Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could be just 18 days away from the next LAB leadership con

1234579

Comments

  • BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    Its gone from 10 to 7 in a week though and we have over 2 weeks left and no sign of Jester having any policies whatsoever
    Your side has just one policy - national bankruptcy for the sake of socialism.

    Opposing that fate is worth a mountain of lesser policies.
    It didnt work in 2017 it wont work in 2019

    Get some policies
    Labour are free to make up any lunatic policies they like because they know they can't win outright and therefore will never be held accountable for them. We Tories expect to have to actually govern, and so can't play trillion-pound fantasy games like your lot can.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    The tories don;t have the guts to offer tax cuts and deregulation.

    And so they are stuck in a spending arms race with labour which they can never, ever, hope to win.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    BluerBlue said:

    I do have a horrible feeling that Labour have hit the jackpot with the Waspi pledge. I did as soon as I heard it and the size of the sums payable to individuals. I offered some ideas on countering it below but I'm not sure they will work. Some husbands and partners may be swayed as well so this policy could add above a million votes. Tricky.

    If it's that easy to bribe people, the Tories should just offer everyone who votes Conservative £1000, boosted to £5000 in marginal seats. What's the difference?
    It wold be an illegal policy

    Tories dont have any policies

    Run out of ideas like in 1997
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    The public are innumerate morons. Or a large enough proportion of them are to make it count, anyway.

    Masses of them wouldn't be voting for about £1.5 trillion in extra spending over a five-year Parliament if they could count.
  • Gabs3Gabs3 Posts: 836
    kinabalu said:

    Gabs3 said:

    I just found out from my brother that him and his wife are now seriously looking at property abroad and working out the economics of emigrating. They are more religious than me so get exposed to more anti-Semitism, but it is seriously depressing. Say they don't feel truly safe long term in the UK.

    Will they cancel those plans if the next YouGov looks good for Boris?
    They have been looking for the last couple of months and seems like they are relatively committed at this point. Although if Corbyn keeps climbing in the polls I may have to start thinking about joining them.
  • Foxy said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    IanB2 said:

    Byronic said:

    Serious question. How does one shift money out of the country? How does one wall it off, safely away from Corbyn’s evil grasp?

    Buying foreign shares isn’t exactly difficult.
    I know how to do that. But would foreign shares owned by a UK citizen be safe from, say, a Corbynite wealth tax?
    No, but at least it protects you from sterling crashing and McDonnell screwing up UK companies.

    Thankyou! When I go to Hargreaves Lansdown should I buy funds that invest in US or Asian stocks or should I buy actual shares in actual companies?
    I move my investments into Asian and European funds, earlier this year in anticipation of Brexit, but the UK risk is similar with Corbyn.

    I cannot see Ed Davey or the SNP going along with quite such a confiscatory McDonnell budget. There would be significant attenuation.
    Davey may not be there.The squeeze is on.
  • nico67 said:

    Did anyone see the Nicki Morgan car crash on GMB regarding the nurse pledge ! Luckily for the Tories I don’t think many people watch that although it has already got 1.4 million you tube views since this morning .

    There was bound to be something that the media sunk their teeth into.

    It could be worse. Much worse.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    Its gone from 10 to 7 in a week though and we have over 2 weeks left and no sign of Jester having any policies whatsoever
    Your side has just one policy - national bankruptcy for the sake of socialism.

    Opposing that fate is worth a mountain of lesser policies.
    It didnt work in 2017 it wont work in 2019

    Get some policies
    Labour are free to make up any lunatic policies they like because they know they can't win outright and therefore will never be held accountable for them. We Tories expect to have to actually govern, and so can't play trillion-pound fantasy games like your lot can.
    Maybe Boris should say something like that
  • BluerBlue said:

    I do have a horrible feeling that Labour have hit the jackpot with the Waspi pledge. I did as soon as I heard it and the size of the sums payable to individuals. I offered some ideas on countering it below but I'm not sure they will work. Some husbands and partners may be swayed as well so this policy could add above a million votes. Tricky.

    If it's that easy to bribe people, the Tories should just offer everyone who votes Conservative £1000, boosted to £5000 in marginal seats. What's the difference?
    It wold be an illegal policy

    Tories dont have any policies

    Run out of ideas like in 1997
    The insane bribery Labour offers should indeed be illegal, you're right.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    If Labour lose again under Corbyn they need to pick Starmer to have any chance and win back centrists, if they go for another Corbynista the main beneficiaries will be the LDs and Tories
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You don’t. You’d get slower roll-out of a worse service, and all the money would go into higher wages for the staff and increased subsidy from the Treasury (to keep the cost at zero).

    That would create a very strong disincentive for new customers or investing in a better service.
    South Korea did it.

    Superfast is needed didnt have you down as a Fook Business supporter
  • IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To respect a democratic mandate. I have to say I am personally conflicted as I want us to leave because of the vote but I do not mind remaining but I cannot see how we could settle into the EU without having left first
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    Its gone from 10 to 7 in a week though and we have over 2 weeks left and no sign of Jester having any policies whatsoever
    Your side has just one policy - national bankruptcy for the sake of socialism.

    Opposing that fate is worth a mountain of lesser policies.
    It didnt work in 2017 it wont work in 2019

    Get some policies
    Labour are free to make up any lunatic policies they like because they know they can't win outright and therefore will never be held accountable for them. We Tories expect to have to actually govern, and so can't play trillion-pound fantasy games like your lot can.
    Maybe Boris should say something like that
    But there are only two viable positions: a fiscally responsible budget, or promising to spend more than anyone else. Bozo has stranded himself midway between the two.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,236

    I think I said earlier today I expected almost all Labour waverers to firm up, which will naturally drive their score up.

    They can’t help it. Election. Sheep. Red rosette.

    They’d vote Labour even if they pledged to billet people in their homes, hand out vegan rations, and nationalise their gran.

    Baaaaaaaaaaa.

    Mmm - so different to the restless intellect and grounded maturity of judgement that one observes in the supporters of the other political parties. 😏
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You nationalise Openreach (£20 to 25 billion), build said national network (£20 billion). Then you need to create a national ISP, I guess from swallowing another chunk of BT (£morebillions). Then you need to provide free broadband to everyone, and maintain a national network (£more billions each year).
  • IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .


    Hearing them explain, on R4 this morning, that a nurse who has thought about leaving but stayed on would ‘count’ towards their promised figure of “new nurses” was pretty pitiful.
    Why?

    Any company that successfully reduces turnover but continues to recruit the same number of staff would see their total staffing level increase.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    It might be worth observing that the Labour manifesto also committed to cancelling all planned state pension increases above 66. Have they costed that in their manifesto? (Note also that these days most public sector pension schemes are tied to the state pension age...)
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    Who gives a flying fig about Brexit.

    It is utterly irrelevant compared to the economic effects of 5 years of Labour.

    The selfishness of Labour voters who would happily grab as much free stuff as they can whilst not pausing for a moment to think it will be their kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc who will be left with the bill.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    PeterC said:

    SunnyJim said:


    And then the last, desperate hope is that Scotland votes to go, though even that may not be enough to save us from bankruptcy. As I've also said, the only satisfaction to be had from living through that nightmare is at least it might finally teach some people a lesson.

    There should still be enough voters kicking around from the 1970s who know how the story will end with this type of Labour.

    If there aren't then the younger voters who put Corbyn in to No.10 will hopefully caution future generations once memories start fading.

    Brexit is an irrelevance compared to the damage Labour would do.
    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.
    This whole situation wouldn't be so terrifying if Labour were led by a figure like Michael Foot. At least Michael Foot was a democratic socialist and not an evil lunatic like the Labour high command that we may have to live under. It's full of terrorist sympathisers and includes several actual Stalinists.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    Tony Blair says the chances of a Corbyn majority are 'negligible' and urges voters to vote LD or even for ex Tory independents if they stand a better chance of winning than Labour

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair-vote-tactically-to-force-boris-johnson-into-new-referendum-a4295861.html
  • IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To take back control over our laws and money.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,605

    Barnesian said:

    Tories running out of steam a bit as BXP squeezed hard and Labour on the move.

    Adding Survation and ICM gives

    Con Lab LD BXP Green PC SNP Total
    England 316 191 25 0 1 0 0 533
    Wales 16 20 1 0 0 4 0 40
    Scotland 8 1 5 0 0 0 45 59

    TOTAL 340 212 31 0 1 4 45 632

    Tory majority of 30.

    Tories reduce by two in England (Rother Valley and Scunthorpe stay in Labour column) but increase by two in Scotland based on latest Scottish poll.

    The impact of the latest Welsh poll is not yet available but I suspect it won't be positive for the Tories.

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yIHH_ZtcH9w9JF5e8WwYD6QuhOhlVwCO_GboafT6kfc/edit?usp=sharing

    Plus 5
    I'm assuming +8 for the Tories in Wales. If you are right it reduces the Tory majority from 30 to 24.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Andrew said:

    alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You nationalise Openreach (£20 to 25 billion), build said national network (£20 billion). Then you need to create a national ISP, I guess from swallowing another chunk of BT (£morebillions). Then you need to provide free broadband to everyone, and maintain a national network (£more billions each year).

    And in the meantime whilst we’re waiting for the new network...

    Do they expect any job losses from the policy?
  • HYUFD said:

    If Labour lose again under Corbyn they need to pick Starmer to have any chance and win back centrists, if they go for another Corbynista the main beneficiaries will be the LDs and Tories

    In view of todays polls are you confident IDS and others including Raab will hold their seats
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,721
    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .


    Hearing them explain, on R4 this morning, that a nurse who has thought about leaving but stayed on would ‘count’ towards their promised figure of “new nurses” was pretty pitiful.
    Without really explaining why retention would miraculously improve!

    Mrs Foxy is a nurse and it was just as well she was lying down when I told her that BoZo was counting on her. The reality is that the worst thing for staff retention for years has been Brexit. We have only two left of our dozen Iberian nurses who joined us 4 years ago.

  • Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating BXP. A pact would have kept the Lab/BXP switchers away from labour. Their utter arrogance in failing to understand that there are an awful lot of working class Brexit supporters who would never vote conservative as long as they have a hole in their arse has put them in this situation. I suspect we have not seen the last of Mr. Farage in this election and we face a huge political realignment post election.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To respect a democratic mandate. I have to say I am personally conflicted as I want us to leave because of the vote but I do not mind remaining but I cannot see how we could settle into the EU without having left first
    Problem with "get Brexit done" is that Jester says that would be done in a month. His Manifesto doesnt propose anything worthwhile for next 4years and 11 months

    We know he is a lazy sod but come on Nothing FA Bugger all seriously
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    SunnyJim said:

    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    Who gives a flying fig about Brexit.

    It is utterly irrelevant compared to the economic effects of 5 years of Labour.

    The selfishness of Labour voters who would happily grab as much free stuff as they can whilst not pausing for a moment to think it will be their kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc who will be left with the bill.
    The selfishness of the over 65s removing EU citizenship from their grand kids . We can all play this game .
  • Getting Brexit Done is such a hollow mantra and people are beginning to realise that it won't be done for years.

    The Tory Manifesto is such a light document and the pothole and hospital parking promises reminds me of Major's cone hotline debacle.

    I'm sure the country can do better than this
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To respect a democratic mandate. I have to say I am personally conflicted as I want us to leave because of the vote but I do not mind remaining but I cannot see how we could settle into the EU without having left first
    Big G you know you said Lab were finished in Wales.

    How do you explain latest Wales only Poll?
  • alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You don’t. You’d get slower roll-out of a worse service, and all the money would go into higher wages for the staff and increased subsidy from the Treasury (to keep the cost at zero).

    That would create a very strong disincentive for new customers or investing in a better service.
    South Korea did it.

    Superfast is needed didnt have you down as a Fook Business supporter
    Err, nationalising all the broadband providers is the very definition of fook business!

    From Wikipedia, not a perfect source but gives a flavour: “There are multiple reasons why South Korea has good broadband, such as Government planning, healthy competition, urban population density, private-sector growth, and Korean culture.”

    Which of those do you think is the one Corbyn has misrepresented whilst ignoring the rest?
  • Andrew said:

    alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You nationalise Openreach (£20 to 25 billion), build said national network (£20 billion). Then you need to create a national ISP, I guess from swallowing another chunk of BT (£morebillions). Then you need to provide free broadband to everyone, and maintain a national network (£more billions each year).
    And what happens to Sky Virgin media etc when broadband is free
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    kle4 said:
    That is still a swing to the Tories in Wales of 4.5% since 2017
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,721

    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To take back control over our laws and money.
    I think that you mean for Corbyn to control the laws, and McDonnell the money...
  • BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    I do have a horrible feeling that Labour have hit the jackpot with the Waspi pledge. I did as soon as I heard it and the size of the sums payable to individuals. I offered some ideas on countering it below but I'm not sure they will work. Some husbands and partners may be swayed as well so this policy could add above a million votes. Tricky.

    If it's that easy to bribe people, the Tories should just offer everyone who votes Conservative £1000, boosted to £5000 in marginal seats. What's the difference?
    It wold be an illegal policy

    Tories dont have any policies

    Run out of ideas like in 1997
    The insane bribery Labour offers should indeed be illegal, you're right.
    I don't think Labour has ever promised a bribe as blatant as right to buy at a discount to market value.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    IanB2 said:

    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    Its gone from 10 to 7 in a week though and we have over 2 weeks left and no sign of Jester having any policies whatsoever
    Your side has just one policy - national bankruptcy for the sake of socialism.

    Opposing that fate is worth a mountain of lesser policies.
    It didnt work in 2017 it wont work in 2019

    Get some policies
    Labour are free to make up any lunatic policies they like because they know they can't win outright and therefore will never be held accountable for them. We Tories expect to have to actually govern, and so can't play trillion-pound fantasy games like your lot can.
    Maybe Boris should say something like that
    But there are only two viable positions: a fiscally responsible budget, or promising to spend more than anyone else. Bozo has stranded himself midway between the two.
    He is remaining neutral and letting the voters decide
  • alex_ said:

    Where do you get the free fibre broadband from if 1) it hasn’t been “built” yet 2) all the existing ISPs quit the market?

    You don’t. You’d get slower roll-out of a worse service, and all the money would go into higher wages for the staff and increased subsidy from the Treasury (to keep the cost at zero).

    That would create a very strong disincentive for new customers or investing in a better service.
    South Korea did it.

    Superfast is needed didnt have you down as a Fook Business supporter
    South Korea did it privately. Not with a nationalised provider.

    Oops!
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    It’s like all these nationalisations. They seem to think they’re going to deliver them all practically overnight with no disruption to service in the interim!
  • nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
    He said 50,000 more nurses. Where did the word new come from?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    Foxy said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    IanB2 said:

    Byronic said:

    Serious question. How does one shift money out of the country? How does one wall it off, safely away from Corbyn’s evil grasp?

    Buying foreign shares isn’t exactly difficult.
    I know how to do that. But would foreign shares owned by a UK citizen be safe from, say, a Corbynite wealth tax?
    No, but at least it protects you from sterling crashing and McDonnell screwing up UK companies.

    Thankyou! When I go to Hargreaves Lansdown should I buy funds that invest in US or Asian stocks or should I buy actual shares in actual companies?
    I move my investments into Asian and European funds, earlier this year in anticipation of Brexit, but the UK risk is similar with Corbyn.

    I cannot see Ed Davey or the SNP going along with quite such a confiscatory McDonnell budget. There would be significant attenuation.
    Davey may not be there.The squeeze is on.
    Let’s see you betting slip where you have put the house on a Tory victory over Davey, nobody believes your completely shite ramping.
  • IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    So Boris Johnson could be PM?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited November 2019
    alex_ said:

    It might be worth observing that the Labour manifesto also committed to cancelling all planned state pension increases above 66. Have they costed that in their manifesto? (Note also that these days most public sector pension schemes are tied to the state pension age...)

    I think they didn't bother to include that in what they laughably call their 'costings'. It's about another £6bn a year, which we used to think was a lot of money, but I suppose it's lost in the noise in Labour's case.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149

    HYUFD said:

    If Labour lose again under Corbyn they need to pick Starmer to have any chance and win back centrists, if they go for another Corbynista the main beneficiaries will be the LDs and Tories

    In view of todays polls are you confident IDS and others including Raab will hold their seats
    IDS more than Raab, I think Labour voters are more likely to vote LD than LD voters to vote Corbyn Labour but I think both will win
  • IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To respect a democratic mandate. I have to say I am personally conflicted as I want us to leave because of the vote but I do not mind remaining but I cannot see how we could settle into the EU without having left first
    Big G you know you said Lab were finished in Wales.

    How do you explain latest Wales only Poll?
    Labour lose 5 seats and are well down on 2017
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    PeterC said:



    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.

    I always like the affection that Tories have for *past* Labour leaders. They would absolutely retrospectively have considered voting for them... even if they didn't actually do so at the time.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    edited November 2019
    nico67 said:


    The selfishness of the over 65s removing EU citizenship from their grand kids . We can all play this game .

    I would not equate the result of a democratic vote (which can be democratically overturned in the future) with putting hundreds of billions of pounds on to the credit card of your unborn grandchildren.

    It is a gross selfishness that really is shameful and any Labour voter who claims otherwise really needs to give their head a wobble.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    alex_ said:

    It might be worth observing that the Labour manifesto also committed to cancelling all planned state pension increases above 66. Have they costed that in their manifesto? (Note also that these days most public sector pension schemes are tied to the state pension age...)

    The rise to 67 comes later in the 2020s, so that's one bill that doesn't come due during the next Parliament.

    Of course, in the one after that it'll go up to 75 straight away, as part of the same programme of austerity in which state pension payments will be cut by 25% and all the other OAP freebies will be scrapped, the NHS will be sold off, legal aid, child benefit and most other non-disability welfare payments will all be abolished and the minimum wage will be cut to £3 an hour.

    If people vote for free everything they'll end up getting free nothing. Emerging market economies can't afford lavish public services, as any Greek will tell you.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019
    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    And a 7% lead is still a swing to the Tories of 2.5% since 2017 and would see them gain 24 Labour seats for a Tory majority
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    HYUFD said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    An a 7% lead is still a swing to the Tories of 2.5% since 2017
    Nearly useless. There are still two weeks left for the remainder to unwind.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    PeterC said:

    SunnyJim said:


    And then the last, desperate hope is that Scotland votes to go, though even that may not be enough to save us from bankruptcy. As I've also said, the only satisfaction to be had from living through that nightmare is at least it might finally teach some people a lesson.

    There should still be enough voters kicking around from the 1970s who know how the story will end with this type of Labour.

    If there aren't then the younger voters who put Corbyn in to No.10 will hopefully caution future generations once memories start fading.

    Brexit is an irrelevance compared to the damage Labour would do.
    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.
    This whole situation wouldn't be so terrifying if Labour were led by a figure like Michael Foot. At least Michael Foot was a democratic socialist and not an evil lunatic like the Labour high command that we may have to live under. It's full of terrorist sympathisers and includes several actual Stalinists.
    No positive policies from your mob and this could be close.

    Keep shouting evil lunatic terrorist sympathiser and Stalinist if you like

    Have you learned nothing from 2017
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047

    Barnesian said:

    Tories running out of steam a bit as BXP squeezed hard and Labour on the move.

    Adding Survation and ICM gives

    Con Lab LD BXP Green PC SNP Total
    England 316 191 25 0 1 0 0 533
    Wales 16 20 1 0 0 4 0 40
    Scotland 8 1 5 0 0 0 45 59

    TOTAL 340 212 31 0 1 4 45 632

    Tory majority of 30.

    Tories reduce by two in England (Rother Valley and Scunthorpe stay in Labour column) but increase by two in Scotland based on latest Scottish poll.

    The impact of the latest Welsh poll is not yet available but I suspect it won't be positive for the Tories.

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yIHH_ZtcH9w9JF5e8WwYD6QuhOhlVwCO_GboafT6kfc/edit?usp=sharing

    Plus 5
    There is one thing that is outstanding about your model. It's conplete and Utter crap. Bath Labour?
  • The key to South Korea’s success in broadband (apart from being very urbanised) is that its government established policies and programmes that *facilitated* the rapid expansion and rapid roll-out.

    Um, by private firms. There are three major ISP providers there: KT Corporation, SK Broadband, and LG Uplus. All are publicly traded companies, even if KT is ex-state owned.

    That’s why it’s been successful - the national infrastructure planning bit.

    Precisely what the Government here is pledging to do.
  • MangoMango Posts: 1,019
    IanB2 said:



    When the Tories got so obsessed with Brexit, it is a shame they weren’t able to think a few more moves ahead.

    Been a weakness of theirs since about 1990 or so.

    They are not alone.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited November 2019


    And what happens to Sky Virgin media etc when broadband is free

    Still have TV revenues I guess, and Virgin can perhaps sell a higher quality broadband than the state provider, since they already have the connection in place. All the other providers go out of business though, other than (very expensive) specialist/business sellers. Investment dies.


    The daft thing here is that there is a case for state investment in initial fibre rollout - it's difficult to coordinate in piecemeal fashion, so many laws and permissions to take care of, and just the sort of thing the state can push through. But free broadband for everyone, that's plain idiotic. You ruin an entire sector of the economy for no benefit at all.
  • PeterC said:

    SunnyJim said:


    And then the last, desperate hope is that Scotland votes to go, though even that may not be enough to save us from bankruptcy. As I've also said, the only satisfaction to be had from living through that nightmare is at least it might finally teach some people a lesson.

    There should still be enough voters kicking around from the 1970s who know how the story will end with this type of Labour.

    If there aren't then the younger voters who put Corbyn in to No.10 will hopefully caution future generations once memories start fading.

    Brexit is an irrelevance compared to the damage Labour would do.
    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.

    Wilson managed an 83% top rate for income tax plus a further 15% for unearned income bringing the marginal rate to 98% & then followed the mass exodus.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
    He said 50,000 more nurses. Where did the word new come from?
    New or more the public will think its 50000 more than there is today . You’re playing with semantics in an attempt to spin this .

  • It wouldn’t be a GE campaign without a good old Tory wobble.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    edited November 2019

    HYUFD said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    An a 7% lead is still a swing to the Tories of 2.5% since 2017
    Nearly useless. There are still two weeks left for the remainder to unwind.
    The poll would also see the Tories lose just 3 seats to the LDs now for a clear overall Tory majority of 24 assuming the 1 seat lost to the SNP with Panelbase too, still the biggest Tory majority since 1987.

    Perhaps instead of bleating on here you could do something useful like go canvassing or deliver some leaflets
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    PeterC said:

    SunnyJim said:


    And then the last, desperate hope is that Scotland votes to go, though even that may not be enough to save us from bankruptcy. As I've also said, the only satisfaction to be had from living through that nightmare is at least it might finally teach some people a lesson.

    There should still be enough voters kicking around from the 1970s who know how the story will end with this type of Labour.

    If there aren't then the younger voters who put Corbyn in to No.10 will hopefully caution future generations once memories start fading.

    Brexit is an irrelevance compared to the damage Labour would do.
    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.
    This whole situation wouldn't be so terrifying if Labour were led by a figure like Michael Foot. At least Michael Foot was a democratic socialist and not an evil lunatic like the Labour high command that we may have to live under. It's full of terrorist sympathisers and includes several actual Stalinists.

    It’s not terrifying because it won’t happen and if it did it would be because Johnson fails. We have to live with EU referendum result so if Johnson is so incompetent that he loses to an idiot like corbyn then you will have to live with it. But it won’t happen and corbyn will crash burn and bring forth the next destructive leader of the momentum party RBL.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:
    That is still a swing to the Tories in Wales of 4.5% since 2017
    More than 2 weeks to go
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411

    HYUFD said:

    BluerBlue said:

    Reassuring facts for panickers (like me!):

    7 points is the 3rd biggest lead ICM has given the Tories since GE2017. The others were 8 and 10.

    An a 7% lead is still a swing to the Tories of 2.5% since 2017
    Nearly useless. There are still two weeks left for the remainder to unwind.
    We might see a BORIS BURST! Bit like 1970!

  • Perhaps blips like these, be they noise or genuine movement, may result in increased discussion of the what the reality of Labour's offer would likely mean in practice, in terms of the media and public discussion. The conversations I've had over the last few weeks have made me realise that whilst it is pointless talking to the cultists and utopians who believe it would actually work, a fair number across the undecided part of the spectrum have tended to not treat it seriously. Fear of the reality might sharpen should hopefully sharpen.

    For what it is worth, I've seen some comments on here that generalise about the north and public sector. My own experiences tell me that whilst there may be a hard boiled anti-Tory element amongst these, particularly the latter, Corbyn's appeal and credibility isn't all that, and Boris's appeal (both as a non-standard politician, and in trying to 'Get Brexit done') shouldn't be underestimated.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating BXP. A pact would have kept the Lab/BXP switchers away from labour. Their utter arrogance in failing to understand that there are an awful lot of working class Brexit supporters who would never vote conservative as long as they have a hole in their arse has put them in this situation. I suspect we have not seen the last of Mr. Farage in this election and we face a huge political realignment post election.

    You're not wrong about realignment. A Conservative win is the last chance for something resembling the existing system to survive.

    Any period of unfettered rule by Corbyn and McDonnell will bring financial ruin, and what will emerge from the wreckage won't be the Conservative Party, but something far, far nastier.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Good grief I'm not sure Ive witnesses such goofy behaviour since 2017! The wales poll is entirely in line with the polling average as if stands and the general movement since the campaign began. ICM is, as it stands the outlier opposite the Opinium at the other end. A trend is if the next icm confirms or continues the movement. The weekend saw opinium and bmg widening the tory lead and deltapoll, survation and comres reducing it with yougov flat.




  • alex_ said:

    It might be worth observing that the Labour manifesto also committed to cancelling all planned state pension increases above 66. Have they costed that in their manifesto? (Note also that these days most public sector pension schemes are tied to the state pension age...)

    I think they didn't bother to include that in what they laughably call their 'costings'. It's about another £6bn a year, which we used to think was a lot of money, but I suppose it's lost in the noise in Labour's case.
    It’s quite brilliant, though, isn’t it?

    Labour has pledged so much money, and so much spending, that everyone has lost count, and have stopped even trying to count. Anything more on this now sounds like noise - no-one can place it.

    Meanwhile, the electorate *are* hearing “only the rich will pay”, and rubbing their hands with glee.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106

    It wouldn’t be a GE campaign without a good old Tory wobble.

    Unfortunately 'Monday' doesn't lend itself readily to alliteration.
  • Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating BXP. A pact would have kept the Lab/BXP switchers away from labour. Their utter arrogance in failing to understand that there are an awful lot of working class Brexit supporters who would never vote conservative as long as they have a hole in their arse has put them in this situation. I suspect we have not seen the last of Mr. Farage in this election and we face a huge political realignment post election.

    It’s one national poll. Personally I don’t think there’s any point over analysing until we get a couple more to see if it’s a trend.

    Do we have any more due tonight?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
    He said 50,000 more nurses. Where did the word new come from?
    New or more the public will think its 50000 more than there is today . You’re playing with semantics in an attempt to spin this .

    It is 50,000 more than there is today. If there are 100,000 today it will be 150,000 in 2024, it's not a complicated concept.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    To some extent, CChQ set themselves up for disappointing campaigns by exaggerating the abuse at Corbyn. If they'd said he was elderly and stuck in the past people might have nodded along, but by saying he's like Stalin and an enemy of Britain, they run into cognitive dissonance when people actually see him on the box every day and think he sounds OKish.

    It's like lefties saying Tory leaders are intrinsically evil racists - people don't believe it, whereas they might be prepared to believe that Boris is not very serious or honest. Less is more in these things.
  • Long time lurker - just checked what I would get under Labour’s waspi promise - £25353 over 5 years - that’s some bung!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,130
    So one poll and everybody is panicking?

    (ducks)

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,721

    Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating

    You're not wrong about realignment. A Conservative win is the last chance for something resembling the existing system to survive.

    Any period of unfettered rule by Corbyn and McDonnell will bring financial ruin, and what will emerge from the wreckage won't be the Conservative Party, but something far, far nastier.
    Vote for us or we will turn into Nazis?

    Not sure it really works as a strap line.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    Register to vote numbers 22 Nov 2019 102,768 (18-25) 103,243 (25-34)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    viewcode said:

    So one poll and everybody is panicking?

    (ducks)

    It tells us nothing other than having Labour higher than other pollsters and the LDs lower.

    The Tories still on 41% matches most other pollsters bar Opinium, the main difference is the Tories hold a few more seats from the LDs with ICM but do not win as many from Labour
  • SunnyJim said:

    It wouldn’t be a GE campaign without a good old Tory wobble.

    Unfortunately 'Monday' doesn't lend itself readily to alliteration.
    Moody? Morose? Manic Depressive?
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited November 2019


    Do we have any more due tonight?

    Might be a Kantar tomorrow? That was a bit outlier-ishy (45-27) last week, so probably narrows a lot …. it was +10 the week before.

  • MangoMango Posts: 1,019

    IanB2 said:

    No one hasn’t yet answered the biggest question of all: What are we going through Brexit FOR?

    To take back control over our laws and money.
    Oh, the North Korea option.

    Parrot much?
  • To some extent, CChQ set themselves up for disappointing campaigns by exaggerating the abuse at Corbyn. If they'd said he was elderly and stuck in the past people might have nodded along, but by saying he's like Stalin and an enemy of Britain, they run into cognitive dissonance when people actually see him on the box every day and think he sounds OKish.

    It's like lefties saying Tory leaders are intrinsically evil racists - people don't believe it, whereas they might be prepared to believe that Boris is not very serious or honest. Less is more in these things.

    He is like Stalin and an enemy of Britain, but I agree that attacking him alone won’t seal it. He’s already widely disliked.

    To win, the Tories need to go big on his policy, which they’re still nervous (and intellectually lacking in self-confidence) to do.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Sir_Geoff said:

    Perhaps blips like these, be they noise or genuine movement, may result in increased discussion of the what the reality of Labour's offer would likely mean in practice, in terms of the media and public discussion. The conversations I've had over the last few weeks have made me realise that whilst it is pointless talking to the cultists and utopians who believe it would actually work, a fair number across the undecided part of the spectrum have tended to not treat it seriously. Fear of the reality might sharpen should hopefully sharpen.

    For what it is worth, I've seen some comments on here that generalise about the north and public sector. My own experiences tell me that whilst there may be a hard boiled anti-Tory element amongst these, particularly the latter, Corbyn's appeal and credibility isn't all that, and Boris's appeal (both as a non-standard politician, and in trying to 'Get Brexit done') shouldn't be underestimated.

    Talking to people won't work. Most of the Labour vote are total robots and the rest don't do detail. Detail such as the £400bn uncosted pledge to set up a state bank, £250bn for an investment fund on top of that, an unknown sum (perhaps £200-£300bn, though it might be a lot less if they decide to attempt confiscation) for the mass renationalisation program. Oh, and £58bn for the old bats, which is almost a rounding error relative to everything else.

    Everyone's so busy going on about ephemera like the exact number of nurses that there might be in two years' time, or whether or not some old women deserve compensation for not being allowed to retire earlier than men, that the big questions aren't being asked at all. Like where is the £1 trillion or more in funding commitments that isn't costed in the Labour grey book meant to come from? If there's been one single mention of it anywhere on the TV news or the coverage of any of these imbecilic "debates" then I've not seen it. And that won't change either. Watch.
  • Register to vote numbers 22 Nov 2019 102,768 (18-25) 103,243 (25-34)

    And the other age groups?
  • alex_ said:

    It might be worth observing that the Labour manifesto also committed to cancelling all planned state pension increases above 66. Have they costed that in their manifesto? (Note also that these days most public sector pension schemes are tied to the state pension age...)

    I think they didn't bother to include that in what they laughably call their 'costings'. It's about another £6bn a year, which we used to think was a lot of money, but I suppose it's lost in the noise in Labour's case.
    It’s quite brilliant, though, isn’t it?

    Labour has pledged so much money, and so much spending, that everyone has lost count, and have stopped even trying to count. Anything more on this now sounds like noise - no-one can place it.

    Meanwhile, the electorate *are* hearing “only the rich will pay”, and rubbing their hands with glee.
    While we are complaining about Labour costings, how much has CCHQ accounted for their manifesto's flagship policy of Brexit?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
    He said 50,000 more nurses. Where did the word new come from?
    New or more the public will think its 50000 more than there is today . You’re playing with semantics in an attempt to spin this .

    It is 50,000 more than there is today. If there are 100,000 today it will be 150,000 in 2024, it's not a complicated concept.
    Its 38000 more
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    I sometimes wonder whether the change a majoirty parliament in any direction would bring is so profound the electorate will not countenance one.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The nurses pledge is really blowing up in Bozos face .

    If you’re going to attack Corbyn on his pledges then at least have your flagship one which stands up to scrutiny .

    Otherwise you blunt your own attacks . The public think its 50,000 new nurses , to then be told 18,000 of those aren’t new but existing staff staying on complete demolishes your argument .

    Only if the public are innumerate morons. I don't think that little of the public.

    Why are 18,000 more experienced nurses supposed to be inferior to 18,000 new inexperienced nurses?
    If someone says new nurses most people think that’s added to the existing total of nurses. I never said anything about inferior , and because the nurse pledge has imploded the police one will also be called into question .

    If Labour did this you’d call it out , I admire you trying to spin this but the nurse pledge is falling apart .
    He said 50,000 more nurses. Where did the word new come from?
    New or more the public will think its 50000 more than there is today . You’re playing with semantics in an attempt to spin this .

    It is 50,000 more than there is today. If there are 100,000 today it will be 150,000 in 2024, it's not a complicated concept.
    18,000 of that total is existing nurses so it’s 32,000 at best . Really the desperation by some Tory supporters to keep arguing over this point is ridiculous .

    One ICM poll seems to have sent some into panic who are now saying that two and two makes 5 !
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149

    Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating BXP. A pact would have kept the Lab/BXP switchers away from labour. Their utter arrogance in failing to understand that there are an awful lot of working class Brexit supporters who would never vote conservative as long as they have a hole in their arse has put them in this situation. I suspect we have not seen the last of Mr. Farage in this election and we face a huge political realignment post election.

    Brexit Party candidates are still standing in Labour seats and taking enough Labour votes to enable the Tories to win seats like Workington and Grimsby
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    alex_ said:

    It’s like all these nationalisations. They seem to think they’re going to deliver them all practically overnight with no disruption to service in the interim!

    That's actually a point that could reasonably be asked. You want to do 100 things. What would you do first, and what would you take your time over?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Sir_Geoff said:

    Perhaps blips like these, be they noise or genuine movement, may result in increased discussion of the what the reality of Labour's offer would likely mean in practice, in terms of the media and public discussion. The conversations I've had over the last few weeks have made me realise that whilst it is pointless talking to the cultists and utopians who believe it would actually work, a fair number across the undecided part of the spectrum have tended to not treat it seriously. Fear of the reality might sharpen should hopefully sharpen.

    For what it is worth, I've seen some comments on here that generalise about the north and public sector. My own experiences tell me that whilst there may be a hard boiled anti-Tory element amongst these, particularly the latter, Corbyn's appeal and credibility isn't all that, and Boris's appeal (both as a non-standard politician, and in trying to 'Get Brexit done') shouldn't be underestimated.

    They are both crap and in their own way want to destroy the financial stability of the uk, corbyn wants to do it overnight Johnson will ensure the decline is slow enough for him to go in four years with enhanced pension and earn a fortune from idiots who want to listen to him.
  • The lack of self-awareness of Leavers, willing to push the country through the equivalent of a severe recession to secure their mad hobbyhorse, complaining about Labour supporters wanting to run up debts for their priorities is quite something.
  • HYUFD said:

    Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating BXP. A pact would have kept the Lab/BXP switchers away from labour. Their utter arrogance in failing to understand that there are an awful lot of working class Brexit supporters who would never vote conservative as long as they have a hole in their arse has put them in this situation. I suspect we have not seen the last of Mr. Farage in this election and we face a huge political realignment post election.

    Brexit Party candidates are still standing in Labour seats and taking enough Labour votes to enable the Tories to win seats like Workington and Grimsby
    Maybe but it is all to play for
  • PeterC said:



    Corbyn is a thousand times worse than Harold Wilson. We never got to experience Michael Foot.

    I always like the affection that Tories have for *past* Labour leaders. They would absolutely retrospectively have considered voting for them... even if they didn't actually do so at the time.
    And called them all kinds of names at the time too... Foot with his Donkey Jacket, Red Ed etc. Mind you, I have quite a soft spot for John Major these days so it goes both ways.
    I think the demonisation of Corbyn goes way too far and the demonisation of McDonnell goes a bit far too. They both strike me as basically decent people who are rightly angry at the injustice in the world even if they if a bit naive on economic issues.
    They don't appear to me as "hating Britain" either. A lot of Tories don't seem to understand that there is a lot more to Britain than its elite institutions - most of which are actually unrepresentative of the country Britain actually is, especially now.
    Not a fan of Milne though, don't like public school Marxists and have a lot more time for people who stand for election instead of operating in the shadows (cf Dominic Cummings).
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    Register to vote numbers 22 Nov 2019 102,768 (18-25) 103,243 (25-34)

    It ends tomorrow
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Foxy said:

    Today’s change shows how shortsighted the Conservatives have been in not accommodating

    You're not wrong about realignment. A Conservative win is the last chance for something resembling the existing system to survive.

    Any period of unfettered rule by Corbyn and McDonnell will bring financial ruin, and what will emerge from the wreckage won't be the Conservative Party, but something far, far nastier.
    Vote for us or we will turn into Nazis?

    Not sure it really works as a strap line.
    I don't think that the Conservative Party will turn into any such thing. It will simply get swept away.

    Whatever comes after Labour wrecks the economy (pray God it doesn't get the chance) probably won't be fascism, but it'll be something very unpleasant. It can be no other. The country won't be able to afford George Osborne trimming the state with a scalpel. Entire limbs will have to be hacked off with a blunt axe to get us through the aftermath.
  • The key to South Korea’s success in broadband (apart from being very urbanised) is that its government established policies and programmes that *facilitated* the rapid expansion and rapid roll-out.

    Um, by private firms. There are three major ISP providers there: KT Corporation, SK Broadband, and LG Uplus. All are publicly traded companies, even if KT is ex-state owned.

    That’s why it’s been successful - the national infrastructure planning bit.

    Precisely what the Government here is pledging to do.

    Its how the Government have successfully gotten Wind Energy production to be the best in the world and cheaper than any alternative too. Its a model that works that needs replicating.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533

    The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job

    Do you doubt it? Or that he'd join the Catholic Church or abolish the monarchy if that would do the trick?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    Sir_Geoff said:

    Perhaps blips like these, be they noise or genuine movement, may result in increased discussion of the what the reality of Labour's offer would likely mean in practice, in terms of the media and public discussion. The conversations I've had over the last few weeks have made me realise that whilst it is pointless talking to the cultists and utopians who believe it would actually work, a fair number across the undecided part of the spectrum have tended to not treat it seriously. Fear of the reality might sharpen should hopefully sharpen.

    For what it is worth, I've seen some comments on here that generalise about the north and public sector. My own experiences tell me that whilst there may be a hard boiled anti-Tory element amongst these, particularly the latter, Corbyn's appeal and credibility isn't all that, and Boris's appeal (both as a non-standard politician, and in trying to 'Get Brexit done') shouldn't be underestimated.

    Talking to people won't work. Most of the Labour vote are total robots and the rest don't do detail. Detail such as the £400bn uncosted pledge to set up a state bank, £250bn for an investment fund on top of that, an unknown sum (perhaps £200-£300bn, though it might be a lot less if they decide to attempt confiscation) for the mass renationalisation program. Oh, and £58bn for the old bats, which is almost a rounding error relative to everything else.

    Everyone's so busy going on about ephemera like the exact number of nurses that there might be in two years' time, or whether or not some old women deserve compensation for not being allowed to retire earlier than men, that the big questions aren't being asked at all. Like where is the £1 trillion or more in funding commitments that isn't costed in the Labour grey book meant to come from? If there's been one single mention of it anywhere on the TV news or the coverage of any of these imbecilic "debates" then I've not seen it. And that won't change either. Watch.
    The reason the Tories are so wobbly is that deep down they know that Brexit, at best, will be a managed slow burn of bad news, and they also know that they haven’t learned from 2017 and offered the electorate anything positive to look forward to once “Brexit is done”.

    So they are left utterly reliant upon Labour’s perceived awfulness (which they themselves have diminished because of the above) to get re-elected.
  • BluerBlue said:

    Register to vote numbers 22 Nov 2019 102,768 (18-25) 103,243 (25-34)

    And the other age groups?

    How many will make it to the polling station?
This discussion has been closed.