politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast: Housing policy could decide the next General Election
On this week’s PB / Polling Matters podcast, Keiran Pedley and Matt Singh look at recent polling by Matt on behalf of Shelter and ask ‘what’s going on in the marginals’ and ‘How important is housing politically?’
Edited extra bit: I'd want to consult a map, but I'm not necessarily sure I buy Williamson's argument, to be honest.
IANAE on GPS, but it wouldn't surprise me if Williamson was correct. For instance, Russia recently opened a ground station for Glosnass in Nicaragua, and another in SA.
Probably for the same reason that NASA has ground stations for space comms around the world, including famously in Australia.
Second - Can someone post the thread again so I get to have another go at being first?
What if we promised you a somewhat different thread, covering the same sort of theme but asking a subtly different question, and with 3 years of new information to hand quite a bit of which flatly contracted the earlier thread.
Would you pass up the chance of commenting First?
No deal Brexit pretty much invalidates 99% of what Leavers of all persuasions told us would be the case in 2016 and any residual legitimacy their prospectusses had would be shot.
F1: planning and chatting going on to change qualifying to a four part format. Because what F1 needs to do now is dick around with one aspect that works fine and ignore all the significant problems of coverage, audiences declining, sponsorship, financial equality, and difficulty overtaking.
As an aside, viewers may recall the last time they tried changing qualifying. Everybody said it was stupid. And it turned out to be very stupid. I'm hopeful they won't be quite so delinquent again, but we'll see.
F1: planning and chatting going on to change qualifying to a four part format. Because what F1 needs to do now is dick around with one aspect that works fine and ignore all the significant problems of coverage, audiences declining, sponsorship, financial equality, and difficulty overtaking.
As an aside, viewers may recall the last time they tried changing qualifying. Everybody said it was stupid. And it turned out to be very stupid. I'm hopeful they won't be quite so delinquent again, but we'll see.
It's not as stupid as the last attempt but is another one where they are trying to find a means for a driver in a top 3 team to fail to get to final qualifying....
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
What do you mean a couple of hours? We found some whilst he was still speaking.
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
He started out very well but it became tedious and faded.
In the last two days, Hunt, Javid and Boris have all underwhelmed
Looks as if TM is going to continue for quite some time
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
He started out very well but it became tedious and faded.
In the last two days, Hunt, Javid and Boris have all underwhelmed
Looks as if TM is going to continue for quite some time
So, a couple of hours after delivering his speech it turns out that Johnson got some basic details wrong and told lies about the EU. Whoever would have thought it?
He started out very well but it became tedious and faded.
In the last two days, Hunt, Javid and Boris have all underwhelmed
Looks as if TM is going to continue for quite some time
Before handing over to Raab.
Maybe but it is no clearer after today just who her successor will be
No but he's asking based on a story in the Times this weekend (can't remember if it was in Saturday or Sundays) where a sister had to pay tax to inherit the family home she had always lived in with her sister.
now its a rare example but a not totally unheard of issue...
(From the previous thread) The perception of Corbyn's view of Brexit is in fact quite damaging to him. In general people are much more likely to believe that his position is the opposite of their own position, even though the numbers supporting Leave and Remain are almost equal. Given that the art of politics is persuading people that you share their concerns, that is a remarkable failure of political messaging.
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
Mr. Glenn, to be fair, Willetts has been a bit silly for some time. I still recall his inane plan to tackle intergenerational unfairness by increasing inheritance tax (he may also have been in favour of higher taxes on the elderly. Can't recall if that daftness was his or another's).
(From the previous thread) The perception of Corbyn's view of Brexit is in fact quite damaging to him. In general people are much more likely to believe that his position is the opposite of their own position, even though the numbers supporting Leave and Remain are almost equal. Given that the art of politics is persuading people that you share their concerns, that is a remarkable failure of political messaging.
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
That’s worth going up on a thread header.
Maybe titled ‘People more distrustful of Corbyn than May on Beexit’
(From the previous thread) The perception of Corbyn's view of Brexit is in fact quite damaging to him. In general people are much more likely to believe that his position is the opposite of their own position, even though the numbers supporting Leave and Remain are almost equal. Given that the art of politics is persuading people that you share their concerns, that is a remarkable failure of political messaging.
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
Edited extra bit: I'd want to consult a map, but I'm not necessarily sure I buy Williamson's argument, to be honest.
IANAE on GPS, but it wouldn't surprise me if Williamson was correct. For instance, Russia recently opened a ground station for Glosnass in Nicaragua, and another in SA.
Probably for the same reason that NASA has ground stations for space comms around the world, including famously in Australia.
My understanding, and I too am not an expert, is this:
All three positioning systems (the US's GPS, China's BeiDou and Russia's Glonass) work with satellites that broadcast the time. This means that if you look at the differences in time of signals recieved you can triangulate your position.
This does not require ground stations.
However, it is common to have A-GPS, or assisted GPS, type systems where - in addition to the satellites - there are ground stations that broadcast the time too. This enables a greater level of accuracy than just using the satellites alone. The more signals you can triangulate off, the more detail you have. Furthermore, it adds redundancy. Satellites have problems that cannot be easily fixed ground stations do not.
If Gallileo lost Diego Garcia, the Falklands and the other place, then it would degrade the accuracy and resiliency of the system. However, it is not like these are the only places where you can put ground stations - its simply that the middle of the sea is where there are fewest options.
In the Indian Ocean, there are a number of alternatives (whether Reunion or the Maldives or any number of alternatives), so the loss of Diego Garcia is probably no big deal. Likewise, in the Pacific, there are a lot of options. The South Atlantic is probably the place where there would be the biggest impact - but, again, there's no reason why you couldn't do Southern Chile or Argentina.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
So what. It does not matter who backs it you need to showchowcit would happen
Also it is not certain who would win
Binary choice: Ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or Revoke Article 50. It's the right thing to do and whoever wins, it will legitimise the outcome.
Having a WTO Brexit would mean we don't want to ratify the Withdrawal Agreement (paying money to he EU) nor revoke Article 50 (which is not ours to revoke).
(From the previous thread) The perception of Corbyn's view of Brexit is in fact quite damaging to him. In general people are much more likely to believe that his position is the opposite of their own position, even though the numbers supporting Leave and Remain are almost equal. Given that the art of politics is persuading people that you share their concerns, that is a remarkable failure of political messaging.
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
That’s worth going up on a thread header.
Maybe titled ‘People more distrustful of Corbyn than May on Beexit’
Though it also should be weighted by how much the subject determines their vote. Strangely, there are a fair number of people bothered either way.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
IANAE on GPS, but it wouldn't surprise me if Williamson was correct. For instance, Russia recently opened a ground station for Glosnass in Nicaragua, and another in SA.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
(From the previous thread) The perception of Corbyn's view of Brexit is in fact quite damaging to him. In general people are much more likely to believe that his position is the opposite of their own position, even though the numbers supporting Leave and Remain are almost equal. Given that the art of politics is persuading people that you share their concerns, that is a remarkable failure of political messaging.
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
That’s worth going up on a thread header.
Maybe titled ‘People more distrustful of Corbyn than May on Beexit’
The Government are certainly pushing house building targets on councils to be met through Local Plans which should help them in marginal seats at the next general election. However it is annoying their core vote in the Home Counties shires especially in council elections
So what. It does not matter who backs it you need to showchowcit would happen
Also it is not certain who would win
Binary choice: Ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or Revoke Article 50. It's the right thing to do and whoever wins, it will legitimise the outcome.
Having a WTO Brexit would mean we don't want to ratify the Withdrawal Agreement (paying money to he EU) nor revoke Article 50 (which is not ours to revoke).
I disagree with you here. I think it doesn't matter so much (in terms of medium term economic growth) what kind of Brexit we have, but it does matter that we have an orderly transition to it.
So, we need to negotiate bilateral corporate tax treaties with the EU-27 during a transition period, for example, and to ensure that (as much as possible) existing EU trading arrangements are replicated.
IANAE on GPS, but it wouldn't surprise me if Williamson was correct. For instance, Russia recently opened a ground station for Glosnass in Nicaragua, and another in SA.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
The proposal on a Customs Union is not for a final deal but to resolve the Irish backstop issue for a withdrawal agreement and transition period.
Even if the ERG and DUP oppose it I think enough Labour and LD backbenchers could support it to get the transition period
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
Polling shows Remain v Leave is still neck and neck but Remain v Leave with No Deal sees Remain have at least a 10% lead
Mr. Recidivist, whether you're referring to Lucius Junius Brutus or Marcus Junius Brutus (founder of the republic and assassin of Caesar, respectively), it's unfair on Brutus.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
The proposal on a Customs Union is not for a final deal but to resolve the Irish backstop issue for a withdrawal agreement and transition period.
Even if the ERG and DUP oppose it I think enough Labour and LD backbenchers could support it to get the transition period
Lab, could easily support a Customs Union
Dont think May can survive one as leader of Tories though
I'm sure many of you have heard of the game "bullshit bingo" which is a way to liven up meetings at corporate events. Perhaps they could have done a similar thing with Boris speech. Spot the deliberate or accidental inaccuracy and shout bingo when you get a full-house. It wouldn't take long, the lying little bastard.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
In fairness to her she is putting herself about a lot more this Conference than we have seen before. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews, even if they are all on the BBC.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
We're talking about May, Hammond et al. They have trouble walking in a straight line. The idea that May is some kind of political Moriarty with an infeasibly cunning plan for reverse-ferreting the UK back into the EU is, in my view, wishful thinking of the first water.
In fairness to her she is putting herself about a lot more this Conference than we have seen before. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews, even if they are all on the BBC.
What the podcast makes clear is that the section by Boris today on housing was spot on in identifying the issue which could resolve the next election. Generation rent need homes and they need them now. There has been a modest pick up in housebuilding but it is nothing like what the situation requires: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-house-building
Getting home ownership climbing again really should be a priority for the government.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
We're talking about May, Hammond et al. They have trouble walking in a straight line. The idea that May is some kind of political Moriarty with an infeasibly cunning plan for reverse-ferreting the UK back into the EU is, in my view, wishful thinking of the first water.
William will believe anything if it is anti Brexit. He's been sent mad by it. I reckon he is Andrew Adonis.
In fairness to her she is putting herself about a lot more this Conference than we have seen before. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews, even if they are all on the BBC.
Hasn't she just done one on Sky?
Didn't see it. There was some tweet earlier that she had done 20 interviews with BBC journalists and none with ITV or C4. If that is true she is doing a lot more interviews than in previous years.
Can anyone with a straight face say the Tories aren't completely bonkers?
They're queuing up to eulogize Boris.
It's a sign of the times, Roger me old lad. Basically, the Tories are wank, Labour are wank and the Lib Dems haven't got a decent wank in them. I don't have the foggiest where we go from here. Brexit might well be a shiteshow, but it pales into insignificance compared to the dismal standard of the motley gangs who want to be our leaders through it.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
In fairness to her she is putting herself about a lot more this Conference than we have seen before. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews, even if they are all on the BBC.
Hasn't she just done one on Sky?
Didn't see it. There was some tweet earlier that she had done 20 interviews with BBC journalists and none with ITV or C4. If that is true she is doing a lot more interviews than in previous years.
I wonder if May has the balls to say in her speech tomorrow that she's not willing to stand down before the next election. Newsnight was claming a few weeks ago (via "sources") that she was considering saying it.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
We're talking about May, Hammond et al. They have trouble walking in a straight line. The idea that May is some kind of political Moriarty with an infeasibly cunning plan for reverse-ferreting the UK back into the EU is, in my view, wishful thinking of the first water.
William will believe anything if it is anti Brexit. He's been sent mad by it. I reckon he is Andrew Adonis.
I had an inkling that William was mildly fond of the EU. But some straws are too frail to be grasped and May having any political nous is such a one.
Can anyone with a straight face say the Tories aren't completely bonkers?
They're queuing up to eulogize Boris.
It's a sign of the times, Roger me old lad. Basically, the Tories are wank, Labour are wank and the Lib Dems haven't got a decent wank in them. I don't have the foggiest where we go from here. Brexit might well be a shiteshow, but it pales into insignificance compared to the dismal standard of the motley gangs who want to be our leaders through it.
It is a function of the "I don't do politics" malaise which has infected much of the West. Moderate people have decided they don't do politics, and have left politics to those on the extreme left and the extreme right who like to "do us" in more ways than a sex worker with a revised edition of the Kama Sutra
In fairness to her she is putting herself about a lot more this Conference than we have seen before. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews, even if they are all on the BBC.
Hasn't she just done one on Sky?
Didn't see it. There was some tweet earlier that she had done 20 interviews with BBC journalists and none with ITV or C4. If that is true she is doing a lot more interviews than in previous years.
Mr. Glenn, second referendum enthusiasts would be wise to make those the options, if they actually get another vote.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
A straight Leave/Remain rerun boils down to those two options anyway, because unless Leave is accompanied by overthrowing the government, it will mean accepting the deal they've negotiated.
They need to have a deal first. If they go for the one recently trailed then the DUP may not like it:
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
All the more reason to jump straight to proposing a referendum. That would neutralise any attempt to bring down the government from any quarter.
But wouldn't proposing one bring down the government anyway?
Not if they get the timing and presentation right. It would instantly transform the political landscape.
We're talking about May, Hammond et al. They have trouble walking in a straight line. The idea that May is some kind of political Moriarty with an infeasibly cunning plan for reverse-ferreting the UK back into the EU is, in my view, wishful thinking of the first water.
William will believe anything if it is anti Brexit. He's been sent mad by it. I reckon he is Andrew Adonis.
I had an inkling that William was mildly fond of the EU. But some straws are too frail to be grasped and May having any political nous is such a one.
He may not be "fond" of the EU at all. He might be like me and recognise that it is far from perfect as an institution, but that Brexit is a collective insanity that is mainly advocated by morons, nationalistic nutjobs and opportunist egotists. (I'll let you guess who falls in the last category).
So, for those who haven't checked the news yet today, how was Boris's speech? Passionate but empty of detail? Surprisingly insightful? A damp squib? Glorified only by the true believers? Has he swayed the doubters?
Can anyone with a straight face say the Tories aren't completely bonkers?
They're queuing up to eulogize Boris.
I come not to praise Boris, but to bury him...
Tories always go for a posh boy with no attention to detail. It is in the genes for them to tug their forelocks to such.
Labour had the same problem at one time. Do you remember Anthony Charles Lynton Blair? And on the left they had Anthony Wedgewood Benn (a family that has done quite well from an hereditary perspective). Even Corbyn went to a private prep school, and then on to one of the top Grammar schools in the country, where he got two Es at A-level. He lived in quite a large Manor House I recall.
Comments
Galileo news:
https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1047029149221699584
Edited extra bit: I'd want to consult a map, but I'm not necessarily sure I buy Williamson's argument, to be honest.
Probably for the same reason that NASA has ground stations for space comms around the world, including famously in Australia.
Mr. Jessop, perhaps.
Would you pass up the chance of commenting First?
No deal Brexit pretty much invalidates 99% of what Leavers of all persuasions told us would be the case in 2016 and any residual legitimacy their prospectusses had would be shot.
As an aside, viewers may recall the last time they tried changing qualifying. Everybody said it was stupid. And it turned out to be very stupid. I'm hopeful they won't be quite so delinquent again, but we'll see.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1047100671579906049
In the last two days, Hunt, Javid and Boris have all underwhelmed
Looks as if TM is going to continue for quite some time
now its a rare example but a not totally unheard of issue...
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/former-tory-cabinet-minister-lord-willetts-backs-second-brexit-referendum-a3951621.html
The detail is this. In YouGov's poll, of those who voted Leave, only 20% believe that Corbyn backs Leave, compared to 51% who believe he backs Remain. That's a net balance of 31% of Leavers who consider he takes the opposite view to theirs. Of those who voted Remain, 40% believe he backs Remain compared to 27% who believe he backs Leave. A net balance of 13% of Remains who consider he takes the same view to theirs. Do the same for May and this is what you get: For Remainers 28% net think that May backs their view, and for Leavers 23% net think that May doesn't back their view.
Overall, for Corbyn, people are more likely to think that he disagrees with their view on Brexit by a margin of around 19% (*). Overall for May, people are more likely to think that she agrees with their view on Brexit by a margin about 4% (*).
[* Note: Weighting slightly to take account of the fact that the number of 2016 leavers in the sample is slightly greater than the number of 2016 remainers.]
Also it is not certain who would win
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45722675
Maybe titled ‘People more distrustful of Corbyn than May on Beexit’
https://news.sky.com/story/dup-demands-theresa-may-comes-clean-over-reported-plan-to-create-border-in-irish-sea-11515343
All three positioning systems (the US's GPS, China's BeiDou and Russia's Glonass) work with satellites that broadcast the time. This means that if you look at the differences in time of signals recieved you can triangulate your position.
This does not require ground stations.
However, it is common to have A-GPS, or assisted GPS, type systems where - in addition to the satellites - there are ground stations that broadcast the time too. This enables a greater level of accuracy than just using the satellites alone. The more signals you can triangulate off, the more detail you have. Furthermore, it adds redundancy. Satellites have problems that cannot be easily fixed ground stations do not.
If Gallileo lost Diego Garcia, the Falklands and the other place, then it would degrade the accuracy and resiliency of the system. However, it is not like these are the only places where you can put ground stations - its simply that the middle of the sea is where there are fewest options.
In the Indian Ocean, there are a number of alternatives (whether Reunion or the Maldives or any number of alternatives), so the loss of Diego Garcia is probably no big deal. Likewise, in the Pacific, there are a lot of options. The South Atlantic is probably the place where there would be the biggest impact - but, again, there's no reason why you couldn't do Southern Chile or Argentina.
It'd depress Leave voter turnout because at least some will be unhappy with the deal (and probably the second vote itself). A straight Remain/Leave re-run would be likelier to go Leave again.
But whatever happens, this will rumble on for decades.
House price inflation is only a good thing for people who have a house to sell and are down sizing.
For people trying to buy a house for the first time or to upsize from their existing house, increased prices make it harder.
Colour me unsurprised...
Next one to back another referendum will be bloody Letwin!
"On Monday, ex-Brexit minister Steve Baker told Sky News that if true, the proposal would probably see the DUP "bring down the government". "
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Navigation/Service_interruption_for_Galileo_system_upgrade
Does look like a bit of a gap wrt the Falklands though - don't think there are any French rocks down there.
Lock Her Up.
So, we need to negotiate bilateral corporate tax treaties with the EU-27 during a transition period, for example, and to ensure that (as much as possible) existing EU trading arrangements are replicated.
Even if the ERG and DUP oppose it I think enough Labour and LD backbenchers could support it to get the transition period
Dont think May can survive one as leader of Tories though
Getting home ownership climbing again really should be a priority for the government.
They're queuing up to eulogize Boris.
A deckhead is a 'ceiling' in a ship. Not quite as amusing as futtocks (type of planks).
Anyway, I must be off.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1047159744593584134
Boris's Brexit Bollix
Tories always go for a posh boy with no attention to detail. It is in the genes for them to tug their forelocks to such.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi abuse blamed on Russian trolls and 'political agendas'.
Report finds half of negative comments aimed at Rian Johnson’s movie came from Twitter bots or trolls, indicating fan backlash was overstated.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/oct/02/star-wars-the-last-jedi-rian-johnson-abuse-politically-motivated-russian-trolls
https://twitter.com/BBCWorld/status/1047029653779697671?s=19
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/former-tory-cabinet-minister-lord-willetts-backs-second-brexit-referendum-a3951621.html
I can't even pronounce 'Khrushchyevka' properly.
Somebody who speaks French, now, comes under automatic suspicion of treason...