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.
I don't care about the sodding Tories... oh, I give up
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?
A lot. The costings are in line with Treasury forecasts for future growth of the economy.
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
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
150,000 is 38,000 more than 100,000? You're a fucking joker
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 !
Sorry but away from politics this is exactly how we discuss increasing numbers of staff in the real world. If I want a larger organisation in five years I use both recruitment AND retention to achieve it. Some of the increase will be people I’ve persuaded not to go. And actually I need that to be the case as I’m going to need experienced staff in amongst the larger organisation to manage the influx of new ones.
Calling that a lie and saying I should not quote the total extra size I’ve managed is just political spinning and nonsense. The Tories are right to say there will be an increase of 50,000 even if part of that comes from retention.
Not understanding this comes from politicians and journalists never having run anything.
You can see the opposite of this in army numbers. Recruitment is now where it needs to be, but numbers are decreasing. The solution will be retention measures, and by retaining more staff there’ll be a bigger army.
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
That’s fine if there were good reason to assume the retention rate would improve which there arent
Anecdata: just had very first election contact in Edinburgh East (the city centre part), from a SNP doorknocker - they took the seat with a 7%ish lead last time, although it was Lab until 2015 (usually 6k to 10k majorities), since about the 1930s I think.
Otherwise …. you'd have no idea an election was on. Labour seem to have given up (or maybe focusing all on Ed South?)
The Tories are the front runners trying to keep schtum until they win, Labour are chucking around money in a way that would make Stafford Cripps spin in his grave. I wouldn't mind but neither side have an ounce of understanding about what needs to be done, just their mantras.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
That’s fine if there were good reason to assume the retention rate would improve which there arent
Assumptions are part of all future planning and manifestos
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
That’s fine if there were good reason to assume the retention rate would improve which there arent
That's the policy though. To improve the retention rate.
You are sounding a little bit frantic. It's not xmas yet but you have my permission to have a sherry.
I am bloody frantic. I knew this would bloody happen from the start, but I was just hoping I might be wrong. It's the hope that kills you, as they say.
And I hate sherry.
I'm going to open the wine instead. Might as well enjoy it whilst I'm still employed and can afford the luxury.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Labour would not have the bandwidth to do everything they wanted to do in a single term, even if the forces of conservatism rolled out a red carpet and scattered rose petals in front of them.
Both Brexit and a one term majority Labour government would be about equally disastrous in reality.
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.
Rubbish, the Boris campaign is far more positive than May's was with promises of more money for the police and NHS and no new taxes like the Dementia Tax.
Hence the Tories poll lead is stable unlike hers which plummeted by this stage (ICM has always had the Tories lead lower than other pollsters)
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
You're a fucking joker
276000 is 38000 more than the curren 238000 keep up
You are sounding a little bit frantic. It's not xmas yet but you have my permission to have a sherry.
I am bloody frantic. I knew this would bloody happen from the start, but I was just hoping I might be wrong. It's the hope that kills you, as they say.
And I hate sherry.
I'm going to open the wine instead. Might as well enjoy it whilst I'm still employed and can afford the luxury.
Even the Tories lead with ICM is as big as Major's was over Kinnock in 1992 with the LDs lower.
The occasional poll showing the race narrowing is probably good for the Tories because it stops their voters getting complacent, as long as it is just the odd poll and doesn't become a pattern.
Re TSE's earlier post. Does the combination of a slight narrowing in the lead and the news that late voter registrations, particularly among younger voters, are substantially up on 2017 bode badly for BJ?
I know Blair's wins were on very low turnouts but historically high turnouts favour the Left (see Feb 1974).
But the latest polls show Brexiteers (right wing) less likely to vote than Remainers (left wing) So in that case a high turnout suits Boris maybe?
I have often wondered whether the belief in a higher turnout in summer months a bit of an old wive's tale. "Got nowt else to do in winter, might as well go out and vote"
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
150,000 is 38,000 more than 100,000? You're a fucking joker
138000 is 38000 more than 100000 keep up
its like 200000 new starter homes means zero
and 40 new hospitals means 6 upgraded ones
Pathological liars
So you agree that if we start with 100,000 nurses and end in 2024 with 150,000 nurses then there are 50,000 more nurses? (I dont know how many nurses there are right now so I'm using 100,000 to illustrate the point)
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.
Who said I put the house on it. It was a very modest constituency better there andin Carshalton .I am more betting against overall numberof LD seats generally.You sound very touchy by the way .Are you beginning to realise they are going to have a terrible result?
Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
Just been told by Mrs Exiled that she doesn't agree with being taxed £2k to pay towards the pensions of older women who will get to retire younger than her.
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
When brexit candidate stands aside, Tories get three of their votes to every 1 labour get. But when they stand, effectively on a Tory manifesto with more policies and detail than the actual Tory manifesto, they suck up enough Labour votes for the conservatives to take the seat? Would the math not have been better if Farage had stood in all the safe Tory seats rather than the Close Peterborough type ones, like how on earth in polling at time did Corbyn win Peterborough
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
It’s worse than that. Retaining experienced nurses should be better than having to recruit and train up new ones from the point of patient care.
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 !
So if there are 50,000 more nurses employed in the nhs in 2024 than now it doesn't count if they arent new nurses?? There will be 50,000 more nurses, it's a simple concept. I find the line of argument baffling. Nobody has claimed that 50,000 new nurses will be recruited.
That’s fine if there were good reason to assume the retention rate would improve which there arent
That's the policy though. To improve the retention rate.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Labour would not have the bandwidth to do everything they wanted to do in a single term, even if the forces of conservatism rolled out a red carpet and scattered rose petals in front of them.
Both Brexit and a one term majority Labour government would be about equally disastrous in reality.
Labour can do anything they want with a Commons majority. I think we already proved that with the Brexit Supreme Court decision. The law of the land is whatever Parliament says it is.
So, they're free to confiscate as much property as they like and print as much money as they like. That's the foundations of the economy cracked, to borrow a phrase from the CBI.
The international markets would bring them to heel eventually because the Government couldn't borrow any more hard currency from abroad and Sterling would be worth about as much as the Venezuelan bolivar by that point, leading to the kind of fuel and food riots that have been predicted as a consequence of Brexit actually taking place. But of course by then it would be far too late to undo the 9.0 on the Richter scale, seismic damage caused.
Leaving the EU - even if it does transpire to have significant negative consequences - is irrelevant by comparison. Especially if done with some form of trade agreement, which would be the most likely outcome of a Conservative win. Johnson is no more likely to stick to the end of 2020 deadline than to the rhetoric about the border in the Irish Sea, as Arlene Foster can testify.
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.
They simultaneously claim he's like Stalin and that he's pathetically unable to control people around him - not a complaint commonly directed at Uncle Joe.
The Tories are fighting the last war. Last time they went big on his policies, and nearly lost. So they've defaulted to generic abuse, which doesn't survive prolonged exposure.
They could, of course, try having some policies of their own. They say they'll deal with Brexit in 2020. Let's take them at their word for a moment. What would they like to do next? Recruit some nurses and fill some potholes for 4 years?
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.
They seem to be saying that the public are so dumb they don't understand what they're voting for. 😂
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
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.
What a bunch of lily livered, quivering wankers half the Tories are on this site. One poll and you are literally shitting yourselves. Labour activists must be pissing themselves silly reading the panic stricken hysteria on here.
Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
Just been told by Mrs Exiled that she doesn't agree with being taxed £2k to pay towards the pensions of older women who will get to retire younger than her.
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
Re TSE's earlier post. Does the combination of a slight narrowing in the lead and the news that late voter registrations, particularly among younger voters, are substantially up on 2017 bode badly for BJ?
I know Blair's wins were on very low turnouts but historically high turnouts favour the Left (see Feb 1974).
But the latest polls show Brexiteers (right wing) less likely to vote than Remainers (left wing) So in that case a high turnout suits Boris maybe?
I have often wondered whether the belief in a higher turnout in summer months a bit of an old wive's tale. "Got nowt else to do in winter, might as well go out and vote"
Yours confused.......
'late voter registrations, particularly among younger voters, are substantially up on 2017' ??
Are late voter registrations up? I did a quick google, (Not fully fact checked) it looks like lots of headlines of 2 million new registrations in 2017, and 1.5 million new registrations in 2019. the registration deadline is tomorrow, so the 1.5 million will go up, the new registrations could aproch or even match 2017 registrations, but its hard to see them 'substantially'
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.
They simultaneously claim he's like Stalin and that he's pathetically unable to control people around him - not a complaint commonly directed at Uncle Joe.
The Tories are fighting the last war. Last time they went big on his policies, and nearly lost. So they've defaulted to generic abuse, which doesn't survive prolonged exposure.
They could, of course, try having some policies of their own. They say they'll deal with Brexit in 2020. Let's take them at their word for a moment. What would they like to do next? Recruit some nurses and fill some potholes for 4 years?
Jester would have enough time to Chair every interview panel and fill every Pot Hole himself as he would have bugger all else to do
Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
Just been told by Mrs Exiled that she doesn't agree with being taxed £2k to pay towards the pensions of older women who will get to retire younger than her.
Doesn't matter. Oldies are numerous, they vote and are needed by the Tories.
Interesting to see if the tories just keep b8ggering on after today, or if they are tempted to offer something else.
Match Corbyn's WASPI pledge and invent a new pensioner benefit out of thin air on top of that. Call it Zimmer Frame Money or something. No need to explain where the extra money is meant to come from. Works for Labour, after all.
Context from yesterday I think, he had the lead at 13 +-5. My guess is the Tories will level off at maybe an 11ish lead, since there's not much more BXP vote left to cannibalize.
The occasional poll showing the race narrowing is probably good for the Tories because it stops their voters getting complacent, as long as it is just the odd poll and doesn't become a pattern.
That’s quite a big change . I said when the policy was announced that it couldn’t do anything but help Labour. And this is crucial in marginal Midlands and Northern seats .
Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
Just been told by Mrs Exiled that she doesn't agree with being taxed £2k to pay towards the pensions of older women who will get to retire younger than her.
Doesn't matter. Oldies are numerous, they vote and are needed by the Tories.
Interesting to see if the tories just keep b8ggering on after today, or if they are tempted to offer something else.
Match Corbyn's WASPI pledge and invent a new pensioner benefit out of thin air on top of that. Call it Zimmer Frame Money or something. No need to explain where the extra money is meant to come from. Works for Labour, after all.
Pensioners and young people are the same.
They both want to cut their costs and up their freebies.
What a bunch of lily livered, quivering wankers half the Tories are on this site. One poll and you are literally shitting yourselves. Labour activists must be pissing themselves silly reading the panic stricken hysteria on here.
It is quite amusing. The upper case outcome for Labour is minority government with the ability to do precisely nothing radical other than cancel Brexit via Ref2.
Just been told by Mrs BJO that she is due a £15k WASPI bribe
Just been told by Mrs Exiled that she doesn't agree with being taxed £2k to pay towards the pensions of older women who will get to retire younger than her.
Doesn't matter. Oldies are numerous, they vote and are needed by the Tories.
Interesting to see if the tories just keep b8ggering on after today, or if they are tempted to offer something else.
Match Corbyn's WASPI pledge and invent a new pensioner benefit out of thin air on top of that. Call it Zimmer Frame Money or something. No need to explain where the extra money is meant to come from. Works for Labour, after all.
Pensioners and young people are the same.
They both want to cut their costs and up their freebies.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Labour would not have the bandwidth to do everything they wanted to do in a single term, even if the forces of conservatism rolled out a red carpet and scattered rose petals in front of them.
Both Brexit and a one term majority Labour government would be about equally disastrous in reality.
Labour can do anything they want with a Commons majority. I think we already proved that with the Brexit Supreme Court decision. The law of the land is whatever Parliament says it is.
So, they're free to confiscate as much property as they like and print as much money as they like. That's the foundations of the economy cracked, to borrow a phrase from the CBI.
The international markets would bring them to heel eventually because the Government couldn't borrow any more hard currency from abroad and Sterling would be worth about as much as the Venezuelan bolivar by that point, leading to the kind of fuel and food riots that have been predicted as a consequence of Brexit actually taking place. But of course by then it would be far too late to undo the 9.0 on the Richter scale, seismic damage caused.
Leaving the EU - even if it does transpire to have significant negative consequences - is irrelevant by comparison. Especially if done with some form of trade agreement, which would be the most likely outcome of a Conservative win. Johnson is no more likely to stick to the end of 2020 deadline than to the rhetoric about the border in the Irish Sea, as Arlene Foster can testify.
It’s a bit late for Leavers to worry about democracy after they happily acquiesced in the attempt to suspend democracy. If democratic norms have broken down, you have only your own side to blame.
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.
They simultaneously claim he's like Stalin and that he's pathetically unable to control people around him - not a complaint commonly directed at Uncle Joe.
The Tories are fighting the last war. Last time they went big on his policies, and nearly lost. So they've defaulted to generic abuse, which doesn't survive prolonged exposure.
They could, of course, try having some policies of their own. They say they'll deal with Brexit in 2020. Let's take them at their word for a moment. What would they like to do next? Recruit some nurses and fill some potholes for 4 years?
Except they didn’t go big on policies, did they?
They locked the Chancellor in a room for the whole campaign and didn’t mention the economy once.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Apart from the inapproprite knifing how does that help
You're right. It doesn't. They'll do it anyway because they'll be pissed off and desperate, but it won't matter.
The Tory Party exists primarily to keep someone like Corbyn out of power. If it fails in that then it has no further purpose, and it won't be radical enough to channel the electric shockwave of rage that will pulse across the country when the mass unemployment and hyperinflation really start to take hold.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
That's never going to work as an attack. These women see it as money owed to them.
Without matching it, I don't see what the Tories can do. I wonder if this is another "magic money tree" moment for the Tories.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
Not going to work. Waspis will rationalise it by saying to themselves they will give the kids part of it.
What a bunch of lily livered, quivering wankers half the Tories are on this site. One poll and you are literally shitting yourselves. Labour activists must be pissing themselves silly reading the panic stricken hysteria on here.
It all stems from winning when they know they don’t deserve to.
There are certainly key differences . The Tory cabinet had more credibility still in 2017, without being controlled by the vote leave liars meant Torys benefitted from economic credibility That won 15, in 17. There’s probably more voters thinking brexit bad idea voting in the 2019 one? Libdems probably had more credible leader in the aging Cable Who had built up credibility in the noughties.
many leavers voted Corbyn last time need a reason to do something different this time? Anti semitism? The labour manifesto? the Tory vision of a wealthy global Britain?
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
Not going to work. Waspis will rationalise it by saying to themselves they will give the kids part of it.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
Not going to work. Waspis will rationalise it by saying to themselves they will give the kids part of it.
Boomers once again proving why everybody else hates them.
That’s quite a big change . I said when the policy was announced that it couldn’t do anything but help Labour. And this is crucial in marginal Midlands and Northern seats .
Sample of 299. Half of them are men. Half of those left were not born in the 1950s so it's about 75 WASPi women. The margin of error is gigantic. Half the poll was before the announcement. So we are looking at about 40 women.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
Not going to work. Waspis will rationalise it by saying to themselves they will give the kids part of it.
Problem is now that whole families will start seeing the benefit of voting for it if they stand to get a pay out.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
A good attack line but best if it also comes from other sources. LDs need to get stuck in over Labour threat to the economy. I think Tories need to line up some heavy hitters from industry & commerce to point out in no uncertain terms that anybody tempted to vote for Corbyn is risking their jobs, their children's jobs and their mortgage payments.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The women involved add upto about 3.8 million . I wish I could find that link I had which showed the areas with most impacted .
Of course some of their partners and husbands might also be swayed . Some will be people who are okay financially and resolutely anti Labour who won’t be interested .
I think in terms of Waspi Labour Leavers who are still with the party this policy is crucial , as they tend to be less Leave than similar Tories . It might also attract some ex Labour who moved to the Tories .
What a bunch of lily livered, quivering wankers half the Tories are on this site. One poll and you are literally shitting yourselves. Labour activists must be pissing themselves silly reading the panic stricken hysteria on here.
I am a Tory activist and am perfectly calm in the knowledge Boris will win
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The worst response would be to U-turn and it would bake in a panic.
The Conservatives must play the fiscal responsibility card - you take care of the finances you can share sensible, sustainable rewards.
They also need to do a triple whammy tax bombshell and go on Labour’s assault on houses.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Apart from the inapproprite knifing how does that help
You're right. It doesn't. They'll do it anyway because they'll be pissed off and desperate, but it won't matter.
The Tory Party exists primarily to keep someone like Corbyn out of power. If it fails in that then it has no further purpose, and it won't be radical enough to channel the electric shockwave of rage that will pulse across the country when the mass unemployment and hyperinflation really start to take hold.
Thatcher came in when Heath lost, if Corbyn wins I expect someone like Priti Patel would take over on an equally hard right platform.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
It won't work. Firstly the stick bangers want their money now. Secondly their kids get compensation in the form of inheritance. Fuck everybody else's.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
The People's Priorities is such a weak slogan aimed at easy populism. What about the homeless, food banks and hungry school children, are they not priorities?
Obviously those issues are not priorities for the Tories who are busy putting their oven ready Brexit in its mythical oven. Only Johnson could be crass enough to say to the flooded people of Yorkshire that you had to add water to make it work.
Where does everyone think the vote percentage gap will be for a hung parliament?
For me 5% probably hung, 6% tiny Tory majority. Is there a scenario where a 3/4 point lead for the Tories is enough for a narrow majority?
Probably not on the current numbers, you need to recall a stronger LD vote and that there are a lot of narrow marginals that Labour created in 2017 (often forgotten about).
If Labour gets within 2 points, I predict a very Hung Parliament, in which case Labour will almost be governing as a minority Government.
If by this weekend we have more polls closing the gap, then it's squeeky bum time.
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 .
For the first time in a while I’m enjoying reading PB today
The big potential vote-shifter from a Labour p.o.v is still yet to come – Trump’s visit in early Dec. I expect the campaign to go in hard to tie Boris to the Donald, and am optimistic it will have the desired effect on the polls.
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
It is 50,0.
18,000 of
Sorry but away from politics this is exactly how we discuss increasing numbers of staff in the real world. If I want a larger organisation in five years I use both recruitment AND retention to achieve it. Some of the increase will be people I’ve persuaded not to go. And actually I need that to be the case as I’m going to need experienced staff in amongst the larger organisation to manage the influx of new ones.
Calling that a lie and saying I should not quote the total extra size I’ve managed is just political spinning and nonsense. The Tories are right to say there will be an increase of 50,000 even if part of that comes from retention.
Not understanding this comes from politicians and journalists never having run anything.
You can see the opposite of this in army numbers. Recruitment is now where it needs to be, but numbers are decreasing. The solution will be retention measures, and by retaining more staff there’ll be a bigger army.
Yes, but as Mrs Foxy points out, why should retention suddenly improve? In what way will the Tories suddenly improve terms and conditions for nurses? And in what way will the Tories* improve terms and conditions of service for senior consultants perusing early retirement? For that matter how will conditions be improved for specialist NCOs in the forces?
* inventors of the pension taper tax that put 100% marginal tax on my colleagues.
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.
Brexit, however much or little damage it might do if it ever occurs, doesn't come with a £1.5 trillion price tag attached and you know it.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government.
The question that may arise on a hung parliament will Boris agree a referendum to keep his job
He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
Apart from the inapproprite knifing how does that help
You're right. It doesn't. They'll do it anyway because they'll be pissed off and desperate, but it won't matter.
The Tory Party exists primarily to keep someone like Corbyn out of power. If it fails in that then it has no further purpose, and it won't be radical enough to channel the electric shockwave of rage that will pulse across the country when the mass unemployment and hyperinflation really start to take hold.
Thatcher came in when Heath lost, if Corbyn wins I expect someone like Priti Patel would take over on an equally hard right platform.
Priti Patel ain't hard right. Neither is Farage, BTW. Margaret Thatcher certainly wasn't. A lot of rubbish is spoken about most of the senior figures in the Brexit Party and the Tories alike.
You have a crackpot socialist Government driving the country into a brick wall and whoever comes next will be more like the 2019 version of Ukip. Radical, ruthless, genuinely populist and pretty unhinged.
The People's Priorities is such a weak slogan aimed at easy populism. What about the homeless, food banks and hungry school children, are they not priorities?
Obviously those issues are not priorities for the Tories who are busy putting their oven ready Brexit in its mythical oven. Only Johnson could be crass enough to say to the flooded people of Yorkshire that you had to add water to make it work.
The People's Priorities is such a weak slogan aimed at easy populism. What about the homeless, food banks and hungry school children, are they not priorities?
Obviously those issues are not priorities for the Tories who are busy putting their oven ready Brexit in its mythical oven. Only Johnson could be crass enough to say to the flooded people of Yorkshire that you had to add water to make it work.
The phrase 'heartless clown' comes to mind.
They are clearly not Labour's priorities either. Buying votes with public funds and an ideologically motivated restructuring of the economy at great expense and with disastrous effect are their priorities.
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.
Who said I put the house on it. It was a very modest constituency better there andin Carshalton .I am more betting against overall numberof LD seats generally.You sound very touchy by the way .Are you beginning to realise they are going to have a terrible result?
Do you really want to reopen a debate about Kingston which you both lost and were called out on for not showing any proof of your claims to be betting (throwing away money) against Davey?
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
It won't work. Firstly the stick bangers want their money now. Secondly their kids get compensation in the form of inheritance. Fuck everybody else's.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
These are the same ‘old bats’ that voted leave, consistently vote Tory according to their age demographic. You can’t complain if the same people who have been suckered by vote leave, and Tory lies suddenly decide to be suckered by labour bribes.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
It won't work. Firstly the stick bangers want their money now. Secondly their kids get compensation in the form of inheritance. Fuck everybody else's.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
These are the same ‘old bats’ that voted leave, consistently vote Tory according to their age demographic. You can’t complain if the same people who have been suckered by vote leave, and Tory lies suddenly decide to be suckered by labour bribes.
And naturally want to vote Labour anyway.
I personally think this is an absolutely genius play.
Sorry but away from politics this is exactly how we discuss increasing numbers of staff in the real world. If I want a larger organisation in five years I use both recruitment AND retention to achieve it. Some of the increase will be people I’ve persuaded not to go. And actually I need that to be the case as I’m going to need experienced staff in amongst the larger organisation to manage the influx of new ones.
Calling that a lie and saying I should not quote the total extra size I’ve managed is just political spinning and nonsense. The Tories are right to say there will be an increase of 50,000 even if part of that comes from retention.
Not understanding this comes from politicians and journalists never having run anything.
You can see the opposite of this in army numbers. Recruitment is now where it needs to be, but numbers are decreasing. The solution will be retention measures, and by retaining more staff there’ll be a bigger army.
Yes, but as Mrs Foxy points out, why should retention suddenly improve? In what way will the Tories suddenly improve terms and conditions for nurses? And in what way will the Tories* improve terms and conditions of service for senior consultants perusing early retirement? For that matter how will conditions be improved for specialist NCOs in the forces?
* inventors of the pension taper tax that put 100% marginal tax on my colleagues.
Sky went into some detail with the proposals earlier today, there are a few methods planned to increase retention.
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
It won't work. Firstly the stick bangers want their money now. Secondly their kids get compensation in the form of inheritance. Fuck everybody else's.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
These are the same ‘old bats’ that voted leave, consistently vote Tory according to their age demographic. You can’t complain if the same people who have been suckered by vote leave, and Tory lies suddenly decide to be suckered by labour bribes.
And naturally want to vote Labour anyway.
I personally think this is an absolutely genius play.
I don’t want to come over all Mandy Rice, but you would though wouldn’t you? As a more balanced member of the club I am finding it interesting how this one post manifesto policy is worrying the Tories so much on here and they don’t seem to know how to play it. 🤔
'''Who knew that bunging millions of people tens of thousands in public money could buy their vote? '''
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
The Waspi move is genius though. The people receiving it don't think of it as a bribe, the sums are huge it may convert enough target voters to change the result. I think a million extra votes are heading to Corbyn unless something clever is done to change sentiment.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
It won't work. Firstly the stick bangers want their money now. Secondly their kids get compensation in the form of inheritance. Fuck everybody else's.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
These are the same ‘old bats’ that voted leave, consistently vote Tory according to their age demographic. You can’t complain if the same people who have been suckered by vote leave, and Tory lies suddenly decide to be suckered by labour bribes.
And naturally want to vote Labour anyway.
I personally think this is an absolutely genius play.
I don’t want to come over all Mandy Rice, but you would though wouldn’t you? As a more balanced member of the club I am finding it interesting how this one post manifesto policy is worrying the Tories so much on here and they don’t seem to know how to play it. 🤔
No of course I would - but you're right, I noticed that about the Tory side.
Comments
Doesn’t mean their lives will improve.
You are sounding a little bit frantic. It's not xmas yet but you have my permission to have a sherry.
Calling that a lie and saying I should not quote the total extra size I’ve managed is just political spinning and nonsense. The Tories are right to say there will be an increase of 50,000 even if part of that comes from retention.
Not understanding this comes from politicians and journalists never having run anything.
You can see the opposite of this in army numbers. Recruitment is now where it needs to be, but numbers are decreasing. The solution will be retention measures, and by retaining more staff there’ll be a bigger army.
Otherwise …. you'd have no idea an election was on. Labour seem to have given up (or maybe focusing all on Ed South?)
I wouldn't mind but neither side have an ounce of understanding about what needs to be done, just their mantras.
Everything else - whether we stay in the EU or not, whether the UK breaks up or not - is immaterial compared with the consequences of a Labour Government. He won't get the chance. He loses on Friday morning and he'll be knifed by his own Cabinet by Friday afternoon.
And I hate sherry.
I'm going to open the wine instead. Might as well enjoy it whilst I'm still employed and can afford the luxury.
Both Brexit and a one term majority Labour government would be about equally disastrous in reality.
Hence the Tories poll lead is stable unlike hers which plummeted by this stage (ICM has always had the Tories lead lower than other pollsters)
its like 200000 new starter homes means zero
and 40 new hospitals means 6 upgraded ones
Pathological liars
You really are a big girl's blouse
I know Blair's wins were on very low turnouts but historically high turnouts favour the Left (see Feb 1974).
But the latest polls show Brexiteers (right wing) less likely to vote than Remainers (left wing) So in that case a high turnout suits Boris maybe?
I have often wondered whether the belief in a higher turnout in summer months a bit of an old wive's tale. "Got nowt else to do in winter, might as well go out and vote"
Yours confused.......
So, they're free to confiscate as much property as they like and print as much money as they like. That's the foundations of the economy cracked, to borrow a phrase from the CBI.
The international markets would bring them to heel eventually because the Government couldn't borrow any more hard currency from abroad and Sterling would be worth about as much as the Venezuelan bolivar by that point, leading to the kind of fuel and food riots that have been predicted as a consequence of Brexit actually taking place. But of course by then it would be far too late to undo the 9.0 on the Richter scale, seismic damage caused.
Leaving the EU - even if it does transpire to have significant negative consequences - is irrelevant by comparison. Especially if done with some form of trade agreement, which would be the most likely outcome of a Conservative win. Johnson is no more likely to stick to the end of 2020 deadline than to the rhetoric about the border in the Irish Sea, as Arlene Foster can testify.
The Tories are fighting the last war. Last time they went big on his policies, and nearly lost. So they've defaulted to generic abuse, which doesn't survive prolonged exposure.
They could, of course, try having some policies of their own. They say they'll deal with Brexit in 2020. Let's take them at their word for a moment. What would they like to do next? Recruit some nurses and fill some potholes for 4 years?
😂
OMG. Time for that sherry now
Sp what are the tories going to do? nothing?
Are late voter registrations up? I did a quick google, (Not fully fact checked) it looks like lots of headlines of 2 million new registrations in 2017, and 1.5 million new registrations in 2019. the registration deadline is tomorrow, so the 1.5 million will go up, the new registrations could aproch or even match 2017 registrations, but its hard to see them 'substantially'
Or am I looking at incorrect numbers?
https://twitter.com/PME_Politics/status/1198671073539178498
People vote on bungs.
They both want to cut their costs and up their freebies.
Can’t say I blame them. Wouldn’t you?
Terrifying.
They both want to cut their costs and up their freebies.
Can’t say I blame them. Wouldn’t you?
...and Corbyn wants Brexit.
6.30 ish Con Maj 1.56
Now Con Maj 1.51
They locked the Chancellor in a room for the whole campaign and didn’t mention the economy once.
The conservatives should make it clear they waspi women are taking the money out of their own kids' pockets.
The Tory Party exists primarily to keep someone like Corbyn out of power. If it fails in that then it has no further purpose, and it won't be radical enough to channel the electric shockwave of rage that will pulse across the country when the mass unemployment and hyperinflation really start to take hold.
Without matching it, I don't see what the Tories can do. I wonder if this is another "magic money tree" moment for the Tories.
many leavers voted Corbyn last time need a reason to do something different this time? Anti semitism? The labour manifesto? the Tory vision of a wealthy global Britain?
NEW THREAD
Of course some of their partners and husbands might also be swayed . Some will be people who are okay financially and resolutely anti Labour who won’t be interested .
I think in terms of Waspi Labour Leavers who are still with the party this policy is crucial , as they tend to be less Leave than similar Tories . It might also attract some ex Labour who moved to the Tories .
For me 5% probably hung, 6% tiny Tory majority. Is there a scenario where a 3/4 point lead for the Tories is enough for a narrow majority?
The worst response would be to U-turn and it would bake in a panic.
The Conservatives must play the fiscal responsibility card - you take care of the finances you can share sensible, sustainable rewards.
They also need to do a triple whammy tax bombshell and go on Labour’s assault on houses.
The apparent success of this bribe, particularly if it does get Labour into power in the end, is deeply ironic. It's proof of that notorious claim by Thatcher that there's no such thing as society. Folk care about 1. themselves, 2. their immediate family, and at the very most 3. close friends, in that order. Everyone is in it for themselves. It's the L'Oreal theory of politics: people will always vote in the first instance to help themselves to other people's money, "because I'm worth it."
Labour's offer only ceases to appeal if the people actually think they're going to be made to cough up for their own bribes. Otherwise they will work. The old bats think they're going to get oodles of free money, so of course they're going to vote for it. If enough other voters think the same then Labour wins. It's that simple.
Obviously those issues are not priorities for the Tories who are busy putting their oven ready Brexit in its mythical oven. Only Johnson could be crass enough to say to the flooded people of Yorkshire that you had to add water to make it work.
The phrase 'heartless clown' comes to mind.
If Labour gets within 2 points, I predict a very Hung Parliament, in which case Labour will almost be governing as a minority Government.
If by this weekend we have more polls closing the gap, then it's squeeky bum time.
The big potential vote-shifter from a Labour p.o.v is still yet to come – Trump’s visit in early Dec. I expect the campaign to go in hard to tie Boris to the Donald, and am optimistic it will have the desired effect on the polls.
* inventors of the pension taper tax that put 100% marginal tax on my colleagues.
You have a crackpot socialist Government driving the country into a brick wall and whoever comes next will be more like the 2019 version of Ukip. Radical, ruthless, genuinely populist and pretty unhinged.
I personally think this is an absolutely genius play.