I don't understand this, surely Bloomberg is precisely the candidate Sanders WANTS in the race right now ? I think the people running the Bloomberg campaign are more than likely err... *whisper it quietly* in it for the money.
@Alistair - the other thing to look out for in the YouGov MRP is how efficiently the Labour/Lib Dem vote splits. Same national vote shares could have a very different outcome.
Exactly. The LibDem performance in Scotland in 2017 should inform us all. A 10% relative drop in their vote. A 300% increase in the number of their seats.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
The Saj is just not very good. At all. Rishi Sunak is somewhat more fluent, and has appeared fairly often, but seems uncomfortable with hostile questioning. It can't help that the Tory manifesto is basically Brexit, whose implications are essentially uncosted, plus a whole heap of nothing very much.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
On the Conservative manifesto, Brexit we are told will be done by the end of 2020. That leaves three and a bit years to re-energise the Greatness of Great Britain, but an empty* manifesto suggests the Tories have no ideas of what to do. Brexit is the plan.
* I'm exaggerating, but it seems to be the main talking point in the media and most voters won't even look at it.
It’s the missing part of the plan. The Tories have been telling us for ages that we need to get Brexit out of the way so we can get on with the important stuff. Then we find there isn’t any.
Instead of hoping it's not the case, might people be interested in addressing the fairly obvious dent in the tories' lead in the last week? Why? Why? Why?
Is it the student issue? WASPI? Johnson's frankly rubbish performances in front of camera?
Or just Labour coming home?
What's it all about?
I think we should be told.
The reason I'm asking this is because this could be nothing more than a blip. Or it could be the beginning of the end of the Conservatives. Or something in between.
I don’t honestly know the answer. I have always thought - and said on here - that I expected Labour to do better, the Tories worse than they both thought and for the Lib Dems not to do as well as they might once have hoped. Another hung Parliament is a very real possibility. I will suggest three reasons:- 1. There is not much in the Tory manifesto. No eye-catching retail offer. Something towards students / the young should have been included. 2. For all the talk about people disliking Corbyn etc I think a lot of Labour voters are able somehow to disassociate voting Labour with supporting Corbyn. So they feel able to be as rude about Corbyn as possible but still tick the Labour box. 3. The Tories really have not attacked the Labour manifesto - it’s unaffordability, the cost, the unintended consequences, its authoritarianism (a state owned internet, FFS! - like Iran or China). They are - much like May- letting Labour’s manifesto go by default. Where the hell is the Tory treasury team, for instance?
The Tory treasury team are people who think charging interest at RPI+3% on student debt is a good idea even when the ONS is adding it to government borrowing.
Does any PBer think charging interest on student debt at RPI+3% is a good idea ?
Seems to me the Labour supporters here are now repeating the same mistakes as the Tory supporters - they are writing off their opponents chances based on the back of a couple of opinion polls and anecdota central and how they 'feel' things are going. Tory landlside = bollocks, always was, Labour under 200 seats = bollocks, always was, Labour majority = even bigger bollocks, always was, narrow Tory majority/hung parliament - nailed on, always was.
Btw, Boris's photo ops are stage-managed, so CCHQ disagrees with me. Boris is generally shown joining in with the workers, with a broom or mop, or indeed sheep. At hospitals he takes off his jacket and rolls up his sleeves as if he has just delivered a premature baby.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
I don’t honestly know the answer. I have always thought - and said on here - that I expected Labour to do better, the Tories worse than they both thought and for the Lib Dems not to do as well as they might once have hoped. Another hung Parliament is a very real possibility.
I will suggest three reasons:- 1. There is not much in the Tory manifesto. No eye-catching retail offer. Something towards students / the young should have been included.
They are Remainers. They will not vote Tory, so they can be ignored
2. For all the talk about people disliking Corbyn etc I think a lot of Labour voters are able somehow to disassociate voting Labour with supporting Corbyn. So they feel able to be as rude about Corbyn as possible but still tick the Labour box.
I have always maintained that Labour / Marxism is a secular religion. Like many religions, the followers will forgive their Leaders/Prophets almost any transgression
3. The Tories really have not attacked the Labour manifesto - it’s unaffordability, the cost, the unintended consequences, its authoritarianism (a state owned internet, FFS! - like Iran or China). They are - much like May- letting Labour’s manifesto go by default. Where the hell is the Tory treasury team, for instance?
Yes, but theirs is little better. They too are "spaffing" money about.
I don't understand this, surely Bloomberg is precisely the candidate Sanders WANTS in the race right now ? I think the people running the Bloomberg campaign are more than likely err... *whisper it quietly* in it for the money.
Bloomberg will likely run as an Independent in the general election if it is Trump v Sanders
I really hope our Tissue Price wins and not just because he is the Tory candidate. Unless someone has experienced being a candidate, it is impossible to fully comprehend just how hard it is to properly work a seat. The first thing I realised was that the "buck stopped with me"! In other campaigns I could refer the difficult questions and troublesome floating voters to the candidate but when I was the candidate, these matters were being put in my "in-tray".
I admire anyone willing to put him or herself forward for election to public office, especially those candidates who know they cannot win but for the sake of the party they support, make a good show of it.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
I think she was referring to intellectual activity, HYUFD.
But your charm outreach to the electorate will undoubtedly have a marginal effect.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
The Tory line - that it's not allowed for in the manifesto costings - is therefore correct.
Much better than getting into an argument about a contingency fund no-one's heard of.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
You are really being arrogant and stupid in dismissing Cyclefree's sensible comments
Your attitude will see the party lose any chance of a majority
Instead of hoping it's not the case, might people be interested in addressing the fairly obvious dent in the tories' lead in the last week? Why? Why? Why?
Is it the student issue? WASPI? Johnson's frankly rubbish performances in front of camera?
Or just Labour coming home?
What's it all about?
I think we should be told.
The reason I'm asking this is because this could be nothing more than a blip. Or it could be the beginning of the end of the Conservatives. Or something in between.
I don’t honestly know the answer. I have always thought - and said on here - that I expected Labour to do better, the Tories worse than they both thought and for the Lib Dems not to do as well as they might once have hoped. Another hung Parliament is a very real possibility. I will suggest three reasons:- 1. There is not much in the Tory manifesto. No eye-catching retail offer. Something towards students / the young should have been included. 2. For all the talk about people disliking Corbyn etc I think a lot of Labour voters are able somehow to disassociate voting Labour with supporting Corbyn. So they feel able to be as rude about Corbyn as possible but still tick the Labour box. 3. The Tories really have not attacked the Labour manifesto - it’s unaffordability, the cost, the unintended consequences, its authoritarianism (a state owned internet, FFS! - like Iran or China). They are - much like May- letting Labour’s manifesto go by default. Where the hell is the Tory treasury team, for instance?
And the Tories overestimated Bozo’s potential popularity as a campaigner. His glory days are gone (yet note how often Bozo himself tries to refer back to his mayoral days when interviewed); both his personal and political reputations are now tarnished, and he is marmite rather than honey. Marmite means that a proportion of those who haven’t thought much about him will dislike him when forced to take a taste.
The Tories are up 10 to 20% in the polls since the Spring thanks to Boris
No, not "Boris", as you so obsequiously refer to him as. Jeremy is the reason. Johnson is shit by any measure, but most people that are not completely stupid know that Corbyn is even worse.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
You are really being arrogant and stupid in dismissing Cyclefree's sensible comments
Your attitude will see the party lose any chance of a majority
Utter rubbish, as anyone who watched the Tories attack ads on social media over the last week would tell you.
If the Tories win a majority it will be Labour voters going LD or Brexit Party that does it, the Tory voteshare is now already back over 40%
Seems to me the Labour supporters here are now repeating the same mistakes as the Tory supporters - they are writing off their opponents chances based on the back of a couple of opinion polls and anecdota central and how they 'feel' things are going. Tory landlside = bollocks, always was, Labour under 200 seats = bollocks, always was, Labour majority = even bigger bollocks, always was, narrow Tory majority/hung parliament - nailed on, always was.
I'm not a Labour supporter, I still think the Tories will win big, I don't have to write about all of Labour's weaknesses to make my comments balanced, I'm enjoying writing about Tory mistakes.
Instead of hoping it's not the case, might people be interested in addressing the fairly obvious dent in the tories' lead in the last week? Why? Why? Why?
Is it the student issue? WASPI? Johnson's frankly rubbish performances in front of camera?
Or just Labour coming home?
What's it all about?
I think we should be told.
The reason I'm asking this is because this could be nothing more than a blip. Or it could be the beginning of the end of the Conservatives. Or something in between.
I don’t honestly know the answer. I have always thought - and said on here - that I expected Labour to do better, the Tories worse than they both thought and for the Lib Dems not to do as well as they might once have hoped. Another hung Parliament is a very real possibility. I will suggest three reasons:- 1. There is not much in the Tory manifesto. No eye-catching retail offer. Something towards students / the young should have been included. 2. For all the talk about people disliking Corbyn etc I think a lot of Labour voters are able somehow to disassociate voting Labour with supporting Corbyn. So they feel able to be as rude about Corbyn as possible but still tick the Labour box. 3. The Tories really have not attacked the Labour manifesto - it’s unaffordability, the cost, the unintended consequences, its authoritarianism (a state owned internet, FFS! - like Iran or China). They are - much like May- letting Labour’s manifesto go by default. Where the hell is the Tory treasury team, for instance?
And the Tories overestimated Bozo’s potential popularity as a campaigner. His glory days are gone (yet note how often Bozo himself tries to refer back to his mayoral days when interviewed); both his personal and political reputations are now tarnished, and he is marmite rather than honey. Marmite means that a proportion of those who haven’t thought much about him will dislike him when forced to take a taste.
The Tories are up 10 to 20% in the polls since the Spring thanks to Boris
No, not "Boris", as you so obsequiously refer to him as. Jeremy is the reason. Johnson is shit by any measure, but most people that are not completely stupid know that Corbyn is even worse.
It is like choosing a PM from Dumb and Dumber.
Yet the Tories trailed Corbyn Labour after May extended and the May Deal, they only lead now thanks to the Boris Deal and his commitment to Brexit
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
How is the canvassing going there?
The Tories vote is holding up, however Labour are also getting out their vote
HYUFD said: "Utter rubbish, as anyone who watched the Tories attack ads on social media over the last week would tell you." I agree. I have watched Tory attack ads and I will happily tell you they are utter rubbish.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
How is the canvassing going there?
The Tories vote is holding up, however Labour are also getting out their vote
Thanks very much. Fascinating area in relation to national results
Parsnips are disgusting and who is Yougov surveying who'd know an Eton mess from a smashed-up pavlova?
Parsnips should be thoroughly parboiled then roasted until they are only just recognisable as parsnips and then they are one of god's most perfect creations.
Parsnips are disgusting and who is Yougov surveying who'd know an Eton mess from a smashed-up pavlova?
Parsnips should be thoroughly parboiled then roasted until they are only just recognisable as parsnips and then they are one of god's most perfect creations.
The best way to have parsnips is grated in parsnip and onion bhajis. I've made them for about 30 different people, and they've all said they were the best bhajis they've ever had.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
The Tory line - that it's not allowed for in the manifesto costings - is therefore correct.
Much better than getting into an argument about a contingency fund no-one's heard of.
Except the contingency fund is exactly what McDonnell is saying how it will be paid. “Contingency” is the word he used on the radio. So the obvious next statement / question is: “The Contingency Fund is £9.5 billion. Where is the money coming from? Tax rises? On who? Expenditure cuts? On what? More borrowing? How can you say this is capital investment?” Etc..... All that is needed is doubt about whether it will be paid at all and/or reinforce the belief that the sums don’t add up and lots of people will have to pay more to bribe this particular group.
The best way to have parsnips is grated in parsnip and onion bhajis. I've made them for about 30 different people, and they've all said they were the best bhajis they've ever had.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
How is the canvassing going there?
The Tories vote is holding up, however Labour are also getting out their vote
Thanks very much. Fascinating area in relation to national results
That's the point - while we may not like the WASPI bribe - it is an effective campaign point that has cut through and got people to change their vote.
While Aaron may be hearing that people want Brexit done does Boris actually have any other policies - as the lack of them is giving Labour a field day.
Parsnips are disgusting and who is Yougov surveying who'd know an Eton mess from a smashed-up pavlova?
Parsnips should be thoroughly parboiled then roasted until they are only just recognisable as parsnips and then they are one of god's most perfect creations.
The best way to have parsnips is grated in parsnip and onion bhajis. I've made them for about 30 different people, and they've all said they were the best bhajis they've ever had.
Point of (anecdotal) order: My mum always reminds me that "bhaji" is a curry. The fried things are called "bhajia(s)".
Except the contingency fund is exactly what McDonnell is saying how it will be paid. “Contingency” is the word he used on the radio. So the obvious next statement / question is: “The Contingency Fund is £9.5 billion. Where is the money coming from? Tax rises? On who? Expenditure cuts? On what? More borrowing? How can you say this is capital investment?” Etc..... All that is needed is doubt about whether it will be paid at all and/or reinforce the belief that the sums don’t add up and lots of people will have to pay more to bribe this particular group.
TBH I think it's even simpler than that. £58bn is nearly three years' worth of the entire adult social care budget, or alternatively about one and a half times the entire defence budget . If there is £58bn to be spent, how on earth can Labour conceivably justify blowing it on bungs to people whose case is in any case without any merit, apparently being based on the argument that women were too stupid to be able to read leaflets, information from their pension providers, and the newspapers, or use the internet to find out when their retirement date was?
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
How is the canvassing going there?
The Tories vote is holding up, however Labour are also getting out their vote
Thanks very much. Fascinating area in relation to national results
The challenge the Tories have in a seat like Chingford is not that supporters are changing to other parties but that they are disappearing and being replaced with Labour voters.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
A pity you didn’t read what I wrote carefully enough - “a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.”. Stuffing leaflets through doors does none of that. The majority will go in the recycling bin, unread.
Boris has simply course corrected for every one of May’s mistakes, and rolled the dice again.
He’s done nothing else.
You’ve have thought some independent strategic thinking wouldn’t have gone amiss about the circumstances *today* and broader mood and direction of the British electorate, playing the long game. But, no. It’s all last war stuff.
He may just get away with it (postals are already coming back in and it’s barely two weeks away, as opposed to May’s factory of banana skins that had another week or two to develop) but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him limp across the line none the wiser.
Except the contingency fund is exactly what McDonnell is saying how it will be paid. “Contingency” is the word he used on the radio. So the obvious next statement / question is: “The Contingency Fund is £9.5 billion. Where is the money coming from? Tax rises? On who? Expenditure cuts? On what? More borrowing? How can you say this is capital investment?” Etc..... All that is needed is doubt about whether it will be paid at all and/or reinforce the belief that the sums don’t add up and lots of people will have to pay more to bribe this particular group.
TBH I think it's even simpler than that. £58bn is nearly three years' worth of the entire adult social care budget, or alternatively about one and a half times the entire defence budget . If there is £58bn to be spent, how on earth can Labour conceivably justify blowing it on bungs to people whose case is iin any case without any merit, apparently being based on the argument that women were too stupid to be able to read leaflets, information from their pension providers, and the newspapers, or use the internet to find out when their retirement date was?
Indeed - imagine what such a sum could do for social care. But none of these arguments are being made. The best to my mind is that Labour are favouring a few women over the majority of working women, men and the young. “Labour are for the noisy few not the many.” Why aren’t Tory campaigners using that line, for instance?
Needs playing on the 6 o'clock and 10 o'clock and to Corbyn in his interview.
Someone on here yesterday told Jews we need to "put a sock in it". Anti-Semitism is now normalised in the UK political conversation, thanks to Corbynistas and spineless Labour moderates willing to turn a blind eye. I now despise both of them.
It's too sickly sweet and intensely sugar flavoured with the muscovado sugar. If you sub in light brown sugar instead it becomes heavenly as the flavours from the dates and treacle come through.
The following cannot vote in a UK Parliament election:
members of the House of Lords
EU citizens (other than UK, Republic of Ireland, Cyprus and Malta) resident in the UK
anyone other than British, Irish and qualifying Commonwealth citizens
convicted persons detained in pursuance of their sentences, excluding contempt of court (though remand prisoners, unconvicted prisoners and civil prisoners can vote if they are on the electoral register)
anyone found guilty within the previous five years of corrupt or illegal practices in connection with an election
Don't pollsters say it takes 3 days for 'an event' to filter through to polling and 7 days for it to disappear if it didn't have a lasting impact? So we aren't yet into the polling that has reacted to the Con Manifesto launch.
It may just be poor old Jo Swinson. She really needs to ditch the hideous earrings, get better dresses (she has a good figure) and a nicer haircut. Boris needs to learn to tuck his shirt in and not dress like a schoolboy who’s just got out of bed and is late for school. Jeremy has made an effort but his trousers are a bit too long. Their policies are rubbish on the whole. But intellectual argument seems wholly absent these days so we as may well vote on superficial stuff.
I know Corbyn mainly as a private individual, though I catch his speeches on TV from time to time - might be why I like him personally more (separated from policies and actions) than some here for whom it's the reverse.
We have a very senior spokesperson for the Jewish community saying that Jeremy Corbyn is unfit to be PM because he tolerates and enables antisemitism. More generally we are told (very credibly) that Corbyn is toxic on the doorstep. People think he's unpatriotic, weak, a bit soft in the head. And then we have just about every senior spokesperson for the large and diverse "head screwed on the right way" community (many millions) saying that Boris Johnson is unfit to be PM because he believes in nothing, lies relentlessly and has no principles, political or personal. And yet no breakthrough for the Lib Dems? How can this be?
Indeed - imagine what such a sum could do for social care. But none of these arguments are being made. The best to my mind is that Labour are favouring a few women over the majority of working women, men and the young. “Labour are for the noisy few not the many.” Why aren’t Tory campaigners using that line, for instance?
Yes, you are absolutely right. Boris seems to be making exactly the same error Theresa May made, of not laying into the inherent nonsense of Corbyn's positions. At least, that is how it appears. Perhaps there's some more subtle targeted campaigning going on under the surface (as the Tories did very well in 2015). If so, I'm not aware of it.
I don't think anyone can deny now that there has been a shift to Labour. It may be small but it's fairly incontrovertible.
The question is why?
1. The Labour manifesto launch gave them a lot of publicity (and although most people have been pointing and laughing at Labours spending commitments as the old saying goes there's no such thing as bad publicity)
2. The debates will never be good news for the incumbent and will always benefit the challenger. In 2010 it was Clegg and the Lib-Dems that benefited from the debates while in 2015 is was Labour/Ed Miliband ("the days the polls turned" etc) although in both cases it was actually pretty fleeting and their rise in the polls wasn't sustained until polling day.
This was always going to be a wobbly week for Con. I'm expecting the polls to continue to narrow through the week with Labour reaching their peak over the weekend.
Next week should see Con stabilizing followed by a swing back to Con in the final week or so of the campaign.
If Labour are still narrowing the gap in the final weekend polls (7th/8th December) then Con are in trouble and we're repeating 2017.
Boris has simply course corrected for every one of May’s mistakes, and rolled the dice again.
He’s done nothing else.
You’ve have thought some independent strategic thinking wouldn’t have gone amiss about the circumstances *today* and broader mood and direction of the British electorate, playing the long game. But, no. It’s all last war stuff.
He may just get away with it (postals are already coming back in and it’s barely two weeks away, as opposed to May’s factory of banana skins that had another week or two to develop) but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him limp across the line none the wiser.
I have thought another hung parliament was the most likely outcome for a long time, and nothing I have seen so far has changed my mind. There is also plenty of time left for some major cock-up, or Boris giving a car crash interview. It is all very well moaning about Labour's bungs being effective, but the Tory attempts to counter them have been utterly pathetic. Cyclefree has done a better job of it than has any Conservative. There has to be more to the Tory campaign than parroting "get Brexit done" every 30 seconds.
Thank you! People are imagining poorly roasted, hard lumps instead of them being roasted within an inch of their lives. @Meeks you need to boil some first then almost forget about them in the oven and voilà.
For the Greens, that must surely be a fair chunk of their total election spending? If they stood in fewer places they could direct a lot more budget to those. Or do the individual candidates stump up (and so not transferable to other locations if they didn't stand). Does anyone know?
The following cannot vote in a UK Parliament election:
members of the House of Lords
EU citizens (other than UK, Republic of Ireland, Cyprus and Malta) resident in the UK
anyone other than British, Irish and qualifying Commonwealth citizens
convicted persons detained in pursuance of their sentences, excluding contempt of court (though remand prisoners, unconvicted prisoners and civil prisoners can vote if they are on the electoral register)
anyone found guilty within the previous five years of corrupt or illegal practices in connection with an election
Thanks. So Lords like Heseltine can't but the Queen can by the looks of it. Nothing noted anywhere about royals being unable to vote. She doesn't but I wonder if other members of the main Royal family do, Charles or Harry etc.
For the mathmatically inclined, in a two possible outcome bet is it better to LAY option 1 at 1.54 or to BACK option 2 at 3.15? I know I ought to know this but digital odds make my head spin, especially when laying.
Boris has simply course corrected for every one of May’s mistakes, and rolled the dice again.
He’s done nothing else.
You’ve have thought some independent strategic thinking wouldn’t have gone amiss about the circumstances *today* and broader mood and direction of the British electorate, playing the long game. But, no. It’s all last war stuff.
He may just get away with it (postals are already coming back in and it’s barely two weeks away, as opposed to May’s factory of banana skins that had another week or two to develop) but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him limp across the line none the wiser.
So what's the best strategic response: attack the Waspi or match the Waspi?
On the election as a whole: depressing as it is how easily the electorate falls for a raft of incredibly expensive bribes, I'm fairly Zen if they get what they deserve as a result - a hung Parliament in which they'll get no bribes, no Brexit, endless political and economic paralysis, and most probably several years of Boris governing impotently in the minority and cutting ribbons at fetes.
If the voters lack the critical thinking to understand that that is exactly the result that a vote for Labour will produce, well, that's democracy for you.
You see what beats me is why we made this idiotic 50k nurses claim. 30k would have been fine, it's a huge number and easy to campaign with. No need to defend it either.
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
I have no idea why Corbyn and McDonnell are getting a free pass on this
Because no-one is (apparently) doing what I have done. A bit of research and asking obvious questions or pointing out the obvious flaws / inconsistencies in the proposals. If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Spending every weekend in Chingford canvassing and delivering 4000 leaflets across Epping I do not need to be lectured to in patronising tones by you Ms Cyclefree about 'complacency' and 'hubris' and 'failing to do the hard graft.'
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
How is the canvassing going there?
The Tories vote is holding up, however Labour are also getting out their vote
Thanks very much. Fascinating area in relation to national results
The challenge the Tories have in a seat like Chingford is not that supporters are changing to other parties but that they are disappearing and being replaced with Labour voters.
Haven’t been there for probably a decade so that is news to me. What is bringing about this change?
For instance, re the WASPI payment, McDonnell is saying that this is not costed because this is some sort of contingency payment - similar to paying compensation after a court order. Setting aside the obvious nonsense in that statement, why has no-one pointed out that according to the Treasury’s own report for 2017-2018 - “The total cash supply expenditure authorised for 2016-17 was £479,543,120,000 (2015-16: £474,091,620,000) and accordingly the maximum capital, including the permanent capital, available to the Contingencies Fund in 2017-18 was £9,590,862,000 (2016-17: £9,481,832,000).”. Nowhere near the £58 billion McDonnell is proposing to spend and doesn’t even allow for other contingencies. The full report can be found here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719821/Contingencies_Fund_2017-18.pdf. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this. What the the hell is the Tory campaign doing? Or journalists for that matter?
The Saj is just not very good. At all. Rishi Sunak is somewhat more fluent, and has appeared fairly often, but seems uncomfortable with hostile questioning. It can't help that the Tory manifesto is basically Brexit, whose implications are essentially uncosted, plus a whole heap of nothing very much.
Yes, that is the problem. The Conservative manifesto is dominated by Brexit which is not costed, which undermines attacks on Labour's costings. The Conservative manifesto also includes measures to limit the courts and parliament, thus undermining attacks on Labour for being authoritarian or even Stalinist.
However, even without being attacked, Labour may run into the 2015 problem which is voters agree Labour has identified the problems and even solutions but voters do not believe Labour could actually implement their programme.
You see what beats me is why we made this idiotic 50k nurses claim. 30k would have been fine, it's a huge number and easy to campaign with. No need to defend it either.
Yes, the 50,000 nurses is like free Corbynband. It is not that people don't want it so much as they do not even believe it.
Yes, you are absolutely right. Boris seems to be making exactly the same error Theresa May made, of not laying into the inherent nonsense of Corbyn's positions. At least, that is how it appears. Perhaps there's some more subtle targeted campaigning going on under the surface (as the Tories did very well in 2015). If so, I'm not aware of it.
If only. You well know Richard that politicians and especially senior politicians can't tell it like it is. For all our demands for straight talking it would be a huge electoral gaffe. The best imo was Boris' actual more in sorrow than anger response.
The point about the WASPI ‘contingency’ is that it doesn’t matter the mechanism through which it is found. It is still at the end of the day money which henceforth would not be available for other priorities.
If the WASPI court case had been lost it would have necessitated a significant reappraisal in future Government plans. It wouldn’t have just been shrugged off. In 2008 the Govt spent eye watering sums bailing out the banks, but this wasn’t found down the back of a sofa. It led directly to a decade of cut backs and austerity to restore to Government finances. And Labour plans to effectively do that again voluntarily. And I shudder to think what other “historic injustices” are hiding in their manifesto that they are just itching to compensate for.
Indeed - imagine what such a sum could do for social care. But none of these arguments are being made. The best to my mind is that Labour are favouring a few women over the majority of working women, men and the young. “Labour are for the noisy few not the many.” Why aren’t Tory campaigners using that line, for instance?
Yes, you are absolutely right. Boris seems to be making exactly the same error Theresa May made, of not laying into the inherent nonsense of Corbyn's positions. At least, that is how it appears. Perhaps there's some more subtle targeted campaigning going on under the surface (as the Tories did very well in 2015). If so, I'm not aware of it.
Boris’s mistake is different but it has the same effect.
His is laziness, whereas hers was fear.
Either way, the result is they don’t take the fight to the enemy.
Comments
I think the people running the Bloomberg campaign are more than likely err... *whisper it quietly* in it for the money.
The LibDem performance in Scotland in 2017 should inform us all.
A 10% relative drop in their vote.
A 300% increase in the number of their seats.
Rishi Sunak is somewhat more fluent, and has appeared fairly often, but seems uncomfortable with hostile questioning.
It can't help that the Tory manifesto is basically Brexit, whose implications are essentially uncosted, plus a whole heap of nothing very much.
If there is a hung Parliament or the Tories lose it will be because of complacency and hubris - well illustrated by @HYUFD here - and a failure to do the hard graft to be able to demolish your opponents’ arguments.
Does any PBer think charging interest on student debt at RPI+3% is a good idea ?
Plus the Tory social media campaign is far better than 2017 at exposing Labour tax rises for example
I admire anyone willing to put him or herself forward for election to public office, especially those candidates who know they cannot win but for the sake of the party they support, make a good show of it.
https://twitter.com/akmaciver/status/1199267916321099777?s=20
But your charm outreach to the electorate will undoubtedly have a marginal effect.
Much better than getting into an argument about a contingency fund no-one's heard of.
Your attitude will see the party lose any chance of a majority
It is like choosing a PM from Dumb and Dumber.
If the Tories win a majority it will be Labour voters going LD or Brexit Party that does it, the Tory voteshare is now already back over 40%
https://twitter.com/DamCou/status/1199309400550395904
"Utter rubbish, as anyone who watched the Tories attack ads on social media over the last week would tell you."
I agree.
I have watched Tory attack ads and I will happily tell you they are utter rubbish.
So the obvious next statement / question is: “The Contingency Fund is £9.5 billion. Where is the money coming from? Tax rises? On who? Expenditure cuts? On what? More borrowing? How can you say this is capital investment?”
Etc.....
All that is needed is doubt about whether it will be paid at all and/or reinforce the belief that the sums don’t add up and lots of people will have to pay more to bribe this particular group.
https://twitter.com/MattSepara/status/1199139821756784641
Surely the Trump defenders here will not defend the pardoning of, and campaigning with, a soldier who committed war crimes?
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1199296542613626880?s=21
All of that.
I’ve thought for some time (about 20 hours) that Boris will end up getting a wafer-thin majority just like David Cameron did in GE2015.
Say what you like about Thatcher in 1983 but she took the fight to the enemy and the intellectual arguments head-on.
She didn’t just rely upon Foot looking scruffy and pointing and laughing that he was a bit Gorky Park.
While Aaron may be hearing that people want Brexit done does Boris actually have any other policies - as the lack of them is giving Labour a field day.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/sticky_toffee_pudding_05454
Cyclefree was one of two people (David Herdson being the other) who correctly called the Tories losing their majority in the days before GE2017.
I take what she says extremely seriously.
I think that Christmas pudding is undermarked in the sweet section. I've never eaten an Eton Mess as a matter of principle.
Stuffing leaflets through doors does none of that. The majority will go in the recycling bin, unread.
He’s done nothing else.
You’ve have thought some independent strategic thinking wouldn’t have gone amiss about the circumstances *today* and broader mood and direction of the British electorate, playing the long game. But, no. It’s all last war stuff.
He may just get away with it (postals are already coming back in and it’s barely two weeks away, as opposed to May’s factory of banana skins that had another week or two to develop) but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him limp across the line none the wiser.
Good luck, Mr. Price
The best to my mind is that Labour are favouring a few women over the majority of working women, men and the young. “Labour are for the noisy few not the many.” Why aren’t Tory campaigners using that line, for instance?
"LGBT teaching row: Birmingham primary school protests permanently banned"
The following cannot vote in a UK Parliament election:
It may just be poor old Jo Swinson. She really needs to ditch the hideous earrings, get better dresses (she has a good figure) and a nicer haircut. Boris needs to learn to tuck his shirt in and not dress like a schoolboy who’s just got out of bed and is late for school. Jeremy has made an effort but his trousers are a bit too long.
Their policies are rubbish on the whole. But intellectual argument seems wholly absent these days so we as may well vote on superficial stuff.
https://beestonia.wordpress.com/2019/11/26/corbyn-in-the-rylands/
I know Corbyn mainly as a private individual, though I catch his speeches on TV from time to time - might be why I like him personally more (separated from policies and actions) than some here for whom it's the reverse.
And then we have just about every senior spokesperson for the large and diverse "head screwed on the right way" community (many millions) saying that Boris Johnson is unfit to be PM because he believes in nothing, lies relentlessly and has no principles, political or personal.
And yet no breakthrough for the Lib Dems? How can this be?
At least, that is how it appears. Perhaps there's some more subtle targeted campaigning going on under the surface (as the Tories did very well in 2015). If so, I'm not aware of it.
2. The debates will never be good news for the incumbent and will always benefit the challenger. In 2010 it was Clegg and the Lib-Dems that benefited from the debates while in 2015 is was Labour/Ed Miliband ("the days the polls turned" etc) although in both cases it was actually pretty fleeting and their rise in the polls wasn't sustained until polling day.
This was always going to be a wobbly week for Con. I'm expecting the polls to continue to narrow through the week with Labour reaching their peak over the weekend.
Next week should see Con stabilizing followed by a swing back to Con in the final week or so of the campaign.
If Labour are still narrowing the gap in the final weekend polls (7th/8th December) then Con are in trouble and we're repeating 2017.
@Meeks you need to boil some first then almost forget about them in the oven and voilà.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/parliament-and-elections/elections-elections/lost-deposits/
For the Greens, that must surely be a fair chunk of their total election spending? If they stood in fewer places they could direct a lot more budget to those. Or do the individual candidates stump up (and so not transferable to other locations if they didn't stand). Does anyone know?
I know I ought to know this but digital odds make my head spin, especially when laying.
On the election as a whole: depressing as it is how easily the electorate falls for a raft of incredibly expensive bribes, I'm fairly Zen if they get what they deserve as a result - a hung Parliament in which they'll get no bribes, no Brexit, endless political and economic paralysis, and most probably several years of Boris governing impotently in the minority and cutting ribbons at fetes.
If the voters lack the critical thinking to understand that that is exactly the result that a vote for Labour will produce, well, that's democracy for you.
However, even without being attacked, Labour may run into the 2015 problem which is voters agree Labour has identified the problems and even solutions but voters do not believe Labour could actually implement their programme.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1199328545274761217?s=20
The best imo was Boris' actual more in sorrow than anger response.
I`m not sure but I don`t like it.
If the WASPI court case had been lost it would have necessitated a significant reappraisal in future Government plans. It wouldn’t have just been shrugged off. In 2008 the Govt spent eye watering sums bailing out the banks, but this wasn’t found down the back of a sofa. It led directly to a decade of cut backs and austerity to restore to Government finances. And Labour plans to effectively do that again voluntarily. And I shudder to think what other “historic injustices” are hiding in their manifesto that they are just itching to compensate for.
His is laziness, whereas hers was fear.
Either way, the result is they don’t take the fight to the enemy.