Tories are idiots not to have thought through the detail first, got people on board, tested the reactions, and started the explaining well in advance of an election, ideally with some consensus (plenty of Labour councils are desperate for a solution). And not to have realised they haven't helped themselves with their previous hyperbolic reaction to Labour's earlier proposal.
May's cap will disappear in a puff of smoke on 9th June. We will be back to her original proposal before you can say 'dementia'. She is happy to lie and has demonstrated that in her interview with Brillo.
Meanwhile Jezza delivers Jam tommorow:
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154723649792217&id=228735667216
https://blog.alzheimers.org.uk/campaigns/dementia-tax/
The clanger was assuming people knew the current policy. But they didn't, so they didn't recognise it for the more generous improvement that it was. Massively inept from the Tories.
The other utterly wrong assumption was to think nobody could seriously countenance Corbyn as PM. Astonishingly, it seems many people can.
Any fool can see the first one was a wholly avoidable blunder.
The second one I am still really struggling to understand
- representativeness of the sample (as self-selected YouGov at least deserves to be asked more Qs)
- honesty of the sample, especially about whether people will actually vote
- integrity of the data, after all the pollsters' adjusting and massaging the outcome
One loser from this election appears already identified; once again the polling industry isn't coming out of this well. And with so many different adjustment models, who is to say that whoever comes nearest wasn't just lucky, rather than right?
It is a very poor choice. However, how do you think a Hung Parliament would help?
The kiddies like Corbyn because he seems new and sparkly, and has managed to keep his temper, so he comes over as an amiable uncle. And this socialism lark has never been tried before, has it? He may be barmy but he's honest.
For them, May is dull and grey and looks like a time-server. The UK Clinton vs Trump..
But we're not America.
A 65 majority for the Conservatives, with the SNP mischief about a coalition playing into their hands.
Which is pretty much what the LDs tried to introduce while in government.
I have said it before, but with hindsight the Coalition will be seen as a golden period of good government. Policies were properly thrashed out behind closed doors*, not sprung on an unsuspecting public.
*tuition fees being a rare, but significant exception.
And I think they may discover after the election they have a serious infestation of Momentum in their panel....
In reality they are probably looking at 150 seats [ max: 200 ]. In which case, it would be more than 300 per constituency.
Don't the guys at Sporting listen to Woman's Hour?
It would appear to be another mistake by the Tory manifesto to have left out any reference to a cap - people reasonably in the know like IDS insist it was always supposed to be there; others suggest the "new" Tory policy was supposed to be a replacement. Who knows? Despite all the conspiracy theories the truth is probably more mundane: Mr T or whoever wrote the manifesto either forgot, and/or isn't an expert on the detail himself.
The agony of choice.
Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this?
We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow.
I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
Edited extra bit: and, whatever it shows, this place will go nuts when the exit poll comes out.
But you are right of course that she could be ousted and replaced by someone good, plus 5 years is a long time.
Jack, my last post actually said LOL and thank you re JohnO but bloody Vanilla truncated my post YET AGAIN & chopped off the most important part. So - thank you!
' According to provisional data turnover in retail trade in April 2017 was in real terms 0.9% smaller and in nominal terms 0.6% larger than that in April 2016. '
' In April 2017, the quantity bought in the retail industry increased by 2.3% compared with March 2017 and by 4.0% compared with April 2016. '
Can anyone guess the two countries ?
At 12 hours 45 minutes Hackney North's finest gave the correct Labour Party answer of :
"I'll have a look at my iPAD .... can I get back to you on that one? ..."
Hopefully there is no last minute herding next week.
Given the lack of knowledge about one of THE key political/economic issues of our era - funding of elderly care - the fact people increasingly like Cuddly Uncle Jez over Shaggy-Haired IRA Sympathiser Jez from three and a half decades back shouldn't come as a surprise.
IFS says there are 228,000 in residential care, with average cost of £553 a week.
10% of 65 year olds can expect to spend more than £100K on social care.
"64% of local authority spending on care for the over-65s is for residential care, with the remainder spent on home care. The Conservative plans would tip this balance towards a greater fraction of spending on residential care – increasing public funding for residential care (by raising the asset threshold) but decreasing public funding for home care (by including housing wealth in the asset test).
It is not possible to be confident whether the change would increase or decrease overall spending relative to the current system on care on the basis of publically available data. What is clear is that the proposal is less generous than the version of the Dilnot commission’s recommendations that have already been put into law"
https://election2017.ifs.org.uk/article/social-care-a-step-forwards-or-a-step-backwards
in keeping with PP over/under line of 365.5
Your father and his friends were not aware of the current policy, all the tories have done is publicise something which was (a) unknown and (b) massively unpopular. the fact that the new policy is more generous and does not force people to sell their homes in their lifetimes has been lost in the chaos.
What a complete unmitigated disaster. All they needed to do was announce that they would have a review with serious grown up sounding words, job done. And now we risk a bunch of fiscally incontinent jokers coming in and causing economic carnage