Re Grenfell: I see that the trashing of the inquiry judge has already started in earnest. Is this going to be a repeat of the historic abuse debacle, making it impossible to have an effective inquiry at all?
Re Grenfell: I see that the trashing of the inquiry judge has already started in earnest. Is this going to be a repeat of the historic abuse debacle, making it impossible to have an effective inquiry at all?
Oh God, don't tell me the judge is a major shareholder in one the companies making the cladding....
Popcorn time. More difficult for May than Corbyn. I'd say most people have very little sympathy for the DUP on social issues. Keeping this corner of the UK in the dark ages compared to the rest can't be overly popular.
Creaseys amendment is a good one and I hope it passes. Be interesting to see how the government plays it. Umunas amendment is, like everything else in his career, garbage.
Popcorn time. More difficult for May than Corbyn. I'd say most people have very little sympathy for the DUP on social issues. Keeping this corner of the UK in the dark ages compared to the rest can't be overly popular.
I don't think the English NHS has any more responsibility to women in Northern Ireland than it does to women living in other countries around the world where abortion is illegal. Logically, the amendment should be to make abortion free on the NHS to any woman from a country where abortion is illegal.
Re Grenfell: I see that the trashing of the inquiry judge has already started in earnest. Is this going to be a repeat of the historic abuse debacle, making it impossible to have an effective inquiry at all?
Oh God, don't tell me the judge is a major shareholder in one the companies making the cladding....
He is referred to in one report as a social cleanser which seems to be based on one case where he ruled a mother could be rehoused 50 miles away which got overturned.
This is what my Labour hubris = Tory hope piece was mostly about the other day. Seeing Labour's votrs as an endorsement of socialism is misguided and for Labour could prove pretty disastrous. That said, the Tories are currently doing their best to alienate as many people as possible.
Mate....I've always agreed with you 100% on everything you've written...looked out for your posts and all that....
But on this you are wrong...wrong and wrong. Corbyn inspires hope, optimism and change...and that quite frankly is political catnip. The socialist/IRA/communist labels are old hat and not relevant now to a huge swathe of the voting public. Economic dire warnings fall on deaf ears because for many their economic outlook is fucking horrible anyway. And the right wing press...in glorifying the cult of personality and celebrity lifestyles...they only expose the inequalities that are unfair...
Things have to change and they will..... to deal with inequality. People like me and you have to pay more tax and we need to do a lot more to safeguard our environment for future generations.
Re Grenfell: I see that the trashing of the inquiry judge has already started in earnest. Is this going to be a repeat of the historic abuse debacle, making it impossible to have an effective inquiry at all?
Oh God, don't tell me the judge is a major shareholder in one the companies making the cladding....
He is referred to in one report as a social cleanser which seems to be based on one case where he ruled a mother could be rehoused 50 miles away which got overturned.
No wonder housing benefit in this country is sky high when the highest courts quash sensible stuff like that.
I don't usually use Twitter, but just looked at Mike Smithson's feed. Amazing pictures of Enoch Powell on a pogo stick ( and that looks like him in a bubble bath), plus Heath on a skateboard (not the one of him falling off it unfortunately) and Macmillan on a miniature train. https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/880096588936470528
TM increased the Tory vote share by 5.5% to it's highest since the 1980s. So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
I would certainly argue some 2015 Tory voters who voted Remain voted Labour or LD to stop a hard Brexit or abstained and some voted Labour to stop the dementia tax. Neither wanted or expected a Corbyn premiership and Labour must be careful next time not to replace Tory hubris with hubris of their own.
I think that ship has sailed; see most posts by Dyedwoolie, for example.
Labour hubris is certainly showing. Tories no longer have hubris but are still showing arrogance however. Both sides seem to have begun believing the comfort tales they told themselves post-election:
"Labour lost again even against May, haha they are useless and have no hope, peak Corbyn has been and gone! No one will vote for the Reds under the bed when push comes to shove!"
"Expired Tories on their way out, they should stand aside and have their weak fragile government replaced with our own weak fragile government! Jezza will be PM in 5 months, tops!"
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
Popcorn time. More difficult for May than Corbyn. I'd say most people have very little sympathy for the DUP on social issues. Keeping this corner of the UK in the dark ages compared to the rest can't be overly popular.
I don't think the English NHS has any more responsibility to women in Northern Ireland than it does to women living in other countries around the world where abortion is illegal. Logically, the amendment should be to make abortion free on the NHS to any woman from a country where abortion is illegal.
That assumes that Northern Ireland is a different country (from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).
TM increased the Tory vote share by 5.5% to it's highest since the 1980s. So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
TM increased the Tory vote share by 5.5% to it's highest since the 1980s. So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
Just to add - even in Bedford the Tory vote share went up, but the Labour one went up by much more. That doesn't sound like shy Tories to me... It sounds like Labour did an unexpectedly good job at picking up votes from elsewhere.
Running a newspaper must be easier than he thought.
Evening Standard editor and former chancellor George Osborne has just added a sixth job to his portfolio. He is to become an honorary professor of economics at the University of Manchester, an email to staff this morning revealed.
It develops his work on the Northern Powerhouse, an attempt to rebalance the economy away from London that he initiated three years ago.
His fellow architects Lord O’Neill, the ex Goldman Sachs economist, and Sir Howard Bernstein, former Manchester city council boss, are also honorary professors. The job mainly involves giving a few lectures a year.
Mr Osborne, former MP for Tatton in Cheshire, remains chairman of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, a business lobby group he set up to boost the northern economy. He also makes lucrative after-dinner speeches around the world for the Washington Speaker’s Bureau, and remains an advisor to the American fund management firm Blackrock, for which he is said to earn £650,000 annually for working one day a week
Now if the professorship was in making IDS look like a political tactician, I'd understand...
By that logic, Corbyn is a better politician than Blair.
There is no statistical evidence that any general election result is related to previous result. Theresa May achieved a better result than Cameron and Osborne in her first election. When all this current bluster is past and May has successfully negotiated Brexit, kept the economy growing and reduce immigration, I suspect either her or her successor will beat their second result too.
Get it into your head my friend - TMay got a CRAP result. She went to the country early to increase her majority and ended up without one.
No amount of PR waffle can get round that simple fact. She failed in her objective.
Also, Mike there is no coming back for the Tory party from this state of affairs....talking about rose tinted glasses, I don't think Tory PbERs quite realise what a catastrophic state their party is in. Labour's meltdown was at least worked through in opposition....the Tories are in Govt and there is absolutely nowhere to hide.
Before long Parliament will no longer be in session. Before long there will no immediate worries about votes or debates, and there will be no day to day harrassment until the party conference season starts. Before long the ‘events’ wil be more copable with.
Jezza has played the EU subject very well. I'm 80% certain he's a Leaver, but I'm 100% certain he's in favour of FOM. This mixture could have been bad news politically, hence the high wire act.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
At end add ‘but respectfully regret that measures to address the inequality in treatment of women from Northern Ireland with regard to healthcare provision were not included in the Gracious Speech; recognise that the UK currently provides funding for access to healthcare services including abortion to residents of other nations as part of its international development work; note that women from Northern Ireland have no choice but to travel to England for abortion services and face serious difficulties in doing so, and as such the current position risks the continuation of an unwanted pregnancy which may cause distress or illness to the patient concerned purely on the basis of her place of residence within the UK rather than any medical requirements; therefore call on the Government to clarify, if necessary by legislating, that under section 1(1)(a) of the National Health Service Act 2006 it is a requirement on the Secretary of State for Health to prevent illness among those who wish to end an unwanted pregnancy, who are UK taxpayers, by providing such services; and call on the Government to ensure the provision of adequate funding and guidance so that all UK citizens including those from Northern Ireland may access medical services including abortion procedures in England if they so wish without charge, and that such provision does not interfere with decisions made by the Northern Ireland Assembly with regard to the provision of such services in Northern Ireland.’.
Thin end of the wedge to talk about NI citizens as UK taxpayers. As a UK taxpayer, can I have free education in Scotland, please?
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
It's not so much the pound rising as the dollar falling. Both currencies (especially the dollar) have fallen significantly against the euro over the past couple of months.
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn has to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced the Tories to moderate their stance
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What is the difference between a civil partnership and a registry office ‘marriage’.
When I got to the polling station, I was surprised at my own firmness of mind in abstaining. Why on earth would I want to give either of these two fatally flawed propositions my support?
But the country thought the opposite and offered both major parties their highest share for a long time. Indeed turnout rose also.
Perhaps the clear water between major parties energised voters on both sides.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What legal difference is there between a civil marriage and a civil partnership? I would think that if there is a material difference a different-sex civil partnership should be allowed where same-sex marriage is. Seems only right and logical.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
In France they introduced civil partnerships for same sex couples, but it was also possible for heterosexual couples to get the partnership. Even before gay marriage was made legal over 3/4s of civil partnerships were between heterosexual couples not same sex ones. Obviously sheer numbers means it would always be the case, but still, it shows that there is an appetite for civil partnerships over marriage among heterosexuals.
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
Cliff edge is the default. Anything softer requires agreement. That depends on our lot making an offer to the EU that is interesting to them and gives them things they don't already have. No-one in our government except possibly Philip Hammond is in that mind-space. And he is trimming to not alienate his party's hardcore.
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
Running a newspaper must be easier than he thought.
Evening Standard editor and former chancellor George Osborne has just added a sixth job to his portfolio. He is to become an honorary professor of economics at the University of Manchester, an email to staff this morning revealed.
It develops his work on the Northern Powerhouse, an attempt to rebalance the economy away from London that he initiated three years ago.
His fellow architects Lord O’Neill, the ex Goldman Sachs economist, and Sir Howard Bernstein, former Manchester city council boss, are also honorary professors. The job mainly involves giving a few lectures a year.
Mr Osborne, former MP for Tatton in Cheshire, remains chairman of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, a business lobby group he set up to boost the northern economy.
He also makes lucrative after-dinner speeches around the world for the Washington Speaker’s Bureau, and remains an advisor to the American fund management firm Blackrock, for which he is said to earn £650,000 annually for working one day a week
Jezza has played the EU subject very well. I'm 80% certain he's a Leaver, but I'm 100% certain he's in favour of FOM. This mixture could have been bad news politically, hence the high wire act.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
Like most people, I thought he'd lose out through sitting on the fence, but not at all. The Conservatives gained votes by being the party of Leave, but not enough of them, and the Lib Dems gained hardly any, by being the party of Remain.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What legal difference is there between a civil marriage and a civil partnership? I would think that if there is a material difference a different-sex civil partnership should be allowed where same-sex marriage is. Seems only right and logical.
Marriages can be annulled due to non-consummation, and dissolved due to adultery. Civil partnerships can't be.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What is the difference between a civil partnership and a registry office ‘marriage’.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What is the difference between a civil partnership and a registry office ‘marriage’.
To be honest I do not know.I know for some reason did not pry.They never wanted marriage civil or religious for many years, but wanted civil partnership for legal reasons.
Mr. Observer, the opportunity is wide open for an En Marche type party.
Had Corbyn gone backwards, the PLP *might* have gone for it (though I doubt it, given their craven Corbophilia).
I think you are right....a week before the election I thought it would start through disaffected social democrats and members of the PLP. Now I think it is much more likely to start from the centre right, particularly when the Tories realise just how toxic and unelectable their branding is.
As I said before there is a tsunami ripping through British politics.....we'll probably look back and see that it started with the Banking Crisis in 2008...but when it has run it's course the complexion of our politics is going to be profoundly changed. I personally think it will destroy the Tory party, the world's oldest and most successful political party and possibly the Labour Party too.....and leave us with three voting blocks... a populist right, nationalist isolationist party/ a centrist pro business and likely pro Europe centrist party/ and a left populist and Green Party
The mud slinging claims of "social cleanser" against the ex-judge hired for the fire investigation is frankly disgraceful.
Again, this incident is very delicate and lots of very angry people, and we have McMao calling the government murderers, Jezza spreading fake news about cuts being responsible, sites / journos spreading fake claims of cover-ups ala Hillsborough and now this.
What we need is a calm and proper investigation and then when the facts have been established any responsible properly punished.
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
What legal difference is there between a civil marriage and a civil partnership? I would think that if there is a material difference a different-sex civil partnership should be allowed where same-sex marriage is. Seems only right and logical.
There is no real legal difference. Civil partnerships should not have been introduced and I'd sooner see them abolished. However its something I couldn't care less about so why not extend them if other people do care?
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
Cliff edge is the default. Anything softer requires agreement. That depends on our lot making an offer to the EU that is interesting to them and gives them things they don't already have. No-one in our government except possibly Philip Hammond is in that mind-space. And he is trimming to not alienate his party's hardcore.
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
Other EU nations put controls on FoM in 2004 when they introduced transition controls for 7 years on migration from the new accession countries
Mr. Tyson, doubt it'll start from the centre right. The Conservatives are in government and have more to lose, and whilst they're not taken with May, she isn't far right in the way Corbyn is far left.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
Jezza has played the EU subject very well. I'm 80% certain he's a Leaver, but I'm 100% certain he's in favour of FOM. This mixture could have been bad news politically, hence the high wire act.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
Corbyn, I think almost uniquely, doesn't care one way or another about Brexit. It's not that important to him.
No voter would sit on their hands if they were opposed to a Corbyn led government. They would go out and vote. All this crap about the public 'not wanting a Tory majority' is tiresome. There's no option on a ballot paper that states 'no Tory majority', or 'hung parliament'.
That's the semantics of the Westminster bubble and the chattering class.
I don't usually use Twitter, but just looked at Mike Smithson's feed. Amazing pictures of Enoch Powell on a pogo stick ( and that looks like him in a bubble bath), plus Heath on a skateboard (not the one of him falling off it unfortunately) and Macmillan on a miniature train. https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/880096588936470528
Is the one below that Enoch trying to recreate 'Lions led by Donkeys'... ?
(edit - and for once, a good argument for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
TM increased the Tory vote share by 5.5% to it's highest since the 1980s. So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
They certainly did in metropolitan remain areas.
Quick skim of evidence:
Croydon Central Tory vote share held steady (-0.6), dropped a bit in Brighton Kemptown (-2.4) and Bristol North West (-2.1), collapsed in Battersea (-10.8) and Kensington (-10.1), increased in Bedford (+2.6), increased in Canterbury (+1.8),, fell Enfield Southgate (-6.6).
But in most of those - Labour increased by more than Tories fell. But yes - perhaps it's a localised effect like you suggest.
The mud slinging claims of "social cleanser" against the ex-judge hired for the fire investigation is frankly disgraceful.
Again, this incident is very delicate and lots of very angry people, and we have McMao calling the government murderers, Jezza spreading fake news about cuts being responsible, sites / journos spreading fake claims of cover-ups ala Hillsborough and now this.
What we need is a calm and proper investigation and then when the facts have been established any responsible properly punished.
The real Corbyn has come to the fore over this. He's a nasty, small minded bigot, but 'twas ever thus.
When I got to the polling station, I was surprised at my own firmness of mind in abstaining. Why on earth would I want to give either of these two fatally flawed propositions my support?
Apparently you can abstain without going to the polling station - worth remembering for next time maybe? ;-)
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
Cliff edge is the default. Anything softer requires agreement. That depends on our lot making an offer to the EU that is interesting to them and gives them things they don't already have. No-one in our government except possibly Philip Hammond is in that mind-space. And he is trimming to not alienate his party's hardcore.
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
Other EU nations put controls on FoM in 2004 when they introduced transition controls for 7 years on migration from the new accession countries
Other EU nations haven't left the EU. What happens to them and what happens to us on the way out is chalk and cheese. We don't have any influence any more. In any case the 7 years eventually ran out.
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
Heard a labour MP on radio 5 this am saying that the IFS are wrong when they traduced labour's economics. The IFS are the most respected independent financial institute in tbe UK. At budgets they are the No 1 reference point for all the media
When I got to the polling station, I was surprised at my own firmness of mind in abstaining. Why on earth would I want to give either of these two fatally flawed propositions my support?
Apparently you can abstain without going to the polling station - worth remembering for next time maybe? ;-)
I firmly believe that you should abstain in person.
I went to a wedding the other day. Our friends have lived together for over 30 years .They never wanted to get married .However due to family reasons and concerns over wills etc.They thought they should as there preferred option of a civil partnership was not available.Until they told me I did not realise that a man and a woman could not have a civil partnership.Do you think this will change in the future?
In France they introduced civil partnerships for same sex couples, but it was also possible for heterosexual couples to get the partnership. Even before gay marriage was made legal over 3/4s of civil partnerships were between heterosexual couples not same sex ones. Obviously sheer numbers means it would always be the case, but still, it shows that there is an appetite for civil partnerships over marriage among heterosexuals.
AIUI, the opposition to opposite sex civil partnerships comes from some religious people who get very angry at the idea of the state offering an alternative to marriage. Those same people also formed the core of the anti same-sex marriage "coalition4marriage" campaign against (as they termed it) the "redefinition" of marriage to incude same sex couples.
They feel very strongly about "defending the biblical definition of marriage" (and tend to advocate using the state to incentivize and *guide* people into marriage) and crucially, they have a fantastic lobbying organization that almost bought down Cameron.
Unless there is some major inequality that would be addressed by introducing opposite sex CP's (there isn't), the tory party aren't going to touch the issue.
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before the GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
TM increased the Tory vote share by 5.5% to it's highest since the 1980s. So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
They certainly did in metropolitan remain areas.
Quick skim of evidence:
Croydon Central Tory vote share held steady (-0.6), dropped a bit in Brighton Kemptown (-2.4) and Bristol North West (-2.1), collapsed in Battersea (-10.8) and Kensington (-10.1), increased in Bedford (+2.6), increased in Canterbury (+1.8),, fell Enfield Southgate (-6.6).
But in most of those - Labour increased by more than Tories fell. But yes - perhaps it's a localised effect like you suggest.
They held on in Barnet, but I expect it was the Jewish vote that saved those seats (the Tories also polled very well in Hertsmere, which is now quite similar to Barnet).
I think there's very little doubt that the Tories tended to do badly in wealthy Remain areas, but there were curious exceptions like St. Alban's or Guildford.
@OldKingCole The Tories get worse in recess...time on their hands and all. If you think that there is going to be some respite to the relentlessly shambolic nature of Tory politics think again....The Davis/Hammond/Johnson split is toxic....throw in May's weakness and behind the scenes you have their poisonous little toad Gove spitting bile....
The Tories are going to come out of this clinging at any hope...I think Raab is the one who will take the poison chalice as someone untainted by it all...but like any other Tory leader he will limp into the next GE in 2022...
When I got to the polling station, I was surprised at my own firmness of mind in abstaining. Why on earth would I want to give either of these two fatally flawed propositions my support?
Apparently you can abstain without going to the polling station - worth remembering for next time maybe? ;-)
I firmly believe that you should abstain in person.
A man of principles (or is that principals - I never know!)
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
Cliff edge is the default. Anything softer requires agreement. That depends on our lot making an offer to the EU that is interesting to them and gives them things they don't already have. No-one in our government except possibly Philip Hammond is in that mind-space. And he is trimming to not alienate his party's hardcore.
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
Other EU nations put controls on FoM in 2004 when they introduced transition controls for 7 years on migration from the new accession countries
Other EU nations haven't left the EU. What happens to them and what happens to us on the way out is chalk and cheese. We don't have any influence any more. In any case the 7 years eventually ran out.
Maybe but it is difficult for those EU nations to argue against the UK imposing similar controls they imposed albeit they would not accept a permanent end to free movement
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before the GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
They turned out to vote for no tuition fees largely
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
Heard a labour MP on radio 5 this am saying that the IFS are wrong when they traduced labour's economics. The IFS are the most respected independent financial institute in tbe UK. At budgets they are the No 1 reference point for all the media
Yeah they weren't too complementary about the Tory plans either but mainly because there was so little information about them in the manifesto.
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
It's an interesting thread header (as usual) but it's a theory that doesn't really ring true to me.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
Voters in 2 and 3 almost all voted Labour anyway, to win, let alone get a landslide, Corbyn had to win voters who voted Tory despite austerity and who were over 50. On point 4 Corbyn also backed Brexit and the hung parliament has in any case forced to Tories to moderate their stance
Good points but I am not convinced the Tories will moderate enough on public services and tbh the effects of the past 7 years will contunie to filter through over the next 5. Secondly, I expect Labour to really go after the 40% of under 30s who did not vote - watch out as it becomes 'on trend' amongst the young to vote. Finally, don't forget Brexit fall-out.
Heard a labour MP on radio 5 this am saying that the IFS are wrong when they traduced labour's economics. The IFS are the most respected independent financial institute in tbe UK. At budgets they are the No 1 reference point for all the media
Yeah they weren't too complementary about the Tory plans either but mainly because there was so little information about them in the manifesto.
The conservative plans were as per the previous budget
Jezza has played the EU subject very well. I'm 80% certain he's a Leaver, but I'm 100% certain he's in favour of FOM. This mixture could have been bad news politically, hence the high wire act.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
Corbyn, I think almost uniquely, doesn't care one way or another about Brexit. It's not that important to him.
Yes, he cares, but not very much. That, at least, is what I am told by Corbynistas of my acquaintance, some of whom are fairly close to him and Labour's Islington epicentre.
Mr. Tyson, doubt it'll start from the centre right. The Conservatives are in government and have more to lose, and whilst they're not taken with May, she isn't far right in the way Corbyn is far left.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
What if the Tories start polling in the low thirties, or even lower? What if the divisions in the Tory party become even worse as either the Tory right or Tory left lose confidence in the Brexit negotiations? What if the prospect of an emboldened Corbyn with an even more populist regime becomes ever more likely?
Do you think the Tories will walk into an election like 1997 again? Five years is a long, long, long time...particularly when you are saddled with a party that is so toxic that you couldn't even name it in the last election...and now running a weak Govt....
As said, I think many of you Tories are completely out of touch and do not realise what a catastrophic and existential state your party is in.....
Just think if Corbyn had won an extra 7 seats or so...the pressure would be on the other foot...but that narrow victory may prove to be the undoing of the Tory party...
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed - the obvious line of attack against those was to point out that Labour wasn't prepared to wait for you to die to take your house.
edit...I don't know what's up with this formatting
Mr. Tyson, doubt it'll start from the centre right. The Conservatives are in government and have more to lose, and whilst they're not taken with May, she isn't far right in the way Corbyn is far left.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
What if the Tories start polling in the low thirties, or even lower?
For the tories to do that, labour would need to be at 50%+ which would be highly unlikely. (not impossible, but unheard of).
Mr. Tyson, doubt it'll start from the centre right. The Conservatives are in government and have more to lose, and whilst they're not taken with May, she isn't far right in the way Corbyn is far left.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
What if the Tories start polling in the low thirties, or even lower?
For the tories to do that, labour would need to be at 50%+ which would be highly unlikely. (not impossible, but unheard of).
That does raise the important question: in this new two party world, what does bad polling look like?
The government need to recognise that they cannot cut public expenditure in the short term and indeed must increase it in many areas. They could reduce overseas aid and scrap a load of Green stuff but will they? They have to maintain a reasonable degree of fionancial responsibility so they must increase taxation. The best way would be to increase income tax levels at all bands. They should state that the long term aim is to reduce the tax burden but they have undertood the message from the GE and now is not the time for dogma.
The other problem for the Conservatives is the funding crisis in adult social care isn't going to go away and because of their coalition with the DUP they are locked in to the status quo.
We will hear again of local Councils struggling to cope with funding over the coming months and years and everyone will be looking to Government for a solution (or more money) *or probably both).
The care of the elderly is a huge and electorally difficult issue as we've seen.
Presumably they will secure a guarantee that government will allow a vote to lift cap later. They aren't going to crash the government for this....
If true though it shows how Corbyn is really making the running.
To be honest Corbyn doesn't enter my mind on this, the last three months terrorist and fire outrages and the work of the emergency services drives my desire to see them receive a better than 1% pay rise
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
Actually plenty of those under 40s in London and the South East stand to inherit a fat wad when their parents pass away and care greatly about both the dementia tax and IHT
On Brexit can we just accept that no one has a clue how it will work out including all UK and EU politicians.
We can. The problem is that business and individuals are acting accordingly, and not to the interest of the UK.
The pound is rising (1.30) and as long as the QS gets through it is unlikely the government will fall in the short term. However why would anyone invest at present and that is a worry. It has to be hoped that once Merkel gets elected (if she does) this Autumn negotiations will become more pragmatic and solutions sought. I cannot see any pathway that does not lead to a soft Brexit
Cliff edge is the default. Anything softer requires agreement. That depends on our lot making an offer to the EU that is interesting to them and gives them things they don't already have. No-one in our government except possibly Philip Hammond is in that mind-space. And he is trimming to not alienate his party's hardcore.
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
Other EU nations put controls on FoM in 2004 when they introduced transition controls for 7 years on migration from the new accession countries
Other EU nations haven't left the EU. What happens to them and what happens to us on the way out is chalk and cheese. We don't have any influence any more. In any case the 7 years eventually ran out.
Maybe but it is difficult for those EU nations to argue against the UK imposing similar controls they imposed albeit they would not accept a permanent end to free movement
I didn't express it well. We want the EU to agree to a whole new relationship - and by the way, no FoM and we're not offering anything very much. Other countries want to modify FoM rules as part of the normal horsetrading within the EU. You can see the difference?
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
The under 40's will if they see their inheritance attacked
@OldKingCole The Tories get worse in recess...time on their hands and all. If you think that there is going to be some respite to the relentlessly shambolic nature of Tory politics think again....The Davis/Hammond/Johnson split is toxic....throw in May's weakness and behind the scenes you have their poisonous little toad Gove spitting bile....
The Tories are going to come out of this clinging at any hope...I think Raab is the one who will take the poison chalice as someone untainted by it all...but like any other Tory leader he will limp into the next GE in 2022...
I would be totally relaxed about the Tories tearing themselves to bits if they were not in Government. However MP’s will go back to their constituencies and be told very firmly that they must get their act together.
Mr. Tyson, been a little while since I was called a PB Tory
May had a dire campaign and seriously underperformed expectations. However, she did get around 42% of the vote and more votes than anyone except Major.
The Conservatives mustn't be complacent, but nor should Labour.
Jezza has played the EU subject very well. I'm 80% certain he's a Leaver, but I'm 100% certain he's in favour of FOM. This mixture could have been bad news politically, hence the high wire act.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
Corbyn, I think almost uniquely, doesn't care one way or another about Brexit. It's not that important to him.
Yes, he cares, but not very much. That, at least, is what I am told by Corbynistas of my acquaintance, some of whom are fairly close to him and Labour's Islington epicentre.
Aside from the rhetoric on immigration, it would be difficult to put a cigarette paper between Labour's 1983 Manifesto and LePen's 2017 bid for the French presidency.
I am genuinely worried by populism...
I think the Labour Party should offer Jeremy his commitment to non renewal trident in return for a positive approach to Brexit....
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
The under 40's will if they see their inheritance attacked
The next election is probably five years away. Everyone will be older.
All this talk from the EU/Remainers about how David Davis is an arrogant incompetent who can't do anything right would be a lot more credible if they hadn't been telling us for months that he was doing such a good job and really showing Boris Johnson up.
It's almost like the criticism is less correlated to what people are doing and more correlated to the perceived likelihood of being the next Conservative leader.
Citation needed.
And it is Davis who has been the success of Brexit preparations so far. Civil servants report that he is thoughtful, pragmatic and hard-working. He has come to the Commons to update MPs several times. He has not had much of substance to report, but he has impressed MPs on both sides of the House – the Remain side and the Leave side – with his openness.
Is John Rentoul now criticising David Davis? Is he even a Remainer?
Personally, I've thought that all the leading Conservative Brexiters have looked hopelessly out of their depth from the start. David Davis is perhaps the least disconnected from planet earth. That doesn't mean he's any good.
John Rentoul is definitely a Remainer. I cited one example, but there were others saying the same thing. I remember Michael Crick and Michael White stating similar sentiments on the BBC. It was used to knock Boris Johnson a lot on social media. And Rentoul also is citing the opinion of others like civil servants and Remain MPs in his article.
Personally, I think David Davis is doing a very good job. Obviously, he is in the middle of a negotiation right now, so when big business comes wanting explicit commitments to their particular industry, the only smart thing to do is to give positive noises but not commit to anything. Negotiators on the other side will obviously try to undermine him for their own advantage, and there is a subset of the UK population that is only too willing to aid their cause.
Yet, for all that, I know he impresses people he works with, both in politics and in the civil service. Theresa May is very similar. Both of them have also remained graceful and decent despite a lot of political pressure and rather nasty personal attacks. That is the sort of leadership I admire.
Surely Corbyn too has "remained graceful and decent despite a lot of political pressure and rather nasty personal attacks". Do you admire his leadership too?
Actually plenty of those under 40s in London and the South East stand to inherit a fat wad when their parents pass away and care greatly about both the dementia tax and IHT
One interesting sub point on that graph is how despite the age swinging Lab/Con votes hugely - there is almost no difference for the minor parties. SNP and LD, Green, and even UKIP, now seem to rely on some other demographic rather than age.
Mr. Observer, the opportunity is wide open for an En Marche type party.
Had Corbyn gone backwards, the PLP *might* have gone for it (though I doubt it, given their craven Corbophilia).
An En Marche type party would fail horribly over here. We have a totally different electoral system. Even in France, Macron needed a perfect storm - Part Socialiste imploded horribly, Fillon destroyed his own campaign and Macron was left as the only coherent non-extremist alternative. And still didn't get a quarter of the vote in the first round.
The party success in the legislative elections required Macron to have won the Presidency - a position we don't have over here.
The current system of "create 650 artificial districts based on equal population with a despairing nod to something resembling communities where possible but it's often not" was deliberately brought into place as a stitch-up to entrench established parties (primarily the Conservatives) as a concession to Salisbury in order to allow through the franchise extension to allow poorer people to vote. It's done superbly in its primary objective, to be fair (although the Liberal Party managed to suicide out of being protected by it by dint of sustained and heroic effort from 1916-1924... although, to be fair, they did pass PR through the Commons while they were still in the Big Two)
To be honest Corbyn doesn't enter my mind on this, the last three months terrorist and fire outrages and the work of the emergency services drives my desire to see them receive a better than 1% pay rise
More generally, with inflation* now becoming a bit more of a factor, the 1% cap over such a long period is no longer viable.
However, the Chancellor, quite rightly, won't want his hands to be tied.
* I hope you all held on to those inflation-linked National Savings Bonds...
The assumption that the Orange is some kind of Paisleyite machine does seem to be one that is generally made in England. The cartoons since the MAYDUP deal are so odd that I do wonder if all papers should hire a new NI staffer ASAP.
The Mail one of the drunk DUPers drinking Guinness almost beggared belief.
The assumption that the Orange is some kind of Paisleyite machine does seem to be one that is generally made in England. The cartoons since the MAYDUP deal are so odd that I do wonder if all papers should hire a new NI staffer ASAP.
The Mail one of the drunk DUPers drinking Guinness almost beggared belief.
Must state it wasn't the original post that worried me, it was the responses. I don't for one second think anyone should know everyone else's religion.
Mr. Tyson, doubt it'll start from the centre right. The Conservatives are in government and have more to lose, and whilst they're not taken with May, she isn't far right in the way Corbyn is far left.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
What if the Tories start polling in the low thirties, or even lower? What if the divisions in the Tory party become even worse as either the Tory right or Tory left lose confidence in the Brexit negotiations? What if the prospect of an emboldened Corbyn with an even more populist regime becomes ever more likely?
Do you think the Tories will walk into an election like 1997 again? Five years is a long, long, long time...particularly when you are saddled with a party that is so toxic that you couldn't even name it in the last election...and now running a weak Govt....
As said, I think many of you Tories are completely out of touch and do not realise what a catastrophic and existential state your party is in.....
Just think if Corbyn had won an extra 7 seats or so...the pressure would be on the other foot...but that narrow victory may prove to be the undoing of the Tory party...
It was absolutely the best possible result for Labour - Tories own Brexit, the Economy, the Hung Parliament, the whole f*cking mess. Meanwhile JC can tempt the public with all manner of delicious goodies safe in the knowledge that he's not going to have to deliver any time soon.
This situation won't last forever but while it does, every day is Christmas Day for Team Corbyn.
Comments
But on this you are wrong...wrong and wrong. Corbyn inspires hope, optimism and change...and that quite frankly is political catnip. The socialist/IRA/communist labels are old hat and not relevant now to a huge swathe of the voting public. Economic dire warnings fall on deaf ears because for many their economic outlook is fucking horrible anyway. And the right wing press...in glorifying the cult of personality and celebrity lifestyles...they only expose the inequalities that are unfair...
Things have to change and they will..... to deal with inequality. People like me and you have to pay more tax and we need to do a lot more to safeguard our environment for future generations.
"Oh Jeremy Corbyn..."
The legal-government-landlord establishment.
Amazing pictures of Enoch Powell on a pogo stick ( and that looks like him in a bubble bath), plus Heath on a skateboard (not the one of him falling off it unfortunately) and Macmillan on a miniature train.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/880096588936470528
So I think it highly unlikely that significant numbers of Tory voters abstained or voted Labour.
"Labour lost again even against May, haha they are useless and have no hope, peak Corbyn has been and gone! No one will vote for the Reds under the bed when push comes to shove!"
"Expired Tories on their way out, they should stand aside and have their weak fragile government replaced with our own weak fragile government! Jezza will be PM in 5 months, tops!"
https://twitter.com/SophyRidgeSky/status/880363838360694789
Given how tight things are, that could affect the title race.
I agree that most voters, like most pundits and pollsters, expected a substantial Tory majority but I don't get the 'let's vote in a way that keeps the majority quite small' - how could you do that as an individual voter?
I think a combination of three major things happened:
1. Yes, some people thought it was safe to vote Labour because Corbyn could not be PM - if you like, assuaging their consciences. But...
2. I also believe there has been a genuine sea-change in thinking about what is the right combination of tax versus public service spending, versus the deficit - with many people feeling public services slashed too far. The tories haven't helped their case for 'austerity to reduce the deficit' by continually kicking back the balance books target date.
3. The young voted in significantly increasing numbers and they overwhelmingly voted Labour.
Point 1 is not likely to figure next time but I think points 2 and 3 will persits and even strengthen between now and the next GE. In many ways, I think the Tories would b best to call an election right now because effect 1 (and indeed the driver outlined in the thread header) will have evaporated and effects 2 and 3 will not be much increased (yet).
In 5 years time it could be a Labour landslide, especially if, as I expect point 4 rears its head (4. Messy Brexit and who is to blame.)
That doesn't sound like shy Tories to me... It sounds like Labour did an unexpectedly good job at picking up votes from elsewhere.
Before long the ‘events’ wil be more copable with.
Instead of losing electors on each count, he's gained two sets instead. Can he keep it up?
But it will involve more squirming in seats as people vote against what they think is right.
At end add ‘but respectfully regret that measures to address the inequality in treatment of women from Northern Ireland with regard to healthcare provision were not included in the Gracious Speech; recognise that the UK currently provides funding for access to healthcare services including abortion to residents of other nations as part of its international development work; note that women from Northern Ireland have no choice but to travel to England for abortion services and face serious difficulties in doing so, and as such the current position risks the continuation of an unwanted pregnancy which may cause distress or illness to the patient concerned purely on the basis of her place of residence within the UK rather than any medical requirements; therefore call on the Government to clarify, if necessary by legislating, that under section 1(1)(a) of the National Health Service Act 2006 it is a requirement on the Secretary of State for Health to prevent illness among those who wish to end an unwanted pregnancy, who are UK taxpayers, by providing such services; and call on the Government to ensure the provision of adequate funding and guidance so that all UK citizens including those from Northern Ireland may access medical services including abortion procedures in England if they so wish without charge, and that such provision does not interfere with decisions made by the Northern Ireland Assembly with regard to the provision of such services in Northern Ireland.’.
Thin end of the wedge to talk about NI citizens as UK taxpayers. As a UK taxpayer, can I have free education in Scotland, please?
Perhaps the clear water between major parties energised voters on both sides.
https://order-order.com/2017/06/29/jon-snow-storm-behind-scenes-last-nights-channel-4-news/
There is a deal to be done and I am confident that it will be done. Better than nothing but worse than what we have is a big negotiating space. I expect an outcome that is a lot better than nothing and substantially worse than what we have. I also expect the uncertainty to drag on for years unless we sign up with enthusiasm for EEA + CU + FoM. Enthusiasm is important because the other side have to agree. Unlikely IMO.
I think you are right....a week before the election I thought it would start through disaffected social democrats and members of the PLP. Now I think it is much more likely to start from the centre right, particularly when the Tories realise just how toxic and unelectable their branding is.
As I said before there is a tsunami ripping through British politics.....we'll probably look back and see that it started with the Banking Crisis in 2008...but when it has run it's course the complexion of our politics is going to be profoundly changed. I personally think it will destroy the Tory party, the world's oldest and most successful political party and possibly the Labour Party too.....and leave us with three voting blocks... a populist right, nationalist isolationist party/ a centrist pro business and likely pro Europe centrist party/ and a left populist and Green Party
Again, this incident is very delicate and lots of very angry people, and we have McMao calling the government murderers, Jezza spreading fake news about cuts being responsible, sites / journos spreading fake claims of cover-ups ala Hillsborough and now this.
What we need is a calm and proper investigation and then when the facts have been established any responsible properly punished.
Civil weddings have existed forever.
A new mostly PLP party could've taken from the Lib Dems and some left Con MPs, though.
That's the semantics of the Westminster bubble and the chattering class.
(edit - and for once, a good argument for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
Croydon Central Tory vote share held steady (-0.6), dropped a bit in Brighton Kemptown (-2.4) and Bristol North West (-2.1), collapsed in Battersea (-10.8) and Kensington (-10.1), increased in Bedford (+2.6), increased in Canterbury (+1.8),, fell Enfield Southgate (-6.6).
But in most of those - Labour increased by more than Tories fell.
But yes - perhaps it's a localised effect like you suggest.
They feel very strongly about "defending the biblical definition of marriage" (and tend to advocate using the state to incentivize and *guide* people into marriage) and crucially, they have a fantastic lobbying organization that almost bought down Cameron.
Unless there is some major inequality that would be addressed by introducing opposite sex CP's (there isn't), the tory party aren't going to touch the issue.
I think there's very little doubt that the Tories tended to do badly in wealthy Remain areas, but there were curious exceptions like St. Alban's or Guildford.
The Tories get worse in recess...time on their hands and all. If you think that there is going to be some respite to the relentlessly shambolic nature of Tory politics think again....The Davis/Hammond/Johnson split is toxic....throw in May's weakness and behind the scenes you have their poisonous little toad Gove spitting bile....
The Tories are going to come out of this clinging at any hope...I think Raab is the one who will take the poison chalice as someone untainted by it all...but like any other Tory leader he will limp into the next GE in 2022...
https://twitter.com/tim_hustler/status/880372687905882112
If the young did not vote this time they are unlikely to do so next time and the Tories will also have dumped the dementia tax which hit them with the middle aged, Brexit may be difficult but again I don't see many 2017 Tories switching to Corbyn because of it
Well, you may be right - time will tell... but I heard the argument about the young not voting before GE and then it turned out that more than expected did, albeit there are still plenty more for Jezza & co to go after.
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Corbyn will have his own dementia tax if he restates his IHT and LVA tax proposals at the next GE
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
They aren't going to crash the government for this....
If true though it shows how Corbyn is really making the running.
Do you think the Tories will walk into an election like 1997 again? Five years is a long, long, long time...particularly when you are saddled with a party that is so toxic that you couldn't even name it in the last election...and now running a weak Govt....
As said, I think many of you Tories are completely out of touch and do not realise what a catastrophic and existential state your party is in.....
Just think if Corbyn had won an extra 7 seats or so...the pressure would be on the other foot...but that narrow victory may prove to be the undoing of the Tory party...
Indeed and with the dementia tax dumped the Tories can make that case
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
He is showing his true colours as a hypocritical, bitter, nasty little man.
edit...I don't know what's up with this formatting
We will hear again of local Councils struggling to cope with funding over the coming months and years and everyone will be looking to Government for a solution (or more money) *or probably both).
The care of the elderly is a huge and electorally difficult issue as we've seen.
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
Actually plenty of those under 40s in London and the South East stand to inherit a fat wad when their parents pass away and care greatly about both the dementia tax and IHT
I am sure dyed-in-the-wool tories will be apoplectic but they were never going to vote Labour, so no votes lost for JC... The under 40's however generally couldn't give a stuff about either of those two things. The Tories have to find a way to start getting more of that under 40 vote if they are to survive...
The under 40's will if they see their inheritance attacked
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/880371436841521152
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/880372137655193600
May had a dire campaign and seriously underperformed expectations. However, she did get around 42% of the vote and more votes than anyone except Major.
The Conservatives mustn't be complacent, but nor should Labour.
I am genuinely worried by populism...
I think the Labour Party should offer Jeremy his commitment to non renewal trident in return for a positive approach to Brexit....
The under 40's will if they see their inheritance attacked
The next election is probably five years away. Everyone will be older.
Even in France, Macron needed a perfect storm - Part Socialiste imploded horribly, Fillon destroyed his own campaign and Macron was left as the only coherent non-extremist alternative. And still didn't get a quarter of the vote in the first round.
The party success in the legislative elections required Macron to have won the Presidency - a position we don't have over here.
The current system of "create 650 artificial districts based on equal population with a despairing nod to something resembling communities where possible but it's often not" was deliberately brought into place as a stitch-up to entrench established parties (primarily the Conservatives) as a concession to Salisbury in order to allow through the franchise extension to allow poorer people to vote. It's done superbly in its primary objective, to be fair (although the Liberal Party managed to suicide out of being protected by it by dint of sustained and heroic effort from 1916-1924... although, to be fair, they did pass PR through the Commons while they were still in the Big Two)
However, the Chancellor, quite rightly, won't want his hands to be tied.
* I hope you all held on to those inflation-linked National Savings Bonds...
https://twitter.com/RevRichardColes/status/880378619352297473
The assumption that the Orange is some kind of Paisleyite machine does seem to be one that is generally made in England. The cartoons since the MAYDUP deal are so odd that I do wonder if all papers should hire a new NI staffer ASAP.
The Mail one of the drunk DUPers drinking Guinness almost beggared belief.
That only happens here.
This situation won't last forever but while it does, every day is Christmas Day for Team Corbyn.