Good morning, everyone. Edmund and Cyclefree ask why BJO and I think a Labour government would be redistributive, rather than merely giving bungs to the middle class like free tuition fees.
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
My assumption is it's the ex-lab, 2015 ukip, then brexit vote (that was blue a month ago) - which is boosting lab.
Any other theories?
I can't see why anyone fitting that description would vote for Corbyn. I am one of them, maybe not representative though. I live in a very Ukip area and have never heard anyone say one good thing about Corbyn, he is a laughing stock. In fact the only time two of my mates have ever brought up politics was to say 'wtf is that new labour weirdo all about'
YouGov is not doing these polls for free, is it? Surely it is doing what any business does - delivering on orders placed by customers. It's the media that commissions this stuff. And the Times has definitely got good value for its money.
On reflection - maybe that's wrong. As others have said, it's great brand building for YG and name recognition alone will get them plenty of commissions. If it is about brand building there would definitely be a temptation to develop ways of looking at things that create noise.
I hope you're right.
I didn't sleep last night because of that poll, and have been up since 4am.
Welcome to my world. The choice voters face in this election is the worst there has ever been. It is genuinely worrying: on one side a lamentably poor Conservative party willing to inflict economic catastrophe on the UK by walking out of the EU with no deal; on the other side a Labour party led by an incompetent throwback to the 1980s who surrounds himself with publis school Stalinists and every kind of anti-Western advocate you can imagine. What the hell have we done to deserve this?
There will be a deal. Even Theresa May said at the time the election was called that she needed a majority to be able to compromise with the EU. And, after this campaign, she won't have the same latitude she did within Cabinet anyway to maintain her opaque stance.
With his fourth-form attitudes to national security, and mind-numbing incompetence, I think Corbyn could actually get people killed. McDonnell will use his budgets to settle scores, and we know what a thoroughly nasty piece of work he is.
I wouldn't forgive those that put him in power.
Every thinking person now agrees that Brexit will be a disaster. So by the same token you xenophobes who can't claim the ignorance of the old and uneducated will never be forgiven
I'm a xenophobe, am I?
Riiight. Thanks for clearing that up, Roger.
You were desperate to leave the EU on a visceral level. I can't envisage such passion if you were merely looking at the pros and cons of trade. So yes. Probably.
In that case, it is pointless engaging in debate with you.
April 2015, Cameron had a 14% lead over Miliband on the best PM question.
In last night's YouGov poll, May has a 13% lead over Corbyn on the same question
If May gets a majority under 20 who replaces her as leader and PM?
Ken Clarke. We need a serious and experienced PM now.
I think Jeremy Hunt might be the dark horse.
If Ken Clarke became PM now the Tory Party would split, up to half its voters would shift to UKIP, Hunt would be wary about standing as if he tries to push through a soft Brexit platform again he would not get through the membership and you may really end up with Leadsom for leader this time, if not David Davis
The fact that May is start to imitate Gordon Brown levels of awkwardness is worrying and hilarious in equal measures.
Some wise owl on PB kept on saying she was a pound shop Gordon Brown.
A few of us saw through her pretty quickly. The most terrifying thing is that despite being dreadful she was still better than the other option, who currently sits in the cabinet!!
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
We have to take our pleasures where we find them.
@Indigo is already abroad, Max has left, and now @Casino is thinking of fucking off.
At this rate there won't be any PB Leavers left living in the UK.
Just Tyndall in his fortress in Lincolnshire having to pop out and pick the sprouts from time to time before they rot on the stem.
Oh, I shall still be here. At least, until Corbyn puts up taxes....then he can go swing for my money! Jeremy would do well to heed Marquee Mark's Maxim - Money Flees Taxation.
Absolutely. I think it'll be terrific if Corbyn makes it - a huge sea change in British politics to adult, redistributive politics delivered without artifice, instead of the ineffective jostling into decline of recent years. (I know him moderately well so am of course biased.)
You can correct me if I'm missing something but the weird thing about this is that the manifesto doesn't actually seem very redistributive. Even the opposite, since it's very kind to the elderly and timid on benefits. It's the exact opposite of New Labour: They gave off a vibe as if they weren't going to redistribute then did, whereas the Corbyn plan seems to be to give off a vibe as if you are going to redistribute then don't.
I wonder if there might not be possible dialectical synthesis whereby you make the voters think you're going to redistribute, but only a little bit and not so much that it freaks them out, then get elected and do it.
What the manifesto says is irrelevant.
The true colours of Corbyn/McDonnell will be revealed in office.
And you know this because?
Their record and intent is abundantly clear to anyone who bothers to look.
The fact that May is start to imitate Gordon Brown levels of awkwardness is worrying and hilarious in equal measures.
Some wise owl on PB kept on saying she was a pound shop Gordon Brown.
A few of us saw through her pretty quickly. The most terrifying thing is that despite being dreadful she was still better than the other option, who currently sits in the cabinet!!
I agree about the Midlands. If anyone wants a value bet, West Bromwich East at 10/3 for the Conservatives looks too long to me. I'd say it's only evens. Watson has been invisible this campaign and if there is a Corgasm he will hardly benefit. But more pertinently, it's heavily Leave and he's not personally popular. DYOR, of course.
I really can't see a way West Bromwich East turns Conservative:
Even if the Conservatives hovered up all the UKIP vote they would still need a significant swing from Labour. The demographics aren't good for the Conservatives either.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
In the past 2 hours "Yougov" has been the 7th trendingest term on twitter. Thats Yougov with no hashtag btw, don't understand twitter so don't know if that makes a difference. https://trends24.in/united-kingdom/
A hashtag simply indicates it's a 'thing' (in the modern parlance). i.e. #LibDemFightback that probably wouldn't pop up in regular conversation. The Twitter algorithms tend to boost these hashtags in the trending algorithms (because it's all part of the game, and shows people have come to Twitter to actively promote, boost or share something, and that's good for Twitter's ad business (advertisers tend to pay to boost hashtags)
When non-hashtag words or phrases trend, that's a big deal because it reflects ordinary words are simply popping up in discussions. That's why on slow news days (remember those?!) 'Amazon' often is trending, because a lot of self-published authors are on Twitter promoting their books, and this is a continuous low-level trend that doesn't need a big event to get it trending (Amazon gets tons of 'free' promotion on Twitter this way).
So yes, YouGov trending without a hashtag is a big deal.
Anyway, it appears that dated fantasies that are actively destructive of the nation's wellbeing are all the rage on both the left and the right at present. Jeremy Corbyn is probably less dangerous than car crash Brexit because he's more transient.
Why? If Corbyn gets in he not only shifts the economy to a high tax and high spend model, nationalisation model he also probably takes control of Labour for the left for 2 decades, whereas we could return to the single market in a decade under a moderate Labour leader once immigration has been brought under control
Morning all. I have no idea what the result will be, but none of us do. It seems a shame that people on here and the broader media, desperate for a little sense of adventure, seize upon one poll and exaggerate the affect. For those who gamble on politics, I am sure you are looking at core fundamentals and historic experience when guiding your decisions. I hope you are!
I remain unconvinced that a General Election campaign changes the fundamentals around leadership, economic competence, vision for the country as much as people on here seem to think or as much as the polling suggests. We are in danger of confusing the signal and the noise.
Ultimately the vast majority of people do not follow politics closely and certainly don't care about polling. They will be switching on to the campaign this week and making up their minds. This delayed consideration is more acute this time due to the holiday week and the fact this is another voting opportunity for the public in quick succession.
When they do switch on to the decision we are left with the fundamentals of May leading on best PM. The Conservatives leading on economic competence. The Conservatives leading on national security. The Conservatives understood by enough people to be the Brexit party.
The campaigns as we debate them on here are looked at through a strange lens. We are desperate to add some glamour so the impact of singular incidents are exaggerated beyond all sense. Have the Conservatives fought a flawless campaign? No. But beyond the social care wobble (which some polling suggests doesn't much impact the over 65 vote anyway) they have stuck to Brexit and criticising Corbyn. Yet this doesn't fit the media narrative. So now, the final week of campaigning Mrs May is focusing on the positive vision and this is framed as a sign of a failure to dent Corbyn's popularity. Why could it not also be that the Conservatives are happy that people now know Corbyn's foreign policy background (attack ad with over 4 million hits) and are going on this new track to win over further wavering voters and expand their vote?
Ultimately if Mrs May wins a majority of above 60 or 70 I cannot see any serious Conservative MP suggesting she has been fundamentally weakened.
In conclusion, I have no doubt Labour have closed on the Conservatives from the position at the start of the campaign. Leads of 20% + were never realistic in our multi-party democracy and not where the Labour brand has resilience and there is a Labour manifesto with populist content. Whilst I will keep my predictions under review, I still think we are looking at a 8% Conservative vote share lead and an increased majority of at least 75.
Now I am off to canvass in my West Midlands marginal where cabinet ministers keep visiting!
She must have watched? If not live, than later. I mean, anyone would, surely?
I haven't. Any of the debates. Nor did I in 2015. I learned from 2010 they were a complete waste of time and their only reason for existence is that it makes journalists' lives easier.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Nevertheless her credibility is dented. Even if she comes away with a landslide of the sorts PB'ers were confidently predicting two weeks back, after the glow fades people will conclude that it would have happened whatever, and not ascribe any of it to Mrs May's brilliance on the campaign trail.
The campaign has been dire, but the Tories are facing Corbyn so a win is still likely. If the Tories were facing someone other than Corbyn I'm certain they would lose.
May's meant to be changing tack today, surely that says it all? A week to go and she is forced to try something different because what she has done for the last six weeks has not worked.
Mr. Eagles, I agree. Hunt or Rudd would be favourites. I don't personally rate either of them, but with Osborne's horrendous miscalculation, the field is clear for them.
MD, don't you mean "master strategizing" rather than horrendous miscalculation?
Good morning, everyone. Edmund and Cyclefree ask why BJO and I think a Labour government would be redistributive, rather than merely giving bungs to the middle class like free tuition fees.
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
Nick you're a fair minded man but to say going to university is a luxury is a nonsense, numbers are rising all the time, tuition fees clearly aren't a deterrent.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Well yeah obviously... It gets the bank of mum and dad off the hook from paying those debts.
"Just Tyndall in his fortress in Lincolnshire having to pop out and pick the sprouts from time to time before they rot on the stem."
I worked every school holiday and many evenings during school on the land - driven there in the local ganger's van. Nothing ever rotted and there was much less mechanisation in the 1960s, it was much more labour-intensive.
Plus we had no 'foreign' help. There was a Brummie who appeared briefly, but we suspected he was hiding from the police.
Yes, times have changed, but far fewer workers are needed now.
It's always surprised me that Labour supported FOM. A recipe for keeping wages low. The farmers love it, the local workers not so.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Yes, it's bribing people with their own money, as usual.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
I think TM's future is a fascinating question which really shouldn't have been in play. For that alone, calling the election is a spectacular mistake on her part.
Given Brexit negotiations, I think the party will suck it up at any level above about maj 30 (a leadership contest would play VERY badly, especially if there was debate over the hardness of Brexit being sought). However unconvincing, there's a tale to be told about "doubling their majority, mandate she needed" though I wouldn't rule out her being knifed after a deal in good time for 2022.
Certainly anything above about maj. 50 - which on most polls is still likely - can be painted as a convincing enough win. She still needs an assured performance on Brexit to be sure of being around in 2022, but screwing that up would kill her whether the majority's 51 or 151.
If she's shown not to have delivered the increased mandate she said was essential (say maj sub-25), that will look disastrous.. and leave them with a hard choice between a wounded PM kicking off Brexit negotiations, and weeks/months of navel-gazing when they/the country can't afford it.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Does any of these people wonder where the money for "free" tuition is going to come from?
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Does any of these people wonder where the money for "free" tuition is going to come from?
No
Did many of the 52% wonder where the money for the cost of Brexit is going to come from?
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
Won't work now that May's been rumbled.
She has not been rumbled on the core point, Leave voters want an end to free movement and no 100 billion euros to Brussels, any Tory losses have been over social care NOT Brexit
Good morning, everyone. Edmund and Cyclefree ask why BJO and I think a Labour government would be redistributive, rather than merely giving bungs to the middle class like free tuition fees.
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
Nick you're a fair minded man but to say going to university is a luxury is a nonsense, numbers are rising all the time, tuition fees clearly aren't a deterrent.
Yes that's the only bit I would disagree with. Lib Dems deserve credit for modifying tuition fees policy successfully and avoiding discouraging access for those on low incomes.
YouGov is not doing these polls for free, is it? Surely it is doing what any business does - delivering on orders placed by customers. It's the media that commissions this stuff. And the Times has definitely got good value for its money.
On reflection - maybe that's wrong. As others have said, it's great brand building for YG and name recognition alone will get them plenty of commissions. If it is about brand building there would definitely be a temptation to develop ways of looking at things that create noise.
I hope you're right.
I didn't sleep last night because of that poll, and have been up since 4am.
Welcome to my world. The choice voters face in this election is the worst there has ever been. It is genuinely worrying: on one side a lamentably poor Conservative party willing to inflict economic catastrophe on the UK by walking out of the EU with no deal; on the other side a Labour party led by an incompetent throwback to the 1980s who surrounds himself with publis school Stalinists and every kind of anti-Western advocate you can imagine. What the hell have we done to deserve this?
There will be a deal. Even Theresa May said at the time the election was called that she needed a majority to be able to compromise with the EU. And, after this campaign, she won't have the same latitude she did within Cabinet anyway to maintain her opaque stance.
With his fourth-form attitudes to national security, and mind-numbing incompetence, I think Corbyn could actually get people killed. McDonnell will use his budgets to settle scores, and we know what a thoroughly nasty piece of work he is.
I wouldn't forgive those that put him in power.
The Tories are going to win easily. You should be worrying about what happens after tha, not John McDonnell settling scores from 11 Downing Street :-D
why are you so certain
Old people vote and vote Tory; May easily leads Corbyn on leadership; the Midlands will be a bloodbath for Labour. I have a feeling Yorkshire may be, too.
Midlands were not a bloodbath for Labour in the mayor election. Yes the Tories won, but things have changed since then.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Just them saddled with huge taxes instead! I mean, are these middle class parents all buying into shaking the Free Money Tree?
She must have watched? If not live, than later. I mean, anyone would, surely?
I haven't. Any of the debates. Nor did I in 2015. I learned from 2010 they were a complete waste of time and their only reason for existence is that it makes journalists' lives easier.
Good morning, everyone. Edmund and Cyclefree ask why BJO and I think a Labour government would be redistributive, rather than merely giving bungs to the middle class like free tuition fees.
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
Nick you're a fair minded man but to say going to university is a luxury is a nonsense, numbers are rising all the time, tuition fees clearly aren't a deterrent.
The bit he isn't saying is that the number of university places will inevitably have to fall, or we'll have to splurge on pitching to overseas students.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
Any increase in funding for health and education will rapidly be converted into extra pay for the employees.
Now you might argue that's a good thing but its not going to help the users of those services.
She must have watched? If not live, than later. I mean, anyone would, surely?
I haven't. Any of the debates. Nor did I in 2015. I learned from 2010 they were a complete waste of time and their only reason for existence is that it makes journalists' lives easier.
Mr. B2, hmm, thanks for that. Worth noting that the blues are polling between 40-46% with every pollster, though. If the audience represented that, it should've been apparent.
Blues sit on their hands. They're quiet in pubs. They're shy. Then they troop down to the polling stations and silently place a cross next to the blue candidate.
The noise-to-vote ratio from Corbynistas is massive.
From Tories, it is silent running. Why pick a fight with somebody who will accuse you personally of supporting the grossest injustices of society? The way Apocalypse got abused on here yesterday was instructive - when she was only a maybe. Truth is, most people don't consider their vote as a part of charitable giving. It is to look after number one, get the type of Government that is going to best deliver for you.
Which, let's face it, is what Labour has done to the youth vote. Buy them, with promises it will find very difficult to deliver once the 1% who pay 27% of income tax decide to depart the reach of HMRC. And companies take their investment and their jobs to a country that will undercut our Corporation Tax rates. At which point, the rest of us will have to make up the shortfall - or the commitments turn into aspirations, nothing happens. Sorry kids, but that dream you have been sold by Labour, of lots of free beer tokens and your own crash pad - they will come to nothing.
The middle classes will make up the shortfall. Corporation tax take on small and medium sized business, who find it hard to move abroad, is increasing my 36%. Either the owners will take the hit with reduced dividends. Or, more likely, they'll continue to draw the same dividends and simply invest less.
Big corporations don't care so much about corporation tax. If you are multinational. it's the easiest tax in the world to legally avoid. Simply place all your intellectual property in Luxembourg.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Just them saddled with huge taxes instead! I mean, are these middle class parents all buying into shaking the Free Money Tree?
Put that down as a "hmmmmm......."
If they'd had enough of experts last year, what has the government done in the interim to reacquaint them with the need for hard choices?
Nevertheless her credibility is dented. Even if she comes away with a landslide of the sorts PB'ers were confidently predicting two weeks back, after the glow fades people will conclude that it would have happened whatever, and not ascribe any of it to Mrs May's brilliance on the campaign trail.
The campaign has been dire, but the Tories are facing Corbyn so a win is still likely. If the Tories were facing someone other than Corbyn I'm certain they would lose.
May's meant to be changing tack today, surely that says it all? A week to go and she is forced to try something different because what she has done for the last six weeks has not worked.
Not true as Yougov showed Cooper and Umunna polled slightly worse than Corbyn against May and Khan only a point better
Good morning one week to goers! The thing to remember, for anyone brave enough to be risking money on this crap shoot, is that May stopped talking to the politically interested/savvy some time ago. She is banking now on the 2015 Tory vote turning out in fear of Corbyn and speaking directly to kippers, Brexiteers, anti immigrationists etc. The strategy is for 2015 blues to save held marginals via encumberence etc and to gain via the purple patch. She's not going to be saying anything that politicos think 'oh that's rather good, that's fiscally sound' etc etc between now and next week. She'll let speculation run riot on polling data to put the fear of God into anti Corbynites and play had on the prospect of Corbyn not delivering the Brexit the faithful want. Corbyn, on the other hand, has the task of getting the dispossessed, en masse, to the polling booth, he needs to find a way of tapping what is left of remainia. It's a very sorry state of affairs and all roads now lead to ruin for poor UK. It's Brexit hard and the remaining public wealth goes to private hands or its Brexit chaotically whilst the economy tanks out. Individually you need to work out where you are more protected in your own circumstances. Personally, I'm better off under a Corbyn cluster fuck than a May one, but I loathe Corbyn and his duplicitousness and deep down unpleasantness towards this country. May is ludicrous and hollow and a Conservative government harsh and damaging to the common weald. It's a terrible, sad and desperate choice this time. Feels to me like the last tango before the night falls.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Does any of these people wonder where the money for "free" tuition is going to come from?
No
Did many of the 52% wonder where the money for the cost of Brexit is going to come from?
People are selfish and stupid
Good quote from last night:
"I know we don’t all agree on Brexit, but she’s off to negotiate a deal for you, for me – for all of us. Imagine if it’s a bad deal – I mean Dementia Tax bad."
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
We have to take our pleasures where we find them.
@Indigo is already abroad, Max has left, and now @Casino is thinking of fucking off.
At this rate there won't be any PB Leavers left living in the UK.
Just Tyndall in his fortress in Lincolnshire having to pop out and pick the sprouts from time to time before they rot on the stem.
Oh, I shall still be here. At least, until Corbyn puts up taxes....then he can go swing for my money! Jeremy would do well to heed Marquee Mark's Maxim - Money Flees Taxation.
Quite right. You voted Leave, presumably, in celebration of the noble British backbone.
Good morning, everyone. Edmund and Cyclefree ask why BJO and I think a Labour government would be redistributive, rather than merely giving bungs to the middle class like free tuition fees.
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
Nick you're a fair minded man but to say going to university is a luxury is a nonsense, numbers are rising all the time, tuition fees clearly aren't a deterrent.
The bit he isn't saying is that the number of university places will inevitably have to fall, or we'll have to splurge on pitching to overseas students.
Yep, its called the market, everything finds its price.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
No, she has a mandate and even with no landslide the biggest Tory majority since 1987
Nevertheless her credibility is dented. Even if she comes away with a landslide of the sorts PB'ers were confidently predicting two weeks back, after the glow fades people will conclude that it would have happened whatever, and not ascribe any of it to Mrs May's brilliance on the campaign trail.
Now free movement means you have to let anyone in regardless of job offer or not
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
Won't work now that May's been rumbled.
She has not been rumbled on the core point, Leave voters want an end to free movement and no 100 billion euros to Brussels, any Tory losses have been over social care NOT Brexit
You may be the only person left in the UK who feels May has not been rumbled.
Abstract scenario is not the same as reality; most Leave voters are not all Leave voters; and all Leave voters = 52%.
Worrying thing about May is that she is getting worse and worse at the job. If she wins, she could be even more terrible in a year's time than she is now.
"Just Tyndall in his fortress in Lincolnshire having to pop out and pick the sprouts from time to time before they rot on the stem."
I worked every school holiday and many evenings during school on the land - driven there in the local ganger's van. Nothing ever rotted and there was much less mechanisation in the 1960s, it was much more labour-intensive.
Plus we had no 'foreign' help. There was a Brummie who appeared briefly, but we suspected he was hiding from the police.
Yes, times have changed, but far fewer workers are needed now.
It's always surprised me that Labour supported FOM. A recipe for keeping wages low. The farmers love it, the local workers not so.
It's tricky - low costs for farmers = low prices in the supermarkets = improved economic conditions for millions of consumers, but of course = low wages for workers involved.
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
Yes, we would be trotting behind gallant Merkel slagging off the country who we invest in the most and who invests the most with us because we would know that any voice of moderation in our relationship with America would be dismissed by Merkel in her rage at having someone who disagrees with her.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Just them saddled with huge taxes instead! I mean, are these middle class parents all buying into shaking the Free Money Tree?
Put that down as a "hmmmmm......."
All parties have been shaking the magic money tree and all will continue to do so - the 2015 general election was shocking in its profligate promises - the only questions are:
1) Who are the promises made to 2) How big are the promises 3) How effective they are 4) When it all falls apart
Now if you're a middle class parent you might prefer the MMT being shaken for your teenage kids rather than for some oldies.
Morning all. I have no idea what the result will be, but none of us do. It seems a shame that people on here and the broader media, desperate for a little sense of adventure, seize upon one poll and exaggerate the affect.
The campaigns as we debate them on here are looked at through a strange lens. We are desperate to add some glamour so the impact of singular incidents are exaggerated beyond all sense. Have the Conservatives fought a flawless campaign? No. But beyond the social care wobble (which some polling suggests doesn't much impact the over 65 vote anyway) they have stuck to Brexit and criticising Corbyn. Yet this doesn't fit the media narrative. So now, the final week of campaigning Mrs May is focusing on the positive vision and this is framed as a sign of a failure to dent Corbyn's popularity. Why could it not also be that the Conservatives are happy that people now know Corbyn's foreign policy background (attack ad with over 4 million hits) and are going on this new track to win over further wavering voters and expand their vote?
Ultimately if Mrs May wins a majority of above 60 or 70 I cannot see any serious Conservative MP suggesting she has been fundamentally weakened.
In conclusion, I have no doubt Labour have closed on the Conservatives from the position at the start of the campaign. Leads of 20% + were never realistic in our multi-party democracy and not where the Labour brand has resilience and there is a Labour manifesto with populist content. Whilst I will keep my predictions under review, I still think we are looking at a 8% Conservative vote share lead and an increased majority of at least 75.
Well said. Also, read this from Nick Tyrone this morning - basically saying that, once you cut through all the noise from Momentum activists, Labour have moved from 'meltdown' to simply 'dire'.
The latest emails I'm receiving from CCHQ mark a distinct change of tone. They've realised all the Corbyn ad hominem attacks aren't working, and it's back to 'Brexit means Brexit'. I think it's a smart move.
The only way I would disagree with you is that Theresa *has* been fundamentally weakened because she's not a naturally combative politician, and in the rough-and-tumble of an election campaign (particularly one with a residue of the bitterness left over from the referendum) I think a tipping point has been reached within the Tory echelons that she's not for the long-term. A healthy majority will ensure she survives in the short term, but you can bet that that the party is already beginning to sound our replacements (Jeremy Hunt being my favourite).
Nevertheless her credibility is dented. Even if she comes away with a landslide of the sorts PB'ers were confidently predicting two weeks back, after the glow fades people will conclude that it would have happened whatever, and not ascribe any of it to Mrs May's brilliance on the campaign trail.
The campaign has been dire, but the Tories are facing Corbyn so a win is still likely. If the Tories were facing someone other than Corbyn I'm certain they would lose.
May's meant to be changing tack today, surely that says it all? A week to go and she is forced to try something different because what she has done for the last six weeks has not worked.
Not true as Yougov showed Cooper and Umunna polled slightly worse than Corbyn against May and Khan only a point better
Meaningless - Corbyn is in charge and has been since 2015. A different Labour leader would have done things very differently.
How did May go from Remain to Hard Brexiteer in the space of under a year?
Weirdly, although I think May is more dishonest than the average politician, I think I believe her on this one. It is possible to be resigned to something but still be pleased when you are rid of it.
She must have watched? If not live, than later. I mean, anyone would, surely?
I haven't. Any of the debates. Nor did I in 2015. I learned from 2010 they were a complete waste of time and their only reason for existence is that it makes journalists' lives easier.
Same here. I went to the pub last night instead.
It was on the big screen?
No chance I'm about the only one in my local with even a vague interest in politics.
Ms. Apocalypse, et al., there is a difference between campaigning and governing, though. Blair was great at the former, rather less good at the latter. May's especially bad at campaigning.
Not saying she won't or shouldn't be knifed, but they're different areas.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Does any of these people wonder where the money for "free" tuition is going to come from?
No
Did many of the 52% wonder where the money for the cost of Brexit is going to come from?
People are selfish and stupid
Good quote from last night:
"I know we don’t all agree on Brexit, but she’s off to negotiate a deal for you, for me – for all of us. Imagine if it’s a bad deal – I mean Dementia Tax bad."
The so called demetia tax is not bad, it's an improvement on what we currently are subjected to. I doubt, however that anyone that isn't a tory will even consider the improvement to the majority of the population over shert term political games. Oh,yes and avoid the elephant that is social care provision.
Let's just get the terrorist sympathiser, Stalinist incompetents into No.10/11
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Just them saddled with huge taxes instead! I mean, are these middle class parents all buying into shaking the Free Money Tree?
Put that down as a "hmmmmm......."
Picking up from yesterday's discussion, you said Cameron should have said before June 23rd that if he would resign if Remain lost as it might have persuaded the public to think a bit more.
In that scenario, would you have switched to Remain?
Which, let's face it, is what Labour has done to the youth vote. Buy them, with promises it will find very difficult to deliver once the 1% who pay 27% of income tax decide to depart the reach of HMRC. And companies take their investment and their jobs to a country that will undercut our Corporation Tax rates. At which point, the rest of us will have to make up the shortfall - or the commitments turn into aspirations, nothing happens. Sorry kids, but that dream you have been sold by Labour, of lots of free beer tokens and your own crash pad - they will come to nothing.
Now that the lies of Cameron and Osborne about the consequences of voting for Leave have been shown to be lies its harder to convince anyone that voting for change would bring disaster.
Cameron and Osborne also promised the oldies that they could have triple lock pensions, endless freebies and subsidised house prices.
So why wouldn't the young vote for free beer tokens and their own crash pad ? They've little to lose and much more to gain and the establishment has had its fear tactics exposed as being groundless.
It wouldn't matter what Corbyn promised if May had an ounce of personality or political acumen. I know Brexiteers love to blame Cameron and his ideological impurity for everything. But its nonsense. She's against Corbyn ffsl.
Cameron managed to get beaten by Corbyn in the 2016 local elections.
Worrying thing about May is that she is getting worse and worse at the job. If she wins, she could be even more terrible in a year's time than she is now.
May did very little for her first nine months except cosy up to the right wing press. This GE has been the first sustained test of her ability to think on her feet and roll out a strategy. She's failed it dismally.
In the past 2 hours "Yougov" has been the 7th trendingest term on twitter. Thats Yougov with no hashtag btw, don't understand twitter so don't know if that makes a difference. https://trends24.in/united-kingdom/
A hashtag simply indicates it's a 'thing' (in the modern parlance). i.e. #LibDemFightback that probably wouldn't pop up in regular conversation. The Twitter algorithms tend to boost these hashtags in the trending algorithms (because it's all part of the game, and shows people have come to Twitter to actively promote, boost or share something, and that's good for Twitter's ad business (advertisers tend to pay to boost hashtags)
When non-hashtag words or phrases trend, that's a big deal because it reflects ordinary words are simply popping up in discussions. That's why on slow news days (remember those?!) 'Amazon' often is trending, because a lot of self-published authors are on Twitter promoting their books, and this is a continuous low-level trend that doesn't need a big event to get it trending (Amazon gets tons of 'free' promotion on Twitter this way).
So yes, YouGov trending without a hashtag is a big deal.
But it is probably a load of Corbynites swapping news that they might win this.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
Won't work now that May's been rumbled.
She has not been rumbled on the core point, Leave voters want an end to free movement and no 100 billion euros to Brussels, any Tory losses have been over social care NOT Brexit
You may be the only person left in the UK who feels May has not been rumbled.
Apart from the voters - who even in that YouGov Con lead of +3 had May's Best PM score nearly 50% ahead of Corbyn's: 43 vs 30.....The only area where she's not ahead is London and that's a tie (34 vs 35)
Not true as Yougov showed Cooper and Umunna polled slightly worse than Corbyn against May and Khan only a point better
In a poll, in practice I think Cooper at least would be better, and there are surely other options that don't have Corbyn's barmy beliefs.
Corbyn has managed to acquire the 'break the system' meme that also fuelled Brexit, Trump and Le Pen. There is no way Cooper would have done this. She might have started a few points higher but could easily have seen her popularity sink.
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
Yes, we would be trotting behind gallant Merkel slagging off the country who we invest in the most and who invests the most with us because we would know that any voice of moderation in our relationship with America would be dismissed by Merkel in her rage at having someone who disagrees with her.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
Won't work now that May's been rumbled.
She has not been rumbled on the core point, Leave voters want an end to free movement and no 100 billion euros to Brussels, any Tory losses have been over social care NOT Brexit
You may be the only person left in the UK who feels May has not been rumbled.
Apart from the voters - who even in that YouGov Con lead of +3 had May's Best PM score nearly 50% ahead of Corbyn's: 43 vs 30.....The only area where she's not ahead is London and that's a tie (34 vs 35)
In the past 2 hours "Yougov" has been the 7th trendingest term on twitter. Thats Yougov with no hashtag btw, don't understand twitter so don't know if that makes a difference. https://trends24.in/united-kingdom/
A hashtag simply indicates it's a 'thing' (in the modern parlance). i.e. #LibDemFightback that probably wouldn't pop up in regular conversation. The Twitter algorithms tend to boost these hashtags in the trending algorithms (because it's all part of the game, and shows people have come to Twitter to actively promote, boost or share something, and that's good for Twitter's ad business (advertisers tend to pay to boost hashtags)
When non-hashtag words or phrases trend, that's a big deal because it reflects ordinary words are simply popping up in discussions. That's why on slow news days (remember those?!) 'Amazon' often is trending, because a lot of self-published authors are on Twitter promoting their books, and this is a continuous low-level trend that doesn't need a big event to get it trending (Amazon gets tons of 'free' promotion on Twitter this way).
So yes, YouGov trending without a hashtag is a big deal.
But it is probably a load of Corbynites swapping news that they might win this.
Oh yeah, definitely that. It's not called 'Twitter' for nothing...
Really sceptical about YG. After the two previous incidents more caution should be attached to their polling. That other pollsters seem to swing in that direction says everything.
All pollsters failed at GE1015. Most, including YouGov, got the referendum right within the margin of error.
Tomorrow night Theresa May and Corbyn face the BBC question time event and on Tuesday Theresa May concludes the broadcasts with a live interview with Julie Etchingham on ITV.
This weekend the news media will be featuring Friday nights event and it is therefore a big moment for Theresa May to change the narrative. We will see how it pans out
April 2015, Cameron had a 14% lead over Miliband on the best PM question.
In last night's YouGov poll, May has a 13% lead over Corbyn on the same question.
That is a seriously impressive performance by Mrs May.
Unfortunately we will never know how he would be faring now because he quit.
Cameron was defeated by Corbyn in the 2016 local elections.
Its likely Cameron and Osborne would have been an open goal for Corbyn's 'resentment and promises' strategy. Time for a change would also have worked strongly against Cameron.
I was wondering: suppose May wins well (call it 60+ majority).
Does the PCP still knife her? If so, when?
The day after Brexit is complete. One thing is clear, May cannot be allowed to lead the party into another election campaign. She has been spectacularly useless in this one. At least Brown left the campaign up to better politicians, May seems to have farmed it out to Timothy who is clearly a complete numpty.
The only way Brexit will be complete before the next election is if there is no deal. And if that happens it will not matter who the Tory leader is.
It doesn't because we'll get a 200 majority if that happens. We'll blame it on the EU and drape it in the Union flag, anyone attacking no deal will be attacking the nation.
Won't work now that May's been rumbled.
She has not been rumbled on the core point, Leave voters want an end to free movement and no 100 billion euros to Brussels, any Tory losses have been over social care NOT Brexit
I'm sure that's true about engaged Leavers. But I'm beginning to wonder about the size of the "Screw You" vote in the referendum, and whether they believe in anything but "Screw You". If the 52% is split, say, two-thirds informed Brexiteer, one-third S.Y., that's a rich vein of votes in play for the Corbyn money tree.
And I still think we shouldn't underestimate the absolute transformation from grumpy Socialist nerd in his mum's jumper ("do up your tie and sing the national anthem"), to personable smiley fella in a suit. That's probably also detoxified him to a slice of One Show viewers and the aforementioned middle-class parents of students. Voters have short, shallow memories (see their lack of knowledge on the existing social care limits).
Really sceptical about YG. After the two previous incidents more caution should be attached to their polling. That other pollsters seem to swing in that direction says everything.
All pollsters failed at GE1015. Most, including YouGov, got the referendum right within the margin of error.
Which maybe hints they're ok in a simple yes/no question, but not in something more complex.
On Mrs May herself, I would acknowledge she is not a natural, charismatic campaigner. Yet that isn't her pitch is it? She pitches as serious, experienced, competent. I don't believe that the social care policy is enough to undo 7 years plus of Government experience in voters eyes. Does it mean she doesn't fight another GE, I don't know. Certainly you would expect more of the team to come forward in future campaigns, but Angela Merkel seems to keep fighting elections with the same reputation doesn't she?
We are in a wierd and unfair situation to Mrs May that seemingly if May wins a majority of say 100 (best Tory performance since the 1980's) she will gain no credit because it will be down to Corbyn, yet if she doesn't increase her majority it will be all her fault - she can't win!
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
Yes, we would be trotting behind gallant Merkel slagging off the country who we invest in the most and who invests the most with us because we would know that any voice of moderation in our relationship with America would be dismissed by Merkel in her rage at having someone who disagrees with her.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
You should really post more often.
+1
The mentions of dummy spitting and hissy fits were a nice touch, conforming to the maxim of accusing others of that which you are guilty.
Without that the economy would be booming, Corbyn and his thugs would be an irrelevance, and we would welcome our European friends as allies against the insanity of Trump
Hey ho...
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
Yes, we would be trotting behind gallant Merkel slagging off the country who we invest in the most and who invests the most with us because we would know that any voice of moderation in our relationship with America would be dismissed by Merkel in her rage at having someone who disagrees with her.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
You should really post more often.
+1
The mentions of dummy spitting and hissy fits were a nice touch, conforming to the maxim of accusing others of that which you are guilty.
Cyclefree also says "The "character" question bothers me a lot about Corbyn." I think this has been well aired, but I like Cyclefree and FWIW a response from me which I'll try to be honest about. What you see is what you get with him, to a degree that I wouldn't say about most politicians. In public he is leftist in a generalised fashion, polite about opponents and very hard to get down by tiredness or personal abuse. Privately he is exactly the same. I've known him on and off all my adult life: I've never heard him talk abusively about anyone. He is an acute sense of duty which makes him indifferent to personal attacks and personal comfort - I've seen him turn up on his bike in the pouring rain for a routine canvassing session, and I've seen him conduct a 6-hours surgery to ensure that every constituent who attended could get everything off their chest.
Downsides? He is not a detail man and not academically trained, although he has the instinct of an academic to treat a problem as something to be discussed rather than avoided. He has been consistently critical of postwar Western policy and it's led him to indulge all kinds of underdog campaigns and groups, some of which he should IMO have steeeered clear of, but it misreads him to see him as a terrorist sympathiser: he is closer to being a pacifist, and certainly endorses the "better jaw-jaw than war-war" principle, though like most of us he sees no prospect of talking to ISIS. He would not get us involved in further MidEast adventures, unlike Ms May and Boris, who would find it "very difficult" to refuse a request for that from Mr Trump.
It is exceedingly difficult not to agree. And now erstwhile Leavers are cacking themselves.
Yes, we would be trotting behind gallant Merkel slagging off the country who we invest in the most and who invests the most with us because we would know that any voice of moderation in our relationship with America would be dismissed by Merkel in her rage at having someone who disagrees with her.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
I think you are assigning too great an autonomy to "The EU". We were part of it as a group of nations coming together to forge a sensible common approach on a range of issues. It involved compromise, and some sub-optimal outcomes. All such associations do. But to think that we will not need to make any compromises in future (or, in the jargon, lose any sovereignty) is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Plus of course our democratically-elected government in each case signed up to each measure (or not - the fiscal compact). Just because you didn't agree with it doesn't make it not democratic.
Worrying thing about May is that she is getting worse and worse at the job. If she wins, she could be even more terrible in a year's time than she is now.
May did very little for her first nine months except cosy up to the right wing press. This GE has been the first sustained test of her ability to think on her fit and roll out a strategy. She's failed it dismally.
Trouble is she hasn't been thinking on her feet, she's been letting Timothy do the thinking. When that when flopped, she didn't know what to do next.
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
Comments
They're right that the Labour manifesto doesn't contain the massive reversals of benefit cuts that many expected: it promises to end the worst ones (the bedroom tax is the best-known example) and stop making them worse (which the Conservatives would undoubtedly do), but not to have a spending spree. I think that's healthy - McDonnell, who is not as nice as Corbyn but an intelligent man, has quietly insisted that the programme is reasonably costed. One can debate the assumptions of the costings but - unlike the Conservatives - a serious effort has been made, and it rules out a benefits splurge.
But redistribution isn't only about cash, it's about opportunity and the strength of public support for people on low incomes.
At present, both the NHS and schools are underfunded to the point that the effects are obvious. If you have substantial capital you can avoid these issues by going private. If you don't, you can't. Labour will address both issues with significantly improved funding; the Conservatives don't even bother to claim that they will. Labour will restore nursing bursaries; the Conservatives are presumably happy to continue to rely on foreign staff.
At present, going to university is a luxury. You can still do it if you accept massive debt, and you take a gamble that you'll recover it with a better job. If you come from a wealthy family, you can avoid worrying about it. If you don't, you can't. Labour will remove the problem.
I could go on. More generally, I trust Corbyn and McDonnell on this. Their instincts are redistributive, just as the Conservative instincts are entirely to support the wealthiest in the belief that this encourage incentives. I'm happy to pay the extra tax expected over £80K and so are most successful left-leaning people, if it leads to a healthier society. In fact, it's what most of us on the left have always wanted in politics. I grew up in Scandinavia, which has higher taxes and decent services. It works better.
You are wrong about everything, all the time.
Edit/ or is it a reverse Turing Test pass? I have confused myself.
Both of them made the same point, their focus groups aren't interested in politics in the way we are, so this is their first proper look at Mrs May.
They were expecting The Iron Lady Mark II and well they've been left disappointed
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/westbromwicheast/
Even if the Conservatives hovered up all the UKIP vote they would still need a significant swing from Labour. The demographics aren't good for the Conservatives either.
I wouldn't take 10/1 on a Conservative win.
When non-hashtag words or phrases trend, that's a big deal because it reflects ordinary words are simply popping up in discussions. That's why on slow news days (remember those?!) 'Amazon' often is trending, because a lot of self-published authors are on Twitter promoting their books, and this is a continuous low-level trend that doesn't need a big event to get it trending (Amazon gets tons of 'free' promotion on Twitter this way).
So yes, YouGov trending without a hashtag is a big deal.
I remain unconvinced that a General Election campaign changes the fundamentals around leadership, economic competence, vision for the country as much as people on here seem to think or as much as the polling suggests. We are in danger of confusing the signal and the noise.
Ultimately the vast majority of people do not follow politics closely and certainly don't care about polling. They will be switching on to the campaign this week and making up their minds. This delayed consideration is more acute this time due to the holiday week and the fact this is another voting opportunity for the public in quick succession.
When they do switch on to the decision we are left with the fundamentals of May leading on best PM. The Conservatives leading on economic competence. The Conservatives leading on national security. The Conservatives understood by enough people to be the Brexit party.
The campaigns as we debate them on here are looked at through a strange lens. We are desperate to add some glamour so the impact of singular incidents are exaggerated beyond all sense. Have the Conservatives fought a flawless campaign? No. But beyond the social care wobble (which some polling suggests doesn't much impact the over 65 vote anyway) they have stuck to Brexit and criticising Corbyn. Yet this doesn't fit the media narrative. So now, the final week of campaigning Mrs May is focusing on the positive vision and this is framed as a sign of a failure to dent Corbyn's popularity. Why could it not also be that the Conservatives are happy that people now know Corbyn's foreign policy background (attack ad with over 4 million hits) and are going on this new track to win over further wavering voters and expand their vote?
Ultimately if Mrs May wins a majority of above 60 or 70 I cannot see any serious Conservative MP suggesting she has been fundamentally weakened.
In conclusion, I have no doubt Labour have closed on the Conservatives from the position at the start of the campaign. Leads of 20% + were never realistic in our multi-party democracy and not where the Labour brand has resilience and there is a Labour manifesto with populist content. Whilst I will keep my predictions under review, I still think we are looking at a 8% Conservative vote share lead and an increased majority of at least 75.
Now I am off to canvass in my West Midlands marginal where cabinet ministers keep visiting!
The Labour policy on abolitionist tuition fees last night is not only popular with young voters, but with middle class parents, who don't want their kids saddled with huge debts by the time they are 21.
May's meant to be changing tack today, surely that says it all? A week to go and she is forced to try something different because what she has done for the last six weeks has not worked.
As though she's some delicate, shrinking violet who can be bullied into appearing on TV against her wishes...
"Just Tyndall in his fortress in Lincolnshire having to pop out and pick the sprouts from time to time before they rot on the stem."
I worked every school holiday and many evenings during school on the land - driven there in the local ganger's van. Nothing ever rotted and there was much less mechanisation in the 1960s, it was much more labour-intensive.
Plus we had no 'foreign' help. There was a Brummie who appeared briefly, but we suspected he was hiding from the police.
Yes, times have changed, but far fewer workers are needed now.
It's always surprised me that Labour supported FOM. A recipe for keeping wages low. The farmers love it, the local workers not so.
Given Brexit negotiations, I think the party will suck it up at any level above about maj 30 (a leadership contest would play VERY badly, especially if there was debate over the hardness of Brexit being sought). However unconvincing, there's a tale to be told about "doubling their majority, mandate she needed" though I wouldn't rule out her being knifed after a deal in good time for 2022.
Certainly anything above about maj. 50 - which on most polls is still likely - can be painted as a convincing enough win. She still needs an assured performance on Brexit to be sure of being around in 2022, but screwing that up would kill her whether the majority's 51 or 151.
If she's shown not to have delivered the increased mandate she said was essential (say maj sub-25), that will look disastrous.. and leave them with a hard choice between a wounded PM kicking off Brexit negotiations, and weeks/months of navel-gazing when they/the country can't afford it.
Whatever you think of Thatcher, she didn't lack self confidence as PM.
Mrs May comes across as nervous.
Did many of the 52% wonder where the money for the cost of Brexit is going to come from?
People are selfish and stupid
Put that down as a "hmmmmm......."
I went to the pub last night instead.
Now you might argue that's a good thing but its not going to help the users of those services.
The thing to remember, for anyone brave enough to be risking money on this crap shoot, is that May stopped talking to the politically interested/savvy some time ago. She is banking now on the 2015 Tory vote turning out in fear of Corbyn and speaking directly to kippers, Brexiteers, anti immigrationists etc. The strategy is for 2015 blues to save held marginals via encumberence etc and to gain via the purple patch. She's not going to be saying anything that politicos think 'oh that's rather good, that's fiscally sound' etc etc between now and next week. She'll let speculation run riot on polling data to put the fear of God into anti Corbynites and play had on the prospect of Corbyn not delivering the Brexit the faithful want.
Corbyn, on the other hand, has the task of getting the dispossessed, en masse, to the polling booth, he needs to find a way of tapping what is left of remainia.
It's a very sorry state of affairs and all roads now lead to ruin for poor UK. It's Brexit hard and the remaining public wealth goes to private hands or its Brexit chaotically whilst the economy tanks out. Individually you need to work out where you are more protected in your own circumstances.
Personally, I'm better off under a Corbyn cluster fuck than a May one, but I loathe Corbyn and his duplicitousness and deep down unpleasantness towards this country. May is ludicrous and hollow and a Conservative government harsh and damaging to the common weald. It's a terrible, sad and desperate choice this time. Feels to me like the last tango before the night falls.
"I know we don’t all agree on Brexit, but she’s off to negotiate a deal for you, for me – for all of us.
Imagine if it’s a bad deal – I mean Dementia Tax bad."
Abstract scenario is not the same as reality; most Leave voters are not all Leave voters; and all Leave voters = 52%.
Or we could stay silent just as we did with the EU Ports Directive, the Payment Services directive et all because despite the harmful nature of the law to the UK we knew it was pointless to protest and we would be given the same consideration when they put Jean Claude Juncker in charge of the bureaucrats that write our laws.
Or we would protest that perhaps Trump has a point that the majority of the EU NATO members are security parasites. We would then get our under 5% say in any legislation that was drafted in support of Merkel's dummy spitting, and when that failed to change anything as it always do we could then get outvoted at the European council at over double the rate of our nearest "Friends" (12.5% losses when we bothered to fight), by nations such as Ireland who pay 0.5% of their GDP on defence or Spain with their 0.9%. Supported of course by the European Parliament where we get outvoted about 50% of the time on Foreign Policy Decisions. We could then take the matter to the ECJ where we lost 75% of the time.
Or we could beg and plead for an Opt out or Exemption to the EU, knowing the above and knowing our voice didn't matter a damn. If the EU was feeling generous it might allow us to sign the hissy fit away from the Media.
The only time the UK's voice was heard was when it was saying "How high" to the command "jump".
Even with Corbyn at the helm we will be able to make decisions that suit us, and more importantly get rid of them when enough people finally realise that he doesn't know what he is doing. Can we say the same about the EU?
1) Who are the promises made to
2) How big are the promises
3) How effective they are
4) When it all falls apart
Now if you're a middle class parent you might prefer the MMT being shaken for your teenage kids rather than for some oldies.
The latest emails I'm receiving from CCHQ mark a distinct change of tone. They've realised all the Corbyn ad hominem attacks aren't working, and it's back to 'Brexit means Brexit'. I think it's a smart move.
The only way I would disagree with you is that Theresa *has* been fundamentally weakened because she's not a naturally combative politician, and in the rough-and-tumble of an election campaign (particularly one with a residue of the bitterness left over from the referendum) I think a tipping point has been reached within the Tory echelons that she's not for the long-term. A healthy majority will ensure she survives in the short term, but you can bet that that the party is already beginning to sound our replacements (Jeremy Hunt being my favourite).
If so can anyone tell me what % of 18-24s are now registered please?
I'm about the only one in my local with even a vague interest in politics.
Not saying she won't or shouldn't be knifed, but they're different areas.
Let's just get the terrorist sympathiser, Stalinist incompetents into No.10/11
In that scenario, would you have switched to Remain?
+1
This weekend the news media will be featuring Friday nights event and it is therefore a big moment for Theresa May to change the narrative. We will see how it pans out
Its likely Cameron and Osborne would have been an open goal for Corbyn's 'resentment and promises' strategy. Time for a change would also have worked strongly against Cameron.
And I still think we shouldn't underestimate the absolute transformation from grumpy Socialist nerd in his mum's jumper ("do up your tie and sing the national anthem"), to personable smiley fella in a suit. That's probably also detoxified him to a slice of One Show viewers and the aforementioned middle-class parents of students. Voters have short, shallow memories (see their lack of knowledge on the existing social care limits).
Historic is the adjective to describe this poll.
We are in a wierd and unfair situation to Mrs May that seemingly if May wins a majority of say 100 (best Tory performance since the 1980's) she will gain no credit because it will be down to Corbyn, yet if she doesn't increase her majority it will be all her fault - she can't win!
The Lemmings....
Act 1: Leave
Act 2: Labour
Downsides? He is not a detail man and not academically trained, although he has the instinct of an academic to treat a problem as something to be discussed rather than avoided. He has been consistently critical of postwar Western policy and it's led him to indulge all kinds of underdog campaigns and groups, some of which he should IMO have steeeered clear of, but it misreads him to see him as a terrorist sympathiser: he is closer to being a pacifist, and certainly endorses the "better jaw-jaw than war-war" principle, though like most of us he sees no prospect of talking to ISIS. He would not get us involved in further MidEast adventures, unlike Ms May and Boris, who would find it "very difficult" to refuse a request for that from Mr Trump.
Plus of course our democratically-elected government in each case signed up to each measure (or not - the fiscal compact). Just because you didn't agree with it doesn't make it not democratic.