Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Farage plays his Trump card but Johnson surely shouldn’t be te

135678

Comments


  • Blair may have been a scumbag but I don't think he was corrupt. What are you thinking of specifically?

    Ecclestone's million? Blair reportedly thought that was the end of his career when that came out. Thankfully for him, he was still in his honeymoon period with the press.....
    Fair point
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,718

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    edited November 2019

    I'm having problems displaying comments below the line again except with Vanilla (since last night). I've cleared the cache history and tried a different browser - no luck. Any ideas?

    I cannot get PB on my tablet or mobile and can only access it through vanilla.

    It is now 36 hours. No idea why but it is not optimal
    What is wrong with using Vanilla? I much prefer being able to read the comments in the right order rather than having to scroll to the bottom and then slowly up again.
    can't swipe down to refresh.
  • Mr. Pointer, *loath. The 'reluctance' spelling has no 'e'. Very easy mistake to make, though.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    Something a bit sad about the haka being performed for the third place game....
  • So on Vanilla, I also long-since gave up trying to see pb comments on my phone. But is there a way to get mobile vanilla to show the most recent posts first? On android Firefox I always end up hitting refresh, then scrolling going down to the bottom, which I do by doing an in-page search for "Leave a c". I can't help thinking there must be a more efficient workflow.
  • Meanwhile, in "How dare the media describe me as a Labour activist?" news:
    https://twitter.com/JeremyDuns/status/1190016836433264640
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,490
    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The LDs apparently want Labour to stand down in Jacob Rees-Mogg's seat in NE Somerset. The problem is why would Labour stand down when the result last time was Con 54%, Lab 35%, LD 8%.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7634195/Lib-Dems-WONT-stand-against-ex-Cabinet-minister-Dominic-Grieve.html

    Same situation in a lot of seats, especially in the SW . The failure to recover in 2017 makes the tactical argument harder.
    Same in Totnes. LibDems might claim they have the MP here, but last time they were 7,000 votes behind Labour, who in turn were 13,000 behind the Conservatives. If stopping Brexit is so important, perhaps Dr. Sarah should stand down and let Labour have a crack at it?

    Yeah, right.....
    Yep. There’s lots of places in the south of England where ‘tactical’ voters won’t know who to vote for. There’s no chance of Labour overtaking the Tories, but the LDs were a distant third last time out. Places like Wokingham were also mentioned yesterday, where there’s a large Con majority and a split opposition.

    The risk for the LDs is that they spread their resources too thin on the ground, missing target seats by trying to get large numbers of tactical votes for second place in safe Tory seats.
    I'll be interested to see what happens in my seat. Traditionally they put in lots of effort, more than the tories (as it's a safe seat) but last time none at all as they all worked Bath instead.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Foxy said:

    I really never got this NHS worship thing. Respecting doctors and medical staff? Sure.

    But when did a system of funding become an article of faith, what's so special about the NHS that makes it holy and sacred when compared to the German or Swiss models.

    This twitter thread and programme on Dispatches gives some idea of what is in store with Britain Trump doing a deal:

    https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945?s=19
    Much ado about nothing.

    No government ever would or could afford to end NICE making sure drugs are value for money and as cheap as possible.
    And yet we managed without until the Labour government created it in 1999.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,582

    Mr. Pointer, *loath. The 'reluctance' spelling has no 'e'. Very easy mistake to make, though.

    I stand corrected.

    You'll have to take my word for it that I had doubts as I typed it :smile:
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 20,038
    Interesting description of the subtleties of misuse of social media:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/01/undercover-reporter-reveals-life-in-a-polish-troll-farm
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Right now they are going to the greens (makes sense) and lib dems

    I doubt they will change in the next few weeks
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Even the Beeb are criticising Corbyn’s campaign slogans as lies, although they do rather pull their punches in the conclusion:

    General election 2019: Have the Conservatives 'slashed taxes for the richest'?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50249909

    During the Osborne years I lost my PA, my CB and paid a higher rate on a greater proportion of my income. I didn't complain (much). The country clearly needed the money to reduce the deficit and people like me fortunate enough to have a good income had to take the strain. But this "slashing taxes for the rich" meme is just irritating.
    That is BoZo's plan though. He promised* in his leadership campaign to raise the threshold for higher rate tax to £80,000.

    *yes, I know what his promises are worth!
    Do you think that, after five years of a Corbyn government, life will be better or worse for someone on a £100k salary, with a £1m pension pot and £1m in property and other investments?
    I imagine it's hard to convince somebody who has chosen to live in Dubai that there is more to life than money, but here goes. I have more money than I know what to do with but in every other respect my quality of life has gone down under this government. I can't get doctors appointments for my kids. The schools are visibly struggling under spending cuts. The pavements never get cleaned. There are homeless people everywhere. They have visited this Brexit nightmare on us that has disrupted the lives of friends and family and taken away rights to work and live in Europe that I considered my birthright. And all the Tories can offer is to cut my taxes, when more money is the one thing I don't need. And they're probably lying anyway! I don't know if Corbyn will succeed in improving things (I am sceptical) but at least he's offering to try.
    Ha yes, given the only reason one would volunteer to live in Dubai is a preoccupation with money, I think you are probably fighting a losing battle —- but a very good effort anyway.
    Money and sun I would assume
    I think Sandpit also is stuck because Mrs Sandpit falls foul of Home Office rules for residency.

    One positive for him about a Jezza government is a relaxation of those rules...
    Ha. Half true, but the majority of migration of skilled workers under a Jezza government will be from the UK, not to it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Tories down from 21% to 15%

    Labour down from 64% to 38%

    Who should be cacking it more?
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,490

    Foxy said:



    Nah, for the vast majority of voters there is an easy tactical choice. Vote Lab in a Lab held seat, vote LD in a Tory held one. It really is that simple.

    That works as tactical voting advice in a lot of places, but the LibDems are also trying hard in seats where Labour holds the seat and they're third, using the argument "That was then, this is now", as Mike did.
    Indeed in Bedford where I've voted tactically for LAB at the last two elections I won't be next time. However successful the LDs might be I don't want my vote to go Corbyn because of his lack of action on Jew hate racism - something I feel very strongly about.
    Yup - exactly ,my reasoning in Lewisham east - anyone but Labour.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,507



    JRM is a useful bogeyman for Labour, that picture of him lounging in HoC will be his legacy to British politics. The LDs are wasting time, money and effort if they are trying to unseat him from their starting, far more juicy targets sit just a few miles in either direction (Wells, Cheltenham etc)...I think a bit of expectation management is needed.

    According to HuffPost, the LibDems are deliberately trying to give the impression that they are winning everywhere, so as to push up their national share of the vote and give them a shot at becoming the second party to the Tories in vote share. This is, of course, antithetical to tactical voting (except in seats where they really do have a chance) - they feel it's more important than stopping Brexit, evidently.
    Nick, how would you have advised tactical voters to vote in Portsmouth South in 2017? With Labour third behind the Lib Dems, who had only just lost the seat to the Tories.

    Would you have told Labour supporters that voting Labour would be wasted and would just let the Tories through the middle?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    edited November 2019

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    .
    !
    Do you think that, after five years of a Corbyn government, life will be better or worse for someone on a £100k salary, with a £1m pension pot and £1m in property and other investments?
    I imagine it's hard to convince somebody who has chosen to live in Dubai that there is more to life than money, but here goes. I have more money than I know what to do with but in every other respect my quality of life has gone down under this government. I can't get doctors appointments for my kids. The schools are visibly struggling under spending cuts. The pavements never get cleaned. There are homeless people everywhere. They have visited this Brexit nightmare on us that has disrupted the lives of friends and family and taken away rights to work and live in Europe that I considered my birthright. And all the Tories can offer is to cut my taxes, when more money is the one thing I don't need. And they're probably lying anyway! I don't know if Corbyn will succeed in improving things (I am sceptical) but at least he's offering to try.
    Ha yes, given the only reason one would volunteer to live in Dubai is a preoccupation with money, I think you are probably fighting a losing battle —- but a very good effort anyway.
    To be fair to @Sandpit he wants to live in the U.K. but the Home Office won’t grant his Ukrainian(?) wife a visa
    I feel for him then. Of all the nasty things this govt has done the financial threshold for spouse visas is the most disgusting - from the self-appointed party of the family too.
    The income thresholds aren’t the problem, it’s the assumption (which has always been there) that you’re bringing a wife from overseas to live with you in the U.K, with you already living there. The situation where you marry someone while you are living abroad is completely alien to them.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,718

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,490

    So on Vanilla, I also long-since gave up trying to see pb comments on my phone. But is there a way to get mobile vanilla to show the most recent posts first? On android Firefox I always end up hitting refresh, then scrolling going down to the bottom, which I do by doing an in-page search for "Leave a c". I can't help thinking there must be a more efficient workflow.

    I have FF on my laptop and chrome on the phone and use Vanilla for both - much easier tom operate and the main site does not work on either.
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Right now they are going to the greens (makes sense) and lib dems

    I doubt they will change in the next few weeks
    Green support is self-squeezing. I wouldn't be surprised to see their national share of the vote fall below the 1.7% of 2017.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    The LDs apparently want Labour to stand down in Jacob Rees-Mogg's seat in NE Somerset. The problem is why would Labour stand down when the result last time was Con 54%, Lab 35%, LD 8%.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7634195/Lib-Dems-WONT-stand-against-ex-Cabinet-minister-Dominic-Grieve.html

    Same situation in a lot of seats, especially in the SW . The failure to recover in 2017 makes the tactical argument harder.
    Same in Totnes. LibDems might claim they have the MP here, but last time they were 7,000 votes behind Labour, who in turn were 13,000 behind the Conservatives. If stopping Brexit is so important, perhaps Dr. Sarah should stand down and let Labour have a crack at it?

    Yeah, right.....
    Yep. There’s lots of places in the south of England where ‘tactical’ voters won’t know who to vote for. There’s no chance of Labour overtaking the Tories, but the LDs were a distant third last time out. Places like Wokingham were also mentioned yesterday, where there’s a large Con majority and a split opposition.

    The risk for the LDs is that they spread their resources too thin on the ground, missing target seats by trying to get large numbers of tactical votes for second place in safe Tory seats.
    I expect LDs will have 30-35 seats, and hundreds of second places, but that will be a much better starting place for GE 2024. It is very possible that with a hung parliament that we may get another GE in short order, so those second places matter.
    Yes, at the very least this election should wipe the slate clean from the coalition period and restore a much better base going forward. I'd expect to see the LibDem recover their position as second party of local government in the South on the back of this.

    But of course in this election the party has reason to aim higher. It'll be interesting how the campaign shapes up for them - traditionally the national campaign is a bit 'meh' hampered by limited funds and limited expertise, and they've relied on spirited local efforts in their target seats (and very experienced local campaigners) to see them home. This time the autumn weather will hamper the local effort, but we might see a better air war with more national £ to spend. Provided they can get some media attention, of course.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Something a bit sad about the haka being performed for the third place game....

    Difficult to know where to begin about hakas. For a start it's not like NZ puts respect for maori culture and people front and centre in any other context (count the maoris in the team doing the haka). For another, the maori warrior culture was so fucking horrible that celebrating it is a bit like the German football team singing the Horst Wessel before matches. Google "moriori genocide." For a third, as you say you look a twat if you do the haka and then lose, and/or lose and then do the haka in the loser's match.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Right now they are going to the greens (makes sense) and lib dems

    I doubt they will change in the next few weeks
    The LibDems and Greens start with a third of the youth vote between them - let's hope the promised Remain Alliance announcement next week is a broad enough one.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,685
    I’ve had a very positive NHS experience being treated long term for Crohn’s Disease in Newcastle.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,718

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Right now they are going to the greens (makes sense) and lib dems

    I doubt they will change in the next few weeks
    I think Jezza will go strong on environmental issues, in the campaign. It is an issue that unites the party, loved by activists and can get out the youth vote. Those Green inclined voters are convertible. A good number of older voters care deeply too.
  • Farage is very much hinting he’ll give the Tories an easy ride.

    Interesting move and one I didn’t see coming. Perhaps he thinks a post-Brexit “keeping Tory toes to the fire on the future relationship” is going to be more beneficial to him than a betrayal narrative under a government that cancels Brexit or campaigns for a second referendum. I must admit I assumed he’d be gunning for the latter but perhaps he has calculated a second referendum victory for remain would make it much harder for him to actually see Brexit happening in the future.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,718
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    Greens not standing in a lot of places I imagine. And young people not being self defeating by voting green in a marginal if they do stand.
    The Greens have to stand somewhere, else the lose all credibility. There are very few seats where the Greens can safely stand with any hope of getting a credible number of votes that doesn't actively damage other pro-Remain parties (or Labour).
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Interesting description of the subtleties of misuse of social media:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/01/undercover-reporter-reveals-life-in-a-polish-troll-farm

    One of the problems it raises is: how do you define a fake account?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 8,695
    numbertwelvesaid: "Farage is very much hinting he’ll give the Tories an easy ride."

    Where is he hinting this? This is not the impression I got from his meeting with Trump yesterday.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,024
    edited November 2019

    kle4 said:



    That said there are places such as the SW where based on history and the euros the LDs really do have a better shot despite being a distant third.

    There is no evidence that such is the case. I think in many seats in the S and SW, it is very unclear who you should vote for tactically..........

    [edit]

    This is why I think tactical voting is likely to be very inefficient in the GE.
    Spot on. The fact that there is a discussion going on here about how a tactical vote should be cast is supporting evidence of that.

    I have no doubt that many Remainers will want to vote tactically to stop the Conservatives. The problem is that the LDs are in general starting from so far back that not everyone will buy into the idea that a party starting from a poor 3rd place can come through, although others will. Given that split opinion, the result in many places could be Labour and LDs on roughly equal shares of the vote, leaving the Conservatives to scrape home.

    Remember also that the LDs have another motive as well. They will be content with an inefficient tactical vote in 2019 if it delivers a large number of 2nd places that move them into more obvious contention to challenge for a seat in future. That's why I think they are putting a lot of effort into seats they cannot realistically win in 2019. In the past the LDs have won Conservative seats over a series of 2 or 3 elections, in which they first come from nowhere to a credible 3rd place, then overtake Labour into 2nd place, then really put the tactical vote squeeze on to get over the line.

    It is quite conceivable that this process could be accelerated and that we will be looking at another GE in 2020, with the 2019 result then serving as the tactical voting baseline, in which the tactical voting choices for Remainers will be more obvious.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,077
    edited November 2019
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Labour on just 9% with over 70s

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189873849279627265?s=20

    Plus

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189871272366411777?s=20
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596
    edited November 2019
    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
    With private medicine you get belt and braces no-expense spared care, which is better at finding such conditions, but with the downside that money is wasted on a whole raft of objectively unnecessary tests and procedures (during one such, ironically, an unrelated rare condition that I have was revealed by accident).

    With the NHS a lot depends on the patient pushing to open the necessary doors and thinking to join the necessary dots. Even down to basic stuff like reminding hospital nurses what they're supposed to be doing and dispensing when. It's the passive patients who tend to lose out.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,890

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    More funding alone isn't enough but more funding is a prerequisite.
    That pretty often turns into perquisites.
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Right now they are going to the greens (makes sense) and lib dems

    I doubt they will change in the next few weeks
    Green support is self-squeezing. I wouldn't be surprised to see their national share of the vote fall below the 1.7% of 2017.
    This raises the question of why? Two main reasons.

    1. Pessimist realists - those most likely to accept the pessimist realism of the predictions for climate change can do the same for the Green Party electoral prospects. I took up the quixotic challenge for the last four general elections, but I can understand why others wouldn't.

    2. Naive idealists - those most likely to agree with the idealism of the Green Party, that generally wants to think the best of the vast majority of people, is also susceptible to trusting Green pledges from other parties. They want to believe that those parties mean it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189871272366411777?s=20
    That is a killer stat. Especially when tagged with the huge fall in the under 24 vote from 2017.

    Labour vote being squeezed from both ends.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,685
    IanB2 said:

    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
    With private medicine you get belt and braces no-expense spared care, which is better at finding such conditions, but with the downside that money is wasted on a whole raft of objectively unnecessary tests and procedures (during one such, ironically, an unrelated rare condition that I have was revealed by accident).

    With the NHS a lot depends on the patient pushing to open the necessary doors and thinking to join the necessary dots. Even down to basic stuff like reminding hospital nurses what they're supposed to be doing and dispensing when. It's the passive patients who tend to lose out.
    Maybe this is why I’ve had such a positive experience. I email the doctors and nurses directly chasing things and asking questions.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    This age group is too small to be meaningful IMO. 18-30 would be better.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596

    kle4 said:



    That said there are places such as the SW where based on history and the euros the LDs really do have a better shot despite being a distant third.

    There is no evidence that such is the case. I think in many seats in the S and SW, it is very unclear who you should vote for tactically..........

    [edit]

    This is why I think tactical voting is likely to be very inefficient in the GE.
    Spot on. The fact that there is a discussion going on here about how a tactical vote should be cast is supporting evidence of that.

    I have no doubt that many Remainers will want to vote tactically to stop the Conservatives. The problem is that the LDs are in general starting from so far back that not everyone will buy into the idea that a party starting from a poor 3rd place can come through, although others will. Given that split opinion, the result in many places could be Labour and LDs on roughly equal shares of the vote, leaving the Conservatives to scrape home.

    Remember also that the LDs have another motive as well. They will be content with an inefficient tactical vote in 2019 if it delivers a large number of 2nd places that move them into more obvious contention to challenge for a seat in future. That's why I think they are putting a lot of effort into seats they cannot realistically win in 2019. In the past the LDs have won Conservative seats over a series of 2 or 3 elections, in which they first come from nowhere to a credible 3rd place, then overtake Labour into 2nd place, then really put the tactical vote squeeze on to get over the line.

    It is quite conceivable that this process could be accelerated and that we will be looking at another GE in 2020, with the 2019 result then serving as the tactical voting baseline, in which the tactical voting choices for Remainers will be more obvious.
    If it remains obvious that Labour is going backwards and the LibDems forwards, it should be easy - vote Labour in Labour held seats (assuming the MP is a remainer) and vote LibDem/Remain Alliance everywhere else (ex Scotland)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,623
    Farage wants to be British Ambassador to Washington. My guess is that's the deal but not one we'll discover until the nightmare of a Johnson majority govenment becomes a reality
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    edited November 2019
    IanB2 said:

    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
    With private medicine you get belt and braces no-expense spared care, which is better at finding such conditions, but with the downside that money is wasted on a whole raft of objectively unnecessary tests and procedures (during one such, ironically, an unrelated rare condition that I have was revealed by accident).

    With the NHS a lot depends on the patient pushing to open the necessary doors and thinking to join the necessary dots. Even down to basic stuff like reminding hospital nurses what they're supposed to be doing and dispensing when. It's the passive patients who tend to lose out.
    This is true. If you let the NHS "do its thing" then you are putting yourself at grave risk. If you sharpen your elbows, shout, insist and overrule, then you have a sporting chance.

    A while ago, when visiting someone who was caught in the NHS inertia, and hence not getting the treatment or operation they required, I ended up standing in the middle of the ward (at Addenbrookes) during the senior consultant's round and shouting at them that I was about to call the police if nothing happened instantly to address the situation.

    It happened. And I would have called the police otherwise.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,718
    edited November 2019
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Something a bit sad about the haka being performed for the third place game....

    Difficult to know where to begin about hakas. For a start it's not like NZ puts respect for maori culture and people front and centre in any other context (count the maoris in the team doing the haka). For another, the maori warrior culture was so fucking horrible that celebrating it is a bit like the German football team singing the Horst Wessel before matches. Google "moriori genocide." For a third, as you say you look a twat if you do the haka and then lose, and/or lose and then do the haka in the loser's match.
    Hang on. Even when I lived in NZ 30 years ago, the country was explicitly bicultural. Maori language and culture was compulsory in school for all (and understood by the substantial minority of other Polynesian immigrants too). Mixed relationships are so prevalent that a lot of phenotypically white New Zealanders have some Maori in them. Indeed, I have Maori cousins by marriage.

    Maori warrior culture was very honorable, indeed British colonial troops would often attack Maori fortifications on Sunday, as many warriors would refuse to fight on the sabbath.

    The Moriori were exterminated before the modern period. Comparable perhaps to our colonial wars.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596



    JRM is a useful bogeyman for Labour, that picture of him lounging in HoC will be his legacy to British politics. The LDs are wasting time, money and effort if they are trying to unseat him from their starting, far more juicy targets sit just a few miles in either direction (Wells, Cheltenham etc)...I think a bit of expectation management is needed.

    According to HuffPost, the LibDems are deliberately trying to give the impression that they are winning everywhere, so as to push up their national share of the vote and give them a shot at becoming the second party to the Tories in vote share. This is, of course, antithetical to tactical voting (except in seats where they really do have a chance) - they feel it's more important than stopping Brexit, evidently.
    Nick, how would you have advised tactical voters to vote in Portsmouth South in 2017? With Labour third behind the Lib Dems, who had only just lost the seat to the Tories.

    Would you have told Labour supporters that voting Labour would be wasted and would just let the Tories through the middle?
    Anyone fancy a bet that Labour will be back to third (or worse) in Portsmouth South this time?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,077
    Roger said:

    Farage wants to be British Ambassador to Washington. My guess is that's the deal but not one we'll discover until the nightmare of a Johnson majority govenment becomes a reality

    No, Boris will make Ashcroft US Ambassador most likely
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,077

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189871272366411777?s=20
    That is a killer stat. Especially when tagged with the huge fall in the under 24 vote from 2017.

    Labour vote being squeezed from both ends.
    Yes, the Labour to LD and Green movement since 2017 is deadly to Labour under FPTP
  • StockyStocky Posts: 8,695
    Regarding the next speaker - I see Harmon has moved out in the betting and Laing is now 2nd favourite with Hoyle, of course, stong odds-on.

    Does anyone think that Hoyle will NOT be the next speaker?
  • IanB2 said:

    If it remains obvious that Labour is going backwards and the LibDems forwards, it should be easy - vote Labour in Labour held seats (assuming the MP is a remainer) and vote LibDem/Remain Alliance everywhere else (ex Scotland)

    "Remain" Labour MPs need to be forced to confirm that they will break the Labour whip if necessary. Otherwise its irrelevant what their personal views are if they get pushed into backing Labour negotiating a Brexit deal. I hear a lot of hot air from Labour MPs on all sorts of issues where they are Shocked and Appalled and yet right now they are knocking on doors asking voters to put the person who has Shocked and Appalled them into office.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Farage wants to be British Ambassador to Washington. My guess is that's the deal but not one we'll discover until the nightmare of a Johnson majority govenment becomes a reality

    No, Boris will make Ashcroft US Ambassador most likely
    Will he do this from the opposition benches to which *writing this on 1st November while still in the EU* he has lead the Conservatives victoriously?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Stocky said:

    Regarding the next speaker - I see Harmon has moved out in the betting and Laing is now 2nd favourite with Hoyle, of course, stong odds-on.

    Does anyone think that Hoyle will NOT be the next speaker?

    No, I think he'll get the position.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,077
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Farage wants to be British Ambassador to Washington. My guess is that's the deal but not one we'll discover until the nightmare of a Johnson majority govenment becomes a reality

    No, Boris will make Ashcroft US Ambassador most likely
    Will he do this from the opposition benches to which *writing this on 1st November while still in the EU* he has lead the Conservatives victoriously?
    No from the Government benches after winning a majority and passing his Brexit Deal to deliver Brexit
  • GT10GT10 Posts: 3
    Long time lurker but to fix the comments issue I've found the following works:
    If you clear cache & then navigate to http://www2.politicalbetting.com then they display. It's the www2 that's the important part.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,897
    Re NHS quality, here's an overview of stats from the King's Fund (they will have biases like everyone, but I don't find them overtly policitical and for the studies I've looked at in detail - not this summary! - their methodology looks reasonable).

    https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-international-comparisons
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,077
    Stocky said:

    Regarding the next speaker - I see Harmon has moved out in the betting and Laing is now 2nd favourite with Hoyle, of course, stong odds-on.

    Does anyone think that Hoyle will NOT be the next speaker?

    He is favourite especially as it is before the election but Laing could get most of the Tory and much of the female vote and is likely runner up
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596
    GT10 said:

    Long time lurker but to fix the comments issue I've found the following works:
    If you clear cache & then navigate to http://www2.politicalbetting.com then they display. It's the www2 that's the important part.

    Welcome! Hopefully you're not another male model.

    My regular PB.com is working again this morning, but wasn't yesterday.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596
    edited November 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Stocky said:

    Regarding the next speaker - I see Harmon has moved out in the betting and Laing is now 2nd favourite with Hoyle, of course, stong odds-on.

    Does anyone think that Hoyle will NOT be the next speaker?

    He is favourite especially as it is before the election but Laing could get most of the Tory and much of the female vote and is likely runner up
    I noticed that Theresa May called her "Madam Speaker" by mistake in her speech - a mistake she quickly corrected, with a smile.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Farage wants to be British Ambassador to Washington. My guess is that's the deal but not one we'll discover until the nightmare of a Johnson majority govenment becomes a reality

    No, Boris will make Ashcroft US Ambassador most likely
    Will he do this from the opposition benches to which *writing this on 1st November while still in the EU* he has lead the Conservatives victoriously?
    No from the Government benches after winning a majority and passing his Brexit Deal to deliver Brexit
    You were as sure that he would go into opposition if we weren't out by Oct 31st. Why should anyone set any store by your view this time round?
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,490

    IanB2 said:

    If it remains obvious that Labour is going backwards and the LibDems forwards, it should be easy - vote Labour in Labour held seats (assuming the MP is a remainer) and vote LibDem/Remain Alliance everywhere else (ex Scotland)

    "Remain" Labour MPs need to be forced to confirm that they will break the Labour whip if necessary. Otherwise its irrelevant what their personal views are if they get pushed into backing Labour negotiating a Brexit deal. I hear a lot of hot air from Labour MPs on all sorts of issues where they are Shocked and Appalled and yet right now they are knocking on doors asking voters to put the person who has Shocked and Appalled them into office.

    Hence why I and many others are voting tactically against Labour.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,596
    edited November 2019

    IanB2 said:

    If it remains obvious that Labour is going backwards and the LibDems forwards, it should be easy - vote Labour in Labour held seats (assuming the MP is a remainer) and vote LibDem/Remain Alliance everywhere else (ex Scotland)

    "Remain" Labour MPs need to be forced to confirm that they will break the Labour whip if necessary. Otherwise its irrelevant what their personal views are if they get pushed into backing Labour negotiating a Brexit deal. I hear a lot of hot air from Labour MPs on all sorts of issues where they are Shocked and Appalled and yet right now they are knocking on doors asking voters to put the person who has Shocked and Appalled them into office.

    In most such seats (such as Inner London), the Tories aren't in contention anyway and tactical (remain) voting doesn't arise.
  • Mr. Pointer, *loath. The 'reluctance' spelling has no 'e'. Very easy mistake to make, though.

    We minimalists even prefer it without the 'a'.
  • Welcome to PB (posting, anyway), Mr. 10.

    Any idea when we find out who the next Speaker is?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,718

    IanB2 said:

    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
    With private medicine you get belt and braces no-expense spared care, which is better at finding such conditions, but with the downside that money is wasted on a whole raft of objectively unnecessary tests and procedures (during one such, ironically, an unrelated rare condition that I have was revealed by accident).

    With the NHS a lot depends on the patient pushing to open the necessary doors and thinking to join the necessary dots. Even down to basic stuff like reminding hospital nurses what they're supposed to be doing and dispensing when. It's the passive patients who tend to lose out.
    Maybe this is why I’ve had such a positive experience. I email the doctors and nurses directly chasing things and asking questions.
    Yes, being pleasantly assertive works well in the system.

    In the NHS, we only explicitly ration care financially in a few areas. For most conditions demand management is done by restricting access. The obstructive bureaucracy is not accidental, it is constructed so as to moderate demand, whether waiting times, or via the GP gateway, or restrictive referral policies.

    Certainly this accounts for why middle class folk get through the system better, and partly why outcomes for marginalised communities are less good, across a range of conditions.

    Of course those health inequalities have other roots too, and are considerably worse in many other countries systems.

  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    I really never got this NHS worship thing. Respecting doctors and medical staff? Sure.

    But when did a system of funding become an article of faith, what's so special about the NHS that makes it holy and sacred when compared to the German or Swiss models.

    This twitter thread and programme on Dispatches gives some idea of what is in store with Britain Trump doing a deal:

    https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945?s=19
    Conversations about pricing happen, but that's not really my point. No other country has this fetish about public healthcare funding, it even made it into the opening of the London Olympics, it's frankly bizarre
    The NHS was a major reason people voted Brexit, and is central to the Tory party campaign.

    I am sure that you are right though, once they have their majority, the Tories will shaft the NHS and those CDE voters dependent on it.
    I don’t understand how we would pay more. Wasn’t it announced last year that negotiations had lead to previously unavailable drugs being made available as they now met cost benefit models.

    It doesn’t seem to make sense on a basic level. Can anyone explain why we would do this?
    Because what US Pharma wants out of a Trade Deal is removing that monopoly purchasing power that the DoH and NHS currently uses to keep down prices, and the end of NICE.


    It's not the monopoly purchasing power which would be impacted really. It is the ability to agree prices in secrecy. Note the key term that the Trump administration is using: transparency.

    Pharmaceuticals are a global product. NICE/NHS England can negotiate good deals (effectively create 'price discrimination' in our favour) because:

    1) NICE has a rigorous and world-renowned processes for evaluating new pharmaceuticals based on cost-effectiveness (cost versus benefit (measured in QALYs))
    2) NHS England can negotiate prices with pharma companies in secret based on 1 - the effective cap being the cost-effectiveness threshold that NICE use (which is £20-30k per quality adjusted life-year generated).

    However,if 2 fails due to a demand for 'transparency' then pharma will not give discounts to the UK anymore because every other country would demand the same. So prices are higher here to match the non-value based prices paid elsewhere.

    End result: pay A LOT more for the same or don't get access to the drugs.
  • Mr. Divvie, off the variant-spelling gaol with you!
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 6,900
    IanB2 said:



    Anyone fancy a bet that Labour will be back to third (or worse) in Portsmouth South this time?

    It seems as though all the LibDems agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind the LibDems.

    And all the Labour party supporters agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind Labour party.

    LOL.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,623
    edited November 2019

    I’ve had a very positive NHS experience being treated long term for Crohn’s Disease in Newcastle.

    If you don't mind me asking are your family from Gateshead/Newcastle? I have mega numbers of cousins second cousins living there many who I have never met! I would hate to be arguing with one of my sister's extremely extended family and not know
  • Endillion said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    Greens not standing in a lot of places I imagine. And young people not being self defeating by voting green in a marginal if they do stand.
    The Greens have to stand somewhere, else the lose all credibility. There are very few seats where the Greens can safely stand with any hope of getting a credible number of votes that doesn't actively damage other pro-Remain parties (or Labour).
    The Green Party (in England and Wales) stood the following number of candidates at recent elections (out of 573).

    2017 -- 457
    2015 -- 538
    2010 -- 310
    2005 -- 182

    If they stand aside in 70 seats compared to 2017 as part of Unite to Remain, and then maybe take the total to 100 where they decide locally to stand aside for Labour, they would still be standing in more seats than 2010, when they received 1.0% of the vote.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,685
    Roger said:

    I’ve had a very positive NHS experience being treated long term for Crohn’s Disease in Newcastle.

    If you don't mind me asking are your family from Gateshead/Newcastle? I have mega numbers of cousins second cousins living there many who I have never met! I would hate to be arguing with one of my sister's extremely extended family and not know
    No problem at all. I doubt it! My dad’s side of the family is from Morpeth & North Shields but I was brought up in the West Midlands.

    Argue away!
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    IanB2 said:



    Anyone fancy a bet that Labour will be back to third (or worse) in Portsmouth South this time?

    It seems as though all the LibDems agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind the LibDems.

    And all the Labour party supporters agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind Labour party.

    LOL.
    This is certainly the impression you get from the tactical voting guides. I think if the leaders were not 'Tory Swinson' and 'Commie Jezza' but instead Uncle Vince and Mr Bean himself Keir Starmer then vote swappers would be a hell of a lot more generous. You only have to read Mumsnet forums (who doesn't!) to know there are plenty of yellow leaning folk who prefer Boris to Jezza, and presumably plenty of those remainers on the left who cant hold their nose and vote for Tory-lite Swinson.

    Arguably this is the most difficult election in my lifetime to make tactical voting a success.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,718
    IanB2 said:

    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend.

    Where the NHS falls over is undiagnosed rare conditions, where you tend to get bounced around between people over months without anything getting resolved. Or if you ever need anything done quickly.

    Possibly large differences between hospitals on this. Agree completely on GPs.
    With private medicine you get belt and braces no-expense spared care, which is better at finding such conditions, but with the downside that money is wasted on a whole raft of objectively unnecessary tests and procedures (during one such, ironically, an unrelated rare condition that I have was revealed by accident).

    With the NHS a lot depends on the patient pushing to open the necessary doors and thinking to join the necessary dots. Even down to basic stuff like reminding hospital nurses what they're supposed to be doing and dispensing when. It's the passive patients who tend to lose out.
    Again, I think my experience is the opposite. Private doctors don't push you to see related specialists, because they are still in the old-fashioned mindset of "I am your doctor, and I will cure you". The NHS has become much more open to collaborative methods over the 20 years I've been in the system, and there is now
    an appreciation that long-term complex conditions are best handled via a team of people working across traditional specialism boundaries.

    I'm very much an "active patient", and one of the things I don't like about the NHS is they're much more pushy about getting me to do things I don't think add value. I recognise that it's the better approach for most people.

    Others' experiences I'm sure will differ, and it's probably condition/hospital dependent to a large extent.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,897
    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    edited November 2019
    Foxy said:

    Yes, being pleasantly assertive works well in the system.

    In the NHS, we only explicitly ration care financially in a few areas. For most conditions demand management is done by restricting access. The obstructive bureaucracy is not accidental, it is constructed so as to moderate demand, whether waiting times, or via the GP gateway, or restrictive referral policies.

    Certainly this accounts for why middle class folk get through the system better, and partly why outcomes for marginalised communities are less good, across a range of conditions.

    Of course those health inequalities have other roots too, and are considerably worse in many other countries systems.

    Pleasantly assertive? LOL. And the rest. Every single person I met in my particular instance, and plenty otherwise of my friends/contacts, told me that the only way to get things done was to shout. And it worked. Disappointingly.

    Interesting though what you write. Perhaps the demand management management should be examined. Bitter pill as it may be, if people are told the real reason they are not being seen/diagnosed/operated on that might help to mitigate it (probably not but maybe).

    As I said in my case it ended up me threatening to call the police in the middle of a ward which can't be the right way ahead.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 359
    HYUFD said:



    No, Boris will make Ashcroft US Ambassador most likely

    Even by Johnson's standard of derangedly bad judgement, making Farage or Ashcroft Ambassador would be doolally.

    The Ambassador would be expected to serve across the next US election, after which there's an outside chance Trump will have been impeached and an evens chance a "Socialist" (in British: social democrat) Democrat President will have won. In any case, the next 15 months in the US is going to be politically febrile.

    Whoever's in No 10, we'll need a professional, managerialist, diplomat running the Washington Embassy ESPECIALLY if by 2021 the US President is on the opposite ideological side from the UK PM.

    Corbyn/Swinson and Warren or Johnson and Trump can do all the chumming they like: Our Man (or Woman) in Washington has to be able to command the respect of all Their Men in Federal departments and agencies before, during and after the 2020 election.

    As every journalist (the one professional skill there's a case Johnson may posses) will tell you.


  • Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    I really never got this NHS worship thing. Respecting doctors and medical staff? Sure.

    But when did a system of funding become an article of faith, what's so special about the NHS that makes it holy and sacred when compared to the German or Swiss models.

    This twitter thread and programme on Dispatches gives some idea of what is in store with Britain Trump doing a deal:

    https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945?s=19
    Conversations about pricing happen, but that's not really my point. No other country has this fetish about public healthcare funding, it even made it into the opening of the London Olympics, it's frankly bizarre
    The NHS was a major reason people voted Brexit, and is central to the Tory party campaign.

    I am sure that you are right though, once they have their majority, the Tories will shaft the NHS and those CDE voters dependent on it.
    I
    Because what US Pharma wants out of a Trade Deal is removing that monopoly purchasing power that the


    It's not the monopoly purchasing power which would be impacted really. It is the ability to agree prices in secrecy. Note the key term that the Trump administration is using: transparency.

    Pharmaceuticals are a global product. NICE/NHS England can negotiate good deals (effectively create 'price discrimination' in our favour) because:

    1) NICE has a rigorous and world-renowned processes for evaluating new pharmaceuticals based on cost-effectiveness (cost versus benefit (measured in QALYs))
    2) NHS England can negotiate prices with pharma companies in secret based on 1 - the effective cap being the cost-effectiveness threshold that NICE use (which is £20-30k per quality adjusted life-year generated).

    However,if 2 fails due to a demand for 'transparency' then pharma will not give discounts to the UK anymore because every other country would demand the same. So prices are higher here to match the non-value based prices paid elsewhere.

    End result: pay A LOT more for the same or don't get access to the drugs.
    Don’t get me wrong, our system works well for us and we should try and defend it; but the US does have a legitimate grievance in that precisely because it’s healthcare system is so poorly designed it pays more than it’s fair share of development costs. The rest of the world gets a free ride off the US inability to manage healthcare well.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
  • Anyway, must be off. Play nicely, everyone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 46,999
    Endillion said:

    For acute life-threatening illness or injury, the NHS are brilliant as I found out myself in 2013. For long-term chronic ailments it is barely fit for purpose and the linkage with social care isn't joined up. The GP service is over used and abused.

    I don't know what the answer to the problem. Yes it needs to be properly funded, but chucking money at it without addressing the issues does very little in securing long term sustainability.

    Totally disagree; this is the opposite of my experience. The NHS are better even than the private sector at long term chronic conditions, because private can't cope with having to join dots between multiple specialists across different areas. Having access to dieticians, psychologists, specialist nurses, physics etc all under one roof was a godsend....
    Well they more or less wash their hands of Alzheimer's sufferers.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Does the slight drift in the Tory most seat markets and the small move of the BXP vote share band upwards suggest the Brexit Party will be standing in a lot more seats than many anticipated? Perhaps...
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 6,900
    Brom said:

    IanB2 said:



    Anyone fancy a bet that Labour will be back to third (or worse) in Portsmouth South this time?

    It seems as though all the LibDems agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind the LibDems.

    And all the Labour party supporters agree that the anti-Tory tactical vote should line up behind Labour party.

    LOL.
    This is certainly the impression you get from the tactical voting guides. I think if the leaders were not 'Tory Swinson' and 'Commie Jezza' but instead Uncle Vince and Mr Bean himself Keir Starmer then vote swappers would be a hell of a lot more generous. You only have to read Mumsnet forums (who doesn't!) to know there are plenty of yellow leaning folk who prefer Boris to Jezza, and presumably plenty of those remainers on the left who cant hold their nose and vote for Tory-lite Swinson.

    Arguably this is the most difficult election in my lifetime to make tactical voting a success.
    Agreed, because it is clear that the LibDems desire for an election was purely partisan, they want to devour the Labour Party.

    No reason for them to be ashamed of it -- parties are in it to win, after all -- but because they are LibDems they can't quite admit that they did it for parochial party reasons.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,795
    edited November 2019

    Foxy said:



    Nah, for the vast majority of voters there is an easy tactical choice. Vote Lab in a Lab held seat, vote LD in a Tory held one. It really is that simple.

    That works as tactical voting advice in a lot of places, but the LibDems are also trying hard in seats where Labour holds the seat and they're third, using the argument "That was then, this is now", as Mike did.
    Indeed in Bedford where I've voted tactically for LAB at the last two elections I won't be next time. However successful the LDs might be I don't want my vote to go Corbyn because of his lack of action on Jew hate racism - something I feel very strongly about.
    Mike, Salve your conscience with a vote swap - I prefer Lib Dem but our Lab MP in a marginal is a sound remainer. Once I can find a couple of Lab supporters in a seat where Lib Dems are in the running I will do a swap.

    With our electoral system you unfortunately have to hold the candle to the devil. Wouldn't it be great if we could all just safely vote for who we wanted!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    Wales getting hammered - 4 tries to 1
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    edited November 2019

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity. Some of the audience were probably mums so not o/t.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity.
    I do think if the election were today Labour will get a battering in the Midlands. It's a hard working, patriotic and Brexity area - the antithetis of what Labour stand for. I think there are Wolverhampton and West Bromwich seats in play where a double figure swing is possible if Corbyn doesn't smash it on the campaign trail.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    OllyT said:

    Foxy said:



    Nah, for the vast majority of voters there is an easy tactical choice. Vote Lab in a Lab held seat, vote LD in a Tory held one. It really is that simple.

    That works as tactical voting advice in a lot of places, but the LibDems are also trying hard in seats where Labour holds the seat and they're third, using the argument "That was then, this is now", as Mike did.
    Indeed in Bedford where I've voted tactically for LAB at the last two elections I won't be next time. However successful the LDs might be I don't want my vote to go Corbyn because of his lack of action on Jew hate racism - something I feel very strongly about.
    Mike, Salve your conscience with a vote swap - I prefer Lib Dem but our Lab MP in a marginal is a sound remainer. Once I can find a couple of Lab supporters in a seat where Lib Dems are in the running I will do a swap.

    With our electoral system you unfortunately have to hold the candle to the devil. Wouldn't it be great if we could all just safely vote for who we wanted!
    Vote swapping is taken off the menu when it still involves voting for the anti-semite Corbyn.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 20,038
    GT10 said:

    Long time lurker but to fix the comments issue I've found the following works:
    If you clear cache & then navigate to http://www2.politicalbetting.com then they display. It's the www2 that's the important part.

    Thanks! And welcome to delurking - hope to see more.
  • Foxy said:

    I really never got this NHS worship thing. Respecting doctors and medical staff? Sure.

    But when did a system of funding become an article of faith, what's so special about the NHS that makes it holy and sacred when compared to the German or Swiss models.

    This twitter thread and programme on Dispatches gives some idea of what is in store with Britain Trump doing a deal:

    https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945?s=19
    Much ado about nothing.

    No government ever would or could afford to end NICE making sure drugs are value for money and as cheap as possible.
    And yet we managed without until the Labour government created it in 1999.
    We did but it was one of the best things the Labour government did, which itself built on predecessor organisations the Tories had set up and is something no party is challenging or would. The NHS needs affordable drugs that are value for money and quite literally no government could afford to end that, the idea any government would is absolutely preposterous and should be dismissed as prima facie ludicrous. Its simply not going to happen.
  • There was talk yesterday of Battersea and a look at the Best for Britain MRP suggests it could be emblematic of this general election.

    In 2017 the result was:
    Labour 45.9%
    Conservative 41.5%
    Liberal Democrat 8.0%
    Four Others 4.5%

    The MRP predicts roughly:
    Liberal Democrat 31%
    Conservative 31%
    Labour 25%
    Greens 7%
    Brexit 4%

    Interesting that the website is accused of being a Liberal Democrat front but advises a Labour vote in this seat.

    Looks like a swing to Remain but the seat gained by Leave.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity. Some of the audience were probably mums so not o/t.
    Where was it held?
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123


    Don’t get me wrong, our system works well for us and we should try and defend it; but the US does have a legitimate grievance in that precisely because it’s healthcare system is so poorly designed it pays more than it’s fair share of development costs. The rest of the world gets a free ride off the US inability to manage healthcare well.

    That's true, we are getting a good deal relative to the US. But the answer is for them to start being sensible with their pricing not for us to changes ours.

    What should the price be for a new drug? The UK thinks it should be related to the benefits generated.

    Pharma companies think it should be 'what the market will bear' and with the US system, there is almost no upper limit.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,251
    Brom said:

    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity.
    I do think if the election were today Labour will get a battering in the Midlands. It's a hard working, patriotic and Brexity area - the antithetis of what Labour stand for. I think there are Wolverhampton and West Bromwich seats in play where a double figure swing is possible if Corbyn doesn't smash it on the campaign trail.
    West Brom, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Brum - they may well end up with Tory MPs next month.
  • Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    Voting against Remainer May's deal was never voting against Brexit and this lie is not going to convince anyone. Patel voted for us to leave the EU in March.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 359




    It's not the monopoly purchasing power which would be impacted really. It is the ability to agree prices in secrecy. Note the key term that the Trump administration is using: transparency.

    Pharmaceuticals are a global product. NICE/NHS England can negotiate good deals (effectively create 'price discrimination' in our favour) because...
    due to a demand for 'transparency' pharma will not give discounts to the UK anymore because every other country would demand the same. So prices are higher here to match the non-value based prices paid elsewhere.

    ABSO****INGLUTELY

    Nowhere in Trump's "Art of the Deal" does he claim that negotiations should be held in public.

    Indeed every saloon bar negotiating expert (like those claiming "you can't negotiate without the option to walk away with no deal") would fall about laughing if anyone suggested the results deal should be published to the world.
    That, after all, is why Johnson's been so determined to stop the HoC from discussing his Deal.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,000
    Brom said:

    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity.
    I do think if the election were today Labour will get a battering in the Midlands. It's a hard working, patriotic and Brexity area - the antithetis of what Labour stand for. I think there are Wolverhampton and West Bromwich seats in play where a double figure swing is possible if Corbyn doesn't smash it on the campaign trail.
    Not sure where QT was last night but it does seem that Corbyn will struggle to bring the agenda round to his favoured topics, albeit we have been discussing the NHS this morning on here.

    The NHS issue is imo intractable as the Cons say it is an overly bureaucratic monolith delivery health care sub-optimally and that all its failints are because of this which is Labour's fault (whoever is in power); and Lab says it is a matter of funding and it needs more money (whoever is in power).
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    Brom said:

    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity.
    I do think if the election were today Labour will get a battering in the Midlands. It's a hard working, patriotic and Brexity area - the antithetis of what Labour stand for. I think there are Wolverhampton and West Bromwich seats in play where a double figure swing is possible if Corbyn doesn't smash it on the campaign trail.
    West Brom, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Brum - they may well end up with Tory MPs next month.
    Coventry South I think they have a great chance, Lab just selected some hardened socialist last night to replace Jim Cunningham. 7k majority with no incumbancy bounce. Plus Boris should play quite well in the W Mids, Andy Street's performance as Mayor will certainly help regards people becoming used to having Conservatives in charge.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,735
    edited November 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Labour on just 9% with over 70s

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189873849279627265?s=20

    Plus

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189871272366411777?s=20
    The extent to which Labour has lost the older working class vote is unbelievable.
    Does anyone else think that, given the current actual polling the odds for the Tories to get an overall majority are a bit long? In normal circumstances they look close to a certainty, and it must be both the volatility and the experience of last time which is stopping them being much more heavily odds on than they are. But Boris is not TM, much will have been learned from last time, Jezza is no longer new and no-one apart from me (so I must be wrong) seems to think Jo Swinson is a winner.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,897

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    Voting against Remainer May's deal was never voting against Brexit and this lie is not going to convince anyone. Patel voted for us to leave the EU in March.
    Had May's deal passed, Brexit would have happened by now.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    AndyJS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    The QT audience last night, albeit I listened only to the first 20 mins, seemed untypically BBC Brexity. Some of the audience were probably mums so not o/t.
    Where was it held?
    Birmingham
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,623

    Selebian said:

    From the world of anecdotes, I had an interesting conversation with my mum yesterday. Traditionally Tory voter, occasionally UKIP, likely Brexit Party in the Euros (she never reveals her vote, my feeling from her comments, which are quite detailed). She hopes that the MPs who blocked Brexit will get kicked out - I asked whether she therefore wanted Priti Patel (my brother's MP) kicked out as she voted three times against Brexit. Confused silence, "Isn't she for Brexit"? She has a dim view of her own MP, Vicky Ford, as "she's a remainer, isn't she", despite me pointing out that she voted for Brexit three times in the meaningful votes.

    I don't know whether she'll vote Conservative or for whoever the Brexit party put up, but it appears that simply voting or Brexit repeatedly may not be enough for some Brexit supporting voters. She's also no fan of Johnson, but more for personal dislike than policies.

    pb.com: the "mum anecdote" years......
    JohnO got the prize for those!

  • Don’t get me wrong, our system works well for us and we should try and defend it; but the US does have a legitimate grievance in that precisely because it’s healthcare system is so poorly designed it pays more than it’s fair share of development costs. The rest of the world gets a free ride off the US inability to manage healthcare well.

    That's true, we are getting a good deal relative to the US. But the answer is for them to start being sensible with their pricing not for us to changes ours.

    What should the price be for a new drug? The UK thinks it should be related to the benefits generated.

    Pharma companies think it should be 'what the market will bear' and with the US system, there is almost no upper limit.
    There is no proper market in the US system. The NHS uses its buying power to drive down prices as any sensibe organisation in a marketplace should - in the US Medicare etc are legally forbidden from doing the same. That is not a free market restriction.

  • Don’t get me wrong, our system works well for us and we should try and defend it; but the US does have a legitimate grievance in that precisely because it’s healthcare system is so poorly designed it pays more than it’s fair share of development costs. The rest of the world gets a free ride off the US inability to manage healthcare well.

    That's true, we are getting a good deal relative to the US. But the answer is for them to start being sensible with their pricing not for us to changes ours.

    What should the price be for a new drug? The UK thinks it should be related to the benefits generated.

    Pharma companies think it should be 'what the market will bear' and with the US system, there is almost no upper limit.
    I agree, but the “fair” end state once the US sorted itself out would be for us to pay a bit more, and that is problematic for us. There again a better and more efficient US system would free up extra hundreds of billions (literally) for medical research and we’d all win from that.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    That seems to show the youth vote are going to the greens and a smaller number to the lib dems. If this happens on the 12th December how on earth are labour going to survive
    16% Con is pretty grim for the Tories, even compared with 2017.

    Both LDs and Lab need to go strong on the Climate Emergency. It is the issue that has the potential to get out the youth vote.
    Labour on just 9% with over 70s

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189873849279627265?s=20

    Plus

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1189871272366411777?s=20
    The extent to which Labour has lost the older working class vote is unbelievable.
    Does anyone else think that, given the current actual polling the odds for the Tories to get an overall majority are a bit long? In normal circumstances they look close to a certainty, and it must be both the volatility and the experience of last time which is stopping them being much more heavily odds on than they are. But Boris is not TM, much will have been learned from last time, Jezza is no longer new and no-one apart from me (so I must be wrong) seems to think Jo Swinson is a winner.
    Stoke-on-Trent and Newcastle-under-Lyme could go very badly for Labour. Older than average voters in those seats I believe.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    There was talk yesterday of Battersea and a look at the Best for Britain MRP suggests it could be emblematic of this general election.

    In 2017 the result was:
    Labour 45.9%
    Conservative 41.5%
    Liberal Democrat 8.0%
    Four Others 4.5%

    The MRP predicts roughly:
    Liberal Democrat 31%
    Conservative 31%
    Labour 25%
    Greens 7%
    Brexit 4%

    Interesting that the website is accused of being a Liberal Democrat front but advises a Labour vote in this seat.

    Looks like a swing to Remain but the seat gained by Leave.

    I don't think the LDs are strong enough in Battersea to challenge. It'll be Con v Lab and I have a hunch the sitting Lab MP will just hold on.
This discussion has been closed.