Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
Nice summary - and I hope you're right because that is what I want to see.
However I think he will agree an extension for further talks with a view to passing a deal and fighting a spring 2020 election off the back of that. An election that in my view he would win comfortably.
At the G7 summit Boris Johnson said he wanted any future US/UK trade deal to make it far easier for Melton Mowbray pork pies to be imported into the US. Melton Mowbray is, of course, an EU Protected Geographic Indication. As an article in IAM made clear last year, these are probably the most emotive IP rights there are. Unwittingly, no doubt, the Prime Minister identified a reason why the UK will struggle to do an all-encompassing trade deal with the Americans - especially if it wants one with the EU. As a side note, a No Deal Brexit could mean Melton Mowbray and all other UK GIs (there are over 80) losing their protected status inside the EU. I wrote about it on one of our platforms last year: https://www.iam-media.com/copyright/there-one-brexit-ip-issue-could-explode-politically-and-it-has-nothing-do-patents
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
There is a reason the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland: Scots see them for the self-interested little turds they are.
Everyone needs to be careful. We stand on the brink of 5/10 years of Johnson in No10.
no chance
I reckon true Scot Nats should vote Conservative in the next election
After all with 5/10 years of Boris and No Deal Brexit you are almost certain to get independence
It’s all about the long game
That definitely wouldn't result in an avalanche of bullcrap stating that the Scots are in favour of the Union and Brexit, and they definitely don't want/aren't getting Indy ref II.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
There is a reason the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland: Scots see them for the self-interested little turds they are.
That is an insult to a turd
God, I hate agreeing with you... You old curmudgeon :-)
Like so many other Labour members Nick has no need of a Labour government or any reason to fear a Tory one. For him, and so many others, Corbyn being their leader is far more important than defeating the Tories. If you do not support Corbyn’s leadership you are, by definition, a Centrist (at best). Such are the games the privileged get to play.
Um, I don't think you should argue your case personally, especially when you don't really know the details. If your arguments have merit, they should stand on their own, not because of the personal defects of someone else.
FWIW, because of family commitments, I live in a one-bed rented flat, do three jobs, live frugally and virtually never take a holiday. I earn well and in general enjoy life but I don't think most people would think it especially privileged. But I wouldn't argue *for* my beliefs on that basis either - if our views have any value at all, it's to the extent that they benefit most of the population. The well-worn debate between "concentrate on getting elected" and "have good policies" has an honourable tradition on both sides, and the answer is never 100% one or the other.
Definitely. Both Labour and the Conservatives are tainted brands, whose main argument to the public is that they are not the other one. Nobody loves them for their own sakes.
Moreover, under their current leaderships, they are completely untrustworthy. Corbyn is a mass of conflicting principles, and in any case he has effectively been taken over by a gang of Commies. ABDPJohnson would sell his own grandmother if he thought there was anything in it for him - let alone the rest of us who are being sold down the river for a few barrels of contaminated foodstuffs.
It is high time that they both split up properly and we had a proper realignment of our politics.
I'd like a realignment but we overdo the criticism - they are still more popular than the alternatives, even if we blame part of that on the voting system.
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
What is the market cap of a privatised BBC and how many days before Sky or Netflix has bought it lock, stock and Strictly?
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
There is a reason the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland: Scots see them for the self-interested little turds they are.
That is an insult to a turd
God, I hate agreeing with you... You old curmudgeon :-)
I am normally right or thereabouts apart from a few pet hates Cicero
Only Ben Stokes can be Ben Stokes. We can all aspire to be Jack Leach. The courage never to give up, to always be ready for the next ball and to face it without flinching is within everyone. Millions do it each day. It is the courage of the everyday hero and it is magnificent.
My late wife did it. She had lupus, an auto immune disease. Every day was shit, but she faced up to her adversity with such courage.. Her death was a release from the daily feeling of just awfulness. You just have to admire her courage.
And your courage @SquareRoot - it seems to me that the partners of people going through such ordeals suffer terribly as well.
Very much seconded. I am glad that @SquareRoot has found happiness again.
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
Nice summary - and I hope you're right because that is what I want to see.
However I think he will agree an extension for further talks with a view to passing a deal and fighting a spring 2020 election off the back of that. An election that in my view he would win comfortably.
I don't think he will agree a further extension to spring, firstly as if the EU have not agreed a technical solution to the Irish border by October Boris has proposed they are unlikely to do so by Spring either and secondly as if Boris extends as May did the Brexit Party overtake the Tories again and if Boris loses the trust of Leavers like May he will find it difficult to get it back
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly following May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
It would have to be well protected from foreign vultures.
It is essential that we do get variety in our programming, not just the same corporate American hegemony.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Although note that Johnson now is particularly unpopular in London
On topic, the Tories are in danger of becoming hubristic.
The key facts they seem to forget are these:-
1. They have no realistic alternative to the Irish backstop which can be implemented now. 2. They can give no guarantee to the EU27 that the WA would pass Parliament if the backstop were removed. Indeed, according to reports Johnson’s envoy has said that the WA is unacceptable for reasons other than the backstop. 3. When a No Deal exit happens Britain loses control of a lot of key decisions and will become much much more dependant than now on the goodwill and permissions and agreements of others. That would be fine if that is what the voters clearly wanted but they were sold a lie - “Take Back Control” - and if they see that that is not what they are getting the party in charge cannot safely assume it will get an electoral reward.
Like so many other Labour members Nick has no need of a Labour government or any reason to fear a Tory one. For him, and so many others, Corbyn being their leader is far more important than defeating the Tories. If you do not support Corbyn’s leadership you are, by definition, a Centrist (at best). Such are the games the privileged get to play.
Um, I don't think you should argue your case personally, especially when you don't really know the details. If your arguments have merit, they should stand on their own, not because of the personal defects of someone else.
FWIW, because of family commitments, I live in a one-bed rented flat, do three jobs, live frugally and virtually never take a holiday. I earn well and in general enjoy life but I don't think most people would think it especially privileged. But I wouldn't argue *for* my beliefs on that basis either - if our views have any value at all, it's to the extent that they benefit most of the population. The well-worn debate between "concentrate on getting elected" and "have good policies" has an honourable tradition on both sides, and the answer is never 100% one or the other.
You have never needed a Labour government, Nick, or had reason to fear a Tory one. When you prioritise Corbyn’s leadership over defeating the Tories, I see no problem in pointing that privilege out.
Like so many other Labour members Nick has no need of a Labour government or any reason to fear a Tory one. For him, and so many others, Corbyn being their leader is far more important than defeating the Tories. If you do not support Corbyn’s leadership you are, by definition, a Centrist (at best). Such are the games the privileged get to play.
Um, I don't think you should argue your case personally, especially when you don't really know the details. If your arguments have merit, they should stand on their own, not because of the personal defects of someone else.
FWIW, because of family commitments, I live in a one-bed rented flat, do three jobs, live frugally and virtually never take a holiday. I earn well and in general enjoy life but I don't think most people would think it especially privileged. But I wouldn't argue *for* my beliefs on that basis either - if our views have any value at all, it's to the extent that they benefit most of the population. The well-worn debate between "concentrate on getting elected" and "have good policies" has an honourable tradition on both sides, and the answer is never 100% one or the other.
Ok, so you need a Labour government as much as the millions of poor sods out there who can't ever do more than get by no matter how hard they work. So why do you cling to the coat-tails of a man that you know will not win an election? Your political antennae can't be that twisted not to know this, you were a successful MP! Were the years of Labour government really so bad that you would rather take a 20% chance of whatever Stalinist lunacy Milne and Murray want over bringing back in a sane Labour government?
Corbyn is death, the destroyer of things. Under him, a movement which has existed for 119 years in it's current form is done. Unelectable. Impotent. Irrelevant to the Real Needs. And to really make it worse the Stalinists have created their own NKVD, who run around the party seeding hate for their own side and anti-semitism and an absurd personality cult where I am told with a straight face by a cultists that Corbyn is the bravest leader this party has ever had. Braver than Major Attlee I asked? Oh yes, No other leader had to endure the attacks and the traitors like the Jeremy.
Can you think of any former prime ministers who would go swimming during foreign summits, whose hobbies included painting, and whose income came from journalism and books? Funny how we've recently been reminded of the first two!
On topic, the Tories are in danger of becoming hubristic.
The key facts they seem to forget are these:-
1. They have no realistic alternative to the Irish backstop which can be implemented now. 2. They can give no guarantee to the EU27 that the WA would pass Parliament if the backstop were removed. Indeed, according to reports Johnson’s envoy has said that the WA is unacceptable for reasons other than the backstop. 3. When a No Deal exit happens Britain loses control of a lot of key decisions and will become much much more dependant than now on the goodwill and permissions and agreements of others. That would be fine if that is what the voters clearly wanted but they were sold a lie - “Take Back Control” - and if they see that that is not what they are getting the party in charge cannot safely assume it will get an electoral reward.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Although note that Johnson now is particularly unpopular in London
Boris is also particularly unpopular with women, who are much more inclined to DK in polls.
The arithmetic below of 10 gains by LDs from Con looks quite the underestimate to me. I think that the Labour vote will drop, buut will be especially well concentrated.
I don't think Bozo will come out of an election well.
Beautiful day on the Isle of Wight. 30th Anniversary, so signing off. Play nicely people!
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
The LAb->LD switch can be somewhat bigger than the than Con->BXP one and the Conservatives are still a minority government on my reckoning. This is because the Conservatives will lose almost all their seats in Scotland. All switches relative to 2017.
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly foll owing May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
Even if he doesn't think he can, he's got no choice, on the "if you can't ride two horses, you shouldn't have joined the circus" principle.
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Plety are prepared to give Boris credit for actually LISTENING to what the people wanted. He gets points for having a go.
(He also plays well in the SW, where the LibDems reckon their Bollocks To Brexit will play well. Bless.....)
Countries with significant migration from India top the list.
Quite a lot of Indians in Italy. Indeed there is a small Italian speaking Indian community in Leicester, to match the Portuguese one. The best Samosas in town are 30p at the Anmol Sweet Centre, run by an Italian Sikh.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Plety are prepared to give Boris credit for actually LISTENING to what the people wanted. He gets points for having a go.
(He also plays well in the SW, where the LibDems reckon their Bollocks To Brexit will play well. Bless.....)
Both are right. Boris plays well to leavers because he listens. Swinson p.ays well to remainers because she vocalises their opinion. When the paradigm is leave/remain you need to set aside the old party tags
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Although note that Johnson now is particularly unpopular in London
Boris is also particularly unpopular with women, who are much more inclined to DK in polls.
The arithmetic below of 10 gains by LDs from Con looks quite the underestimate to me. I think that the Labour vote will drop, buut will be especially well concentrated.
I don't think Bozo will come out of an election well.
Beautiful day on the Isle of Wight. 30th Anniversary, so signing off. Play nicely people!
UNS is a very unreliable tool when vote shares have changed so much. Both main parties are vulnerable to widespread tactical voting and I expect both to underperform UNS substantially unless polling changes substantially.
I challenge anyway to explain to me why there should be a taxpayer funded dancing contest on the telly every Saturday.
Because privatising it will inevitably involve giving many millions to banker scum to spend on 488GTBs, cocaine and teenage prostitutes.
Of course it could be privatized to an independent trust, like the Grauniad's Scott trust... I think a purely commercial privatisation would never fly.
Countries with significant migration from India top the list.
Quite a lot of Indians in Italy. Indeed there is a small Italian speaking Indian community in Leicester, to match the Portuguese one. The best Samosas in town are 30p at the Anmol Sweet Centre, run by an Italian Sikh.
I can see this leading to a whole new chapter in the pizza toppings debate...
Incidentally, my wife's brother's wife's cousin migrated from India to Italy.
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
The trouble with the proliferation of streaming services is they forget their competition isn't each other. It's piracy.
Spotify achieved more or less global dominance because more or less every song in the world is there. One price (plus an ad supported model), one app, one place for everything.
At the minute, I subscribe to Netflix and get Amazon Prime thrown in for free as part of free delivery. Amazon prime has gotten a lot better in the last year and is quite good for movies. But if they spun off the delivery service from the streaming service, I would cancel the streaming service. And this is the problem.
When I can get 90% of my content through Netflix and Amazon for about £15 a month, I use pirate streams only 10% of the time. But once I'm expected to pay a subscription to Netflix, Amazon, Disney, BBC, HBO, whoever else - for all their exclusive content, it becomes cheaper - but more importantly far easier - to go to one single site (a pirate site) for all the same content.
I largely pay Netflix because it's convenient. 90% of the stuff I want to watch, all in one place, in HD, no ads. Once that's gone, people won't pay five or six different providers. They'll go back to the one place they can get all that content. And it will be a pirate site.
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
The BBC could - should - be a massive, dominant force in world broadcasting.
But it would need a wholesale change in management to achieve it.
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Although note that Johnson now is particularly unpopular in London
Boris is also particularly unpopular with women, who are much more inclined to DK in polls.
The arithmetic below of 10 gains by LDs from Con looks quite the underestimate to me. I think that the Labour vote will drop, buut will be especially well concentrated.
I don't think Bozo will come out of an election well.
Beautiful day on the Isle of Wight. 30th Anniversary, so signing off. Play nicely people!
UNS is a very unreliable tool when vote shares have changed so much. Both main parties are vulnerable to widespread tactical voting and I expect both to underperform UNS substantially unless polling changes substantially.
There's definitely an opportunity for someone to come up with some new kind of model that looks at how to transfer these vote shares we are seeing in polls to numbers of seats.
No one knows how much tactical voting will occur, but it would be interesting to at least see some analysis of the sensitivity to this factor.
Edit to add: unless someone knows of one that exists already?
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
The BBC could - should - be a massive, dominant force in world broadcasting.
But it would need a wholesale change in management to achieve it.
The License Fee is from the Ark. Spin it off. State owned commercial business. No mandatory tv tax, let it raise money as all the other subscription businesses are doing. No need for advertising, pay a subscription
Losses of Labour marginals to Con because of a greater LAb->LD than Con->BXP switch will be balanced by losses of Con seats to SNP and LD. Up to a point. It depends on the differential gap between the switches.
I think it *completely* depends on the differential gap, and please note that the Tories are getting thumped in Scotland. Also places like Stroud are far from the natural Tory seat that you may think. When even Cotswold is now in play, the Conservatives are taking a very big risk indeed.
Johnson is potentially going to be as big a vote loser for the Tories as Corbyn is for Labour. He is absolutely poisonous on the door step.
No. Boris is only poisonous with Remainers (many of whom can't stand Corbyn either) and socialists who will never vote Tory anyway. With Leavers Boris is very popular, more so than May was
There seems to be this fiction that Johnson is an anathema to non-Tory voters. Is he really? I hear a lot of positive noises for the man from a lot of very non-Tories. Sure, they hate many of his government's ministers and policies. But Boris personally?
I can see him attracting a lot of votes from people prepared to vote Boris who would never vote Tory otherwise. Whereas with Corbyn as we already can prove in spades the opposite is true, with Labour voters LLLLLLLLL all the way across the canvas records refusing to vote Labour because of him.
Just because May tried to run a personality election when she didn't have one doesn't mean it can't work for someone who actually has one. As it did twice in London...
Plety are prepared to give Boris credit for actually LISTENING to what the people wanted. He gets points for having a go.
(He also plays well in the SW, where the LibDems reckon their Bollocks To Brexit will play well. Bless.....)
What makes people think Boris will run a better campaign than the statesmanlike May? Have people not seen Boris on the TV over the weekend? He comes across as a comedian or clown, not a statesman. In statesman terms he’s currently being upstaged by an actor in a car deal “vat reduction” advert
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
The BBC could - should - be a massive, dominant force in world broadcasting.
But it would need a wholesale change in management to achieve it.
The BBC ought to be massive and dominant, but its too biased towards its own agenda.
I agree with Mr. Pedley. We saw a 20 point lead vanish last time (admittedly with the most stupid campaign since Caligula declared war on Neptune) and things are very turbulent right now.
I too agree. But sages like Pedley aren’t being listened to by the media.
Let’s not forget, following 2016 leave vote in Labour areas Tories strategy last time was these seats are in play for them.
🤣
That voting leave 2016 makes you vote for the staunchest leave party in subsequent GE? Ignoring all other tribalism? and ideology how leave actually favours socialism rather than the business friendly conservatives? And the history where two thirds of labour MPs voted in commons to keep us out 1973, it’s prominent MPs lead no to Europe 75, it was a manifesto commitment to take us out without a ref in 83. Ignore all that sentiment and count their leave response to voters as votes in the bag for Boris? Bonkers! Bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk
Go on Cummings call that election. It’s easier to burn it down than build it up ain’t it. Easier to laugh at the King getting wet than stay dry on the beach yourself.
PS there’s an argument the Tories have already blown an autumn election with all these promises the last few weeks with fake money.
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
The trouble with the proliferation of streaming services is they forget their competition isn't each other. It's piracy.
Spotify achieved more or less global dominance because more or less every song in the world is there. One price (plus an ad supported model), one app, one place for everything.
At the minute, I subscribe to Netflix and get Amazon Prime thrown in for free as part of free delivery. Amazon prime has gotten a lot better in the last year and is quite good for movies. But if they spun off the delivery service from the streaming service, I would cancel the streaming service. And this is the problem.
When I can get 90% of my content through Netflix and Amazon for about £15 a month, I use pirate streams only 10% of the time. But once I'm expected to pay a subscription to Netflix, Amazon, Disney, BBC, HBO, whoever else - for all their exclusive content, it becomes cheaper - but more importantly far easier - to go to one single site (a pirate site) for all the same content.
I largely pay Netflix because it's convenient. 90% of the stuff I want to watch, all in one place, in HD, no ads. Once that's gone, people won't pay five or six different providers. They'll go back to the one place they can get all that content. And it will be a pirate site.
Agreed. One of my children said much the same. Paying one subscription is fine. Paying for half a dozen: no.
Part of May's 'problem' in 2017 was that she let everyone else have the airwaves (inc. TV). I suspect Boris' problem will be similar, if the Conservative leadership campaign is any guide. He also appears incapable of giving the same straight answer to the same question by different interviewers.
Boris is a GE car crash we all want to see happen.
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.....
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
The trouble with the proliferation of streaming services is they forget their competition isn't each other. It's piracy.
Spotify achieved more or less global dominance because more or less every song in the world is there. One price (plus an ad supported model), one app, one place for everything.
At the minute, I subscribe to Netflix and get Amazon Prime thrown in for free as part of free delivery. Amazon prime has gotten a lot better in the last year and is quite good for movies. But if they spun off the delivery service from the streaming service, I would cancel the streaming service. And this is the problem.
When I can get 90% of my content through Netflix and Amazon for about £15 a month, I use pirate streams only 10% of the time. But once I'm expected to pay a subscription to Netflix, Amazon, Disney, BBC, HBO, whoever else - for all their exclusive content, it becomes cheaper - but more importantly far easier - to go to one single site (a pirate site) for all the same content.
I largely pay Netflix because it's convenient. 90% of the stuff I want to watch, all in one place, in HD, no ads. Once that's gone, people won't pay five or six different providers. They'll go back to the one place they can get all that content. And it will be a pirate site.
I tend to agree (though piracy is probably a little less important than you think).
The competition is much more formidable than even a few years ago, and every new entrant faces the hurdle of representing extra cost and inconvenience to the consumer. The BBC might have had a real chance at being a dominant player a few years back, but I seriously doubt it now.
And they don’t have either the deep pockets of Netflix/Amazon/Apple, or anyone with the commercial programming genius of Ted Sarandos.
The politics don’t really work, either, as going that way would mean turning off most of the current terrestrial service. Which would piss off the Tories key voting demographic...
I'm struggling with formatting. In response to Nigel:
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
The trouble with the proliferation of streaming services is they forget their competition isn't each other. It's piracy.
Spotify achieved more or less global dominance because more or less every song in the world is there. One price (plus an ad supported model), one app, one place for everything.
At the minute, I subscribe to Netflix and get Amazon Prime thrown in for free as part of free delivery. Amazon prime has gotten a lot better in the last year and is quite good for movies. But if they spun off the delivery service from the streaming service, I would cancel the streaming service. And this is the problem.
When I can get 90% of my content through Netflix and Amazon for about £15 a month, I use pirate streams only 10% of the time. But once I'm expected to pay a subscription to Netflix, Amazon, Disney, BBC, HBO, whoever else - for all their exclusive content, it becomes cheaper - but more importantly far easier - to go to one single site (a pirate site) for all the same content.
I largely pay Netflix because it's convenient. 90% of the stuff I want to watch, all in one place, in HD, no ads. Once that's gone, people won't pay five or six different providers. They'll go back to the one place they can get all that content. And it will be a pirate site.
I suspect Netflix will want to tighten up their device/login rules at some point too. Not entirely sure how they do that, but I think it's an accepted truth that there's a lot of people using it who aren't an account payer.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
I think that this is the bit I have a problem with. I can certainly see the Tories losing seats to the Lib Dems in the SW and possibly London along with the loss of some seats to the SNP. Where I struggle is how that is consistent with Labour's vote share recovering. The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour supporters defecting. How is that consistent with Labour's share recovering?
In 2017 both the main parties did spectacularly well with enough votes to win pretty much any other election decisively and all the minor parties were squeezed to death. Next time we may well see the opposite effect with the vote fragmenting. The question is which major party is most damaged by that. At the moment Labour looks nailed on and they will remain so until they finally get rid of Corbyn.
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will surge.
The other thing to consider is that in Labour seats that are currently seen as non-marginal there could be a lot of churn because 2017 Labour voters don’t think their vote is as important. I think that may apply in one or two London seats. Hornsey and Wood Green springs to mind, maybe Hampstead and Kilburn, too.
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local MP, voters will know their local MP, particularly if the MP is on record as staunchly remain exactly what remain voters of all colours will want returned to parliament. That is what happened last time isn’t it?
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
In which case privatise it.
It is an immensely powerful UK asset. I think that needs to be factored in to its future. But there is no doubt it would thrive as a subscription-based platform able to access the capital markets.
I agree with Mr. Pedley. We saw a 20 point lead vanish last time (admittedly with the most stupid campaign since Caligula declared war on Neptune) and things are very turbulent right now.
I too agree. But sages like Pedley aren’t being listened to by the media.
Let’s not forget, following 2016 leave vote in Labour areas Tories strategy last time was these seats are in play for them.
🤣
That voting leave 2016 makes you vote for the staunchest leave party in subsequent GE? Ignoring all other tribalism? and ideology how leave actually favours socialism rather than the business friendly conservatives? And the history where two thirds of labour MPs voted in commons to keep us out 1973, it’s prominent MPs lead no to Europe 75, it was a manifesto commitment to take us out without a ref in 83. Ignore all that sentiment and count their leave response to voters as votes in the bag for Boris? Bonkers! Bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk
Go on Cummings call that election. It’s easier to burn it down than build it up ain’t it. Easier to laugh at the King getting wet than stay dry on the beach yourself.
PS there’s an argument the Tories have already blown an autumn election with all these promises the last few weeks with fake money.
Besides, when is this election meant to happen?
October 17 has been mentioned, but that means no parliament in the run-up to a huge, known event. That's got to be a non-starter, hasn't it? It may be tempting for No 10 to have MPs out of the way on October 31, but there's no way enough MPs will vote for it.
In that case, we're looking at an election called early in November, in the triumph of B-day, "to allow the nation to democratically chart its course for the next chapter in its great history" yada yada. But that means an election around Christmas (brave), when the bumps in the road are probably at their bumpiest (double brave).
I know the No 10 bunker are keen on confusing the enemy as a virtue in itself, but this seems to be taking that principle too far. What am I missing?
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
The BBC could - should - be a massive, dominant force in world broadcasting.
But it would need a wholesale change in management to achieve it.
The License Fee is from the Ark. Spin it off. State owned commercial business. No mandatory tv tax, let it raise money as all the other subscription businesses are doing. No need for advertising, pay a subscription
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly foll owing May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
Even if he doesn't think he can, he's got no choice, on the "if you can't ride two horses, you shouldn't have joined the circus" principle.
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
I'm not sure about this. Johnson may have to accept the backstop.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
I think that this is the bit I have a problem with. I can certainly see the Tories losing seats to the Lib Dems in the SW and possibly London along with the loss of some seats to the SNP. Where I struggle is how that is consistent with Labour's vote share recovering. The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour supporters defecting. How is that consistent with Labour's share recovering?
In 2017 both the main parties did spectacularly well with enough votes to win pretty much any other election decisively and all the minor parties were squeezed to death. Next time we may well see the opposite effect with the vote fragmenting. The question is which major party is most damaged by that. At the moment Labour looks nailed on and they will remain so until they finally get rid of Corbyn.
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will surge.
The other thing to consider is that in Labour seats that are currently seen as non-marginal there could be a lot of churn because 2017 Labour voters don’t think their vote is as important. I think that may apply in one or two London seats. Hornsey and Wood Green springs to mind, maybe Hampstead and Kilburn, too.
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local MP, voters will know their local MP, particularly if the MP is on record as staunchly remain exactly what remain voters of all colours will want returned to parliament. That is what happened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
Even if Boris does win the polls are showing it will not be on the scale May was projected to win by in 2017, currently most polls predict a Tory majority of 0 to 50 at most not 100+ as they were predicting in early 2017. What is the same though is Boris still has a clear lead over Corbyn as best PM and best PM numbers tend to be a better predictor of election winners than general voting intention numbers.
Corbyn will also face the problem the general election is likely to be in the midst of Brexit with Boris and Farage winning Leavers to finally deliver Brexit and the LDs, Greens and SNP winning Remainers to stop Brexit and so he will get squeezed whereas in 2017 there were still 2 days until Brexit Day so he could neutralise the issue by promising Leavers he would still deliver Brexit and Remainers he would stop a hard Brexit and then focus on an anti austerity message. He is unlikely to be able to repeat the trick again
Much as I have argued with you @HYUFD I acknowledge you do seem to have an inside track on the machinations of the Tory Party...
How do you currently see things panning out - GE before Brexit, just after, or early next year?
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air it will boil down to one simple thing, Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
That will be the tide coming in, good luck staying dry Cummings
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
I think that this is the bit I have a problem with. I can certainly see the Tories losing seats to the Lib Dems in the SW and possibly London along with the loss of some seats to the SNP. Where I struggle is how that is consistent with Labour's vote share recovering. The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour supporters defecting. How is that consistent with Labour's share recovering?
In 2017 both the main parties did spectacularly well with enough votes to win pretty much any other election decisively and all the minor parties were squeezed to death. Next time we may well see the opposite effect with the vote fragmenting. The question is which major party is most damaged by that. At the moment Labour looks nailed on and they will remain so until they finally get rid of Corbyn.
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will surge.
The other thing to consider is that in Labour seats that are currently seen as non-marginal there could be a lot of churn because 2017 Labour voters don’t think their vote is as important. I think that may apply in one or two London seats. Hornsey and Wood Green springs to mind, maybe Hampstead and Kilburn, too.
LibDem support is very soft - 'easy come - easy go' - and likely to fall back in a GE. I really cannot see Swinson being a stronger campaigner than Corbyn.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly foll owing May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
Even if he doesn't think he can, he's got no choice, on the "if you can't ride two horses, you shouldn't have joined the circus" principle.
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
I'm not sure about this. Johnson may have to accept the backstop.
FWIW, I think that he'll try that as well. Accept the backstop with some lipstick, stand down the no deal plan, probably blaming Gove and Cummings for misleading him about the adequacy of their no deal prep. But the climbdown from his current posture will be enormous.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
I think that this is the bit I have a problem with. I can certainly see the Tories losing seats to the Lib Dems in the SW and possibly London along with the loss of some seats to the SNP. Where I struggle is how that is consistent with Labour's vote share recovering. The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour supporters defecting. How is that consistent with Labour's share recovering?
In 2017 both the main parties did spectacularly well with enough votes to win pretty much any other election decisively and all the minor parties were squeezed to death. Next time we may well see the opposite effect with the vote fragmenting. The question is which major party is most damaged by that. At the moment Labour looks nailed on and they will remain so until they finally get rid of Corbyn.
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will surge.
The other thing to consider is that in Labour seats that are currently seen as non-marginal there could be a lot of churn because 2017 Labour voters don’t think their vote is as important. I think that may apply in one or two London seats. Hornsey and Wood Green springs to mind, maybe Hampstead and Kilburn, too.
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local MP, voters will know their local MP, particularly if the MP is on record as staunchly remain exactly what remain voters of all colours will want returned to parliament. That is what happened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
How on earth a family survive something like that I do not know. But it is so admirable that he is trying to do something for the largely forgotten (at least by the West) victims of this awful tragedy.
Someone is going to have to teach me how to do the quotes without it saying "too long". Anyway.
Amazon are unlikely to unbundle the TV platform from their delivery service. For them it's all about customer retention and data gathering.
Disney are a shoo-in to have the stickiest subscriber base, as they have tied up so much old and new content and have the pester power factor, as a family orientated platform which complements a more adult platform. For them too, the streaming business is mostly about getting excellent customer data to cross-sell to their other (far more profitable) divisions (parks/hotels, games, toys).
The rest will compete against each other for casual subscribers, key players being Netflix, Apple, Warner and potentially the Beeb. Netflix are best placed with a) existing subscriber base b) management culture and are well placed for c) content. There's no reason why the BBC couldn't be very well placed for c) and a) were it not for b)!
Cheapskates and students might still do piracy but most people like the simplicity of an HD integrated user experience that they can subscribe or unsubscribe from easily. I am overseas where this model is already well embedded and do this all the time, signing up to things for a month or two at a time for the like of the World Cup, Ashes or Game of Thrones. You then keep an anchor subscription on top (which for me is Netflix).
To whoever said "oh no, evil Sky will buy them once it's public!". Well firstly why should I care about that. Secondly, any take private would still need to go through regulatory approval. And thirdly, if the govt kept a large or golden share, it could block this anyway.
TV licensing should be replaced by a system in which viewers pay per programme watched. They shouldn't have to pay the licence fee poll tax or monthly subscriptions to fund services they may or may not want. The technology is surely there.
The BBC brand is incredibly powerful, and it’s archive is huge. If it were to become subscription only and get full control of its platform, it could probably take on Sky very successfully in terms of subscription price and financial backing. It would also be a significant pull for advertisers. There’s no doubt it would do very well.
In which case privatise it.
It is an immensely powerful UK asset. I think that needs to be factored in to its future. But there is no doubt it would thrive as a subscription-based platform able to access the capital markets.
I'm sure that will be exploited by the lead underwriter on behalf of the state in the valuation.
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly foll owing May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
Even if he doesn't think he can, he's got no choice, on the "if you can't ride two horses, you shouldn't have joined the circus" principle.
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
I'm not sure about this. Johnson may have to accept the backstop.
FWIW, I think that he'll try that as well. Accept the backstop with some lipstick, stand down the no deal plan, probably blaming Gove and Cummings for misleading him about the adequacy of their no deal prep. But the climbdown from his current posture will be enormous.
Couldn't happen to a nicer chap.
Brexit is far less interesting than Cricket and BBC privatization. But since you raised it, I'm amazed how many people still think the government is bluffing on No Deal. This is now the overwhelmingly likely outcome.
The next election will be fought on the new political paradigm - leave/remain. Several parties are now very clearly embedded in positions along this new axis - Brexit and Tory on the Brexit side, LibDem, SNP, Plaid, Green, TIG on the other.
My former party - Labour- is the wild card. There is no way on this planet that the Stalinists will allow Labour to run a clear campaign that is unequivocally remain, No Way. Regardless of what party may want or even vote for.
So we can expect that in such a campaign as Brexit rages Labour will keep trying to ignore it, and will continue to openly contradict themselves. What impact this has will depend on the metrics in each individual seat. In my own seat of Stockton South Dr Paul Williams has been out front for remain and a referendum since the get go, knowing that our election win in 2017 was pulled off by creating a coalition of switching progressive voters. Alternately In Sheffield Hallam Labour took the seat from the LibDems because voters pivoted away from Clegg and the coalition and were prepared to vite for literally anyone as an alternative...
So an election won't be smooth and UNS can stay in it's box. But my view remains that Johnson has a narrow window of opportunity where he can call an election as his last remaining play before being emancipated by MPs and can campaign against parliament on a "give me majority to deliver No Deal" platform.
It's a risk. A big risk. But is not going a bigger risk...?
I disagree with your assumption that so much turns on attitudes to Brexit. Voters were sick to death of the subject in 2017 and are far more so now. There will be a very receptive audience for a party leader who brings up other issues.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
Neither here nor there - it was not the issue which really mattered to people.
To whoever said "oh no, evil Sky will buy them once it's public!". Well firstly why should I care about that. Secondly, any take private would still need to go through regulatory approval. And thirdly, if the govt kept a large or golden share, it could block this anyway.
If the government kept a large share, the next government would sell it off. Magic money trees and all that. Although foreign governments see nothing wrong in the state owning shares in private companies, what have the Germans got to teach us about running a stable economy?
And if Sky buys it, or any foreign company, it is another hole in the balance of payments. Watching telly will be an invisible import.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
I think that this is the bit I have a problem with. I can certainly see the Tories losing seats to the Lib Dems in the SW and possibly London along with the loss of some seats to the SNP. Where I struggle is how that is consistent with Labour's vote share recovering. The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will surge.
The other thing to consider is that in Labour seats that are currently seen as non-marginal there could be a lot of churn because 2017 Labour voters don’t think their vote is as important. I think that may apply in one or two London seats. Hornsey and Wood Green springs to mind, maybe Hampstead and Kilburn, too.
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local MP, voters will know their local MP, particularly if the MP is on record as staunchly remain exactly what remain voters of all colours will want returned to parliament. That is what happened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
No Deal Brexit collapses the Brexit Party vote in the Tories favour, if an election is held in the autumn perhaps even to get a mandate for it there is less economic impact yet and by aiming for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop Boris looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
Definitely. Both Labour and the Conservatives are tainted brands, whose main argument to the public is that they are not the other one. Nobody loves them for their own sakes.
Moreover, under their current leaderships, they are completely untrustworthy. Corbyn is a mass of conflicting principles, and in any case he has effectively been taken over by a gang of Commies. ABDPJohnson would sell his own grandmother if he thought there was anything in it for him - let alone the rest of us who are being sold down the river for a few barrels of contaminated foodstuffs.
It is high time that they both split up properly and we had a proper realignment of our politics.
I think this is mistaken, for a non-obvious reason. Both Tories and Labour do have a core vote of people (maybe 20% each) who really like them - Tory Leavers feel they're at last delivering Brexit and optimism, Labour leftists feel that the party at last stands for left-wing values again. But nearly *all* the LibDems who I know (and I know lots) are treating it exactly like football fans whose team is doing well - they're enjoying the ride, but apart from "bollocks to Brexit" they don't cite a single policy that they're keen to see implemented.
That's part of the general centrist malaise that's evident in most countries. Blairism didn't wear out its welcome only because of Iraq; ultimately, it wasn't seen to be making most people's lives better. The LibDems don't have a convincing agenda that really addresses that positively - they are riding high on exactly the negative appeal that you cite for the others - stop Brexit, stop Boris, stop Corbyn. Does the average LibDem voter know anything at all that the party is for?
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
Neither here nor there - it was not the issue which really mattered to people.
Stopping May getting a monster majority mattered to people last time. Not an issue next time.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
Neither here nor there - it was not the issue which really mattered to people.
Stopping May getting a monster majority mattered to people last time. Not an issue next time.
Most polls had ceased to imply that two weeks before polling day . Several were pointing to the possibility of a Hung Parliament - as some of us stated at the time.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
The American food lobby hates GIs. It will want the UK to, at a minimum, have a far more flexible regime than the EU does. Of course, the Melton Mowbray pork pie is not the most significant UK EU GI, Cornish pasties and Stilton are probably a bigger deal - but the biggest one of all, by a country mile, is Scotch whisky.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
Neither here nor there - it was not the issue which really mattered to people.
Stopping May getting a monster majority mattered to people last time. Not an issue next time.
The 2017 GE had echos of Heath's 1974 "who governs Britain?" election by asking the electorate for a strong mandate without a broad well-argued policy platform.
Even if Boris does win the polls are showing it will not be on the scale May was projected to win by in 2017, currently most polls predict a Tory majority of 0 to 50 at most not 100+ as they were predicting in early 2017. What is the same though is Boris still has a clear lead over Corbyn as best PM and best PM numbers tend to be a better predictor of election winners than general voting intention numbers.
Corbyn will also face the problem the general election is likely to be in the midst of Brexit with Boris and Farage winning Leavers to finally deliver Brexit and the LDs, Greens and SNP winning Remainers to stop Brexit and so he will get squeezed whereas in 2017 there were still 2 days until Brexit Day so he could neutralise the issue by promising Leavers he would still deliver Brexit and Remainers he would stop a hard Brexit and then focus on an anti austerity message. He is unlikely to be able to repeat the trick again
Much as I have argued with you @HYUFD I acknowledge you do seem to have an inside track on the machinations of the Tory Party...
How do you currently see things panning out - GE before Brexit, just after, or early next year?
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air it will boil down to one simple thing, Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
That will be the tide coming in, good luck staying dry Cummings
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
The American food lobby hates GIs. It will want the UK to, at a minimum, have a far more flexible regime than the EU does. Of course, the Melton Mowbray pork pie is not the most significant UK EU GI, Cornish pasties and Stilton are probably a bigger deal - but the biggest one of all, by a country mile, is Scotch whisky.
Yup, Scotch will be a test of just what the Brexitloons are willing to chuck on the fire to win their precious. Should burn with a nice blue flame at least.
Someone is going to have to teach me how to do the quotes without it saying "too long".
1. Click "Quote". You'll get the previous discussion in pairs of "blockquote" to "slash blockquote", nested, thus (I'm leaving out the actual slashes and angled brackets as they'll confuse this post:) : blockqoute class="Quote" rel=Byronic Thai girls are womderful. All of them. blockquote class="Quote" rel=hyufd Opinion polls show that Boris is more popular than Thai girls in the Scottish subsample slash blockquote slash blockquote
2. Highlight the bits of the discussion that you want to delete. Be sure to delete both the blockquote and the slash blockquote of anything you want to take out entirely. E.g. if you wanted to reply to byronic above but didn't want to reply to hyufd, you'd delete the middle two bits. Or you could just delete some words in it.
3. Press "backspace" to get rid of the highlighted stuff
Even if Boris does win the polls are showing it will not be on the scale May was projected to win by in 2017, currently most polls predict a Tory majority of 0 to 50 at most not 100+ as they were predicting in early 2017. What is the same though is Boris still has a clear lead over Corbyn as best PM and best PM numbers tend to be a better predictor of election winners than general voting intention numbers.
Corbyn will also face the problem the general election is likely to be in the midst of Brexit with Boris and Farage winning Leavers to finally deliver Brexit and the LDs, Greens and SNP winning Remainers to stop Brexit and so he will get squeezed whereas in 2017 there were still 2 days until Brexit Day so he could neutralise the issue by promising Leavers he would still deliver Brexit and Remainers he would stop a hard Brexit and then focus on an anti austerity message. He is unlikely to be able to repeat the trick again
Much as I have argued with you @HYUFD I acknowledge you do seem to have an inside track on the machinations of the Tory Party...
How do you currently see things panning out - GE before Brexit, just after, or early next year?
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air it will boil down to one simple thing, Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
That will be the tide coming in, good luck staying dry Cummings
"How many times do we have to tell you?"
Nice tax credits and housing benefit. It would be a shame if you lost them...
Johnson is clearly enjoying being Prime Minister, which he has looked forward to all his life. He really needs, and seems to want, a Brexit success, which is incompatible with the scorched earth that his policy implies. I get the impression his heart is no longer in Do or Die, although nothing changed on the ground and his advisors and backers are pushing to burn the bridges.
So he is rapidly foll owing May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
Even if he doesn't think he can, he's got no choice, on the "if you can't ride two horses, you shouldn't have joined the circus" principle.
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
I'm not sure about this. Johnson may have to accept the backstop.
FWIW, I think that he'll try that as well. Accept the backstop with some lipstick, stand down the no deal plan, probably blaming Gove and Cummings for misleading him about the adequacy of their no deal prep. But the climbdown from his current posture will be enormous.
Couldn't happen to a nicer chap.
Brexit is far less interesting than Cricket and BBC privatization. But since you raised it, I'm amazed how many people still think the government is bluffing on No Deal. This is now the overwhelmingly likely outcome.
One one hand, I can see the logic of that conclusion. On the other hand, consider this.
In the early 1990's there was a plan to change everyone's phone codes. The plan was originally published in 1991, to happen in 1994. In 1992, this was pushed back to 1995. The public information push started two years before the changes.
There was a £16 million publicity campaign (about £30 million in today's money), and eight months of parallel running of the old and new systems together.
When the big day came, plenty of people hadn't made the necessary changes.
Now that was a simple change, where nothing too bad was going to go wrong. If push comes to shove, the government has to ask itself whether the nation is going to be ready for a huge change in two months time, with lots of potential for things to go wrong?
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
The American food lobby hates GIs. It will want the UK to, at a minimum, have a far more flexible regime than the EU does. Of course, the Melton Mowbray pork pie is not the most significant UK EU GI, Cornish pasties and Stilton are probably a bigger deal - but the biggest one of all, by a country mile, is Scotch whisky.
Cheddar cheese is pretty huge. It has a low to middling GI* I think. Or is GI something to do with US military?
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
On UNS on the latest Yougov the Tories would gain 37 Labour seats, adding Rother Valley, Ashfield, Bishop Auckland, Keighley, Great Grimsby, Weaver Vale, Darlington, Stoke North, Vale of Clwyd, Penistone and Stockbridge, Peterborough, High Peak, Wolverhampton South West, Warwick and Leamington, Ipswich, Blackpool South etc to the seats you mention above
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Without breaking a sweat, I think the Tories will take or retake the following under pretty much any circumstances:
Kensington Canterbury Stroud Newcastle under Lyme Gower Chester Lincoln Barrow. Crewe Derby North
And there could be a few more where Labour are vulnerable due to Lib Dem seepage - Battersea and Bristol Norh West spring to mind.
However, that doesn't come close to 30. And that presupposes no Tory losses to Labour, which may be a bold assumption.
Disagree . Six of the defending Labour MPs will enjoy first term incumbency.
Where's the first term incumbency for MPs who pledged to implement Brexit - then didn't?
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
Neither here nor there - it was not the issue which really mattered to people.
Stopping May getting a monster majority mattered to people last time. Not an issue next time.
The 2017 GE had echos of Heath's 1974 "who governs Britain?" election by asking the electorate for a strong mandate without a broad well-argued policy platform.
If the Tories lose 10 seats to the SNP and 10 to the LibDems, how many gains from Labour do they need to get a majority?
642 seats (excl SF + Speaker) Therefore 322 seats needed for Majority Con currently 311 seats Minus 20 seats leaves Con with 291 seats Therefore, they would need to gain 31 seats from Labour. None of those would come in Scotland. Maybe a couple in Wales(?) So they need to gain 30 English Labour seats. Where?? Kensington, then, er...
Totnes, Canterbury
(I assume you weren’t factoring them in when you had the LDs gaining 10 seats but thinking about the 2017 baseline instead)
I don’t know Canterbury but I had understood that there were specific issues with the previous MP?
Julian Brazier was a hardcore brexiteer and a social conservative in the hand em and flog em tradition in what is increasingly a remainery and socially liberal university city. Unlike the local authority, the constituency does not include very Brexity Herne Bay but it does include gentrified Whitstable.
If the Tories want to win Canterbury back they have to call an election during the University of Kent and Canterbury Christ Church University vacation IMHO. It was the students that tipped it over - particularly those of the latter institution that is doing well and growing rapidly.
The TV licence is a very regressive tax. Public service broadcasting should be funded from general taxation. How much should be classed as 'public service' is another debate.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will hold their noses and stick with Labour because they viscerally dislike Johnson and don’t want him to be PM? It’s unknowable, but I suspect that where it counts quite a few will. Whether it’s enough is another question. I think the Tories have a very good chance in my constituency - Warwick & Leamington - because the LDs will
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local MP, voters will know their local MP, particularly if the MP is on record as staunchly remain exactly what remain voters of all colours will want returned to parliament. That is what happened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
No Deal Brexit collapses the Brexit Party vote in the Tories favour, if an election is held in the autumn perhaps even to get a mandate for it there is less economic impact yet and by aiming for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop Boris looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
You think Boris is a better campaigner than May and not gaffe after gaffe waiting to happen? Then why did his own campaign team hide him and not use this potent super weapon?
For evidence look at last weeks podium with Angela: Trumpesque mocking of Merkel with his premeditated “Wir schaffen das” jibe. And then accepting the insane 30day challenge with bumbling oomph leaving Malcolm Tucker back in downing street sounding off at the screen and banging his head on the table whilst chanting further expletives about the lack of operating sponge between his bosses ears.
Even if Boris does win the polls are showing it will not be on the scale May was projected to win by in 2017, currently most polls predict a Tory majority of 0 to 50 at most not 100+ as they were predicting in early 2017. What is the same though is Boris still has a clear lead over Corbyn as best PM and best PM numbers tend to be a better predictor of election winners than general voting intention numbers.
Corbyn will also face the problem the general election is likely to be in the midst of Brexit with Boris and Farage winning Leavers to finally deliver Brexit and the LDs, Greens and SNP winning Remainers to stop Brexit and so he will get squeezed whereas in 2017 there were still 2 days until Brexit Day so he could neutralise the issue by promising Leavers he would still deliver Brexit and Remainers he would stop a hard Brexit and then focus on an anti austerity message. He is unlikely to be able to repeat the trick again
Much as I have argued with you @HYUFD I acknowledge you do seem to have an inside track on the machinations of the Tory Party...
How do you currently see things panning out - GE before Brexit, just after, or early next year?
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
That all sounds plausible but I appreciate it's just a guess. Thanks.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local ppened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
No Deal Brexit collapses the Brexit Party vote in the Tories favour, if an election is held in the autumn perhaps even to get a mandate for it there is less economic impact yet and by aiming for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop Boris looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
You think Boris is a better campaigner than May and not gaffe after gaffe waiting to happen? Then why did his own campaign team hide him and not use this potent super weapon?
For evidence look at last weeks podium with Angela: Trumpesque mocking of Merkel with his premeditated “Wir schaffen das” jibe. And then accepting the insane 30day challenge with bumbling oomph leaving Malcolm Tucker back in downing street sounding off at the screen and banging his head on the table whilst chanting further expletives about the lack of operating sponge between his bosses ears.
Boris has won 2 London Mayoral elections, the only Tory to do so and was lead campaigner for Leave in the winning EU referendum campaign.
By offering to propose a technical solution for the Irish border to Merkel and Macron in 30 days he also looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse his proposal and he has to go to No Deal on October 31st, so excellent politics again
Even if Boris does win the polls are showing it will not be on the scale May was projected to win by in 2017, currently most polls predict a Tory majority of 0 to 50 at most not 100+ as they were predicting in early 2017. What is the same though is Boris still has a clear lead over Corbyn as best PM and best PM numbers tend to be a better predictor of election winners than general voting intention numbers.
Corbyn will also face the problem the general election is likely to be in the midst of Brexit with Boris and Farage winning Leavers to finally deliver Brexit and the LDs, Greens and SNP winning Remainers to stop Brexit and so he will get squeezed whereas in 2017 there were still 2 days until Brexit Day so he could neutralise the issue by promising Leavers he would still deliver Brexit and Remainers he would stop a hard Brexit and then focus on an anti austerity message. He is unlikely to be able to repeat the trick again
Much as I have argued with you @HYUFD I acknowledge you do seem to have an inside track on the machinations of the Tory Party...
How do you currently see things panning out - GE before Brexit, just after, or early next year?
Corbyn pushes a VONC in September which fails, if the EU do not agree to a technical alternative to the backstop by the end of conference season I think Boris will call a general election in early October on a Brexit Deal or No Deal ticket on October 31st, the EU will grant an extension until general election day at the Commons request which Boris will reluctantly accept forcing a choice between Brexit with No Deal under Boris or potentially further extension leading to EUref2 and no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
That all sounds plausible but I appreciate it's just a guess. Thanks.
We will see but that is the likeliest scenario in my view
You think Boris is a better campaigner than May and not gaffe after gaffe waiting to happen? Then why did his own campaign team hide him and not use this potent super weapon?
For evidence look at last weeks podium with Angela: Trumpesque mocking of Merkel with his premeditated “Wir schaffen das” jibe. And then accepting the insane 30day challenge with bumbling oomph leaving Malcolm Tucker back in downing street sounding off at the screen and banging his head on the table whilst chanting further expletives about the lack of operating sponge between his bosses ears.
The TV licence is a very regressive tax. Public service broadcasting should be funded from general taxation. How much should be classed as 'public service' is another debate.
I agree. If it's a public service, fund it like one, if necessary slimmed down.
If it isn't, sell it.
IMO it would be a shame if the latter route is taken. I think there IS room in the media landscape for public service broadcasting. If everything were driven by the profit motive I dread to imagine the sort of 'popular' dross I would have to wade through to find anything suitable for my refined sensibilities.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
The American food lobby hates GIs. It will want the UK to, at a minimum, have a far more flexible regime than the EU does. Of course, the Melton Mowbray pork pie is not the most significant UK EU GI, Cornish pasties and Stilton are probably a bigger deal - but the biggest one of all, by a country mile, is Scotch whisky.
Is that actually true? That the American food lobby hates GIs? Or are GIs something American negotiators can "reluctantly" concede because in most cases there are FDA rules against blue Smarties and Kinder Eggs or sheer distance keeping Americans safe.
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls proving accurate guide. and forget how the last exit poll came as such a shock. Labour will pick up on polling day for the same reason as last time, it’s not about Corbyn it’s about the local ppened last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
No Deal Brexit collapses the Brexit Party vote in the Tories favour, if an election is held in the autumn perhaps even to get a mandate for it there is less economic impact yet and by aiming for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop Boris looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
You think Boris is a better campaigner than May and not gaffe after gaffe waiting to happen? Then why did
Boris has won 2 London Mayoral elections, the only Tory to do so and was lead campaigner for Leave in the winning EU referendum campaign.
By offering to propose a technical solution for the Irish border to Merkel and Macron in 30 days he also looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse his proposal and he has to go to No Deal on October 31st, so excellent politics again
Ken Livingstone is the only Labour politician to win 2 London mayoral elections and no-one is suggesting he should lead Labour. If Ken hadn’t gratuitously pissed off Jewish voters in NW postcodes he would have won in 2008 and in 2012 he was a tired busted flush. Then again so is Corbyn. But it’s not just Corbyn he’s up against.
The problem with a “technical solution” is that (even if there is one) it is, well, technical - in other words it needs attention to detail. Which even his most rabid defenders cannot say he has.
< The 2017 GE had echos of Heath's 1974 "who governs Britain?" election by asking the electorate for a strong mandate without a broad well-argued policy platform.
Actually, the forthcoming GE is more likely to be a Feb-74 type contest. In 1970, the Conservatives got 46% of the vote (Heath got a higher share then Thatcher, Major or May) and between them Con-Lab got 89% of the vote (85% in 2017).
The Feb 74 election (for the benefit of those under 50) took place in a febrile atmosphere with the 3 Day Week and power cuts (a brief shortage of avocadoes doesn't really compare). Heath saw the election as an opportunity to show it was the Conservatives and not the TUC who ran Britain rather as Johnson trying to show us it's the Conservatives and not the Remain lobby and their EU allies which governs Britain.
The two things about Feb 74 many forget are first that the Conservatives won more votes than Labour but fewer seats (1951 reversed) and that the Con-Lab share fell to 76% with the Liberals and SNP picking up a lot of votes but not many seats.
The latest YouGov shows Con-Lab at 54% - it has never been so low. For the first time the Conservatives face a substantial challenge on their flank from BP while Labour and the LDs are very close. The Con-LD swing on YouGov is 10.5% while the Lab-LD swing is 15.5%.
These are huge movements and make UNS USE-less. In Feb 74 the Liberal vote went up spectacularly but broadly and that meant a few wins and lot of strong second places. The vote may be more concentrated (in 2017 a lower vote share than 1970 brought 12 seats) in 2019. Where will the BP poll well and what will be the impact - what of Scotland and Wales where equally large vote swings are being registered in polls?
For all the faux optimism in the pro-Johnson press, nothing has changed. The EU constantly and rightly remind us the onus is on the UK to come up with solutions to the issues caused by us leaving the SM and possibly the CU. Only a quarter are in the No Deal bunker and more than a third want to Remain with another quarter either clinging to the TM deal or the nonsensical Labour position (these are the votes in play when it comes down to No Deal vs Remain).
Polls will be used not as scientific statements of objective fact but as propaganda - as we know, it's the question, not the answer, that drives most polls.
The TV licence is a very regressive tax. Public service broadcasting should be funded from general taxation. How much should be classed as 'public service' is another debate.
< The 2017 GE had echos of Heath's 1974 "who governs Britain?" election by asking the electorate for a strong mandate without a broad well-argued policy platform.
Actually, the forthcoming GE is more likely to be a Feb-74 type contest. In 1970, the Conservatives got 46% of the vote (Heath got a higher share then Thatcher, Major or May) and between them Con-Lab got 89% of the vote (85% in 2017).
The Feb 74 election (for the benefit of those under 50) took place in a febrile atmosphere with the 3 Day Week and power cuts (a brief shortage of avocadoes doesn't really compare). Heath saw the election as an opportunity to show it was the Conservatives and not the TUC who ran Britain rather as Johnson trying to show us it's the Conservatives and not the Remain lobby and their EU allies which governs Britain.
The two things about Feb 74 many forget are first that the Conservatives won more votes than Labour but fewer seats (1951 reversed) and that the Con-Lab share fell to 76% with the Liberals and SNP picking up a lot of votes but not many seats.
The latest YouGov shows Con-Lab at 54% - it has never been so low. For the first time the Conservatives face a substantial challenge on their flank from BP while Labour and the LDs are very close. The Con-LD swing on YouGov is 10.5% while the Lab-LD swing is 15.5%.
These are huge movements and make UNS USE-less. In Feb 74 the Liberal vote went up spectacularly but broadly and that meant a few wins and lot of strong second places. The vote may be more concentrated (in 2017 a lower vote share than 1970 brought 12 seats) in 2019. Where will the BP poll well and what will be the impact - what of Scotland and Wales where equally large vote swings are being registered in polls?
For all the faux optimism in the pro-Johnson press, nothing has changed. The EU constantly and rightly remind us the onus is on the UK to come up with solutions to the issues caused by us leaving the SM and possibly the CU. Only a quarter are in the No Deal bunker and more than a third want to Remain with another quarter either clinging to the TM deal or the nonsensical Labour position (these are the votes in play when it comes down to No Deal vs Remain).
Polls will be used not as scientific statements of objective fact but as propaganda - as we know, it's the question, not the answer, that drives most polls.
Had May still been Tory leader it may have been Feb or even October 1974, Boris though is far more charismatic than the Heath like May and has stopped leakage of the Tory vote to the Brexit Party, even Powell refused to endorse Heath in 1974 causing Tory seats in the Midlands to be lost.
Corbyn is also more left-wing than Wilson was and polls far worse in best PM polls than Wilson did too
"It’s possible to foresee a world where Lib Dem / SNP gains really hurt the Tories & meanwhile Lab run a 2017 style campaign that recovers vote share again."
The Lib Dems are turbo charged by remainer Labour
The key is, come an election, how many 2017 Labour voters in Labour marginals will
Yes the likes of HY has tied himself to these polls last time isn’t it?
The last Survation poll in the 2017 campaign had a 1% Tory lead, the Tories ended up with a 2% lead, the latest Survation has a 4% Tory lead
That 4% lead is not a day before polling day though is it? The theme of an election doesn’t emerge till the campaign is underway. And I’m confident If the election comes this autumn with no deal brexit in the air the theme will be Boris Johnson will wreck the economy and make your household poorer.
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
No Deal Brexit collapses the Brexit Party vote in the Tories favour, if an election is held in the autumn perhaps even to get a mandate for it there is less economic impact yet and by aiming for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop Boris looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
You think Boris is a better campaigner than May and not gaffe after gaffe waiting to happen? Then why did
Boris has won 2 London Mayoral elections, the only Tory to do so and was lead campaigner for Leave in the winning EU referendum campaign.
By offering to propose a technical solution for the Irish border to Merkel and Macron in 30 days he also looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse his proposal and he has to go to No Deal on October 31st, so excellent politics again
Ken Livingstone is the only Labour politician to win 2 London mayoral elections and no-one is suggesting he should lead Labour. If Ken hadn’t gratuitously pissed off Jewish voters in NW postcodes he would have won in 2008 and in 2012 he was a tired busted flush. Then again so is Corbyn. But it’s not just Corbyn he’s up against.
The problem with a “technical solution” is that (even if there is one) it is, well, technical - in other words it needs attention to detail. Which even his most rabid defenders cannot say he has.
London is a mainly Labour city, not an area in the shires.
Boris has advisers to do the detail, like most of the best leaders he sets the direction
< The 2017 GE had echos of Heath's 1974 "who governs Britain?" election by asking the electorate for a strong mandate without a broad well-argued policy platform.
Actually, the forthcoming GE is more likely to be a Feb-74 type contest. In 1970, the Conservatives got 46% of the vote (Heath got a higher share then Thatcher, Major or May) and between them Con-Lab got 89% of the vote (85% in 2017).
The Feb 74 election (for the benefit of those under 50) took place in a febrile atmosphere with the 3 Day Week and power cuts (a brief shortage of avocadoes doesn't really compare). Heath saw the election as an opportunity to show it was the Conservatives and not the TUC who ran Britain rather as Johnson trying to show us it's the Conservatives and not the Remain lobby and their EU allies which governs Britain.
The two things about Feb 74 many forget are first that the Conservatives won more votes than Labour but fewer seats (1951 reversed) and that the Con-Lab share fell to 76% with the Liberals and SNP picking up a lot of votes but not many seats.
The latest YouGov shows Con-Lab at 54% - it has never been so low. For the first time the Conservatives face a substantial challenge on their flank from BP while Labour and the LDs are very close. The Con-LD swing on YouGov is 10.5% while the Lab-LD swing is 15.5%.
These are huge movements and make UNS USE-less. In Feb 74 the Liberal vote went up spectacularly but broadly and that meant a few wins and lot of strong second places. The vote may be more concentrated (in 2017 a lower vote share than 1970 brought 12 seats) in 2019. Where will the BP poll well and what will be the impact - what of Scotland and Wales where equally large vote swings are being registered in polls?
For all the faux optimism in the pro-Johnson press, nothing has changed. The EU constantly and rightly remind us the onus is on the UK to come up with solutions to the issues caused by us leaving the SM and possibly the CU. Only a quarter are in the No Deal bunker and more than a third want to Remain with another quarter either clinging to the TM deal or the nonsensical Labour position (these are the votes in play when it comes down to No Deal vs Remain).
Polls will be used not as scientific statements of objective fact but as propaganda - as we know, it's the question, not the answer, that drives most polls.
Well indeed, and it was the Feb 1974 GE I was referring to.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr O'Callaghan - who chairs the association, which represents pie producers - said: "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."
Let me guess, a bad boy told BJ this and ran away (not that he'll ever feel obliged to justify it, particularly since he's now refusing to be interviewed by C4 because they accused him of..er..lying).
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
The American food lobby hates GIs. It will want the UK to, at a minimum, have a far more flexible regime than the EU does. Of course, the Melton Mowbray pork pie is not the most significant UK EU GI, Cornish pasties and Stilton are probably a bigger deal - but the biggest one of all, by a country mile, is Scotch whisky.
Is that actually true? That the American food lobby hates GIs? Or are GIs something American negotiators can "reluctantly" concede because in most cases there are FDA rules against blue Smarties and Kinder Eggs or sheer distance keeping Americans safe.
Yep, it hates them and lobbies against them. See here for a decent summary of the issues:
Comments
However I think he will agree an extension for further talks with a view to passing a deal and fighting a spring 2020 election off the back of that. An election that in my view he would win comfortably.
Netflix and Amazon are engaged in a content arms-war because until extremely recently, they had no proprietary content at all. Netflix in particular knew early on that once the big content producers realised the superiority of the Netflix distribution model, Netflix would be stuffed unless they had their own content.
Both Disney and the BBC start from an entirely different position, with decades of content. I'd counter that the BBC could get halfway towards Netflix's current subscription numbers of 150 million without upping their content spend much at all. Don't underestimate the value of an Only Fools or Fawlty Towers - people say they subscribe to Netflix for arty new content Roma but all they end up watching when they're tired on a Tuesday night is re-runs of Friends.
Either way, wouldn't the whole point of privatisation be to allow the BBC to compete on a level playing field? That is, with the same scale as the globalised content producers? Netflix have been paying for their content splurge with debt and there's no reason why a privatised BBC couldn't do something similar.
FWIW, because of family commitments, I live in a one-bed rented flat, do three jobs, live frugally and virtually never take a holiday. I earn well and in general enjoy life but I don't think most people would think it especially privileged. But I wouldn't argue *for* my beliefs on that basis either - if our views have any value at all, it's to the extent that they benefit most of the population. The well-worn debate between "concentrate on getting elected" and "have good policies" has an honourable tradition on both sides, and the answer is never 100% one or the other.
So he is rapidly following May's journey and has now reactivated Chequers that the EU rejected sand he called a turd before resigning over it.
The Brexit challenge is to negotiate an arrangement that is significantly worse than the one we already have and call it a triumph. Johnson thinks he can do that, I believe.
It is essential that we do get variety in our programming, not just the same corporate American hegemony.
https://twitter.com/yougov/status/1159017909756338176
Congratulations to Keiran on becoming a father. Relax and enjoy. The first 20 years are the worst. After that it gets easier.
Really the MSM should be paying OGH. The facts for this story - https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/26/priti-patel-accused-of-conflict-of-interest-in-mod-contract?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true - were being debated on here a few weeks back.
On topic, the Tories are in danger of becoming hubristic.
The key facts they seem to forget are these:-
1. They have no realistic alternative to the Irish backstop which can be implemented now.
2. They can give no guarantee to the EU27 that the WA would pass Parliament if the backstop were removed. Indeed, according to reports Johnson’s envoy has said that the WA is unacceptable for reasons other than the backstop.
3. When a No Deal exit happens Britain loses control of a lot of key decisions and will become much much more dependant than now on the goodwill and permissions and agreements of others. That would be fine if that is what the voters clearly wanted but they were sold a lie - “Take Back Control” - and if they see that that is not what they are getting the party in charge cannot safely assume it will get an electoral reward.
Corbyn is death, the destroyer of things. Under him, a movement which has existed for 119 years in it's current form is done. Unelectable. Impotent. Irrelevant to the Real Needs. And to really make it worse the Stalinists have created their own NKVD, who run around the party seeding hate for their own side and anti-semitism and an absurd personality cult where I am told with a straight face by a cultists that Corbyn is the bravest leader this party has ever had. Braver than Major Attlee I asked? Oh yes, No other leader had to endure the attacks and the traitors like the Jeremy.
But give it a week. It will be back.
The arithmetic below of 10 gains by LDs from Con looks quite the underestimate to me. I think that the Labour vote will drop, buut will be especially well concentrated.
I don't think Bozo will come out of an election well.
Beautiful day on the Isle of Wight. 30th Anniversary, so signing off. Play nicely people!
At some point, he will have to press the go/no go button on leaving with no deal on October 31. That may come in 25ish days time. Whatever he does then will upset someone. Then the gamesg afoot...
(He also plays well in the SW, where the LibDems reckon their Bollocks To Brexit will play well. Bless.....)
Incidentally, my wife's brother's wife's cousin migrated from India to Italy.
Spotify achieved more or less global dominance because more or less every song in the world is there. One price (plus an ad supported model), one app, one place for everything.
At the minute, I subscribe to Netflix and get Amazon Prime thrown in for free as part of free delivery. Amazon prime has gotten a lot better in the last year and is quite good for movies. But if they spun off the delivery service from the streaming service, I would cancel the streaming service. And this is the problem.
When I can get 90% of my content through Netflix and Amazon for about £15 a month, I use pirate streams only 10% of the time. But once I'm expected to pay a subscription to Netflix, Amazon, Disney, BBC, HBO, whoever else - for all their exclusive content, it becomes cheaper - but more importantly far easier - to go to one single site (a pirate site) for all the same content.
I largely pay Netflix because it's convenient. 90% of the stuff I want to watch, all in one place, in HD, no ads. Once that's gone, people won't pay five or six different providers. They'll go back to the one place they can get all that content. And it will be a pirate site.
But it would need a wholesale change in management to achieve it.
No one knows how much tactical voting will occur, but it would be interesting to at least see some analysis of the sensitivity to this factor.
Edit to add: unless someone knows of one that exists already?
Let’s not forget, following 2016 leave vote in Labour areas Tories strategy last time was these seats are in play for them.
🤣
That voting leave 2016 makes you vote for the staunchest leave party in subsequent GE? Ignoring all other tribalism? and ideology how leave actually favours socialism rather than the business friendly conservatives? And the history where two thirds of labour MPs voted in commons to keep us out 1973, it’s prominent MPs lead no to Europe 75, it was a manifesto commitment to take us out without a ref in 83. Ignore all that sentiment and count their leave response to voters as votes in the bag for Boris? Bonkers! Bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk bonk
Go on Cummings call that election. It’s easier to burn it down than build it up ain’t it. Easier to laugh at the King getting wet than stay dry on the beach yourself.
PS there’s an argument the Tories have already blown an autumn election with all these promises the last few weeks with fake money.
Call that election tomorrow 😆
The competition is much more formidable than even a few years ago, and every new entrant faces the hurdle of representing extra cost and inconvenience to the consumer.
The BBC might have had a real chance at being a dominant player a few years back, but I seriously doubt it now.
And they don’t have either the deep pockets of Netflix/Amazon/Apple, or anyone with the commercial programming genius of Ted Sarandos.
The politics don’t really work, either, as going that way would mean turning off most of the current terrestrial service. Which would piss off the Tories key voting demographic...
October 17 has been mentioned, but that means no parliament in the run-up to a huge, known event. That's got to be a non-starter, hasn't it? It may be tempting for No 10 to have MPs out of the way on October 31, but there's no way enough MPs will vote for it.
In that case, we're looking at an election called early in November, in the triumph of B-day, "to allow the nation to democratically chart its course for the next chapter in its great history" yada yada. But that means an election around Christmas (brave), when the bumps in the road are probably at their bumpiest (double brave).
I know the No 10 bunker are keen on confusing the enemy as a virtue in itself, but this seems to be taking that principle too far. What am I missing?
That will be the tide coming in, good luck staying dry Cummings
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49470831
Couldn't happen to a nicer chap.
Just another bunch of lying shysters.....
I would agree though, waiting till 2020, 21, 22, could result in a more cataclysmic loss
How on earth a family survive something like that I do not know. But it is so admirable that he is trying to do something for the largely forgotten (at least by the West) victims of this awful tragedy.
Amazon are unlikely to unbundle the TV platform from their delivery service. For them it's all about customer retention and data gathering.
Disney are a shoo-in to have the stickiest subscriber base, as they have tied up so much old and new content and have the pester power factor, as a family orientated platform which complements a more adult platform. For them too, the streaming business is mostly about getting excellent customer data to cross-sell to their other (far more profitable) divisions (parks/hotels, games, toys).
The rest will compete against each other for casual subscribers, key players being Netflix, Apple, Warner and potentially the Beeb. Netflix are best placed with a) existing subscriber base b) management culture and are well placed for c) content. There's no reason why the BBC couldn't be very well placed for c) and a) were it not for b)!
Cheapskates and students might still do piracy but most people like the simplicity of an HD integrated user experience that they can subscribe or unsubscribe from easily. I am overseas where this model is already well embedded and do this all the time, signing up to things for a month or two at a time for the like of the World Cup, Ashes or Game of Thrones. You then keep an anchor subscription on top (which for me is Netflix).
To whoever said "oh no, evil Sky will buy them once it's public!". Well firstly why should I care about that. Secondly, any take private would still need to go through regulatory approval. And thirdly, if the govt kept a large or golden share, it could block this anyway.
And if Sky buys it, or any foreign company, it is another hole in the balance of payments. Watching telly will be an invisible import.
At the weekend BJ was blathering on about all the current restrictions to UK exports to the US, including shower trays. I think the exciting opportunities of the international shower tray trade have got innovative jam knocked into a cocked hat.
Boris is also a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the likes of the dementia tax gaffe
:
blockqoute class="Quote" rel=Byronic Thai girls are womderful. All of them.
blockquote class="Quote" rel=hyufd Opinion polls show that Boris is more popular than Thai girls in the Scottish subsample
slash blockquote
slash blockquote
2. Highlight the bits of the discussion that you want to delete. Be sure to delete both the blockquote and the slash blockquote of anything you want to take out entirely. E.g. if you wanted to reply to byronic above but didn't want to reply to hyufd, you'd delete the middle two bits. Or you could just delete some words in it.
3. Press "backspace" to get rid of the highlighted stuff
4. Add your pearls of wisdom at the bottom.
In the early 1990's there was a plan to change everyone's phone codes.
The plan was originally published in 1991, to happen in 1994. In 1992, this was pushed back to 1995. The public information push started two years before the changes.
There was a £16 million publicity campaign (about £30 million in today's money), and eight months of parallel running of the old and new systems together.
When the big day came, plenty of people hadn't made the necessary changes.
(https://www.independent.co.uk/news/bt-chaos-one-to-remember-1615841.html)
Now that was a simple change, where nothing too bad was going to go wrong. If push comes to shove, the government has to ask itself whether the nation is going to be ready for a huge change in two months time, with lots of potential for things to go wrong?
*Gycemic Index.
If the Tories want to win Canterbury back they have to call an election during the University of Kent and Canterbury Christ Church University vacation IMHO. It was the students that tipped it over - particularly those of the latter institution that is doing well and growing rapidly.
For evidence look at last weeks podium with Angela: Trumpesque mocking of Merkel with his premeditated “Wir schaffen das” jibe. And then accepting the insane 30day challenge with bumbling oomph leaving Malcolm Tucker back in downing street sounding off at the screen and banging his head on the table whilst chanting further expletives about the lack of operating sponge between his bosses ears.
By offering to propose a technical solution for the Irish border to Merkel and Macron in 30 days he also looks reasonable to swing voters if the EU refuse his proposal and he has to go to No Deal on October 31st, so excellent politics again
If it isn't, sell it.
IMO it would be a shame if the latter route is taken. I think there IS room in the media landscape for public service broadcasting. If everything were driven by the profit motive I dread to imagine the sort of 'popular' dross I would have to wade through to find anything suitable for my refined sensibilities.
The problem with a “technical solution” is that (even if there is one) it is, well, technical - in other words it needs attention to detail. Which even his most rabid defenders cannot say he has.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2019/08/25/lettersadd-slave-reparations-claim-scots-exiled-clearances/
The Feb 74 election (for the benefit of those under 50) took place in a febrile atmosphere with the 3 Day Week and power cuts (a brief shortage of avocadoes doesn't really compare). Heath saw the election as an opportunity to show it was the Conservatives and not the TUC who ran Britain rather as Johnson trying to show us it's the Conservatives and not the Remain lobby and their EU allies which governs Britain.
The two things about Feb 74 many forget are first that the Conservatives won more votes than Labour but fewer seats (1951 reversed) and that the Con-Lab share fell to 76% with the Liberals and SNP picking up a lot of votes but not many seats.
The latest YouGov shows Con-Lab at 54% - it has never been so low. For the first time the Conservatives face a substantial challenge on their flank from BP while Labour and the LDs are very close. The Con-LD swing on YouGov is 10.5% while the Lab-LD swing is 15.5%.
These are huge movements and make UNS USE-less. In Feb 74 the Liberal vote went up spectacularly but broadly and that meant a few wins and lot of strong second places. The vote may be more concentrated (in 2017 a lower vote share than 1970 brought 12 seats) in 2019. Where will the BP poll well and what will be the impact - what of Scotland and Wales where equally large vote swings are being registered in polls?
For all the faux optimism in the pro-Johnson press, nothing has changed. The EU constantly and rightly remind us the onus is on the UK to come up with solutions to the issues caused by us leaving the SM and possibly the CU. Only a quarter are in the No Deal bunker and more than a third want to Remain with another quarter either clinging to the TM deal or the nonsensical Labour position (these are the votes in play when it comes down to No Deal vs Remain).
Polls will be used not as scientific statements of objective fact but as propaganda - as we know, it's the question, not the answer, that drives most polls.
Corbyn is also more left-wing than Wilson was and polls far worse in best PM polls than Wilson did too
Boris has advisers to do the detail, like most of the best leaders he sets the direction
https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R44556.html