I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
Mr. Brooke, will there be an election, or negotiations to try and form something new with existing numbers?
No one knows atm, it all depends on the leaderless SPD. Some of their members want to break the coalition and have new elections as they dont want to support a CDU government on the principle the junior partner suffers. But they will get a kicking based on current polls and probably hand the centre left slot nationally to the Greens. Merkel wants to hang on as long as possible but rumblings at the grass roots want her to go and let a successor fight the next GE.
Odds are they will limp on in office but not in government but its fairly shaky as an administration atm.
It feels like a futile argument as to which party is most broken by Brexit Tory or Labour. Surely the answer is both.
I firmly believe the old duopoly has been smashed by Brexit. For decades we have seen voting largely framed around which side of the Con/Lab divide people see themselves on. That divide is rapidly being utterly eclipsed by the Remain/Leave divide, and as both Con and Lab manage to wriggle and writhe without having a clear position they are being left behind as irrelevant.
That word - irrelevant - should be what scares them both. For a long time the LibDems were irrelevant. It didn't matter who they were or what they said or what policies they enacted - irrelevant. Even in coalition the only thing of note from the LibDems is that their MPs voted more loyally for Tory bills than Tory MPs and the LibDem voters and members hated it.
Now though they have a focus and a purpose - remain. Labour will literally tear itself in half reaching (or not) a clear position on Brexit. The Tories have already scored their own divide and await the crowning of their new leader to rip off the Remain portion.
While that seems a fair analysis, I think Labour is a bit more resilient electorally (simple inertia, rather than anything deserved). It gives them a bit more time to sort themselves out, & as Nick points out, the Tories have the additional burden of attempting to govern.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
That's three years out of date.
That’s why I said ‘a bit’, but the Leave/Remain shares don’t seem to have changed much. Remain only beat No Deal by 5% at the Euros
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
The explicit Remain vote was unchanged from 2014-2019, while the leave vote increased about 5-6%
Mr. 86, not sure I agree. The Lib Dems have more experience and success in FPTP elections than UKIP/BP (adding UKIP because of Farage's experience). It also depends where the votes are cast. UKIP scored a string of second places in 2015 (many in the north, in Labour territory), and held Carswell's seat, but Lib Dem marginals tend to be contested with the Conservatives.
Fascinating. Had assumed Fox would back a solid leaver. Then again, that would put the onus back onto him to land the promised trade deals. Which after several years in his current job he knows to be impossible
Fox wants to Leave just with a Deal
Brexiteers are belatedly noticing that a US trade deal might be a damn sight worse than what we have with the EU. The Telegraph published a couple of articles on this theme and other papers are also getting jumpy about threats to the NHS.
It will be interesting to see what is raised at the hustings as the notion that Britain can be a rulemaker rather than a ruletaker (or would even want to be) fails its first contact with reality.
Businesses that already deal with the US, are less than desperate for us to ink any major trade deal. The rush to sign one could well do more harm than good.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Sutton was a lib dem seat back 20 odd years ago, so could go again and is more built up. Esher is far more stokebroker belt territory so would be true blue no matter what.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
The Lib Dems pose a major threat to the Tories, certainly, in wealthy London and Stockbroker Belt constituencies. They could also expect to do very well in university seats, and some of the old villa constituencies in provincial cities - but the Conservatives no longer have much left to lose in the latter areas.
Oddly, the South West is no longer a place where the Lib Dems do pose much of a threat to the Tories. They forfeited their eurosceptic supporters there, from 2010-17, and it's hard to see why they would return to the party of Remain.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
It really does. It’s near impossible for the Tories to win a majority if they lose the LD-Con marginals they won in 2015.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
But much of the Tory > TBP swing was in areas there the Tories wouldn’t have won anyway.
Fascinating. Had assumed Fox would back a solid leaver. Then again, that would put the onus back onto him to land the promised trade deals. Which after several years in his current job he knows to be impossible
Fox wants to Leave just with a Deal
Brexiteers are belatedly noticing that a US trade deal might be a damn sight worse than what we have with the EU. The Telegraph published a couple of articles on this theme and other papers are also getting jumpy about threats to the NHS.
It will be interesting to see what is raised at the hustings as the notion that Britain can be a rulemaker rather than a ruletaker (or would even want to be) fails its first contact with reality.
Businesses that already deal with the US, are less than desperate for us to ink any major trade deal. The rush to sign one could well do more harm than good.
The Tories are desperate for anything to show Brexit will be marvelous but any deal with the US will be stacked in their favour. In the bizarre world of the Brexiters trashing trade with 45% of our market is worth it to do a deal with a country that provides a third of that .
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
But much of the Tory > TBP swing was in areas there the Tories wouldn’t have won anyway.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
Yes, on 32% of the vote the Brexit Party would have won over 400 seats in the Commons if the European voteshare were repeated at a general election
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
No it wouldn't , they would be lucky to win 1 seat in Scotland.
The Lib Dems pose a major threat to the Tories, certainly, in wealthy London and Stockbroker Belt constituencies. They could also expect to do very well in university seats, and some of the old villa constituencies in provincial cities - but the Conservatives no longer have much left to lose in the latter areas.
Oddly, the South West is no longer a place where the Lib Dems do pose much of a threat to the Tories. They forfeited their eurosceptic supporters there, from 2010-17, and it's hard to see why they would return to the party of Remain.
I would expect them to pick up 2 or 3 seats in the SW at the next election - certainly St Ives where they came very close in 2017. But you are right that the days of the SW being a yellow fiefdom are gone.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
No it wouldn't , they would be lucky to win 1 seat in Scotland.
Oh Dear Malcolm... as one-eyed as ever. I'll make a bet with you that the Scottish Lib Dems make gains at the next GE... what will you price me?
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
In the current anti-establishment climate, I think there will still be a lot of tactical anti-Tory voting. I know LibDems in Hastings who actively dislike Corbyn who still plan to vote Labour because they really don't want a Tory MP, even Amber, and similarly I know two Corbynites who plan to vote LibDem (without giving an interview to the media about it...) because they live in Mole Valley. An interesting question is whether anti-Brexit Party tactical voting will start to materialise - hard for the casual voter to tell in advance where they're strong, though.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
Without delivering Brexit the Tories would be lucky to win more than 1 seat
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
In the current anti-establishment climate, I think there will still be a lot of tactical anti-Tory voting. I know LibDems in Hastings who actively dislike Corbyn who still plan to vote Labour because they really don't want a Tory MP, even Amber, and similarly I know two Corbynites who plan to vote LibDem (without giving an interview to the media about it...) because they live in Mole Valley. An interesting question is whether anti-Brexit Party tactical voting will start to materialise - hard for the casual voter to tell in advance where they're strong, though.
The economy is critical. We are overdue a downturn. If people start feeling a pinch in their pocket, endless theological discussions about Brexit may start to feel like a luxury we can no longer afford.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
Without delivering Brexit the Tories would be lucky to win more than 1 seat
Trouble is that if Brexit is anything like as bad as the government fears, the Tories would be lucky to win more than one seat, or more than a hundred anyway.
Dominant swing in England overwhelmingly Con to Lib Dem.
Dominant swing in Scotland overwhelmingly Lab to SNP.
Sweet.
Almost everyone seems to assume that GB will shortly revert to the now century-old Con/Lab duopoly (evidence: the “Most Seats” and “Maj/Min/Coalition” markets) I am starting to think that almost everyone is wrong. There’s gold in them thar hills.
The chances of a disruption are higher than at any time in my life, but the betting markets are right to be cautious even now. As Sean Fear says, there’s a lot of ruin in a nation, and similarly in political parties.
The Conservatives look in worse shape long term than Labour. They’ve lost their Remain flank, are losing their Brexit flank and they will struggle to get one back never mind both.
Good. If the Conservatives are the bulwark of the Union, and the Conservatives are screwed, then...
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
Define hard Brexit please.
Any variant of No Deal.
I agree, that does bring great risks.
Yet that wasn't what Hard Brexit was originally referred to.
May's Deal would have fitted into the middle of the Hard Brexit definition of 2016.
“Progressive” is just Labour-speak for tax the middle class, isn’t it. The contradictions and and bullshit are typified by the comment from Jon Trickett (who surely can’t be as stupid as he sounds here):
“So much of this can be traced back to the broken system of land ownership. Concentration of land in the hands of a few has led to unwanted developments, unaffordable house prices, financial crises and environmental degradation.”
They also seem to be keen on the idea of removing objectivity and the influence of elected representatives from planning:
“Another idea is “jury service” for planning, where people would be selected at random to adjudicate on planning decisions.”
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
No it wouldn't , they would be lucky to win 1 seat in Scotland.
Oh Dear Malcolm... as one-eyed as ever. I'll make a bet with you that the Scottish Lib Dems make gains at the next GE... what will you price me?
what price do you want and how many are you saying they will get
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
And ironically thanks to Corbyn you'll get no Labour government AND Brexit.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
I'm really struggling with this one. There was a swing from the Tories to Ukip/TBP in 2019. That there was a bigger swing from the Tories to the Lib Dems does not alter the fact that TBP came top of the vote.
Now you could argue that EU elections are a much lower turnout than a General Election and that when it's FPTP people will vote differently. But you really are deceiving yourself if you think the Lib Dems - who started from 6.6% of the vote - getting a bigger swing than TBP means that they are a bigger threat to the Tories.
Consider seats like Esher or Sutton. If politics is polarised along Leave/Remain lines, and the Tories become a hard Brexit party, who would win?
Are you saying a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire ?
Nearby Tatton would be in danger too.
It wouldn't.
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
The surest way to risk losing both is by delivering a hard Brexit.
Define hard Brexit please.
Any variant of No Deal.
I agree, that does bring great risks.
Yet that wasn't what Hard Brexit was originally referred to.
May's Deal would have fitted into the middle of the Hard Brexit definition of 2016.
I don’t think the negotiations on the future relationship would have landed where May gave the impression they would land, but otherwise, yes, the ground has shifted since 2016.
The Lib Dems pose a major threat to the Tories, certainly, in wealthy London and Stockbroker Belt constituencies. They could also expect to do very well in university seats, and some of the old villa constituencies in provincial cities - but the Conservatives no longer have much left to lose in the latter areas.
Oddly, the South West is no longer a place where the Lib Dems do pose much of a threat to the Tories. They forfeited their eurosceptic supporters there, from 2010-17, and it's hard to see why they would return to the party of Remain.
I would expect them to pick up 2 or 3 seats in the SW at the next election - certainly St Ives where they came very close in 2017. But you are right that the days of the SW being a yellow fiefdom are gone.
The Lib Dems pose a major threat to the Tories, certainly, in wealthy London and Stockbroker Belt constituencies. They could also expect to do very well in university seats, and some of the old villa constituencies in provincial cities - but the Conservatives no longer have much left to lose in the latter areas.
Oddly, the South West is no longer a place where the Lib Dems do pose much of a threat to the Tories. They forfeited their eurosceptic supporters there, from 2010-17, and it's hard to see why they would return to the party of Remain.
I would expect them to pick up 2 or 3 seats in the SW at the next election - certainly St Ives where they came very close in 2017. But you are right that the days of the SW being a yellow fiefdom are gone.
Surely Cheltenham should be a shoe in. Remain voting, Lib Dem Council and topped the poll in the Euros.
Since people are talking about potential Lib Dem gains, can I flag up these markets on WillHill. I'm not sure if they count gains or wins, but even if the former I think 47.5 at 3/1 is value. There's got to be a decent chance they gain that kind of surge from Tory seats and Labour marginals.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
And ironically thanks to Corbyn you'll get no Labour government AND Brexit.
He’s doing his best in that regard, but it’s a bit too early to call that.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
Old format back! Excellent. Much more classy and prestigious.
Anyway, must dash, got my "Metropolitan Snowflake Libtard" tee shirt on and it's off to the big demo. Hoping to get a selfie with OJ.
I wonder if Trump will do a walkabout amongst the people? I think he should. A risk, sure, but if he did a mass 'meet and greet' with ordinary Londoners (such as me) and won us over with his charm, that would be a game-changer.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
A hard Brexit is far and away the biggest risk. Anything Labour does pales in comparison.
Looking at the Euro results from the SW, and from my own canvassing experience, the BP is a much bigger threat across the SW. LD support is patchy - and some marginals eg amid Dorset is now a Tory stronghold. The only way they go LD is if the Tory vote is split.
I’m with Goodwin; talking to the centre will lose us more seats than tacking to the Eurosceptics.
What on earth do you think aping the Brexit Party does to the Tory vote???
In the SW, it wins more seats than aping the LDs would...
I don't think the Tories can regain those voters who have swung LD in the forseeable. That ship has sailed. Kissing Farages arse is the Tory future now.
Oh, I think they could. The most vulnerable moment for switchers is just after they've switched. The longer they've switched and the more elections in which they've gone with their new party, the more solidly they'll have switched.
The Tories won't try to regain them, though, that's the thing. Their membership is preferentially from those who are further away from that and more in sympathy with the Faragists. The MPs know this and are chasing that support (well, the ones with significant chances of winning are doing that; quixotic candidates like Rory Stewart who are talking about governing for the entire country and appealing to everyone have no chance).
Regaining BXP voters, though, could be chasing the rainbow. Whatever they deliver won't be satisfactory - they'll offend and annoy them because either they'll leave with a deal (treacherously selling out!) or they'll leave with no deal (and the catastrophic damage is solely because they messed up navigating the No Deal waters!).
Lessons have been learnt Lessons have been learnt Lessons have been learnt Lessons have been learnt etc etc etc etc etc etc etc
Why don't they just use broad trackers ?!
I've got some cash in that fund. HL didn't advertise it as a really really risky investment (why would they?). I guess the issue is the run on it rather than just the investments so hopefully investors won't have lost everything.
I feel a complete mug, but I am heartened by the fact that the bloke at Kent County Council is having a worse day than me.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
It really doesn't.
Imagine we had an election in which neither the Tories nor Labour stood any candidates. Where would the Brexit Party win and where would the Lib Dems win? The Lib Dem wins would overlap with a large number of safe Tory seats.
It would look a bit like this
No it wouldn't , they would be lucky to win 1 seat in Scotland.
Oh Dear Malcolm... as one-eyed as ever. I'll make a bet with you that the Scottish Lib Dems make gains at the next GE... what will you price me?
what price do you want and how many are you saying they will get
You said not one gain? They have four now, missed one more by two votes, so lets say the base is five. You still say not one gain above five?
Mr. Cooke, indeed. Anything short of no deal will see a significant number refuse to return from that wing. Centrists could come back, particularly with the threat of Corbyn on one hand and, as they may see it, Farage on the other.
Of course the Conservatives need to take account of BP, but pretending that's the only risk they face is a serious mistake. It's interesting to consider which is the greater threat to the Conservatives, long term.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
A hard Brexit is far and away the biggest risk. Anything Labour does pales in comparison.
Labour is led by a candidate for PM and a shadow chancellor who both want to impose a Marxist experiment on the UK, change the fundamentals of our market economy, move away from capitalism and undermine our security alliances out of ideological disagreement with the USA and NATO.
That is a far bigger risk to us than even the hardest of Brexits.
Looking at the Euro results from the SW, and from my own canvassing experience, the BP is a much bigger threat across the SW. LD support is patchy - and some marginals eg amid Dorset is now a Tory stronghold. The only way they go LD is if the Tory vote is split.
I’m with Goodwin; talking to the centre will lose us more seats than tacking to the Eurosceptics.
What on earth do you think aping the Brexit Party does to the Tory vote???
In the SW, it wins more seats than aping the LDs would...
I don't think the Tories can regain those voters who have swung LD in the forseeable. That ship has sailed. Kissing Farages arse is the Tory future now.
Oh, I think they could. The most vulnerable moment for switchers is just after they've switched. The longer they've switched and the more elections in which they've gone with their new party, the more solidly they'll have switched.
The Tories won't try to regain them, though, that's the thing. Their membership is preferentially from those who are further away from that and more in sympathy with the Faragists. The MPs know this and are chasing that support (well, the ones with significant chances of winning are doing that; quixotic candidates like Rory Stewart who are talking about governing for the entire country and appealing to everyone have no chance).
Regaining BXP voters, though, could be chasing the rainbow. Whatever they deliver won't be satisfactory - they'll offend and annoy them because either they'll leave with a deal (treacherously selling out!) or they'll leave with no deal (and the catastrophic damage is solely because they messed up navigating the No Deal waters!).
Interesting times indeed.
And the Tories could never appeal to the minority of BXP supporters who are former Labour voters, many of these older WWC voters would not vote Tory under any circumstances. So the maximum number of BXP voters the Tories could hope to attract is perhaps 2/3 to 3/4 of the 32% that voted BXP last month.
Looking at the Euro results from the SW, and from my own canvassing experience, the BP is a much bigger threat across the SW. LD support is patchy - and some marginals eg amid Dorset is now a Tory stronghold. The only way they go LD is if the Tory vote is split.
I’m with Goodwin; talking to the centre will lose us more seats than tacking to the Eurosceptics.
What on earth do you think aping the Brexit Party does to the Tory vote???
In the SW, it wins more seats than aping the LDs would...
I don't think the Tories can regain those voters who have swung LD in the forseeable. That ship has sailed. Kissing Farages arse is the Tory future now.
Oh, I think they could. The most vulnerable moment for switchers is just after they've switched. The longer they've switched and the more elections in which they've gone with their new party, the more solidly they'll have switched.
The Tories won't try to regain them, though, that's the thing. Their membership is preferentially from those who are further away from that and more in sympathy with the Faragists. The MPs know this and are chasing that support (well, the ones with significant chances of winning are doing that; quixotic candidates like Rory Stewart who are talking about governing for the entire country and appealing to everyone have no chance).
Regaining BXP voters, though, could be chasing the rainbow. Whatever they deliver won't be satisfactory - they'll offend and annoy them because either they'll leave with a deal (treacherously selling out!) or they'll leave with no deal (and the catastrophic damage is solely because they messed up navigating the No Deal waters!).
Interesting times indeed.
The UKIP vote at 2017 GE showed what the residual vote of TBP will be if we left the EU with a deal.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
And ironically thanks to Corbyn you'll get no Labour government AND Brexit.
He’s doing his best in that regard, but it’s a bit too early to call that.
Labour historians will look back at this period and rue they didn't bin off Corbyn when the MPs VONC'd him. Someone even 5 per cent more credible on the economy and without the anti-semitism/terrorism baggage would have absolutely cleaned up by now.
And I suspect Tory historians will look back and rue not backing the May deal or some variant. No Deal (even with unicorn-flavoured "side deals") or Revoke both risk killing them off, and the EU's not offering much else in between.
The memberships of both "main" parties need to get their heads out of their arses and realise elections are about getting a majority of normal people to back/tolerate/acquiesce to their vision.
Looking at the Euro results from the SW, and from my own canvassing experience, the BP is a much bigger threat across the SW. LD support is patchy - and some marginals eg amid Dorset is now a Tory stronghold. The only way they go LD is if the Tory vote is split.
I’m with Goodwin; talking to the centre will lose us more seats than tacking to the Eurosceptics.
What on earth do you think aping the Brexit Party does to the Tory vote???
In the SW, it wins more seats than aping the LDs would...
I don't think the Tories can regain those voters who have swung LD in the forseeable. That ship has sailed. Kissing Farages arse is the Tory future now.
Oh, I think they could. The most vulnerable moment for switchers is just after they've switched. The longer they've switched and the more elections in which they've gone with their new party, the more solidly they'll have switched.
The Tories won't try to regain them, though, that's the thing. Their membership is preferentially from those who are further away from that and more in sympathy with the Faragists. The MPs know this and are chasing that support (well, the ones with significant chances of winning are doing that; quixotic candidates like Rory Stewart who are talking about governing for the entire country and appealing to everyone have no chance).
Regaining BXP voters, though, could be chasing the rainbow. Whatever they deliver won't be satisfactory - they'll offend and annoy them because either they'll leave with a deal (treacherously selling out!) or they'll leave with no deal (and the catastrophic damage is solely because they messed up navigating the No Deal waters!).
Interesting times indeed.
And the Tories could never appeal to the minority of BXP supporters who are former Labour voters, many of these older WWC voters would not vote Tory under any circumstances. So the maximum number of BXP voters the Tories could hope to attract is perhaps 2/3 to 3/4 of the 32% that voted BXP last month.
I'm fully expecting the 22,615 Tory votes achieved in 2017 to almost collapse completely here in Bassetlaw.
Dominant swing in England overwhelmingly Con to Lib Dem.
Dominant swing in Scotland overwhelmingly Lab to SNP.
Sweet.
Almost everyone seems to assume that GB will shortly revert to the now century-old Con/Lab duopoly (evidence: the “Most Seats” and “Maj/Min/Coalition” markets) I am starting to think that almost everyone is wrong. There’s gold in them thar hills.
The chances of a disruption are higher than at any time in my life, but the betting markets are right to be cautious even now. As Sean Fear says, there’s a lot of ruin in a nation, and similarly in political parties.
The Conservatives look in worse shape long term than Labour. They’ve lost their Remain flank, are losing their Brexit flank and they will struggle to get one back never mind both.
Good. If the Conservatives are the bulwark of the Union, and the Conservatives are screwed, then...
An interesting question would be without the almost certain knowledge that Corbyn will never win an election would the Tories have been as self destructive and useless as they've been? It's difficult to think so. Even in the days of IDS and Hague you felt there was a core there who could bring them round. Now there's nothing.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
A hard Brexit is far and away the biggest risk. Anything Labour does pales in comparison.
Labour is led by a candidate for PM and a shadow chancellor who both want to impose a Marxist experiment on the UK, change the fundamentals of our market economy, move away from capitalism and undermine our security alliances out of ideological disagreement with the USA and NATO.
That is a far bigger risk to us than even the hardest of Brexits.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
How could they form a pact with a “party” that have only one policy with no idea of what else they stood for.
UK Construction and manufacturing now into contraction .
Worrying signs globally aswell and one can only hope the US v China trade war finds a resolution quickly .
It’s upto the services sector once again to save the day but latest consumer spending showed a big drop .
On consumer spending the report this morning on 5 live business was that the drop was expected in comparison to last years record with heatwave conditions and a royal wedding. They also suggested there is a move away from consumer spending on goods to more activity leisure and other spending
The US-China trade war though could cause serious economic disruption around the world
Anyone got a link to the report? It only seems to have made the news in the telegraph and express for some reason.
Reform of council tax is obviously well overdue, but am a little concerned from what's reported Labour may be shying away from going for a land value tax.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
How could they form a pact with a “party” that have only one policy with no idea of what else they stood for.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
A hard Brexit is far and away the biggest risk. Anything Labour does pales in comparison.
Labour is led by a candidate for PM and a shadow chancellor who both want to impose a Marxist experiment on the UK, change the fundamentals of our market economy, move away from capitalism and undermine our security alliances out of ideological disagreement with the USA and NATO.
That is a far bigger risk to us than even the hardest of Brexits.
Disagree with your arguments and conclusions.
You are a loyal supporter of your party, and getting a bit defensive.
My point is that if you are a professional voter who wants to avoid disruptive change then the LDs could easily appear the best option at present.
Anyone got a link to the report? It only seems to have made the news in the telegraph and express for some reason.
Reform of council tax is obviously well overdue, but am a little concerned from what's reported Labour may be shying away from going for a land value tax.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
I think the insight that the real strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems is one of the most important facts in British politics at the moment.
The LDs may end up becoming the de facto conservative option if you’re a middle class professional wanting stability.
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
I don't know. For a family with two kids within 5 years of university and dependent on the NHS for help with chronic illness and a rail commuter, Labour offers quite a lot of practical help.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
Labour, under its current leadership, threatens your income and your home in the pursuit of a 21st century experiment in socialist ideology.
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
A hard Brexit is far and away the biggest risk. Anything Labour does pales in comparison.
Labour is led by a candidate for PM and a shadow chancellor who both want to impose a Marxist experiment on the UK, change the fundamentals of our market economy, move away from capitalism and undermine our security alliances out of ideological disagreement with the USA and NATO.
That is a far bigger risk to us than even the hardest of Brexits.
Disagree with your arguments and conclusions.
+1 - Brexit is a permanent change in our legal relationship with the outside world that could only be fixed if both sides agreed, anything done by Labour could be undone without external agreement.
I have to say that I am not at all impressed with TM decision to prolong her resignation as leader until the 7th June. I have been loyal to her, and consider her deal as the best on offer, but that does not mean I cannot have a go at this delay which serves no purpose but creates the space for every man/woman and their dog to stand for leader and then PM
She made the right decision to continue as interim PM awaiting the election of her successor but the last two weeks have been painful to watch as she became irrelevant and yesterdays story
We could have been into the leadership election already and for that I do criticise her unreservedly
Anyone got a link to the report? It only seems to have made the news in the telegraph and express for some reason.
Reform of council tax is obviously well overdue, but am a little concerned from what's reported Labour may be shying away from going for a land value tax.
What about allotments, Jeremy?
Normally state owned I think. If not I imagine an exemption would be made!
Good riddance - he’s killed the UK life science sector.
This was triggered by Kent Council finally getting their arse in gear. Too late for their pensioners though.
I thought Woodford (along with Terry Smith) was supposed to be Britain's answer to Warren Buffett. Have I mixed him up with someone else? I thought I'd pencilled him in for my next big win from the bookies (which is now long overdue, btw).
In the popular media yes.
He did very well at Invesco based on one inspired investment 20 years ago (buying tobacco at 4x EBITDA)
But he utterly failed to replicate his success when he set up on his own, was arrogant and had some questionable circular structures. When he started doing intrafund swaps and nominal listings at inflated values everyone became aware he was facing disaster
Apparently we should treat sugar like smoking. I don't actually smoke. And if I stopped consuming sugar I'd die. But other than that, fantastic argument.
Good riddance - he’s killed the UK life science sector.
(Snip)
In what way, may I ask?
He took 20-30% stakes in a lot of small companies without proper diligence. That stopped anyone else serious supporting them (no one wanted to be his b1tch).
So it made them dependent on him for capital and dried up other liquidity in the space. Then when he ran out of money....
Speaking of investments, if one came into £300k, would it be worth speaking to an investment manager? How would you find one? No need for speculative returns.
I have to say that I am not at all impressed with TM decision to prolong her resignation as leader until the 7th June. I have been loyal to her, and consider her deal as the best on offer, but that does not mean I cannot have a go at this delay which serves no purpose but creates the space for every man/woman and their dog to stand for leader and then PM
She made the right decision to continue as interim PM awaiting the election of her successor but the last two weeks have been painful to watch as she became irrelevant and yesterdays story
We could have been into the leadership election already and for that I do criticise her unreservedly
I think the Tories will benefit from having a wider pool and more time to choose. Cameron was arguably your best leader of the last 20 years, but needed a proper contest to have a chance. Yes it's probably a bit annoying being the butt of some jokes, but I think she's right to give more time. A few days now makes little difference whereas picking the wrong leader (again) would be a much bigger blow.
Apparently we should treat sugar like smoking. I don't actually smoke. And if I stopped consuming sugar I'd die. But other than that, fantastic argument.
What that graph tells me is that 5% is bollocks.
Honestly you get to the point where if you don't trust or educate the populace enough, there will always be another thing. We have to better equip people to make their own, better choices.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
How could they form a pact with a “party” that have only one policy with no idea of what else they stood for.
Brexit Party stands aside for Tory candidates pledged to implementing a No Deal Brexit?
Interesting to note that with 13 declared runners for the Tory leadership race, eighth in the betting is a non-declared runner, Penny Mordaunt. She is having her conference call with Tory party members this evening - and after that hopefully she will enter the race. What price then?
Apparently we should treat sugar like smoking. I don't actually smoke. And if I stopped consuming sugar I'd die. But other than that, fantastic argument.
Not all sugars obviously. You'll still be free to buy unhealthy food, it will just be harder for those companies to advertise. Seems a good idea to me. I imagine we'd all get used to it just as we have with cigarettes.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
How could they form a pact with a “party” that have only one policy with no idea of what else they stood for.
Brexit Party stands aside for Tory candidates pledged to implementing a No Deal Brexit?
Can see how that would work but I was hoping to be rid of Marcus Fysh the current, not very good, MP for Yeovil by TBP(Ltd) splitting the vote.
I have to say that I am not at all impressed with TM decision to prolong her resignation as leader until the 7th June. I have been loyal to her, and consider her deal as the best on offer, but that does not mean I cannot have a go at this delay which serves no purpose but creates the space for every man/woman and their dog to stand for leader and then PM
She made the right decision to continue as interim PM awaiting the election of her successor but the last two weeks have been painful to watch as she became irrelevant and yesterdays story
We could have been into the leadership election already and for that I do criticise her unreservedly
I disagree with that. I think the Tories need as much time as possible to think really hard about who will be the best leader in these extraordinary times.
Speaking of investments, if one came into £300k, would it be worth speaking to an investment manager? How would you find one? No need for speculative returns.
Pay your mortgage off, stick the rest into a basket of trackers.
If you're renting, buy for cash and secure a big discount.
Since people are talking about potential Lib Dem gains, can I flag up these markets on WillHill. I'm not sure if they count gains or wins, but even if the former I think 47.5 at 3/1 is value. There's got to be a decent chance they gain that kind of surge from Tory seats and Labour marginals.
Correct, the value there is at the extremes. Can't wait for constituency betting :-) We could be looking at an SNP '15 scenario for either or both main parties, depending on where we are with Brexit and how the GE comes about.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
How could they form a pact with a “party” that have only one policy with no idea of what else they stood for.
Brexit Party stands aside for Tory candidates pledged to implementing a No Deal Brexit?
Which implies an election before Brexit, which implies either all of this gets agreed very quickly, or we'll have an extension which will further erode the Tories' Brexit street-cred.
Interesting to note that with 13 declared runners for the Tory leadership race, eighth in the betting is a non-declared runner, Penny Mordaunt. She is having her conference call with Tory party members this evening - and after that hopefully she will enter the race. What price then?
Interesting to note that with 13 declared runners for the Tory leadership race, eighth in the betting is a non-declared runner, Penny Mordaunt. She is having her conference call with Tory party members this evening - and after that hopefully she will enter the race. What price then?
Comments
You don’t want to risk the disruption and instability of Brexit and you certainly don’t want Corbyn or any form of socialism.
So, if you want to keep things as they are, you vote LD.
Odds are they will limp on in office but not in government but its fairly shaky as an administration atm.
It gives them a bit more time to sort themselves out, & as Nick points out, the Tories have the additional burden of attempting to govern.
I do think it's open to dispute.
Oddly, the South West is no longer a place where the Lib Dems do pose much of a threat to the Tories. They forfeited their eurosceptic supporters there, from 2010-17, and it's hard to see why they would return to the party of Remain.
Brexit offers my family nothing.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1135814681887723520
Are you saying that a seat in Surrey is worth more than a seat in Staffordshire.
Lessons have been learnt
Lessons have been learnt
Lessons have been learnt
etc etc etc etc etc etc etc
Yet that wasn't what Hard Brexit was originally referred to.
May's Deal would have fitted into the middle of the Hard Brexit definition of 2016.
“So much of this can be traced back to the broken system of land ownership. Concentration of land in the hands of a few has led to unwanted developments, unaffordable house prices, financial crises and environmental degradation.”
They also seem to be keen on the idea of removing objectivity and the influence of elected representatives from planning:
“Another idea is “jury service” for planning, where people would be selected at random to adjudicate on planning decisions.”
The LDs might seem like the safest choice to them.
Anyway, must dash, got my "Metropolitan Snowflake Libtard" tee shirt on and it's off to the big demo. Hoping to get a selfie with OJ.
I wonder if Trump will do a walkabout amongst the people? I think he should. A risk, sure, but if he did a mass 'meet and greet' with ordinary Londoners (such as me) and won us over with his charm, that would be a game-changer.
The Tories won't try to regain them, though, that's the thing. Their membership is preferentially from those who are further away from that and more in sympathy with the Faragists. The MPs know this and are chasing that support (well, the ones with significant chances of winning are doing that; quixotic candidates like Rory Stewart who are talking about governing for the entire country and appealing to everyone have no chance).
Regaining BXP voters, though, could be chasing the rainbow. Whatever they deliver won't be satisfactory - they'll offend and annoy them because either they'll leave with a deal (treacherously selling out!) or they'll leave with no deal (and the catastrophic damage is solely because they messed up navigating the No Deal waters!).
Interesting times indeed.
Which is the unspeakable and which is the uneatable?
Werrity may have some idea.
I feel a complete mug, but I am heartened by the fact that the bloke at Kent County Council is having a worse day than me.
Bernard Connolly argues that the BP and Cons should form an electoral pact.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/why-the-brexit-party-might-be-wise-to-form-a-pact-with-the-tories/
This is obvious yet it is the solution that dare not speak its name in the Tory hustings.
There will be no way out of the Brexit conundrum without a general election, and that brings on the blues' fear of a Corbyn apocalypse. But they should not shrink back for that imagined risk. The contortions Labour will have to perform in coming to a clear position in a GE, and the threat from remain supporting LDs means that they will be seriously hampered in setting out a clear policy position. Lab will not get away with avoiding the BREXIT issue a second time.
The candidates should now be talking about how they will cooperate with the BP in the forthcoming inevitable general election.
Of course the Conservatives need to take account of BP, but pretending that's the only risk they face is a serious mistake. It's interesting to consider which is the greater threat to the Conservatives, long term.
That is a far bigger risk to us than even the hardest of Brexits.
Its the leaving that matters not the deal.
And I suspect Tory historians will look back and rue not backing the May deal or some variant. No Deal (even with unicorn-flavoured "side deals") or Revoke both risk killing them off, and the EU's not offering much else in between.
The memberships of both "main" parties need to get their heads out of their arses and realise elections are about getting a majority of normal people to back/tolerate/acquiesce to their vision.
Worrying signs globally aswell and one can only hope the US v China trade war finds a resolution quickly .
It’s upto the services sector once again to save the day but latest consumer spending showed a big drop .
The US-China trade war though could cause serious economic disruption around the world
Reform of council tax is obviously well overdue, but am a little concerned from what's reported Labour may be shying away from going for a land value tax.
My point is that if you are a professional voter who wants to avoid disruptive change then the LDs could easily appear the best option at present.
She made the right decision to continue as interim PM awaiting the election of her successor but the last two weeks have been painful to watch as she became irrelevant and yesterdays story
We could have been into the leadership election already and for that I do criticise her unreservedly
He did very well at Invesco based on one inspired investment 20 years ago (buying tobacco at 4x EBITDA)
But he utterly failed to replicate his success when he set up on his own, was arrogant and had some questionable circular structures. When he started doing intrafund swaps and nominal listings at inflated values everyone became aware he was facing disaster
Meanwhile, in joyless puritan news:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48499195
Apparently we should treat sugar like smoking. I don't actually smoke. And if I stopped consuming sugar I'd die. But other than that, fantastic argument.
So it made them dependent on him for capital and dried up other liquidity in the space. Then when he ran out of money....
Honestly you get to the point where if you don't trust or educate the populace enough, there will always be another thing. We have to better equip people to make their own, better choices.
Go on Penny, throw your hat in the ring!
In for a Penny ....
You'll still be free to buy unhealthy food, it will just be harder for those companies to advertise.
Seems a good idea to me. I imagine we'd all get used to it just as we have with cigarettes.
If you're renting, buy for cash and secure a big discount.