Imagine how poor Dan Hannan would feel if Labour actually won. Brexit would have brought about a Corbyn premiership which would bring about a hard-Left Brexit, and it would all be Hannan's fault.
I have always found Daniel Hannan to be totally disingenuous. Fair enough people voting Brexit because they don't like the EU much and would rather be masters of their own ship. Daniel Hannan is smart enough to know his "access to the Single Market is not the same as in the Single Market (but actually it is in terms of what we get)" sophistry is bollocks.
That is because you are wilfully ignorant of what Dan Hannan wanted.
Jesus. I was hoping for double digits. The polls are beginning to herd around a 5-8 point lead? Somewhere between Hung Parliament and 50 seat majority.
The pain is going to last until next Thursday evening at 10pm.
The polls are beginning to be consistent around a Tory share of 44%. That is enough for a comfortable majority.
They really aren't. The Tory lead is collapsing, and the collapse is ongoing. If the trend continues, and it has continued now for two weeks, TMay will lose her majority.
Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead. Look at the share not the lead.
Yes the Conservative vote share is falling , Labour vote share is rising .
And Farron is fighting to hold his seat - looks like you might be next up for leader - it really might be that bad.
Nah, the LibDems will still have the Liar of Orkney to lead them.....
Shome mishtake.
Surely the Lion of Orkney who bravely stood up to those ghastly Nats when they totally overreacted to him being a teensy bit economical with the actualité.
I'm on Carmichael as next LibDem leader. Based on the premise he might be the only one left.
.... 7) If anything is to be salvaged from this disaster, it is by giving a voice to as many different interests as possible in the coming negotiations. That can only be achieved through a hung Parliament. Whatever comes next will at least be something that the entire country can feel some allegiance to. ....
Unfortunately there are two logical flaws in your argument, and both of them lie in this para 7.
- The effect of a hung parliament would be a chaotic outcome to Brexit (and certainly one worse than one negotiated by Theresa May with a majority), for the simple reason that a divided and weak government would be in a very bad position to negotiate and trade concessions.
- The net result would not be an outcome which the entire country can feel some allegiance to; instead it would be one which no-one in the entire country felt any allegiance to.
I intend addressing the first of your points in a thread header in detail after the election. In short, the entire Conservative pitch in this election on Brexit is misconceived. Britain has a better chance of securing more favourable terms from Brexit negotiations if the negotiating team can credibly argue that contentious provisions stand no chance of getting through Parliament. A Prime Minister with a majority of 250 can't make that argument.
.... 7) If anything is to be salvaged from this disaster, it is by giving a voice to as many different interests as possible in the coming negotiations. That can only be achieved through a hung Parliament. Whatever comes next will at least be something that the entire country can feel some allegiance to. ....
Unfortunately there are two logical flaws in your argument, and both of them lie in this para 7.
- The effect of a hung parliament would be a chaotic outcome to Brexit (and certainly one worse than one negotiated by Theresa May with a majority), for the simple reason that a divided and weak government would be in a very bad position to negotiate and trade concessions.
- The net result would not be an outcome which the entire country can feel some allegiance to; instead it would be one which no-one in the entire country felt any allegiance to.
I suspect you are right. We are stuck with Theresa May (God help us all) and the kindness of the estranged (aka the EU).
No Scott it is just you are too dumb to understand it.
Britain, by its own lights, has built its prosperity on a role as a great trading nation. Yet by 2019 it will be the only significant European economy sitting outside all three of the continent’s trading blocs — the European Economic Area, the European Free Trade Area as well as the EU. This really does not make sense.
A trading Nation, that doesn't want to trade.
Fucking genius...
Are you suggesting that China, USA, Canada, India, Japan, Korea, etc ad nauseam cannot and do not trade very freely in the EU? As demanded by their membership of the WTO with Most Favored Nation status? Are you suggesting that WTO compliant tariffs (5% max and notably less for some classes of good) represent armageddon? The Remoaner view seems to be as simplistic as equating non-participation in the governance arrangements of a market as absolute non-participation in a market.
Plaid Cymru would lose all three seats according to Electoral Calculus on those numbers (two to Labour, one to the Conservatives). Carmarthen East & Dinefwr would be a cliffhanger with Labour just edging it from the Conservatives.
Labour would also win Gower and Cardiff North.
I suspect that Baxter is coming up with gibberish here. These figures only represent a swing of 0.7% since 2015 from Con to Lab . Labour would win the Gower and Vale of Clywd but Cardiff North would remain Tory .The idea that Plaid would lose those seats is very fanciful - Labour may have an outside chance of taking Arfon but the other seats really are safe. Ignore Baxter!
Imagine how poor Dan Hannan would feel if Labour actually won. Brexit would have brought about a Corbyn premiership which would bring about a hard-Left Brexit, and it would all be Hannan's fault.
I have always found Daniel Hannan to be totally disingenuous. Fair enough people voting Brexit because they don't like the EU much and would rather be masters of their own ship. Daniel Hannan is smart enough to know his "access to the Single Market is not the same as in the Single Market (but actually it is in terms of what we get)" sophistry is bollocks.
There's a large amount of magical thinking involved in Hannan's worldview. He thinks you can have a single market without any political infrastructure and it will all just work because it's in everyone's rational interests to make it so and that if we all just believe, we can have the benefits of the EU without the actual EU itself.
No. For every square foot of your garden you'd pay whatever the LVT rate was. Generally I think it's mooted at about 1%. So for every square foot of your garden you'd pay 40p (if and only if the value of your garden wasn't already counted in the 'land' proportion of the value of your house).
My best estimate based on the 1% rule and taking a mid-point of the 33-50% range for land vs house prices, LVT would cost just over £1k for every £250k of house price. Since house prices include gardens already I'm not sure we need to obsess about it.
Just don't apply for planning permission to turn your detached double garage into a small block of flats if you're not intending to go through with it.
It's a good way of forcing development. Would affect companies that have traditionally held large land banks without intending to develop them.
At 1%, the LVT on agricultural land would be in excess of typical market rents: interesting how that would be squared.
What does it do to supermarkets and utilities companies with massive land holdings ? Force up food and utility prices I assume ?
Depends what those landholdings are worth, and whether if they aren't being used productively, they can be sold to someone who will use them productively.
I'm not entirely clear why utility companies have massive land holdings (or rather I'm not clear what the basis for viewing that land as particularly valuable in cash terms is).
Farmland yields rather depend on separating out agricultural value elements of the sale price from 'ooh this might get planning permission in a decade or so' elements of the sale price.
Supermarkets don't have massive landholdings, or at least they didn't used to. They have property holdings let to others for conversion. They may also have an interest in a mixed use scheme, for example there is a small Asda near Quedgeley in Gloucester which would have been taken from the housing land. If anything this will affect housing developers who get stuck in endless planning appeals to build houses. The stupidest thing I heard was that housebuilders hoard land. Of course they don't but they do need to secure a supply in order to build houses on, and our planning system is so dysfunctional that it can take over a decade from land purchase to getting a spade in the ground.
Britain has a better chance of securing more favourable terms from Brexit negotiations if the negotiating team can credibly argue that contentious provisions stand no chance of getting through Parliament. A Prime Minister with a majority of 250 can't make that argument.
Tezza has already said "no deal is better than a bad deal"
If at any point she says "I can't get that through Parliament", the EU can say "Your preferred option is no deal is still available. Have a nice day"
Plaid Cymru would lose all three seats according to Electoral Calculus on those numbers (two to Labour, one to the Conservatives). Carmarthen East & Dinefwr would be a cliffhanger with Labour just edging it from the Conservatives.
Labour would also win Gower and Cardiff North.
Labour 14-1 in Carmarthen East on betfair sportsbook.
Is there any reason to think the Wales poll isn't broadly reflective of what's happening in Labour's heartlands in England?
Unlike Scotland, Wales hasn't diverged much from the results in the rest of the country in a long time. In elections or in referendums.
The national polling.
Oh Who knows any more. The Tories on 44ish have to be SOMEWHERE though. Maybe they're on 70% of the vote in Lamb's constituency o_O
The Conservatives are increasing support "bigly" in Wales according to this poll. It's just Labour are increasing (slightly) more.
And unlike in England, there are very few huge metropolitan city seats for Labour to "pile up" votes in in Wales, meaning some of their increased support must be happening in traditional white working-class towns -- and if that's happening in working-class towns in Wales, why not in England too?
More encouraging poll than I was expecting for the Tories in Wales. Labour won't poll that highly on the day. Lead more likely to be 7% than this polls 11%. Some seats might still be in play. As I said before we have nothing to compare the Wales YouGov polls to. If they are showing better Labour numbers than are reality in the UK numbers, then this is likely also to be the case in Wales.
Anecdote : My son is on a network rail apprenticeship, Warrington North, Unionised workforce, three weeks ago no one in his depot was voting Corbyn he was toxic, my son has been away since on training in Portsmouth, just gone back to depot - now everyone there is voting Corbyn since the debates, they like his policies and that he turned up for debate.
You have to wonder why Labour have ruled out a coalition.
Why would they opt for a Labour minority government?
Likely to be no coalition possible (or only a coalition that would destroy Labour at the next election), and you'd expect another election to be inevitable in short order. At a time of national near-crisis, a party that creates further instability by causing an election will be punished by the electorate. If Labour run a minority government it's easy for them to argue the (inevitable) election is the fault of the Tories who shunned national interest for the sake of political game playing.
I want Labour to be crushed so they can either axe Corbyn or split and form a leftwing but not insane party. I want May to get a good majority for the Conservatives, and be thrown overboard so she can be replaced by someone who isn't terminally underwhelming.
A Hung Parliament would embolden the far left.
Mr. P, ah, I'd forgotten about Sinn Fein.
Trade does not equal politics. There may be a political dimension, but we don't pay South Korea £10bn or so a year to trade with them.
When the facts change I change my opinions, so here's mine: a large chunk of people just want an end to austerity.
They voted for Brexit and are contemplating voting for Corbyn for the same reason they voted for Brexit: extra money on public services they don't have to pay for, but can vote for.
That's why the £350m per week was so powerful, as are tax rises for earners over £80k and corporation tax rises.
I probably flattered myself - as a Brexiteer - that all Leave voters were driven by self-governance, sovereignty and making the laws in the UK.
That is true for many - and a good chunk of UKIP defectors will stick with the Tories for those very reasons, because they are, for instance, more trusted on immigration and delivering a proper Brexit than Labour - but another chunk are, at heart, rather EU agnostic and voted UKIP as a NOTA option, Brexit for the money, and are now voting Corbyn because more credibly offered free sweeties than May can.
Two conclusions:
(1) A good chunk of 2015 UKIP voters will vote Corbyn. I'd expect these to be in the areas where the Leave vote was high, but also the Labour vote has been previously high, and public services significantly affected (2) May really should have linked a higher NHS budget to a Brexit dividend by GE2022, like I suggested here almost a month ago. Pledge the £350m extra in cash terms.
She didn't, and as she just sounded like she offered Salt, so she is now suffering from not scooping up all those Kipper votes.
The Left would - probably - have always rallied to Corbyn as the nature of the GE becoming a two-party race became clear, and they discovered the same reasons he became so adored by Labour party members during his leadership battles; his seductive stub campaigning.
But not all those Kipper votes needed to be lost. Tory lead on the day of 5-7% over Labour seems about right.
Labour's trying to avoid the Conservatives attacking them with a Lab-SNP poster, as they did with Miliband.
They want to replace it with this one
@alantravis40: Journalist @elliotttimes booed at Corbyn speech after asking JC whether he would invite Sinn Fein to Westminster to support a Lab coalition
Jeremy Corbyn in the top pocket of an IRA man in balaclava holding an Armalite in one hand and a bomb in the other, anyone?
Can I ask whether anyone has still not received a Postal Vote. Last night I came across a guy who is today departing on holiday today but has not received the Postal Vote applied for - receipt of which has been acknowledged.
I intend addressing the first of your points in a thread header in detail after the election. In short, the entire Conservative pitch in this election on Brexit is misconceived. Britain has a better chance of securing more favourable terms from Brexit negotiations if the negotiating team can credibly argue that contentious provisions stand no chance of getting through Parliament. A Prime Minister with a majority of 250 can't make that argument.
That doesn't work because there would be different and mutually contradictory red lines from the various groups, and a lot of the red lines would just be excuses to cause chaos. The SNP, for example, would just do whatever causes most disruption. Therefore you'd get strange bedfellows voting together to torpedo any deal.
There's a corollary to this, which is that if the EU27 are to make any concessions which are painful from their point of view, they need to be 100% certain that whatever the UK is offering in return can be delivered. A Prime Minister with a good majority would be credible in such a situation, a weak PM wouldn't.
On the question of general Lib Dem vote share outside existing and target seats, when it comes down to marking x's on ballot papers as opposed to replying to pollsters I still expect them to pick up a couple of points or so on current polling figures from centrist Lab voters who when it comes down to it can't back Corbyn. Two regular Lab voting teachers I know hailing from northern towns but working down south are doing just that.
For anyone who doesn't like rich tory supporting farmers then perhaps a development land tax would be better. If you tax the increase in land value from agricultural to residential at a significant rate then you would remove a lot of corruption from the system. If you think that agricultural land is worth very little an acre. Lets say for ease of explanation (10k) then when it is granted outline planning in a local or regional development plan it's value rockets per acre (1m) If you think a farmer deserves this increase of 990k then Ok, but usefully it should be taxed at a much higher rate than CGT. In a lot of instances all the farmer has done is get his mate on the planning committee to lobby for his benefit.
Mr. Pong, dying? They've consistently polled in the 40s for months now. If that happens on the night, it's highly likely the blues will win.
I do think people are getting carried away. The Conservatives are having a rubbish campaign. But they're still on course for victory. The polls vary between losing a majority (still most seats, no?) and a landslide.
Trade does not equal politics. There may be a political dimension, but we don't pay South Korea £10bn or so a year to trade with them.
And we haven't accepted the sovereignty of South Korean law telling us that someone has a family right to stay in the UK because they've bought a pet cat.
In all fairness the South Korean would probably have eaten it for lunch.
Is it just me now rooting for a hopelessly hung parliament in which just about no one can achieve anything?
Vote paralysis
Why would you want that?
Not to mention we'd need another election in the autumn or next year to sort out the mess.
No thanks.
Another election may well be necessary. Tories would have a new leader (and will be looking for a Cameron not a May), all sorts of possibilities for labour including a split and a new centrist party, Corbyns taxes would actually get examined. None of the current offer fit for the job in my estimation.
Anecdote : My son is on a network rail apprenticeship, Warrington North, Unionised workforce, three weeks ago no one in his depot was voting Corbyn he was toxic, my son has been away since on training in Portsmouth, just gone back to depot - now everyone there is voting Corbyn since the debates, they like his policies and that he turned up for debate.
This is not looking good for the tories
Traditional Labour areas are going to deliver for Corbyn. Won't be enough to win, will be enough to better 2015 and probably get a hung parliament.
Is there any reason to think the Wales poll isn't broadly reflective of what's happening in Labour's heartlands in England?
Unlike Scotland, Wales hasn't diverged much from the results in the rest of the country in a long time. In elections or in referendums.
The national polling.
Oh Who knows any more. The Tories on 44ish have to be SOMEWHERE though. Maybe they're on 70% of the vote in Lamb's constituency o_O
The Tories will do well in areas that have actively experienced high immigration from the EU, and are more actively aspirational, or areas that used to have heavy industry, or fishing, that feel they have suffered directly from EU legislation.
West/East Midlands, East Anglia, perhaps a few places in the North East.
Demographics will play off against each other here, with some close results.
I'd be double-checking any area that was previously disillusioned with Labour, but had a strong history of coal-mining or union organisation, for instance.
Labour's trying to avoid the Conservatives attacking them with a Lab-SNP poster, as they did with Miliband.
They want to replace it with this one
@alantravis40: Journalist @elliotttimes booed at Corbyn speech after asking JC whether he would invite Sinn Fein to Westminster to support a Lab coalition
Jeremy Corbyn in the top pocket of an IRA man in balaclava holding an Armalite in one hand and a bomb in the other, anyone?
'New gambling strategy working well, send more money'
Are people seriously contemplating a hung Parliament? Or is it just panic? We have seen nothing, so far, which points to that outcome. Simply a narrowing of the polls.
Imagine how poor Dan Hannan would feel if Labour actually won. Brexit would have brought about a Corbyn premiership which would bring about a hard-Left Brexit, and it would all be Hannan's fault.
I have always found Daniel Hannan to be totally disingenuous. Fair enough people voting Brexit because they don't like the EU much and would rather be masters of their own ship. Daniel Hannan is smart enough to know his "access to the Single Market is not the same as in the Single Market (but actually it is in terms of what we get)" sophistry is bollocks.
There's a large amount of magical thinking involved in Hannan's worldview. He thinks you can have a single market without any political infrastructure and it will all just work because it's in everyone's rational interests to make it so and that if we all just believe, we can have the benefits of the EU without the actual EU itself.
Hannan's (undoubted) utopianism pales into insignificance in the shadow of Corbyn's magical thinking.
The stupidest thing I heard was that housebuilders hoard land. Of course they don't but they do need to secure a supply in order to build houses on, and our planning system is so dysfunctional that it can take over a decade from land purchase to getting a spade in the ground.
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Is it just me now rooting for a hopelessly hung parliament in which just about no one can achieve anything?
Vote paralysis
Why would you want that?
Not to mention we'd need another election in the autumn or next year to sort out the mess.
No thanks.
Another election may well be necessary. Tories would have a new leader (and will be looking for a Cameron not a May), all sorts of possibilities for labour including a split and a new centrist party, Corbyns taxes would actually get examined. None of the current offer fit for the job in my estimation.
Haven't you had enough of elections?
We've had:
2014 - Indy Ref
2015 - General Election
2016 - EU Ref
2017 - General Election
Even I'm exhausted by it all. Now you want another one in 2017 or 2018?
Is it just me now rooting for a hopelessly hung parliament in which just about no one can achieve anything?
Vote paralysis
Why would you want that?
Not to mention we'd need another election in the autumn or next year to sort out the mess.
No thanks.
Another election may well be necessary. Tories would have a new leader (and will be looking for a Cameron not a May), all sorts of possibilities for labour including a split and a new centrist party, Corbyns taxes would actually get examined. None of the current offer fit for the job in my estimation.
Why would Labour split having forced a Hung Parliament? That simply defies logic, as the argument of the PLP always was Corbyn can't win.
Are people seriously contemplating a hung Parliament? Or is it just panic? We have seen nothing, so far, which points to that outcome. Simply a narrowing of the polls.
Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now and would mean a hung parliament, or a Tory majority that is so slim as to be worthless.
Is there any reason to think the Wales poll isn't broadly reflective of what's happening in Labour's heartlands in England?
Unlike Scotland, Wales hasn't diverged much from the results in the rest of the country in a long time. In elections or in referendums.
The national polling.
Oh Who knows any more. The Tories on 44ish have to be SOMEWHERE though. Maybe they're on 70% of the vote in Lamb's constituency o_O
The Tories will do well in areas that have actively experienced high immigration from the EU, and are more actively aspirational, or areas that used to have heavy industry, or fishing, that feel they have suffered directly from EU legislation.
West/East Midlands, East Anglia, perhaps a few places in the North East.
Demographics will play off against each other here, with some close results.
I'd be double-checking any area that was previously disillusioned with Labour, but had a strong history of coal-mining or union organisation, for instance.
Hasn't London experienced high immigration from the EU?
Are people seriously contemplating a hung Parliament? Or is it just panic? We have seen nothing, so far, which points to that outcome. Simply a narrowing of the polls.
Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now and would mean a hung parliament, or a Tory majority that is so slim as to be worthless.
what gains are you expecting labour to make. I still think the Midlands will be a bloodbath for them
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
I intend addressing the first of your points in a thread header in detail after the election. In short, the entire Conservative pitch in this election on Brexit is misconceived. Britain has a better chance of securing more favourable terms from Brexit negotiations if the negotiating team can credibly argue that contentious provisions stand no chance of getting through Parliament. A Prime Minister with a majority of 250 can't make that argument.
That doesn't work because there would be different and mutually contradictory red lines from the various groups, and a lot of the red lines would just be excuses to cause chaos. The SNP, for example, would just do whatever causes most disruption. Therefore you'd get strange bedfellows voting together to torpedo any deal.
There's a corollary to this, which is that if the EU27 are to make any concessions which are painful from their point of view, they need to be 100% certain that whatever the UK is offering in return can be delivered. A Prime Minister with a good majority would be credible in such a situation, a weak PM wouldn't.
For once, I completely agree with you. Alastair's point about 'contentious provisions' is a fair one, but having to sell a deal to a divided Parliament is hopeless. One could make the same point about having to sell it to the British electorate though.
Anecdote : My son is on a network rail apprenticeship, Warrington North, Unionised workforce, three weeks ago no one in his depot was voting Corbyn he was toxic, my son has been away since on training in Portsmouth, just gone back to depot - now everyone there is voting Corbyn since the debates, they like his policies and that he turned up for debate.
This is not looking good for the tories
Traditional Labour areas are going to deliver for Corbyn. Won't be enough to win, will be enough to better 2015 and probably get a hung parliament.
Honestly, I am losing the plot with all this.
Only a month ago many PBers spent all day saying how utterly crap Corbyn is and Labour may not even survive as a party after the GE. I was one of them.
Could be fascinating. Could be crap if they just dissolve into old arguments.
Why would they get into old arguments?
I dunno... if Corbyn does well maybe Ed says austerity failed, Osborne says labour spent all the money etc... If may does well - Osborne says vindication of long-term economic plan, Labour still can't be trusted...
Are people seriously contemplating a hung Parliament? Or is it just panic? We have seen nothing, so far, which points to that outcome. Simply a narrowing of the polls.
Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now and would mean a hung parliament, or a Tory majority that is so slim as to be worthless.
"Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now"
Some strange new definition of "very possible"? Corbyn's ratings were in the toilet, and now he's moved up to the rim.
.... 7) If anything is to be salvaged from this disaster, it is by giving a voice to as many different interests as possible in the coming negotiations. That can only be achieved through a hung Parliament. Whatever comes next will at least be something that the entire country can feel some allegiance to. ....
Unfortunately there are two logical flaws in your argument, and both of them lie in this para 7.
- The effect of a hung parliament would be a chaotic outcome to Brexit (and certainly one worse than one negotiated by Theresa May with a majority), for the simple reason that a divided and weak government would be in a very bad position to negotiate and trade concessions.
- The net result would not be an outcome which the entire country can feel some allegiance to; instead it would be one which no-one in the entire country felt any allegiance to.
I intend addressing the first of your points in a thread header in detail after the election. In short, the entire Conservative pitch in this election on Brexit is misconceived. Britain has a better chance of securing more favourable terms from Brexit negotiations if the negotiating team can credibly argue that contentious provisions stand no chance of getting through Parliament. A Prime Minister with a majority of 250 can't make that argument.
I look forward to reading it. I am coming to the conclusion we need more time. The artificial deadline of two years looked like a good idea in the smoke filled rooms of Nice. It doesn't look so sensible now we are in the middle of it. It's not just that we don't have a plan, any infrastructure or competence and so we will not be nearly ready by 2019. We need time for people to absorb the consequences of what they voted for. That Brexit will be very expensive for us; that we will be more beholden to the EU outside due to our loss of influence; that we will have less than what we had before. From the EU's point of view more time means a more orderly exit and ultimately a more biddable UK - as well as making their point to other countries thinking of leaving the EU, without actually punishing us.
Is there any reason to think the Wales poll isn't broadly reflective of what's happening in Labour's heartlands in England?
Unlike Scotland, Wales hasn't diverged much from the results in the rest of the country in a long time. In elections or in referendums.
The national polling.
Oh Who knows any more. The Tories on 44ish have to be SOMEWHERE though. Maybe they're on 70% of the vote in Lamb's constituency o_O
The Tories will do well in areas that have actively experienced high immigration from the EU, and are more actively aspirational, or areas that used to have heavy industry, or fishing, that feel they have suffered directly from EU legislation.
West/East Midlands, East Anglia, perhaps a few places in the North East.
Demographics will play off against each other here, with some close results.
I'd be double-checking any area that was previously disillusioned with Labour, but had a strong history of coal-mining or union organisation, for instance.
Hasn't London experienced high immigration from the EU?
Yes, but London is a different story. As is Manchester, to be fair.
Alastair's point about 'contentious provisions' is a fair one, but having to sell a deal to a divided Parliament is hopeless. One could make the same point about having to sell it to the British electorate though.
"No deal is better than a bad deal"
If May comes out ahead, she doesn't have to sell anything to anyone. She'll claim a mandate for any old crap, or walking away.
Anecdote : My son is on a network rail apprenticeship, Warrington North, Unionised workforce, three weeks ago no one in his depot was voting Corbyn he was toxic, my son has been away since on training in Portsmouth, just gone back to depot - now everyone there is voting Corbyn since the debates, they like his policies and that he turned up for debate.
This is not looking good for the tories
Traditional Labour areas are going to deliver for Corbyn. Won't be enough to win, will be enough to better 2015 and probably get a hung parliament.
Honestly, I am losing the plot with all this.
Only a month ago many PBers spent all day saying how utterly crap Corbyn is and Labour may not even survive as a party after the GE. I was one of them.
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
And that doesn't even begin to address the issue of commercial property, where demand is far more uncertain and subject to fluctuation than housing.
May should have given some ideas of the extra immigration controls she'd imposed post-Brexit in her manifesto. Plus the Brexit dividend for the NHS.
The focus is all on domestic policy - such as the dementia tax - because that's all she (or Timothy) got specific on the numbers about.
She should have lead on our economic performance, acknowledged that the NHS and education seem to be falling behind in funding and that the Cons will look at this; focused on technical colleges and education (she did this today); and then, like all else, told us that the better our economy the better Brexit outcome we will get.
Are people seriously contemplating a hung Parliament? Or is it just panic? We have seen nothing, so far, which points to that outcome. Simply a narrowing of the polls.
Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now and would mean a hung parliament, or a Tory majority that is so slim as to be worthless.
what gains are you expecting labour to make. I still think the Midlands will be a bloodbath for them
It might, would love to see some more polling from that region.
Anecdote alert.. 21 year old boiler engineer around my house.. likes Corbyn and now wants to vote for him...problem is he didn't register..wonder how many others there are like that.
I dunno... if Corbyn does well maybe Ed says austerity failed, Osborne says labour spent all the money etc... If may does well - Osborne says vindication of long-term economic plan, Labour still can't be trusted...
Actually, it might be the other way round
If May does well, Balls will say it proves the hard left can't win
If Corbyn does well, Osborne will say May shouldn't have sacked him
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
The Land Director at Barratts, in a piece explaining why landbanking is a myth, says this. Which to my mind rather admits that it isn't. The desire to increase turnover is trumped by the need to protect margins - i.e. to keep house prices high.
"The reality is that housebuilders, as return-on-capital businesses are not able to build our products at a pace faster than our customers will purchase them, at the market value. We could in theory cut prices to speed up sales but as we have based our land purchase price on the estimated market values so we don’t have this option in practice."
Christ on a bike. The level of bedwetting on the basis of basically no evidence except for some highly suspect YouGov polling, which was highly suspect and mostly just plain wrong in the last election, is absurd and frankly painful to read. People really need to grow a pair and wait until the gold standard shows us there is a problem. If Tessie romps in with a majority of 80 or so, a lot of people here are going to look more than faintly ridiculous.
It's *still* campaigning on the wrong issues (the right issues are Brexit, the economy and security).
But not in that order. The right issues are:
the economy, the economy, the economy.
And then acknowledge, as Tezza began to today, that we can't let health and education fall back, funding-wise. Dear god compared with Jezza's spending Tezza could promise a free taxi for everyone going to their GP for a year and still come out up vs Lab's plans.
The overarching theme should have been Trust.
Who do you trust to deliver a growing economy while keeping the nation's finances under control? Who do you trust to negotiate with the European Union to deliver the best deal for Britain? Who do you trust to keep you and your family safe?
Those are the questions that the context of May vs Corbyn should have been set within. Frankly, we've had enough public service reform these last seven years. promising not to bugger about with structures would of itself be a vote winner as well as easily deliverable.
Trust is a difficult sell after the u-turns.
All should hinge on the economy. Where is the announcement today about low unemployment? They should hammer on this until people recall what a liability Lab is in office economically.
If the campaign had been hinged on those issues and not had personal hobbyhorses thrown in without being properly developed, focus grouped or explained, there wouldn't have been any U-turns.
In any case, the U-turn on social policy hasn't been damaging. The media seem to think it is incredibly important but they're wrong: they judging the Westminster Village game. What was damaging was the original announcement itself. The U-turn - to the extent that it was - has made precious little difference either way.
The stupidest thing I heard was that housebuilders hoard land. Of course they don't but they do need to secure a supply in order to build houses on, and our planning system is so dysfunctional that it can take over a decade from land purchase to getting a spade in the ground.
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Anecdote alert.. 21 year old boiler engineer around my house.. likes Corbyn and now wants to vote for him...problem is he didn't register..wonder how many others there are like that.
In any case, the U-turn on social policy hasn't been damaging. The media seem to think it is incredibly important but they're wrong: they judging the Westminster Village game. What was damaging was the original announcement itself. The U-turn - to the extent that it was - has made precious little difference either way.
I agree with that.
I would also still maintain that fox-hunting did a LOT of damage with the working-class voters they were trying to win.
Is there any reason to think the Wales poll isn't broadly reflective of what's happening in Labour's heartlands in England?
Unlike Scotland, Wales hasn't diverged much from the results in the rest of the country in a long time. In elections or in referendums.
The national polling.
Oh Who knows any more. The Tories on 44ish have to be SOMEWHERE though. Maybe they're on 70% of the vote in Lamb's constituency o_O
The Tories will do well in areas that have actively experienced high immigration from the EU, and are more actively aspirational, or areas that used to have heavy industry, or fishing, that feel they have suffered directly from EU legislation.
West/East Midlands, East Anglia, perhaps a few places in the North East.
Demographics will play off against each other here, with some close results.
I'd be double-checking any area that was previously disillusioned with Labour, but had a strong history of coal-mining or union organisation, for instance.
Hasn't London experienced high immigration from the EU?
Yes, but London is a different story. As is Manchester, to be fair.
It's a different story because the evidence fails to fit your hypothesis?
Ditto the NE – a pro-brexit area with the square root of sod all immigration.
Anyone might think that Brexit was more a knee-jerk reaction against bogeymen foreigners.
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
I own a small 4 acre paddock that came with my house as agricultural land (horseriding is quite popular in Leics). I rent it out to a farmer, who grazes sheep on it. The agricultural rent would be about £200 per year, but I waive that provided he does the hedging and grazes it enough to keep the grass short. Sheep are pleasant neighbours. Agricultural land in Leics is about £10 000 per acre on the market, currently zero rated for council tax. It is pleasant to look at but not economic.
Planning permission would increase the value about 25 fold if I were to build 40 ish houses. The higher density the more valuble. I would happily pay a little tax on such a million pound windfall. My neighbours would be rather annoyed though!
Anecdote : My son is on a network rail apprenticeship, Warrington North, Unionised workforce, three weeks ago no one in his depot was voting Corbyn he was toxic, my son has been away since on training in Portsmouth, just gone back to depot - now everyone there is voting Corbyn since the debates, they like his policies and that he turned up for debate.
This is not looking good for the tories
Traditional Labour areas are going to deliver for Corbyn. Won't be enough to win, will be enough to better 2015 and probably get a hung parliament.
Honestly, I am losing the plot with all this.
Only a month ago many PBers spent all day saying how utterly crap Corbyn is and Labour may not even survive as a party after the GE. I was one of them.
Now look at us.
This is the same site that spent GE 2015 saying:
EICIPM
Spent Presidential Election 2016 saying:
Clinton win
Spent EUref saying:
Remain win
Indeed it has spent 2017 saying May win/landslide.
They really do. Off the record they'll admit it. Of course it's an irregular verb - "I ensure a prudent supply of future development opportunities", "You have a landbank which you will build out gradually", "He is a hoarding profiteer".
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
I own a small 4 acre paddock that came with my house as agricultural land (horseriding is quite popular in Leics). I rent it out to a farmer, who grazes sheep on it. The agricultural rent would be about £200 per year, but I waive that provided he does the hedging and grazes it enough to keep the grass short. Sheep are pleasant neighbours. Agricultural land in Leics is about £10 000 per acre on the market, currently zero rated for council tax. It is pleasant to look at but not economic.
Planning permission would increase the value about 25 fold if I were to build 40 ish houses. The higher density the more valuble. I would happily pay a little tax on such a million pound windfall. My neighbours would be rather annoyed though!
Christ on a bike. The level of bedwetting on the basis of basically no evidence except for some highly suspect YouGov polling, which was highly suspect and mostly just plain wrong in the last election, is absurd and frankly painful to read. People really need to grow a pair and wait until the gold standard shows us there is a problem. If Tessie romps in with a majority of 80 or so, a lot of people here are going to look more than faintly ridiculous.
It's *still* campaigning on the wrong issues (the right issues are Brexit, the economy and security).
But not in that order. The right issues are:
the economy, the economy, the economy.
And then acknowledge, as Tezza began to today, that we can't let health and education fall back, funding-wise. Dear god compared with Jezza's spending Tezza could promise a free taxi for everyone going to their GP for a year and still come out up vs Lab's plans.
The overarching theme should have been Trust.
Who do you trust to deliver a growing economy while keeping the nation's finances under control? Who do you trust to negotiate with the European Union to deliver the best deal for Britain? Who do you trust to keep you and your family safe?
Those are the questions that the context of May vs Corbyn should have been set within. Frankly, we've had enough public service reform these last seven years. promising not to bugger about with structures would of itself be a vote winner as well as easily deliverable.
Trust is a difficult sell after the u-turns.
All should hinge on the economy. Where is the announcement today about low unemployment? They should hammer on this until people recall what a liability Lab is in office economically.
If the campaign had been hinged on those issues and not had personal hobbyhorses thrown in without being properly developed, focus grouped or explained, there wouldn't have been any U-turns.
In any case, the U-turn on social policy hasn't been damaging. The media seem to think it is incredibly important but they're wrong: they judging the Westminster Village game. What was damaging was the original announcement itself. The U-turn - to the extent that it was - has made precious little difference either way.
Yes I agree with that. But that doesn't mean there is not a narrative of u-turns to be developed, should the Cons have banged on about trust.
Comments
Vote paralysis
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/870287034073698305
Not to mention we'd need another election in the autumn or next year to sort out the mess.
No thanks.
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-06-01/new-welsh-poll-labour-lead-continues/
I reckon the popular vote will be a draw in Wales.
If at any point she says "I can't get that through Parliament", the EU can say "Your preferred option is no deal is still available. Have a nice day"
And unlike in England, there are very few huge metropolitan city seats for Labour to "pile up" votes in in Wales, meaning some of their increased support must be happening in traditional white working-class towns -- and if that's happening in working-class towns in Wales, why not in England too?
This is not looking good for the tories
Get the popcorn.
I want Labour to be crushed so they can either axe Corbyn or split and form a leftwing but not insane party. I want May to get a good majority for the Conservatives, and be thrown overboard so she can be replaced by someone who isn't terminally underwhelming.
A Hung Parliament would embolden the far left.
Mr. P, ah, I'd forgotten about Sinn Fein.
Trade does not equal politics. There may be a political dimension, but we don't pay South Korea £10bn or so a year to trade with them.
They voted for Brexit and are contemplating voting for Corbyn for the same reason they
voted for Brexit: extra money on public services they don't have to pay for, but can vote for.
That's why the £350m per week was so powerful, as are tax rises for earners over £80k and corporation tax rises.
I probably flattered myself - as a Brexiteer - that all Leave voters were driven by self-governance, sovereignty and making the laws in the UK.
That is true for many - and a good chunk of UKIP defectors will stick with the Tories for those very reasons, because they are, for instance, more trusted on immigration and delivering a proper Brexit than Labour - but another chunk are, at heart, rather EU agnostic and voted UKIP as a NOTA option, Brexit for the money, and are now voting Corbyn because more credibly offered free sweeties than May can.
Two conclusions:
(1) A good chunk of 2015 UKIP voters will vote Corbyn. I'd expect these to be in the areas where the Leave vote was high, but also the Labour vote has been previously high, and public services significantly affected
(2) May really should have linked a higher NHS budget to a Brexit dividend by GE2022, like I suggested here almost a month ago. Pledge the £350m extra in cash terms.
She didn't, and as she just sounded like she offered Salt, so she is now suffering from not scooping up all those Kipper votes.
The Left would - probably - have always rallied to Corbyn as the nature of the GE becoming a two-party race became clear, and they discovered the same reasons he became so adored by Labour party members during his leadership battles; his seductive stub campaigning.
But not all those Kipper votes needed to be lost. Tory lead on the day of 5-7% over Labour seems about right.
The Brexiteer argument that inferior access is better is total bollocks.
Either of them could stick the boot in to their party leaders depending on the result.
TM can't offer anything to hook the youngsters without being sabotaged by her client vote.
Corbyn isn't popular outside of his base of students/momentum types, but he's gaining by default as he chips away further up the age scale.
The tory party is dying. 'twas ever thus.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/the-under-30s-are-the-real-left-behinds-hxsvs7cgf
There's a corollary to this, which is that if the EU27 are to make any concessions which are painful from their point of view, they need to be 100% certain that whatever the UK is offering in return can be delivered. A Prime Minister with a good majority would be credible in such a situation, a weak PM wouldn't.
I do think people are getting carried away. The Conservatives are having a rubbish campaign. But they're still on course for victory. The polls vary between losing a majority (still most seats, no?) and a landslide.
In all fairness the South Korean would probably have eaten it for lunch.
West/East Midlands, East Anglia, perhaps a few places in the North East.
Demographics will play off against each other here, with some close results.
I'd be double-checking any area that was previously disillusioned with Labour, but had a strong history of coal-mining or union organisation, for instance.
I instinctively read it with emphasis on a hard K
So I was giggling too much to bother with the rest of it.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/07/number-of-unbuilt-homes-with-planning-permission-hits-record-levels-lga-says
We've had:
2014 - Indy Ref
2015 - General Election
2016 - EU Ref
2017 - General Election
Even I'm exhausted by it all. Now you want another one in 2017 or 2018?
Yes, sure. Instead of turning over their capital as fast as they can, they deliberately keep it tied up so as to minimise their return on capital. Or something equally fantastical.
Alastair's point about 'contentious provisions' is a fair one, but having to sell a deal to a divided Parliament is hopeless. One could make the same point about having to sell it to the British electorate though.
Only a month ago many PBers spent all day saying how utterly crap Corbyn is and Labour may not even survive as a party after the GE. I was one of them.
Now look at us.
If may does well - Osborne says vindication of long-term economic plan, Labour still can't be trusted...
May should have given some ideas of the extra immigration controls she'd imposed post-Brexit in her manifesto. Plus the Brexit dividend for the NHS.
The focus is all on domestic policy - such as the dementia tax - because that's all she (or Timothy) got specific on the numbers about.
"Labour gaining 10-20 seats is very possible now"
Some strange new definition of "very possible"? Corbyn's ratings were in the toilet, and now he's moved up to the rim.
Either way he's shortly going to be flushed.
If May comes out ahead, she doesn't have to sell anything to anyone. She'll claim a mandate for any old crap, or walking away.
EICIPM
Spent Presidential Election 2016 saying:
Clinton win
Spent EUref saying:
Remain win
Not that Corbyn gives a damn about such matters.
https://twitter.com/guardianheather/status/870299096434737152
21 year old boiler engineer around my house.. likes Corbyn and now wants to vote for him...problem is he didn't register..wonder how many others there are like that.
If May does well, Balls will say it proves the hard left can't win
If Corbyn does well, Osborne will say May shouldn't have sacked him
"The reality is that housebuilders, as return-on-capital businesses are not able to build our products at a pace faster than our customers will purchase them, at the market value. We could in theory cut prices to speed up sales but as we have based our land purchase price on the estimated market values so we don’t have this option in practice."
In any case, the U-turn on social policy hasn't been damaging. The media seem to think it is incredibly important but they're wrong: they judging the Westminster Village game. What was damaging was the original announcement itself. The U-turn - to the extent that it was - has made precious little difference either way.
I would also still maintain that fox-hunting did a LOT of damage with the working-class voters they were trying to win.
Ditto the NE – a pro-brexit area with the square root of sod all immigration.
Anyone might think that Brexit was more a knee-jerk reaction against bogeymen foreigners.
Planning permission would increase the value about 25 fold if I were to build 40 ish houses. The higher density the more valuble. I would happily pay a little tax on such a million pound windfall. My neighbours would be rather annoyed though!
Good point.