Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget the 70s, new voters can’t even remember the 90s
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget the 70s, new voters can’t even remember the 90s
We’ve seen a plenty column inches devoted to Ed Miliband wanting to take Britain back to the 1970s by committing to freeze energy prices for two years. The title of Dominic Sandbrook’s article in the Daily Mail, ‘Miliband’s Marxist father and the real reason he wants us to drag us back to the nightmare 70s’ has a full house in the bingo game seeminlgy played by right wing journalists.
-1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
:llok-towards-the-bright-side-master-walker...:
On topic, I wish Henry was wrong but unfortunately I don't think he is - there hasn't been anything like enough time to repair the damage caused by the last Labour government for us to withstand the damage another one will do so soon.
Henry might go on about targeting the demographic who would have been LibDem in the past. But I still can't for the life of me think why Ed Miliband is going for the demographic who would have been Socialist Worker in the past....
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister.
From that I gather you find the analogy of Ed’s leftward lurch back to the 70’s as ‘problematic’ ?
The delete function is a cruel thing.....
Barring a major cockup by the Tories, Bland the Younger will never be PM of the UK.
Whether it's a good policy or not ( I don't know, either way), Milliband's energy price freeze is bound to be popular, after all, who doesn't moan about the cost of running a house?
At the least, it makes Milliband appear that he knows what make the public tick, never a bad thing for the LOTO.
It's interesting also that recent polling has suggested that the under 30s are less pro Labour than they were.
My final point would be this, the voters who do remember the 1970s, are the older voters, if you're going to 60 in 2015, you would have been 23 in 1978 during the winter of discontent.
Now which of these voters are more likely to vote?
There may be lots of voters who are too young to recall it - but the older ones vote more frequently and also pass on our influence to others as grey beards. And of course the Left are still dancing on Thatcher's grave.
You can't have it both ways. Grabbing privately owned land, price fixing and State intervention is deeply repellent to many of us who did vote for Tony but who recoiled from Michael Foot.
The comparison between Foot's manifesto and EdM's is rather too close for comfort. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100237733/milibands-cunning-plan-republish-labours-1983-manifesto/
Fluffy, I never, ever understand a damned thing that you post.
On the "moneyball" point I think there is something in the Nate Silver comparison. The pundits always want a close race that could go either way, even when objectively it's not what the evidence shows. The objective indicators right now are pointing at the closest to a tie for the popular vote, but even that makes Ed Miliband PM. To the extent that punters let themselves get drawn in by the media narratives as well as the numbers, that puts the value on the Labour / Labour-NOM side.
The 80s, on the other hand, was the time of my life. Dad had a decent job, the council house had a Parkray boiler and central heating, we had colour TV, clothes were great, I had a David Sylvian hairstyle, music was brilliant, and I discovered girls, drinking, and computer games. Happy days.
The Bank of England's Financial Policy Committee has issued a statement on the housing market following its recent policy meeting.
The key section is as follows:
In the United Kingdom, the continued recovery of the banking sector had been associated with a further easing in credit conditions. Against that backdrop, the recovery in the housing market appeared to have gained momentum and to be broadening. Mortgage approvals in July were 30% higher than a year earlier and average house prices in August were 5% higher than a year earlier and had risen more in some parts of the country, particularly London.
Nevertheless, activity in the housing market and loan-to-value ratios on new mortgage lending remained below their historic averages. Households’ debt servicing costs were low and the ratio of house prices to earnings was at its level of a decade ago.
In view of that, the Committee judged that it should closely monitor developments in the housing market and banks' underwriting standards. The Committee would be vigilant to potential emerging vulnerabilities.
The Committee noted that if risks to the stability of the financial system were to emerge from the housing market, both it and the microprudential regulators had a range of tools available to address those risks. These included, amongst others, supervisory guidance on underwriting standards, sectoral capital requirements and recommendations to the regulators on tightening of affordability tests.
The Committee agreed that, if it became necessary to deploy its tools, they would be used in a way that was proportionate to the risks and consistent with a graduated response.
[to be continued...]
The Bank of England has also agreed with the Treasury that the FPC will conduct a formal review of the Help to Buy schemes every September and that any extension to the schemes beyond their planned three year term will require prior FPC approval. The recent statement by the BoE follows this year's FPC review and there is unlikely to be any further comment by the BoE before Help to Buy moves into its next phase on 1st January 2014.
The conclusion of all this officialese is that the BoE has given the Help to Buy scheme a clean bill of health. The Bank has reassured market and political critics by establishing a regular review process and by highlighting their powers and options to control credit supply and lending policy if conditions in the housing market start to present an unacceptable financial risk.
For anyone looking at the current mortgage lending statistics (from the CML, BBA and BoE) would immediate agree with Danny Alexander that "we are a million miles away from a housing bubble". For example, the BBA reported new mortgage lending in August to be £9.3 billion matched by an equivalent £9.3 billion of capital repayments. So far this year, net lending has fallen by -£1.6 bn. This should be compared to average annual increases in net lending between 2001-07 of £57.3 bn.
Jobs and money were aplenty. We had great films, great music and scruffy haircuts, bars were full from Thursday to Sunday and there was a real sense of optimism about the place. And I viewed a three bed house which cost £28,000.
I remember doing two weeks in Magaluf for £300. And only spending £500 out there, most of it on my back surrounded by beautiful young women. Having breakfast and a pint for 3 pesetas.
What happened to those days when we could afford stuff?
Then the noughties began. Labour started spending money we hadn't earned yet, 9/11 happened, the Mail got nastier, footballers started costing zillions, bling and fake tans arrived and the internet stole all our time and sense of serenity.
I'd take the 90s over now any day of the week.
What his argument boils down is that IF Labour keep their 2010 voters (allowing for death churn) AND get 6.5% from the LibDems AND get 1% from the Tories they'll get 40% and therefore a nice majority.
Whilst it makes a pleasant change to find a Labour supporter who can do basic arithmetic, albeit on vote shares if not on the public finances, this is a very long-winded way of stating the obvious. But we don't need to state the obvious, we can just look at the opinion polls, which currently show Labour doing a shade worse than this, and with the lead sliding by 1% a month over the last five months. If Labour can stop this slide and do as well as, or a bit better than, the polls are currently showing, they'll get a majority. If, on the other hand, the trend continues and there's a bit more swingback as the reality of the 2015 choice comes into focus, they won't.
Of course everyone knows that the cards are stacked heavily in Labour's favour. But extrapolating from polls now to 2015 as though nothing is likely to change in the interim is an extrapolation too far.
Good to see there are still reasons to visit PB if you're interested in betting on politics.
More Government intervention + Larger Public Sector vs Welfare Cuts and an EC referendum
The centre and right wing newspapers (FT, Mail, Times, Sun), have in the past decades flirted with Labour, but they do remember the 1970s and even with a diminished influence they could mount a major effort against Red Ed and his motley crew.
But Labour still have to get through the Scottish referendum.
Tesco has withdrawn an inflatable figure labelled "gay best friend" and apologised for selling it.
It comes a day after the retailer was forced to remove a Halloween costume called "Psycho Ward" from its shelves after it sparked widespread criticism. On its website Tesco said "The Inflatable g*y Best Friend" was suitable for children aged three to four and was an "amusing gift".
"If SEX in the City and Will & Grace taught us anything, it's that g*y best friends are in this season," the description of the product said. "We've had the manbag, we've had leg warmers and iPhone fever, now it's time for the new craze.
"Although not much can be said for his own attire, your Inflatable g*y Best Friend is ready to give you fashion advice, tell you if your bum looks big and b**ch about everyone who doesn't wear Jimmy Choo's." A Tesco spokesperson said: "This product was uploaded to the website by a third party seller but was removed from sale immediately because we found it offensive.
Porpoise.
I know many people on here can't understand it because Lab got a majority of 66 with a 3% vote lead in 2005 but that is what Kellner thinks.
Now Kellner may be wrong but I suspect he is a better judge of this than anyone posting on here.
And I suspect that one thing most people on here would agree about is that Lab getting a vote lead of 7% in 2015 is not odds on.
Kellner analysis:
http://labourmajority.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Majority-Rules1.pdf
Andy Bell @andybell5news
Lib Dem source; plan to help those who have been out of work for 2 years with compulsory work prog "has been agreed" in government @5_News
Why would the right-wing Press denounce Blairism as 70's socialism?
"The Evening Standard reports on Conservative plans to restrict trade union power. They cover reducing taxpayer subsidies to the trade unions and preventing strikes unless at least 40 per cent of members have taken part in the ballot approving it.
The plans, for a post-2015 Conservative government, will be signalled by chairman Grant Shapps when he accuses Labour leader Ed Miliband of caving in to union pressure to drop reform.
It details the plans as follows:
Requiring unions to be charged a full commercial rent for using public buildings and facilities.
Ending the right to free time off for trade union duties, including for “pilgrims” who work as full-time union officials at the taxpayers’ expense.
Banning “check-off” of fees from salaries, which some public sector unions use to maintain membership.
Increasing the threshold before a union can apply for statutory recognition from 10 per cent of a workforce to 30 per cent.
Insisting that strike ballots do not count unless at least 40 per cent of members vote for it.
Axing taxpayer funding of the Union Learning Fund, currently £15.5 million, which pays for union officials to be trained.
>>http://www.conservativehome.com/leftwatch/2013/09/new-laws-planned-to-cut-strikes-and-union-subsidies-but-will-the-lib-dems-block-them.html
.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/08/22/history-suggests-the-tories-will-see-their-share-of-the-vote-decline-in-2015-2/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPe8ge6pS6I
Takes me back to my youth, and skiving off school to attend parties near Nottingham. ;-)
No wonder Dave is planning for a second coalition rather than planning for an outright majority.
TSE"
Err I said Bet (Meaning Back) Not Lay TSE ^^;
Lab Maj +265
NOM, Lab Most Seats +629
NOM, Con Most Seats +457
Con Maj +562
That excludes some bets on individual constituencies and bets on other markets such as SNP and LibDem seat totals. You do have to be a bit careful to take into account the correlations between all the various bets to make sure you're not more exposed to any particular scenario than you might think at first sight.
Scotland votes for Independence next year, and Dave passes legislation removing Scottish voters and constituencies from the 2015 General Election?
I'm "Balls deep" (for tse) in to Tory Maj (plus a bit on NOM).... using my winnings from Maria in Eastleigh....oops or not on that one!
In this context it is worth pondering the voters from the 1992 general election. The youngest eligible to vote in that election will be 41 by the time of the 2015 general election, and anyone who was already in their fifties would now be in their seventies.
Anyone eligible to vote in 1979 will be 54 or older by 2015. They will make up about 28.3% of the eligible electorate.
All that said I completely disagree with Henry's conclusion that a Labour majority is an odds-on likelihood. Another Hung Parliament is, in my view, overwhelmingly likely.
It's a bit early to be getting overerly excited about individual seats but one small word of warning. NickP (of this parish) is no shoo-in for Broxtowe, despite odds of 1/3 suggesting otherwise. He's the more likely winner, for sure, but 4/6 would be much nearer the mark.
A word to the wise...OK?
HenryG's argument is that, provided Labour are guaranteed a majority in 2015, the party and its leader has a licence to pursue policies which have been proved by academic theory and historical experience to damage the economy.
And that, notwithstanding such policies, the party will be elected because voters are too young to remember the mistakes of the past and the discrediting of socialism.
And that those political commentators who bear witness to past mistakes and who speak out today to warn us today are "out of touch with public understanding and sentiment".
We don't need to go back to 1997 or the 1970s to recognise the evil in this argument: it is no more than McBridist lack of moral principle continuing to course through the veins of Labour's body politic.
Miliband's policies to impose price controls on the energy industry and to incent house building through land confiscation are wrong because they conflict with economic law and have been shown to fail when implemented in the past.
Henry. The policies are wrong. Miliband knows that. We know that. Almost all economists and political commentators know that. But you argue that he is justified in promising to implement them because the electorate is too young to realise they are wrong and that he will win the election anyway.
What happened to the moral compass, Henry?
Just imagine what would happen, if say Ed were to get a majority in 2015, but that majority gets wiped out in May 2016, when Scotland finally leaves.
When I say “people”, I actually mean those commentators, MPs and activists who could broadly be described as the soft Left. People like me, in fact. I think Polly Toynbee started it. The basic thrust of her line of questioning was: “OK, we know Tony is quite Left-wing really, but he keeps confusing the issue by talking and acting in this Right-wing way. So when will the Left-wing bit of him start to assert itself?”
The trouble was, it didn’t. So a new argument was constructed to reassure ourselves everything was going to be OK. Labour's strategy was to “talk Right, but act Left”. Tony would carry on saying lots of fairly Right-wing things, but that would just be cover to enable him to do lots of Left-wing things when no one was looking.
But he didn’t. As his premiership went on, and as we got further away from the first term manifesto, Tony kept talking Right and acting Right. > http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238405/when-ed-miliband-said-he-planned-to-bring-back-socialism-it-wasnt-a-slip-of-the-tongue/
I may disagree with most of what Henry says and with his conclusions but the idea that Mike only brings him out as a 'yes man' is idiotic. Henry has a long standing slot on the site and uses it to put his own particular Labour supporting slant on the threads. Almost everyone recognises that and accepts it.
If the idea is to stimulate discussion and keep the site ticking along merrily then I would say Henry is a great success.
And as I mentioned. I say that from a position of disagreeing with most of what he normally writes.
(Edited for a typo)
Would Dave be able to get that through?
Discoveries is an exhibition about imagination and knowledge, about the pleasures of looking, and the power of objects to generate wonder as well as new ideas. Presenting singular objects and unearthing little-known treasures in the extraordinary interiors of Two Temple Place on London’s Embankment, Discoveries is the first major exhibition to bring together the fascinating collections of the eight University of Cambridge Museums.
...
The exhibition challenges and responds to the very notion of ‘discovery’ as it explores the limits as well as the frontiers of knowledge and the connections between visionary thinking and scientifically- observed vision. The ornate and atmospheric spaces of Two Temple Place are cabinets of curiosities, displaying objects that span millennia, from the majestic to the minuscule: Charles Darwin’s recently re-discovered Tinamou Egg, the only surviving egg from the HMS Beagle voyage, accidentally cracked by Darwin himself; a surprising juxtaposition of art works from the First Millennium BC to the present day; and rare zoological specimens such as a complete skeleton of a dodo.
Visitors are invited to experience the exhibits as peculiar objects with stories to be unravelled and to encounter the idea of museums, not just as repositories of things, but active places of learning and revelation. 19th Century religious prints attempt to counteract the progress of science by demonstrating the Earth as the centre of the universe, while Inuit snow goggles crafted from wood point the way towards today’s polarised version. Historic instruments sit alongside cutting edge technology — The Discovery telescope used in Victorian explorations to the North and South Poles, and which in 1984 was taken aboard the Space Shuttle ‘Discovery’ travelling some 2.5 million miles, keeps company with the ‘Triwizard Tournament’ Digital Optical module, a ground-breaking instrument at the forefront of 21st Century cosmological and astrophysical polar research.
Maybe they are out of touch ,but how do you explain why the majority of voters don't believe any of Ed's pledges will happen,could it be that the Labour party is out of touch?
'Widespread scepticism over Labour pledges - YouGov
yougov.co.uk/news/2013/09/.../widespread-scepticism-over-labour-pledges...
1 day ago - Only a minority of voters – including a minority of Labour voters in some cases – think the Labour party will acheive the goals outlined in Ed ...
Your comment only makes sense if spoken in a Scouser accent.
THere was a fascinating documentary on TV recently whose theme was that Thatcherism was the child of the 70s, not the 80s. It was in the former that the people of Britain started to get wealthier, more educated, more ambitious etc. and saw the left as standing in their way.
The most most perceptive comic creation of the 1970s wasn;t Fletcher or Reggie Perrin, it was Margo Leadbeater.
Everybody sniggered, but tomorrow belonged to her.
'Scotland votes for Independence next year, and Dave passes legislation removing Scottish voters and constituencies from the 2015 General Election? '
Why would you have people participating in an election in a country they had just chosen to leave?
Well said, Richard.
Sean Fear used to contribute similarly from the right and was equally well respected.
Sadly, I agree with Mr. Manson that Labour remains in the best position for electoral success.
73% of PBTories employ their butlers on less than the minimum wage. Fact.
OMG imagine the parliament in the interim under that arrangement.....doesn't bear thinking about.
http://www.euractiv.com/eu-elections-2014/german-elections-put-martin-schu-news-530636?utm_source=EurActiv Newsletter&utm_campaign=fbf258d09d-newsletter_weekly_update&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-fbf258d09d-245514803
'Parliament still represents the whole of the UK till Independence day, which would be at the earliest March 2016'
Westminster would represent the rest of the UK and the Scottish parliament Scotland.
Now, I pretty much believe that the consequences of the current government's policies look a bit like what I've outlined above, but I'm happy to accept that many of the individuals concerned genuinely and passionately believe that those policies produce the best (or least worst) outcome for the most people. In the same way, I'm sure you genuinely believe that when you put forward such policies. I'm surprised that you wouldn't give similar credit to your opponents: surely fairer to believe that they are sincerely, passionately and altruistically wrong, rather than dishonest. It seems a bit arrogant and a lot misanthropic to believe that everyone who expresses disagreement with those beliefs is actually lying, that they're secretly in agreement with you, but suppressing their true understanding of economics in order to pursue their own selfish ends.
Chris Williamson @WilliamsonChris
UK recovering as private sector job worries lowest since pre-crisis & public sector has recovered from 2010 shock twitpic.com/df4jpc
It made me reflect, and it seems that for me each decade brought something new and exciting as it still does today. In my late teens, it was exploring my options and new experiences away from family, in my twenties it was employment, marriage, children, house-owner, being an inventor but losing my father. In my thirties, it was part of the commercial world, living in central America and the Caribbean and then sub-Saharan Africa whilst running the international business of a global operation. In my forties, becoming financially independent as was given shares in oil-fields in return for technical and commercial advice. In my fifties it was getting involved with European politics, World Bank and UN. In my sixties, back to science and technology. But best of all it is the people I have met - both rulers and the poverty-stricken - and now it is my grandchildren who have my focus.
Labour Govt lasting a year. Man, they would have to shake that money tree in that year!
'OMG imagine the parliament in the interim under that arrangement.....doesn't bear thinking about.'
Would be absurd,make the West Lothian question look like petty cash.
But the greater problem would be that we could have Scotsmen on both sides of the negotiating table.
Still, let's hope No wins and we don't end up with that immoral, indefensible situation. [If Yes wins I'd expect the SNP north of the border and Conservatives south of it to benefit greatly].
On a side note, Labour's devolution plan to kill nationalism stone dead is working terribly well, isn't it?
1. Labour's failure - and EdM's failure as the cabinet minister responsible means that we don't have enough power generation capability in the country
2. We are taking steps to try and fix that as quickly as we can
3. To do that needs stable conditions: we need to convince companies to invest
4. EdM is just playing politics - putting the country's future at risk for personal gain
Labour would do the math and weep. The departure of their scotsmen would make a tory majority at some time almost inevitable, followed quickly be a redrawing of boundaries along the lines the tories want. We then have the possibility of a government that would make Douglas Carswell look like a soaking wet pinko.
What would really set the cat amongst the pigeons is if labour tried to use their scotsmen to redraw a constitution for England ahead of any election, to ensure they stayed in the game down here.
Item 4 is the standard politician's reply to any proposal by their opponent which appears popular. Makes the current supporters happy, but doesn't really change anybody's mind.
The reality though may not be as simple as adding the two together. In yesterday’s poll we also asked people to imagine that Ukip and the Conservatives agreed a pact at the next general election where they would not stand against each other, with Ukip backing the Conservative candidate in most constituencies and the Conservatives backing the Ukip candidate in a small number of constituencies. We then asked how they’d vote under those circumstances. Once you’ve taken out the don’t knows and wouldn’t votes, the new Conservative/Ukip alliance would be on 35 percent of the vote (up just two points on their current support), Labour would be on 45 percent (up five points on their current support), the Liberal Democrats on 11 percent (up two points), 9 percent of people would vote for other parties (down eight points).
So what goes wrong, how does 33 plus 11 equal only 35? >> http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/why-a-toryukip-alliance-would-benefit-labour/
I filled the car today (at Tesco), and I noticed the price had dropped below the crucial £1.30 a litre. I remember seeing (on here) a graph associating petrol prices with government approval. If so, that could be more important than jam tomorrow promises from the LOTO.
Although it might be cynical, you can't blame Milli for trying it on. It's one of the few ways for a LOTO to get headlines.
The tories have decided to agree with Ed Miliband that energy is too expensive if Michael Gove's comments are anything to go by. Its not a bad strategy.