Tories/Leavers still ever so slightly frit when it comes to Blair. Sweet.
Dream on.
Blair would be Leave's biggest asset.
The more you protest ...
No. I actively encourage him to get back into the fray. Would be hilarious, and almost certainly split the Labour vote. Would be hilarious to see him see how far his star has fallen...
Does it ever occur to you that people listen to the arguments? There are very few who advocate their position as persuasively and with such erudition as Blair. Certainly not IDS!
The question was about trust, though. There is no one in or out of public life about whom I would be less certain than I am about Blair that he said only what he believed to be true or that if he said he would in the future do something, he fully intended to do it. People pay attention to where the arguments are coming from.
These are both right - on the one hand he's a war criminal and being on the same side as him should make you suspect you're wrong, but on the other, he's a genuinely great communicator.
One of the problems with the Remain campaign was that they didn't really have anyone who could reach out to the waverers; Cameron already looked mildly ridiculous after the "renegotiation", and they ended up getting represented by people like Eddy Izzard who only appealed to the people they appeal to.
They had Bob Geldof shouting abuse at fishermen.
Remain lost because they insulted the voters intelligence.
They lost because they did not make a positive enough case for remaining in the EU and did not adequately address people's concerns.
It still puzzles me why the Remain side were so poor at making a positive case for the EU, as it is now and where it is going, if they thought it was such a good institution and so good for Britain to be in it.
My personal theory is that whilst Leavers had spent decades arguing against the EU, Remainers had rather assumed there wasn’t much need for debate - it was self evident that the EU had been a good thing. They were out of practice.
There’s a bit in 2005 where Farage rants at Blair, who simply responds its 2005 not 1945 because he thinks thats a sufficient argument. And perhaps it was then, but it wasn’t in 2016.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
I've gone from Conservative voter in my 20s, through floating voter in my 30s, to Liberal Democrat member in my 40s... Not sure what that says about where I'll be at retirement age.
For once I completely agree with Tony Blair's appeal today to the EU to recognise the damage UK will do to the EU on leaving and his appeal for them to look again at immigration and how they can still, at this late stage, make a good offer to the UK to resolve Brexit
I do wonder at the irony of the Mail attacking someone for their fascist past.
Ironic or not, it is entirely reasonable to attack someone for having given a misleading answer under cross-examination.
The Mail are being quite clever today by putting in, amongst all the stories about Mosley, a story about a black immigrant killed at the time when Oswald Mosley was whipping up stories about Caribbean immigration and linking it to the Stephen Lawrence killing.
The latter is of course the story where the Mail took the lead in pursuing the killers to the extent of accusing them of murder on its front page.
Peoples' views are not set in stone when they turn 18.
I gave the example yesterday of young people mp.
The Conservatives finished third among 18 - 34 year olds in February 1974. Now, their clearly in first place among those voters.
Labour led b 20% among 18-34 year olds in 1997. Much the same arguments were advanced that for cultural reasons, this group was lost to the Conservatives for good. Twenty years on, the two parties are level-pegging among people aged 38 - 54, and the same group narrowly voted in favour of Brexit.
Most voters become wiser as they become older.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
You learn things in black and white, and right and wrong, as a child, and have little personal experience to leverage to define yourself independently when you become a teenager, which you - socially - desperately want to do, so you tend to leverage what you do know: the views of your family and school. And perhaps a little bit of personal research and reading on top for a minority.
As you grow older, and experience the real world, you develop your own views. That mostly tends toward shades of grey and realism, but not always.
That's one way of looking at it.
Another is that in our youth we have little investment in the status quo and are therefore more likely to want to change things so as to be able to take advantage of our adaptability, so we vote for progressive parties. As we become older, wealthier and more settled, we don't want anyone upsetting the apple cart any longer, and so we tend towards the conservative.
Yes, very interesting and important piece with implications both for long-term political change and short-term betting. A key passage which is not evidenced is:
"There is no good reason to believe the generation that has come of age in the last 25 years is going to change its world view as it grows older. Those whose life s tolerance of diversity (opposing gay marriage is soon going to sound like Flat Earth proponents) and to some extent of migration is here to stay - political preference, I am less sure.
I disagree.
Peoples' views are not set in stone when they turn 18.
I gave the example yesterday of young people mp.
The Conservatives finished third among 18 - 34 year olds in February 1974. Now, their clearly in first place among those voters.
Labour led b 20% among 18-34 year olds in 1997. Much the same arguments were advanced that for cultural reasons, this group was lost to the Conservatives for good. Twenty years on, the two parties are level-pegging among people aged 38 - 54, and the same group narrowly voted in favour of Brexit.
Most voters become wiser as they become older.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
You learn things in black and white, and right and wrong, as a child, and have little personal experience to leverage to define yourself independently when you become a teenager, which you - socially - desperately want to do, so you tend to leverage what you do know: the views of your family and school. And perhaps a little bit of personal research and reading on top for a minority.
As you grow older, and experience the real world, you develop your own views. That mostly tends toward shades of grey and realism, but not always.
As you get older and generally get married and start a family and own property and acquire assets you also tend to get more conservative and want to preserve what you have rather than change the world
I do wonder at the irony of the Mail attacking someone for their fascist past.
Ironic or not, it is entirely reasonable to attack someone for having given a misleading answer under cross-examination.
The Mail are being quite clever today by putting in, amongst all the stories about Mosley, a story about a black immigrant killed at the time when Oswald Mosley was whipping up stories about Caribbean immigration and linking it to the Stephen Lawrence killing.
The latter is of course the story where the Mail took the lead in pursuing the killers to the extent of accusing them of murder on its front page.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
That is the common view but an alternative theory that as voters age, they remain conservative for the radical views of their youth, as real life moves to the left. A pensioner now might well have marched for abortion rights, equal pay for women and to ban race discrimination. Now those questions are settled. If people really do move to the right as they age, why is there no clamour for women to be paid less than men?
The conventional view is just comfort food for those on the right.
And for those on the left who say Ukippers are just coffin-dodgers hankering for the days of empire -- but of course no-one is really wanting to recolonise sub-Saharan Africa.
They are settled for now who knows in a century what will happen. We are also a lower taxed, less unionised and less nationalised nation than we were half a century ago too.
The Brexit and UKIP and Corbyn votes have all been a bit of a rebellion against the Blairite/Cleggite/Cameroon socially liberal and fiscally conservative consensus of the last two decades
I do wonder at the irony of the Mail attacking someone for their fascist past.
Ironic or not, it is entirely reasonable to attack someone for having given a misleading answer under cross-examination.
The Mail are being quite clever today by putting in, amongst all the stories about Mosley, a story about a black immigrant killed at the time when Oswald Mosley was whipping up stories about Caribbean immigration and linking it to the Stephen Lawrence killing.
The latter is of course the story where the Mail took the lead in pursuing the killers to the extent of accusing them of murder on its front page.
Was -2, but -11 with windchill. I encountered four polite young ladies (who thanked me as a held the hound to one side whilst they passed) off for some sledging. Seems bonkers to me, but there we are.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
That is the common view but an alternative theory that as voters age, they remain conservative for the radical views of their youth, as real life moves to the left. A pensioner now might well have marched for abortion rights, equal pay for women and to ban race discrimination. Now those questions are settled. If people really do move to the right as they age, why is there no clamour for women to be paid less than men?
The conventional view is just comfort food for those on the right.
And for those on the left who say Ukippers are just coffin-dodgers hankering for the days of empire -- but of course no-one is really wanting to recolonise sub-Saharan Africa.
Yet, the US example I gave suggests otherwise. If anything, the current Republican party is to the right of where it was under Nixon. It's much more hostile to abortion and affirmative action and trade unions than it was in 1972, yet left wing voters from 1972 voted for Trump in 2016.
"Just had a Guardian newsflash to say that the National Grid doesn’t, today, have enough gas to meet demand."
If only we'd started fracking earlier. Perhaps we should only supply gas to non-greenies as greenies like the hair - shirt approach.
All after a couple of days of chill. You'll remember 62 - 63 when we had three months of this, but then we didn't have central heating anyway. Just a coal fire with a back boiler. Pah! these modern snowflakes don't know they're born, do they? Days off school? Unheard of then.
If we had more wind generation capacity, we wouldn't be using so much gas to generate electricity. So perhaps we should cut off the gas to the Nimbies who have made wind generation so much more expensive by driving it into the sea. They can go out and enjoy their uninterrupted country views while we stay at home in the warm.
If we had the Swansea and Cardiff tidal barrages, we would have all the houses in Wales powered without even needing wind.
The delays in the Government taking this decision are becoming embarrassing. Ther eis no political downside - Labour are saying they would do it. Yes, the Swansea barrage requires a price equivalent to that for nuclear. But the much bigger Cardiff one is at a significant discount - maybe 75%-80% the price of nuclear.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
That is the common view but an alternative theory that as voters age, they remain conservative for the radical views of their youth, as real life moves to the left. A pensioner now might well have marched for abortion rights, equal pay for women and to ban race discrimination. Now those questions are settled. If people really do move to the right as they age, why is there no clamour for women to be paid less than men?
The conventional view is just comfort food for those on the right.
And for those on the left who say Ukippers are just coffin-dodgers hankering for the days of empire -- but of course no-one is really wanting to recolonise sub-Saharan Africa.
We haven't Banned the Bomb though. But Apartheid has gone.
A tax on those that use self service checkouts ? Genius.
More "thinking" along the same lines as Corbyn's robot tax. Never mind the 1970s, they will be taking us back to the early 19th century.
the manifesto had it that it would be a legal requirement to have a “driver” on the docklands light rail. I personally think we need to bring lift attendents back, I don’t think the public can be trusted to press the correct buttons.
If New Hampshire can hold its primaries in February in snow and blizzards we can have a council by election on 1st March in Devon in similar conditions
"Just had a Guardian newsflash to say that the National Grid doesn’t, today, have enough gas to meet demand."
If only we'd started fracking earlier. Perhaps we should only supply gas to non-greenies as greenies like the hair - shirt approach.
All after a couple of days of chill. You'll remember 62 - 63 when we had three months of this, but then we didn't have central heating anyway. Just a coal fire with a back boiler. Pah! these modern snowflakes don't know they're born, do they? Days off school? Unheard of then.
If we had more wind generation capacity, we wouldn't be using so much gas to generate electricity. So perhaps we should cut off the gas to the Nimbies who have made wind generation so much more expensive by driving it into the sea. They can go out and enjoy their uninterrupted country views while we stay at home in the warm.
Wind was producing around 30% yesterday which is pretty impressive.
Remain lost because they insulted the voters intelligence.
They lost because they did not make a positive enough case for remaining in the EU and did not adequately address people's concerns.
It still puzzles me why the Remain side were so poor at making a positive case for the EU, as it is now and where it is going, if they thought it was such a good institution and so good for Britain to be in it.
I think it's because they feared that, if they'd done that with sincerity, they'd have lost even more votes for Remain.
The Remain side lost because it was run by and under the control of the top Tories at that time - viz Cameron and Osborne. The only arguments they could come up with were those that appealed to Tory Remainers - and as we now see, there were not all that many of them. They failed to come up with arguments to appeal to Lib Dem and Labour Remainers.
Effectively, voting for Remain implied support for Cameron and his pathetic attempts at renegotiation. I could not bring myself to do it - though I am fully in favour of a properly reformed EU.
And when you bear in mind that the whole pathetic exercise was a vain attempt to hold the Conservative Party together......
Conservatives are worse than a waste of space. They are highly damaging to the interests and wellbeing of the country as a whole.
I'm not sure who you think the extra Labour and Lib Dem Remainers there were available to win over. And BSE was run by Will Straw, an ex Labour Party candidate.
If you mean the c.25-30% of Labour voters that voted Leave, then I doubt a passionate europhile argument would have made much impact on them.
It's possible that an alternative Labour leader, like Andy Burnham, rather than Corbyn, would have been much clearer on Labour's view, leading to a narrow Remain win, but that's not certain either.
Peoples' views are not set in stone when they turn 18.
I gave the example yesterday of young people mp.
The Conservatives finished third among 18 - 34 year olds in February 1974. Now, their clearly in first place among those voters.
Labour led b 20% among 18-34 year olds in 1997. Much the same arguments were advanced that for cultural reasons, this group was lost to the Conservatives for good. Twenty years on, the two parties are level-pegging among people aged 38 - 54, and the same group narrowly voted in favour of Brexit.
Most voters become wiser as they become older.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
You learn things in black and white, and right and wrong, as a child, and have little personal experience to leverage to define yourself independently when you become a teenager, which you - socially - desperately want to do, so you tend to leverage what you do know: the views of your family and school. And perhaps a little bit of personal research and reading on top for a minority.
As you grow older, and experience the real world, you develop your own views. That mostly tends toward shades of grey and realism, but not always.
That's one way of looking at it.
Another is that in our youth we have little investment in the status quo and are therefore more likely to want to change things so as to be able to take advantage of our adaptability, so we vote for progressive parties. As we become older, wealthier and more settled, we don't want anyone upsetting the apple cart any longer, and so we tend towards the conservative.
I think that's also true.
In truth, I think each generation wants to fix things, change a bit, and move things on, whilst also keeping things more broadly more or less stable, and recognisably the same.
Yes, very interesting and important piece with implications both for long-term political change and short-term betting. A key passage which is not evidenced is:
"There is no good reason to believe the generation that has come of age in the last 25 years is going to change its world view as it grows older. Those whose life s tolerance of diversity (opposing gay marriage is soon going to sound like Flat Earth proponents) and to some extent of migration is here to stay - political preference, I am less sure.
I disagree.
Peoples' views are not set in stone when they turn 18.
I gave the example yesterday of young people mp.
The Conservatives finished third among 18 - 34 year olds in February 1974. Now, their clearly in first place among those voters.
Labour led b 20% among 18-34 year olds in 1997. Much the same arguments were advanced that for cultural reasons, this group was lost to the Conservatives for good. Twenty years on, the two parties are level-pegging among people aged 38 - 54, and the same group narrowly voted in favour of Brexit.
Most voters become wiser as they become older.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
You learn things in black and white, and right and wrong, as a child, and have little personal experience to leverage to define yourself independently when you become a teenager, which you - socially - desperately want to do, so you tend to leverage what you do know: the views of your family and school. And perhaps a little bit of personal research and reading on top for a minority.
As you grow older, and experience the real world, you develop your own views. That mostly tends toward shades of grey and realism, but not always.
As you get older and generally get married and start a family and own property and acquire assets you also tend to get more conservative and want to preserve what you have rather than change the world
And the problem for the Conservatives there is ensuring that young people can acquire assets.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
That is the common view but an alternative theory that as voters age, they remain conservative for the radical views of their youth, as real life moves to the left. A pensioner now might well have marched for abortion rights, equal pay for women and to ban race discrimination. Now those questions are settled. If people really do move to the right as they age, why is there no clamour for women to be paid less than men?
The conventional view is just comfort food for those on the right.
And for those on the left who say Ukippers are just coffin-dodgers hankering for the days of empire -- but of course no-one is really wanting to recolonise sub-Saharan Africa.
Yet, the US example I gave suggests otherwise. If anything, the current Republican party is to the right of where it was under Nixon. It's much more hostile to abortion and affirmative action and trade unions than it was in 1972, yet left wing voters from 1972 voted for Trump in 2016.
Nixon is the President most similar to Trump, in my view.
Yes, very interesting and important piece with implications both for long-term political change and short-term betting. A key passage which is not evidenced is:
"There is no good reason to believe the generation that has come of age in the last 25 years is going to change its world view as it grows older. Those whose life s tolerance of diversity (opposing gay marriage is soon going to sound like Flat Earth proponents) and to some extent of migration is here to stay - political preference, I am less sure.
I disagree.
Peoples' views are not set in stone when they turn 18.
I gave the example yesterday of young people mp.
The Conservatives finished third among 18 - 34 year olds in February 1974. Now, their clearly in first place among those voters.
Labour led b 20% among 18-34 year olds in 1997. Much the same arguments were advanced that for cultural reasons, this group was lost to the Conservatives for good. Twenty years on, the two parties are level-pegging among people aged 38 - 54, and the same group narrowly voted in favour of Brexit.
Most voters become wiser as they become older.
Most voters are more left-wing when young, swing voters when middle aged and conservative when they get to retirement age
You learn things in black and white, and right and wrong, as a child, and have little personal experience to leverage to define yourself independently when you become a teenager, which you - socially - desperately want to do, so you tend to leverage what you do know: the views of your family and school. And perhaps a little bit of personal research and reading on top for a minority.
As you grow older, and experience the real world, you develop your own views. That mostly tends toward shades of grey and realism, but not always.
As you get older and generally get married and start a family and own property and acquire assets you also tend to get more conservative and want to preserve what you have rather than change the world
And the problem for the Conservatives there is ensuring that young people can acquire assets.
Otherwise, it is really is finished.
Well they will still inherit but yes acquiring assets and buying hones is important to Tories
Basically if you have 2 children of the same sex over 16 or 2 children of different sex over 10 sharing a bedroom the family is homeless in that they are living in severely overcrowded conditions.
Turns out I was homeless until, well, I left home.
Comments
There’s a bit in 2005 where Farage rants at Blair, who simply responds its 2005 not 1945 because he thinks thats a sufficient argument. And perhaps it was then, but it wasn’t in 2016.
Another is that in our youth we have little investment in the status quo and are therefore more likely to want to change things so as to be able to take advantage of our adaptability, so we vote for progressive parties. As we become older, wealthier and more settled, we don't want anyone upsetting the apple cart any longer, and so we tend towards the conservative.
The Brexit and UKIP and Corbyn votes have all been a bit of a rebellion against the Blairite/Cleggite/Cameroon socially liberal and fiscally conservative consensus of the last two decades
https://www.bmreports.com/bmrs/?q=eds/main
Was -2, but -11 with windchill. I encountered four polite young ladies (who thanked me as a held the hound to one side whilst they passed) off for some sledging. Seems bonkers to me, but there we are.
F1: McLaren have done over 100 laps today.
Livefeed here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/formula1/43190407
The delays in the Government taking this decision are becoming embarrassing. Ther eis no political downside - Labour are saying they would do it. Yes, the Swansea barrage requires a price equivalent to that for nuclear. But the much bigger Cardiff one is at a significant discount - maybe 75%-80% the price of nuclear.
new thread
If you mean the c.25-30% of Labour voters that voted Leave, then I doubt a passionate europhile argument would have made much impact on them.
It's possible that an alternative Labour leader, like Andy Burnham, rather than Corbyn, would have been much clearer on Labour's view, leading to a narrow Remain win, but that's not certain either.
In truth, I think each generation wants to fix things, change a bit, and move things on, whilst also keeping things more broadly more or less stable, and recognisably the same.
Otherwise, it is really is finished.
http://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/repairs/overcrowding
http://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/housing_benefit/what_is_local_housing_allowance_lha
Basically if you have 2 children of the same sex over 16 or 2 children of different sex over 10 sharing a bedroom the family is homeless in that they are living in severely overcrowded conditions.
Turns out I was homeless until, well, I left home.