Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boundary conditions. How Brexit might be helping to lay the gr

13

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    HHemmelig said:

    At school weren't you ever taught to use punctuation? Your lack thereof garbles many of your posts including the excellent example above.
    Last time I checked a full stop was a punctuation mark
  • FF43 said:

    Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. .

    Why? For the zillionth time, anything that looks like a white van might be being used to smuggle fags. So you presumably must believe that therefore all white vans are inspected at the border. If you don't believe this, why on earth can't you understand that the same is even more true of ordinary commercial goods, for which the incentives for smuggling will be far less under all scenarios.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    HHemmelig said:

    It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
    I would imagine the Vietnam War did rather more for LBJ's relatively low rating than his civil rights and social reforms
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,647

    The swing is more pronounced in the Notts area coalfield than Yorkshire though. Look at the seats the Tories have in that part of the world, Sherwood, Mansfield, NE Derbyshire etc. It's UDM country so it's always been more rightwing than other coalfields. Bassetlaw seems like the outlier, but John Mann isn't exactly a standard Labour MP i suppose.
    HHemmelig said:

    I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
    The old Somerset, Leicestershire, Kent, Nottinghamshire, and Derbyshire coalfields have all swung rightwards, and Labour's majorities in Durham and South Yorkshire are well below where they used to be.
  • PeterC said:

    So .. never ending SNP minority government?
    Only until (by as yet unspecified means) Ruthy becomes FM.
  • For political history buffs, the HaroldRise twitter feed has come to an end, as Wilson was elected party leader this week in 1963.

    https://twitter.com/haroldsrise
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,913

    Why? For the zillionth time, anything that looks like a white van might be being used to smuggle fags. So you presumably must believe that therefore all white vans are inspected at the border. If you don't believe this, why on earth can't you understand that the same is even more true of ordinary commercial goods, for which the incentives for smuggling will be far less under all scenarios.
    You didn't read what I wrote. I expect vans to be excluded from spot checks because they are "dual use". They might just be ferrying people. Cars and vans are spot checked at the Canada/US border but I could see customs dialling back on that in Ireland because of the sensitivity of the border.
    TGOHF said:

    Do you know how many road crossing points there are on the border to the nearest 100 ?

    Clue - not a dozen.
    There will be a limited number of customs crossing points. This is normal.

  • Indeed. The British people are being lied to by Boris and chums (again):

    https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/964465485478858752
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,811

    Eh? There's already a HUGE different tariff environment. The criminal gangs operate at the moment. The idea that they are going to switch from booze'n'fags, which are widely available, easy to sell and highly profitable, to car parts or US chickens in order to arbitrate on rules of origin is bonkers. In any case, why would there be any tariffs at all? Every man and his dog wants a Free Trade Agreement; there very probably won't be any tariffs.
    While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.

    Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
  • HYUFD said:

    Last time I checked a full stop was a punctuation mark
    Others are available....

  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    I think Remoaners should adopt Mark Twain as their patron saint.

    Here's a quote from St Mark:

    " I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".

    Perfect for Remoaners.
  • FF43 said:

    Both sides in the Chinese civil war largely left it up to the Americans to fight the Japanese, so they could concentrate on shoring up their own positions. The nationalists and the communists separately won a significant battle against the Japanese.

    You do know 10 million Chinese died during WW2?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309

    A chunk of the terrrrrrible night was down to the former Tory councillor in Devon being sent to prison for trying to murder his wife with a mallet (polo or croquet wasn't specified). All very Midsummer Murders - and not the best circumstances for the Tories to get the vote out to replace him.
    The Chudleigh seat in Devon was won by the LDs in 2003 and they won a by election there in 2016 too so the LDs clearly have a presence there too
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    For political history buffs, the HaroldRise twitter feed has come to an end, as Wilson was elected party leader this week in 1963.

    https://twitter.com/haroldsrise

    Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
  • At the 1918 election, there were clear Nationalist majorities in Counties Fermanagh and Tyrone.
  • Indeed. The British people are being lied to by Boris and chums (again):

    https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/964465485478858752

    German cars in China are mostly built in China not Germany. VW etc have massive factories in China, though they are forced to operate as joint ventures with local partners under Chinese law. Not that this means the message of the tweet is incorrect.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    stevef said:

    Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
    Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    edited February 2018
    Nigelb said:

    The indelible cynicism of Mitch McConnell, enabler of school shootings...
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/deeply-saddened/553478/

    Gun ownership rates have fallen in recent decades and the US has had the second amendment for over 200 years.

    Given mass school and other shootings are only a recent phenomenon in the US the problem has to be a bit more complex than the second amendment. Why are young men doing this today when they weren't 30 or 50 or 100 years ago?

    They have very tight gun control in Chicago - doesn't stop them having a very high murder rate. More people will probably be murdered there by guns in the next week than died in this incident.

    Not saying access to guns doesn't contribute - but the solution is way more complex. Because 99.999 per cent of US gun owners don't commit mass shootings do they? What is driving these young men to do this - when they weren't for 90 per cent of the time there has been a second amendment.

  • stevef said:

    I think Remoaners should adopt Mark Twain as their patron saint.

    Here's a quote from St Mark:

    " I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".

    Perfect for Remoaners.

    I think you should adopt Dan Hodges as your patron saint.


  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,505

    How long before Wales follows suit?
    They have over the last 20 years moved from Labour to PC and sometimes back again. Some refer to PC as Green Tories!

    England is different to Wales. Bonkers Soviet style socialism has never been the turn-off in the economic deserts of South Wales as it has been in the green and pleasant land east of Offa's dyke.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    HYUFD said:

    Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
    Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
  • Not sure if any of you have seen Star Trek: Discovery on Netflix yet, let alone enjoyed it (I did, BTW!)

    Of course in the Star Trek "Mirror Universe", we don't have an EU and a referendum about Britain leaving it.

    What we have instead is the Brexit Empire, "a fascistic culture described as oppressive, racist and xenophobic, predicated on an unconditional hatred and rejection of anything and everything "other"." Despite covering the entire continent of Europe (not just the EU27 of our universe), The Empire is the antithesis of the EU in every way.

    Heroically standing up to the Brexit Empire are Emmanuel Macron of the French Resistance, and Angela Merkel of the German Resistance, along with Ambassadors Barnier and Juncker, who collectively coordinate efforts by Resistance cells all over Europe, with the eventual aim of restoring Freedom to all the occupied nations.

    Key among the Brexit Empire personnel include Captain Michael Burnham Smithson, Admiral Anna Soubry and Commissar Nick Clegg. But who is the head honcho of the Brexit Empire in this Mirror Universe? Who might be turned on by all this oppression, racism and xenophobia in an alternate dimension?

    Easy: our very own Alastair Meeks.

    Sorry, make that - Emperor Alastair Meeks Augustus Hungaricus Centaurius, Father of the Motherland, Overlord of France, Dominus of Germany, Rex Hispania.

    Anyway, just for a bit of harmless fun - most of you probably have no idea what I mean by "mirror universe". But remember, "Context is for Kings" :)
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,913

    You do know 10 million Chinese died during WW2?
    Indeed. And not all at the hands of the Japanese. The Chinese government deliberately breached the Yellow River dykes in a probably futile effort at holding back the Japanese advance. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese peasants were killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Yellow_River_flood
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,055
    stevef said:

    I think Remoaners should adopt Mark Twain as their patron saint.

    Here's a quote from St Mark:

    " I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".

    Perfect for Remoaners.

    Because Brexit is not going to happen?
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,112

    “Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
    Has the UK ever achieved 7%+ growth?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Which should make it obvious that it is unlike most borders, either politically or geographically.
    Yes - and the idea of barbed wire and customs officers in EU uniforms manning every one is bonkers.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 77,063
    stevef said:

    I think Remoaners should adopt Mark Twain as their patron saint.

    Here's a quote from St Mark:

    " I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".

    Perfect for Remoaners.

    He also said that "in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane"....
  • stevef said:

    Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
    He certainly wouldn't have made the mistake of opening up leadership vote to a load of £3 trot students.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Brexit will lead to Scottish independence.
    Brexit will lead to World war.
    Brexit will lead to a return of the Irish troubles.
    Brexit will lead to mass unemployment.
    Brexit will lead to a shortage of Labour. (despite mass unemployment).
    Brexit will lead to hyper inflation.
    Brexit will lead to Recession.
    Brexit will lead to Depression.
    Brexit will lead to the river Thames flowing with blood and a plague of locusts and boils.....

    Calm down dear. its only the UK standing up to a powerful foreign power and becoming independent.



  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited February 2018
    TOPPING said:

    While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.

    Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.

    It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. Since the degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
  • HYUFD said:

    Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
    Interesting to imagine what would have happened if George Brown had won the leadership, given his battle with the booze.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,055

    It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. The degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
    You are conflating inspection and controls. Every border movement has to be controlled somehow, and some have to be inspected. There's no getting away from this.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    Interesting to imagine what would have happened if George Brown had won the leadership, given his battle with the booze.
    It wasnt booze that was the problem. Asquith and Churchill both had similar problems. Brown was a man of poor judgment and no popular appeal to swing voters.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,505
    Scott_P said:
    As inspired a selection as Alan Pardew's pre-Christmas appointment at The Hawthorns!
  • FF43 said:

    Indeed. And not all at the hands of the Japanese. The Chinese government deliberately breached the Yellow River dykes in a probably futile effort at holding back the Japanese advance. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese peasants were killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Yellow_River_flood
    And after the Doolittle Raid in 1942, the Japanese launched a massive offensive to search for US airmen and capture the Chinese airfields that most of them landed at:

    When Japanese troops moved out of the Zhejiang and Jiangxi areas in mid-August, they left behind a trail of devastation. Chinese estimates put the civilian death toll at 250,000.[2] The Imperial Japanese Army had also spread cholera, typhoid, plague and dysentery pathogens.[4] Around 1,700 Japanese troops died out of a total 10,000 Japanese soldiers who fell ill with disease when their biological weapons attack rebounded on their own forces.[5][6]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhejiang-Jiangxi_campaign
  • As inspired a selection as Alan Pardew's pre-Christmas appointment at The Hawthorns!
    Yes that has gone really well hasn't it.
  • stevef said:

    It wasnt booze that was the problem. Asquith and Churchill both had similar problems. Brown was a man of poor judgment and no popular appeal to swing voters.
    His judgement on the Labour left was the same as yours....when he died he was a member of the SDP.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    edited February 2018
    stevef said:

    Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
    True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970

    It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,737

    They have over the last 20 years moved from Labour to PC and sometimes back again. Some refer to PC as Green Tories!

    England is different to Wales. Bonkers Soviet style socialism has never been the turn-off in the economic deserts of South Wales as it has been in the green and pleasant land east of Offa's dyke.
    Bonkers Soviet style socialism probably seemed like an enticing forbidden fruit after Chapel Wales!
  • Has the UK ever achieved 7%+ growth?
    Not since comparable records began after the war
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    saddo said:
    Not sure if anyone has seen this http://www.radio.cz/en/section/news/czech-archives-cited-in-reports-of-labour-leaders-meeting-with-spy

    "The StB officer used the codename Jan Dymič, which according to Slovak archives was the name for Jan Sarkocy, a Slovak StB agent who started working in London in May 1986 but returned to Czechoslovakia in 1989."

    and this http://articles.latimes.com/1989-05-26/news/mn-719_1_britain-ousts-czechoslovak-ambassador-jan-fidler-foreign-office

    "Britain ordered the expulsion of four diplomats at Czechoslovakia's Embassy on Thursday for "activities incompatible with their status," and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said she is not willing to sacrifice national security for better ties with the East Bloc.

    Czechoslovak Ambassador Jan Fidler, who was summoned to the Foreign Office, was told the four diplomats had 14 days to leave the country.

    Fidler later issued a statement denying what he called the "totally unfounded allegations" of espionage.

    Thatcher on Thursday told Parliament that Britain will act against East Bloc spies whatever the consequences for international relations.

    "The action had to be taken regardless. The worst thing of all would have been to say that because we have better relations we could ignore these unacceptable activities," she said.

    Although ties between Britain and the Soviet Union have recently improved, frictions remain with Prague over human rights and alleged espionage.

    It was not immediately clear whether Thursday's expulsions, the second involving Czechoslovaks in a year, were related to the defection to Britain earlier this year of Czechoslovak diplomat Vlastimil Ludwik.

    The four expelled are Jan Pavlicek, 39, third secretary and press attache; Dr. Helena Krepelkova, 38, a second secretary; Jan Sarkocy, 35, third secretary, and Rudolf Kasparovsky, 35, technical adviser."

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,505
    stevef said:

    Brexit will lead to Scottish independence.
    Brexit will lead to World war.
    Brexit will lead to a return of the Irish troubles.
    Brexit will lead to mass unemployment.
    Brexit will lead to a shortage of Labour. (despite mass unemployment).
    Brexit will lead to hyper inflation.
    Brexit will lead to Recession.
    Brexit will lead to Depression.
    Brexit will lead to the river Thames flowing with blood and a plague of locusts and boils.....

    Calm down dear. its only the UK standing up to a powerful foreign power and becoming independent.



    You are absolutely right in all your statements, except the last two. Welcome to the sun-drenched plains of Remainderdom!
  • HYUFD said:

    True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970

    It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
    If this government lasts until 2022 a Tory government will only have been in power for 7 years. The coalition years would not count as "Tory government" from the point of view of an impartial historian - it contained many Lib Dem ministers including the Deputy Prime Minister.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,737
    stevef said:

    I think Remoaners should adopt Mark Twain as their patron saint.

    Here's a quote from St Mark:

    " I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".

    Perfect for Remoaners.

    And one of his for the Brexiteers to display proudly:

    "Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will."

    The petrified, with petrified loyalty to a petrified Brussels - yes williamglenn, I'm talking about you!
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    HYUFD said:

    True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970

    It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
    It is very rare for a PM to win four elections in a row. Its never been done since we became a democracy, so Wilson's 1 out of 4 defeat can be forgiven. But if you are judging by vote share, Wilson lost in 1970 with a higher vote share than Corbyn.

    I suspect this government will last until at least 2027. Next time things will be very different now that there is an expectation of a Corbyn government. Indeed, Wilson's close run election of 1964 is proof that expectation of a result often becomes a self denying prophecy.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,913

    It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. Since the degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
    It's more the other way round, I believe. Because people think it's a problem they don't want it. It comes down to how much the parties are willing to compromise to avoid the problem: to have a customs union, to not have a customs union, to allow divergence between NI and rUK. I genuinely don't know how this will play out. There are good reasons for the UK being in the CU anyway, so that would be my preferred choice.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    HHemmelig said:

    I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
    Last nights results show that the number of candidates Ukip (if any) put up in the next GE could be a big factor in the outcome.


  • You are conflating inspection and controls. Every border movement has to be controlled somehow, and some have to be inspected. There's no getting away from this.
    No, I'm the one who is NOT conflating and controls, that is the entire point. It is true that in the absence of a Customs Union most commercial cross-border consignments have to be recorded in some way (there would probably be an exemption for small local traders). It is also true that customs on both sides would want to reserve the right to inspect (as they do at the moment, for booze'n'fags particularly). Neither of those mean that there have to be routine physical checks at the border; since we are talking about very marginal risks of non-compliance anyway, you can easily have a system of self-certification, plus attendance at a customs facility somewhere for non-certified traders, backed up by spot checks as happen at the moment.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited February 2018
    For those thinking Labour have a problem with women, the latest YouGov shows a stark gender divide:

    Men

    Con 44
    Lab 36

    Brexit right 46
    Brexit wrong 45

    Women

    Con 37
    Lab 45

    Brexit right 38
    Brexit wrong 47
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    And one of his for the Brexiteers to display proudly:

    "Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will."

    The petrified, with petrified loyalty to a petrified Brussels - yes williamglenn, I'm talking about you!
    Chicken Licken went around suggesting repeatedly that the sky was falling.

    In the end he got eaten by a fox - just saying..
  • Fascinating article on Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    "FTPA thus makes thinkable some peculiar scenarios that were unthinkable before it passed. Britain could wind up with an unelected Prime Minister who lacks the confidence of the House of Commons. The Queen could be forced to dismiss a Prime Minister who refused to give way to a credible successor. She could, just about, be left without a government, or forced to keep a PrimeMinister in office who wished to step aside. Much would depend on convention, on the Cabinet Manual, and on the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring of two unelected officials—the Cabinet Secretary and the Queen’s PrivateSecretary"


    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12485/epdf

    One for OGH!!!!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,795
    TGOHF said:

    Last nights results show that the number of candidates Ukip (if any) put up in the next GE could be a big factor in the outcome.


    By 2022 UKIP will have no councillors, no MEPs, no Welsh Assembly members, and everyone still in the party will have had a turn at being leader. That's if they exist at all.
  • Scott_P said:
    Mrs May pips “Not Sure” in the “Best PM” stakes:

    May: 36
    Corbyn: 29
    Not Sure: 35
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,257

    Has the UK ever achieved 7%+ growth?
    The Eire case highlights the important difference between GDP and GNP. The best explanation of this I have come across was by Paul Krugman in the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/15/opinion/corporate-tax-cuts-its-only-about-the-wedge-wonkish.html?rref=collection/byline/paul-krugman&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=26&pgtype=collection

    He was explaining how the difference between the 2 affected the US and meant that the benefits of GDP growth would be less than expected to the domestic economy but in truth the gap between the 2 is relatively small beer in the US compared to a country like Eire. The rapid rise in GDP gives very little benefit to Eire because the tax wedge available to the domestic economy is very small. In short Apple, Dell, Pfizer and others benefit from the high GDP of Eire, the Irish largely don't.
  • By 2022 UKIP will have no councillors, no MEPs, no Welsh Assembly members, and everyone still in the party will have had a turn at being leader. That's if they exist at all.
    May all be over by end of the weekend.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,657

    He certainly wouldn't have made the mistake of opening up leadership vote to a load of £3 trot students.
    Should that even be seen as a mistake?

    Labour got a load of new members (which must have helped somewhat in 2017), they also got a nice cash injection and a load of younger supporters attracted into politics.

    Corbyn won with all groups of members - the £3 thing didn’t change the result.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    edited February 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    If this government lasts until 2022 a Tory government will only have been in power for 7 years. The coalition years would not count as "Tory government" from the point of view of an impartial historian - it contained many Lib Dem ministers including the Deputy Prime Minister.
    The PM was Tory as was most of the Cabinet, it was a Tory led government.

    That was certainly the view of left wing voters as seen by the LDs trouncing in 2015 and 2017 post Coalition
  • Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    What's coming down the line in the next 3-4 years will solve the problem of high house prices. However the broader macro-economic conditions that bring about change will be enough to destroy any government in power.

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,795
    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (+2)
    CON: 40% (-3)
    LDEM: 8% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 2% (-1)

    via @YouGov, 12 - 13 Feb

    Swingback, reverse-crossover, etc.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612

    Not since comparable records began after the war
    Really? What about during the Barber boom?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    stevef said:

    It is very rare for a PM to win four elections in a row. Its never been done since we became a democracy, so Wilson's 1 out of 4 defeat can be forgiven. But if you are judging by vote share, Wilson lost in 1970 with a higher vote share than Corbyn.

    I suspect this government will last until at least 2027. Next time things will be very different now that there is an expectation of a Corbyn government. Indeed, Wilson's close run election of 1964 is proof that expectation of a result often becomes a self denying prophecy.
    Much could depend on post election deals, had Heath got Thorpe on board in February 1974 he would have been PM not Wilson and had Clegg gone with Labour in 2010 Cameron would not have become PM
  • Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (+2)
    CON: 40% (-3)
    LDEM: 8% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 2% (-1)

    via @YouGov, 12 - 13 Feb

    Swingback, reverse-crossover, etc.

    Broken sleazy Tories on the slide??
  • Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.

    The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.

    Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI

    Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201]
    1 England £26,160/ $40,000
    2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200
    3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400
    4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,686

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (+2)
    CON: 40% (-3)
    LDEM: 8% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 2% (-1)

    via @YouGov, 12 - 13 Feb

    Swingback, reverse-crossover, etc.

    Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,737

    Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.
    Tory half-term dip though....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (+2)
    CON: 40% (-3)
    LDEM: 8% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 2% (-1)

    via @YouGov, 12 - 13 Feb

    Swingback, reverse-crossover, etc.

    Gives Labour 292 Tories 297 so does not really change much.

    Corbyn still becomes PM with SNP confidence and supply
  • Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.

    Yes, it seems fairly static.

    The top two issues in the YouGov poll (with respondents asked to choose three) are Brexit (61%), and Health (52%). I think we'll remain in the current fairly static position until the nature of the Brexit settlement becomes clear, which probably won't be for another year. It's very hard to predict how sentiment will then shift.
  • Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.

    The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.

    Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI

    Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201]
    1 England £26,160/ $40,000
    2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200
    3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400
    4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500

    Considering that Wales has been led by a Labour government for 21 years now looking at those figures makes me think about the maxim about insanity usually credited to Einstein.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    Scott_P said:
    He should win easily, Utah was a state which saw a swim from Republican to Democrat on 2016 against the national trend
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 77,063

    Mrs May pips “Not Sure” in the “Best PM” stakes:

    May: 36
    Corbyn: 29
    Not Sure: 35
    There is perhaps understandable confusion between Mrs May and "Not Sure", though...

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612
    rcs1000 said:

    Really? What about during the Barber boom?
    Q1 of 1973 saw 9.7% year-over-year GDP growth, the post war record.

    Of course, it did not end well.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    OGH confirms Tories would still be ahead on seats with the new yougov

    https://mobile.twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/964491048146948099
  • HYUFD said:

    OGH confirms Tories would still be ahead on seats with the new yougov

    https://mobile.twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/964491048146948099

    No he doesn't confirm that!

    He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 77,063
    So much for liberals being snowflakes....

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/scott-pruitt-first-class-travel-epa-351669?lo=ap_d1
    Pruitt's security threat? A passenger shouting, 'You're f---ing up the environment'
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,055
    edited February 2018

    For those thinking Labour have a problem with women, the latest YouGov shows a stark gender divide:

    Men

    Con 44
    Lab 36

    Brexit right 46
    Brexit wrong 45

    Women

    Con 37
    Lab 45

    Brexit right 38
    Brexit wrong 47

    Interestingly men are more likely to think negotiations are going badly.

    I think the figures for women are a leading indicator and we’re approaching a tipping point (on Brexit).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 77,063
    This could be fun...
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/trump-gop-memo-fbi-investigations-disclosures-415596
    U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta grew frustrated with a Justice Department lawyer who argued that Trump’s declassification order did not alter the contours of the legal dispute.

    Mehta said the government would normally be entitled to deference in asserting the need to keep its investigative work under wraps, but perhaps no longer with respect to the dossier.

    “This isn’t the ordinary case,” Mehta told a Justice Department lawyer, Anjali Motgi. “I don’t know of any time the president has declassified the fact of a counterintelligence investigation. That’s going to be a hard sell given what the president has done. … This is a new frontier and it has an impact.”
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    Interestingly men are more likely to think negotiations are going badly.

    I think the figures for women are a leading indicator and we’re approaching a tipping point (on Brexit).
    Remoaners will wake up in the shower and discover its all been a dream......
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309

    No he doesn't confirm that!

    He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
    It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,122

    “Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
    Not to mention a program for 116 million Euro of infrastructure projects by 2040.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Latest yougov has Ukip on 4%.

    Unlikely to have enough candidates for this to be possible.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612
    Scott_P said:
    Looking at the Wikipedia page, there don't seem to be any credible Republican challengers, so I think he looks likely to end up in the Senate.

    He will be an effective anti-Trump voice, I suspect.
  • HYUFD said:

    It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
    Can lead to it yes.

    However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    sarissa said:

    Not to mention a program for 116 million Euro of infrastructure projects by 2040.
    116 million ? Is that like 2 roads in 25 years ?
  • Considering that Wales has been led by a Labour government for 21 years now looking at those figures makes me think about the maxim about insanity usually credited to Einstein.
    The issue is that even if Lab fail to get a majority (which they have 3 times) Con and Plaid are unlikely to work together, which means Lab get to stay in power in coalition with the LDs or Plaid.

    We may see something similar happen in Scotland going forward where the SNP don't get a majority but stay in power as Lab and Con won't work together.
  • The issue is that even if Lab fail to get a majority (which they have 3 times) Con and Plaid are unlikely to work together, which means Lab get to stay in power in coalition with the LDs or Plaid.

    We may see something similar happen in Scotland going forward where the SNP don't get a majority but stay in power as Lab and Con won't work together.
    Ultimately maybe if the Welsh want to grow and leave their malaise behind then they should do what England have done and elect a Tory government.

    Alternatively they could just languish at the bottom with an indefinite Labour government incompetently "leading" them forever.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,149
    DavidL said:

    are much more compelling now than they were then.
    However the pensioners that panicked on that topic at the behest of the great clunking fist are diminishing rapidly.
  • Can lead to it yes.

    However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
    That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
  • Top-notch clickbait from Simon Jenkins:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/16/public-services-privatisation-pfi-state-market

    Needless to say, his very sensible article has them frothing at the mouth in the comments.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Q1 of 1973 saw 9.7% year-over-year GDP growth, the post war record.

    Of course, it did not end well.
    Ah yes, I see the point.

    That was a year period, but it wasn't a calendar year. Or a financial year. So it wasn't captured in any of the data I was looking at.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    edited February 2018

    Can lead to it yes.

    However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
    The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.

    Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becomes PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited February 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
    In England? Are you sure?

    EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    HYUFD said:

    The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.

    Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
    1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls.
    2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612

    Ah yes, I see the point.

    That was a year period, but it wasn't a calendar year. Or a financial year. So it wasn't captured in any of the data I was looking at.

    Looking at this (https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/ihyp/pn2), I was intrigued to notice that the 1970s, 1980s, and 2000s all had exactly two years of negative economic growth. The 1990s only had one (1991), but it was bracketed by the two lowest non negative years.

    The 2010s have so far had zero.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612
    What do all the recent school shootings in the US have in common?

    That's right: schools.

    http://newsthump.com/2018/02/15/national-rifle-association-calls-for-ban-on-schools/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,309
    stevef said:

    1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls.
    2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
    A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,612
    HYUFD said:

    A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
    I doubt the LDs would prop up a Corbyn government: it would be electoral suicide in South West London, Eastbourne, Bath.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    HYUFD said:

    A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
    It would be a good position for a Tory leader. I think there is a zero chance of Johnson or Mogg becoming Tory leader. The Tories will skip a generation in those circumstances.
This discussion has been closed.