I agree but think on top of that, we have surrendered our parties to idiots. "Normal" people (hate that phrase but cant think of better...) prefer to go out for dinner with friends, watch the football or go to a theatre or concert, than engage in party politics in their free time. We have left it to the extremists, who in turn make engaging in party politics even more soul destroying, creating a negative loop pushing our parties to the extreme. Perhaps it is time to admit many of us, myself definitely included, dont put enough time into civic society.
We all generalise from our personal experience, but I really don't recognise this picture of a bunch of obsessives in any of the parties (except myself - I spend an hour a day or so on politics, on average). When I was the Broxtowe MP we had 700 members, but I could only usually rely on a handful to turn up to meetings or canvassing or anything else, explicitly because everyone had lots of other interests. It's much the same in SW Surrey - we have 500 members, I've been organising trips to Portsmouth to help there, and the maximum number to date is 3 people. But any number of apologies - daughter's engagement, aunt's illness, house being redecorated, etc etc.
What is closer to the mark is that the people who still join parties are more committed to ideas than they used to be, because it's seen as a nerdy and eccentric thing to do - nobody joins partly in the hope of enriching their social lives, as some used to. So it's not that the parties are full of obsessives, but more that if they're called upon to vote for a leader or the like, they vote for someone close to the ideas that made them join. And of course people with less attachment tend to resign as soon as something happens that they don't like, whereas the ideologically-keen people just sigh and plug on. As a Corbynista, my advice to centrists is to be persistent, don't just walk out every time something annoys you. In the end you'll win some of the arguments, but not if you just give up.
You will definitely have a far better view of the reality of being part of a major political party than I do. Perhaps it is the perception, that those like myself who have never been a party member, hold about political life that has changed more than the reality? Certainly the entryism, ideological purity and bullying that is now seemingly common in both parties is a turn off, to what extent that is real I dont know and guess it will vary massively by branch. Or perhaps it is just us giving ourselves an excuse not to get involved and do the fun things instead!
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
Sturgeon say Johnson unfit to be PM but not Corbyn. I honestly thought she was better than this.
But she's correct. Corbyn might be useless but he's not an amoral crook and liar.
He absolutely is.
Liar Liar Pants on fire!
That was not a comment o Sturgeon, Corbyn or Johnson.
It was a comment on how far the standard of comments on this forum has dropped since the GE was announced. Most people here are believing and repeating what they want to believe.
Perfect opportunity for Boris in the AN interview to rebutt Labour's frankly depserate claims via that document. Surpirsed - very surprised, actually, how easily Jo coburn let the dreadful barry Gardiner off the hook. No mention that the document is two years old.
I suspect not a lot. It is why we don't really see people becoming more Tory with age like previous generations did.
Wrong current polls show the Tories leading with 40s to 50s, 40 being the age most people now own a home
But Foxys argument seems to be that becoming older =/= becoming more likely to vote Tory, rather that the current crop of older people are more likely to vote Tory. So is the average 25-30 year old now, in 20 years, going to be likely to vote Tory at the same rate as current 45-50 year olds (as Foxy suggested would have been the case in the past), or has that trend broken? I was thinking about this during the PB Tory panic over some of the polling, but the Tory party have failed to win a lasting governing majority since Major, with the small blip of Cameron's majority not lasting and being overtaken by the Europe question. Did Thatcher break this age drift? Has something else happened that is making it near impossible for Tories to win a majority? I wonder if the Anyone But Conservative alliance is just too strong and that, as we see now, even unpopular parties with the voters will gain enough tactical votes once an election is called to keep Tories out of power. Is the base of each party enough that, if either side decides to vote tactically, we are now in an era of weak governments and the only response would be electoral reform and a more conciliatory approach to politics, with more emphasis on coalitions and common ground. With Labour trated and therefore more efficient, whereas the white working class vote that the Tories get will be more spread thin, possibly just bolstering them in safe seats rather than winning Lab / LD seats...
Housing affordability is important.
The young will not become more Conservative as they age if they don't own their own home.
It has risen but by 34 over 50% own their own home, coincidentally 35 is the age voters now stop voting Labour with Tories leading with 35 to 54s
Civil servants’ details should have been redacted. Their names have now been given out by a politician who could be PM and their boss in just over two weeks time. Leaks are important but equally so is the way they are presented in the public domain.
A Christopher Hope tweet. Corbyn is a dangerous fantasist. And all over something that is nothing.
Paddy again: I know the Southwest is a Brexity place but Lib Dems 5-6 in St Ives ? There is SOME swing towards them from the Tories and it's only a 312 vote margin to overcome.
The Tory manifesto pledges to negotiate trade deals with the US, Japan, Australia and New Zealand (interestingly not Canada, which they maybe think they can cc’ over) in parallel with the full UK-EU deal.
I think Johnson’s plan is probably to play the US and EU off against each other in advance of the November 2020 elections to get a good EU deal, and then turn back round to the US to polish off in 2021.
If the EU Deal is full and comprehensive (which is what I think Johnson actually wants) the US deal will be thinner but there will be “something” bilateral there so a victory can be declared.
Do the Tories have any similar political slurry that they can tip over Corbyn? Based on Labour's actions, it doesn't matter if it's true or not!
The problem is all the anti-semitism and terrorist sympathizing is priced in. Other than he left wing views and dodgy friendships, Jezza appears to be a very boring man.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
I might not be a "well respected poster" but I am in the same camp. The reason is in my constituency it really is Con Vs Lab, as the 2017 third placed party have pulled out. Under PR I would be voting for someone else.
If the Tories manage to win in a fortnight's time then next time round Labour won't be able to claim the NHS is about to be flogged off to the planks at least. Well they probably will but it'll have even less credibility than this time.
Do the Tories have any similar political slurry that they can tip over Corbyn? Based on Labour's actions, it doesn't matter if it's true or not!
ICYMI they've said he is antisemitic even though so far there is no tape of him using similarly offensive racial epithets as another well-known party leader (and which given Corbyn's an Arsenal season ticket holder and thus ex officio hates Spurs, whose own supporters use the Y-word about the club, is surprising).
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Does "based on the age of household reference persons, individuals within a household who act as a reference person for all individuals in the household" mean a 30 year old living with his homeowner parents counts as a homeowner themself?
No, only the home owner ie the parent would be the reference person and counting as owning the property.
So the point that over 50% at age 34 own their own home by the ONS stands
I remember Jonathan Miller telling a tale of Dudley Moore trying to sabotage a live sketch Miller was taking part in.
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
I suspect not a lot. It is why we don't really see people becoming more Tory with age like previous generations did.
Wrong current polls show the Tories leading with 40s to 50s, 40 being the age most people now own a home
But Foxys argument seems to be that becoming older =/= becoming more likely to vote Tory, rather that the current crop of older people are more likely to vote Tory. So is the average 25-30 year old now, in 20 years, going to be likely to vote Tory at the same rate as current 45-50 year olds (as Foxy suggested would have been the case in the past), or has that trend broken? ....
Housing affordability is important.
The young will not become more Conservative as they age if they don't own their own home.
It has risen but by 34 over 50% own their own home, coincidentally 35 is the age voters now stop voting Labour with Tories leading with 35 to 54s
The point is not whether the Tories lead with one particular age group, or not, the point is that there is now such a large divide between different age groups that was not there before in earlier decades. Why is that? What damage does that do? What can we do about it?
Do the Tories have any similar political slurry that they can tip over Corbyn? Based on Labour's actions, it doesn't matter if it's true or not!
The problem is all the anti-semitism and terrorist sympathizing is priced in. Other than he left wing views and dodgy friendships, Jezza appears to be a very boring man.
I remember Jonathan Miller telling a tale of Dudley Moore trying to sabotage a live sketch Miller was taking part in.
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
Moore did that routine on the notorious 'Derek and Clive' sessions. It ends with Peter Cooke saying, 'I'm not changing your sheets again Mr Hastings.'
Because it is antisemitic to suggest Jews vote as a block and Islamophobic to suggest Muslims vote as a block but for demographic and betting purposes, there are broad trends that, erm, well as long as Jeremy and Boris don't say it (cont p94).
Minefield. For me, there's a difference between saying a group vote as a bloc in a mindless way (e.g. because community leaders tell them to) and saying that a group as a whole are likely to vote in a certain way because of events and the values they hold. The first can be a bit dodgy, the second far less so. But in any case, betting trumps all.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
There are implications in these documents that suggest that sort of thing is on the table, but there's a firm denial from Boris Johnson that for his part anyway, they're open to negotiation.
Interesting snippet in last night's London Standard suggesting Momentum have been pulling out resource from Croydon Central and Battersea to support their Cobynista candidate in Streatham. Very odd if true as it can't be that they think either Croydon Central or Battersea are a shoe in for Labour.I think the Tories may take Croydon C based on current polling and some anecdotal comments I have heard and think Battersea is close .Can't believe Labour are in trouble in Streatham but......
I remember Jonathan Miller telling a tale of Dudley Moore trying to sabotage a live sketch Miller was taking part in.
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
Moore did that routine on the notorious 'Derek and Clive' sessions. It ends with Peter Cooke saying, 'I'm not changing your sheets again Mr Hastings.'
It's on the Come Again album I believe. Which has the lovely story on the cover of Cooke throwing an autograph hunter head first into a public lavatory. 'Thats when the fan really hit the shit'
And the perfect 'hello colin how are you? Yeah, oh lovely and how's Robin? Yeah, alright mate, love to the wife, yeah see ya............ c*nt'
Do the Tories have any similar political slurry that they can tip over Corbyn? Based on Labour's actions, it doesn't matter if it's true or not!
The problem is all the anti-semitism and terrorist sympathizing is priced in. Other than he left wing views and dodgy friendships, Jezza appears to be a very boring man.
I'd hate to see your definition of exciting!
Well you can't argue that a night out with Bozza would be a lot more interesting / exciting than Jezza....the later would be a fair trade Vegan beer (just the one mind you) discussing the benefits of unionization of the whole private sector, man hole cover he has recently photo'ed and how the allotment committee is run by the Jews.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
I might not be a "well respected poster" but I am in the same camp. The reason is in my constituency it really is Con Vs Lab, as the 2017 third placed party have pulled out. Under PR I would be voting for someone else.
If you want Labour to expunge itself of the Far Left (like what happened post 1983) and get your party back then it needs to be defeated heavily this year. Otherwise you reinforce the “one more heave” narrative - you risk going into the next election with a similar platform and similar leader, and losing again. And again.
I know you might think, as a Tory, “I would say that”, but I really mean it. And @SouthamObserver gets this.
The scale of victory doesn’t matter on the Tory side regarding a Labour comeback. The electorate is very loose these days - look at the last two years - and the next Government is likely to badly damage itself, and will have been in power for up to 15 years. It’s a ripe opportunity.
You are far more likely to win GE2024 with a centre-left leader starting from a 180 seat platform than a far-left successor leader starting from a 230 seat platform.
But you need to be willing to switch on the radiotherapy first to save the patient.
What on earth is the problem with the US wanting to sell more drugs to the NHS? As long as the price is reasonable and the drugs are safe I couldn't care less whether drugs are from America, Germany, Japan and Timbuktu.
Jezza comes across as very old fashioned over of this IMO.
The NHS is one of the (possibly the?) biggest health organisations in the world and can negotiate preferential pricing from the US pharma industry. Those prices then become a reference point for many other organisations to aim for. The US pharma industry wants to take away the NHS negotiating power, which will increase their profits not just from the UK but globally. Costs increase to consumers globally = Higher US pharma profits = Good for US Of course it is bad for the UK which is why no sane PM would ever want such a deal, unless they had backed themselves into a corner promising things they cannot deliver to get elected......
"which is why no sane PM would ever want such a deal" Didn't Mr Johnson say the same thing about a Brexit deal in which NI was treated differently to GB?
The logical conclusion is that Mr Johnson is not sane.
No that is a myth. NI was always different to England, especially post-GFA but even before that - and even May's December 2017 agreement left open the window for NI being different to the EU so long as Stormont consented.
Expanding the Stormont consent principle that all parties had signed up to [including the DUP] in 2017 is entirely reasonable!
Are you claiming that Boris did not make that speech? Or just the technical details about NI being different to Engand? Of course. Godalming is different to Watford, but Boris has really sold NI down the swannee and said that no sane MP would do that.
I might not be a "well respected poster" but I am in the same camp. The reason is in my constituency it really is Con Vs Lab, as the 2017 third placed party have pulled out. Under PR I would be voting for someone else.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
For him to answer but he wants to frustrate Leave and (I think) he’s also a visceral heart and soul Labour voter, as Jonathan is too.
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
I suspect not a lot. It is why we don't really see people becoming more Tory with age like previous generations did.
Wrong current polls show the Tories leading with 40s to 50s, 40 being the age most people now own a home
But Foxys argument seems to be that becoming older =/= becoming more likely to vote Tory, rather that the current crop of older people are more likely to vote Tory. So is the average 25-30 year old now, in 20 years, going to be likely to vote Tory at the same rate as current 45-50 year olds (as Foxy suggested would have been the case in the past), or has that trend broken? ....
Housing affordability is important.
The young will not become more Conservative as they age if they don't own their own home.
It has risen but by 34 over 50% own their own home, coincidentally 35 is the age voters now stop voting Labour with Tories leading with 35 to 54s
The point is not whether the Tories lead with one particular age group, or not, the point is that there is now such a large divide between different age groups that was not there before in earlier decades. Why is that? What damage does that do? What can we do about it?
People like @anotherrichard and myself have been warning about this since about 2010. The bean counting sect of the Conservatives poopooed the notion on the grounds young people were lining up to to pay Uni fees and have no houses.
Fix the fees and the houses and the differences will move on to other things, currently Corbyn is the only politician with the guts to say so and is getting more than his fair share of the youth vote.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
And why antisemitism etc won't be expunged too.
It will take a 1983-style landslide to get Labour fit for government. People who vote for Labour are delaying the day of reckoning when Labour will face reality.
If you can't vote for the Tories at least vote Lib Dem. Then at least Labour will need to look inwards and fix its problems and we can have a party suitable for government opposing the Tories - vote for Labour next time then once they've done that!
What is it with Labour and dodgy dossiers? The Tories should get a senior figure to call a press conference and hand out printed details of every meeting and every supportive statement Corbyn has ever had in relation to Britain's enemies. It would be a long list, and have the merit of actually being true...
Sky confirming these documents were from Theresa May's time and before Boris Johnson came into office in Downing Street
Which will make it easy for Boris to refute them by stating that the plans are no longer in effect and he will not implement them. Given that it's such an open goal, he will no doubt do so quickly.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
And why antisemitism etc won't be expunged too.
It will take a 1983-style landslide to get Labour fit for government. People who vote for Labour are delaying the day of reckoning when Labour will face reality.
If you can't vote for the Tories at least vote Lib Dem. Then at least Labour will need to look inwards and fix its problems and we can have a party suitable for government opposing the Tories - vote for Labour next time then once they've done that!
That sums up the situation. Too many folks who should know better are in denial.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
And why antisemitism etc won't be expunged too.
It will take a 1983-style landslide to get Labour fit for government. People who vote for Labour are delaying the day of reckoning when Labour will face reality.
If you can't vote for the Tories at least vote Lib Dem. Then at least Labour will need to look inwards and fix its problems and we can have a party suitable for government opposing the Tories - vote for Labour next time then once they've done that!
Exactly.
Won’t happen though. Visceral dislike of the Tories and loyalty to their identity with the Labour brand will win through.
I remember Jonathan Miller telling a tale of Dudley Moore trying to sabotage a live sketch Miller was taking part in.
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
Miller was brilliant. No wonder people of a certain age yearn for the past when confronted by today's crop of slebs.
Without wanting to be complacent, I see very little evidence that Labour's campaign has caught fire, in the way that it did in 2017. Between the immediate pre-election period and now, the gap between the two parties hasn't shifted very much, even as both have risen in the polls. Corbyn's own ratings remain much worse than Johnson's, and I can't see that altering in the next two weeks.
Without wanting to be complacent, I see very little evidence that Labour's campaign has caught fire, in the way that it did in 2017. Between the immediate pre-election period and now, the gap between the two parties hasn't shifted very much, even as both have risen in the polls. Corbyn's own ratings remain much worse than Johnson's, and I can't see that altering in the next two weeks.
You’re not joining the bedwetting and pantshitting club, then?
I remember Jonathan Miller telling a tale of Dudley Moore trying to sabotage a live sketch Miller was taking part in.
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
Miller was brilliant. No wonder people of a certain age yearn for the past when confronted by today's crop of slebs.
The 'futile gesture' sketch is one of those few things that makes me laugh every time I see it, along with M & W/Andre Previn and Monty Python's 'Working Class Playwright'.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
For him to answer but he wants to frustrate Leave and (I think) he’s also a visceral heart and soul Labour voter, as Jonathan is too.
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
Well given the entirety of Cheltenham and its environs is a Lib Dem/Tory contest, the Tories will be very happy with him voting Labour.
Without wanting to be complacent, I see very little evidence that Labour's campaign has caught fire, in the way that it did in 2017. Between the immediate pre-election period and now, the gap between the two parties hasn't shifted very much, even as both have risen in the polls. Corbyn's own ratings remain much worse than Johnson's, and I can't see that altering in the next two weeks.
You’re not joining the bedwetting and pantshitting club, then?
They’ll either be loads more or loads less tonight after 10pm
Without wanting to be complacent, I see very little evidence that Labour's campaign has caught fire, in the way that it did in 2017. Between the immediate pre-election period and now, the gap between the two parties hasn't shifted very much, even as both have risen in the polls. Corbyn's own ratings remain much worse than Johnson's, and I can't see that altering in the next two weeks.
You’re not joining the bedwetting and pantshitting club, then?
It hasn't caught fire in the same way as 2017, but it is still a slow burning increase on Labour's part. Tories haven't done anything to actively alienate their voters this time around, but we shall see.
Yes I'm afraid that Labour really is scrambling around for something, anything to try to move on from Corbyn's catastrophic interview with Andrew Neil. Quite apart from the substance, I'm not sure having uniformed NHS staff handing the documents to journalists is good optics.
What is clear is that Labour are now being scrutinised much more closely than they were in 2017, and if the public in their wisdom elect a Corbyn led government which turns out to be a disaster (it will be) they will not be able to claim they were not warned.
Well, maybe. The trouble with the "these are just technical talks" line is that it sounds defensive and shifty. similarly "ignore it because these documents were published on Reddit already" makes it sound like there's definitely something there.
in any case it's obviously better for Labour for everybody to be talking about whether there is any significance in these US NHS discussions than about anti-semitism in the Labour Party, so the scrambling around appears to be reasonably successful.
Finally watched the Corbyn-Neil interview. Of course I think he cane across shiftily, but i suspect both sides will be able to mine for social media clips so probably a score draw. However what interests me is this: Neil asked is the phrase “Rothschild Zionists rule Israel and the world” anti Semitic or not? Corbyn didn’t and wouldn’t give a straight answer. A simple yes would have closed it down The only reason why I can think he wouldn’t have done that is he was aware/afraid that Neil had evidence that a friend/ally of Corbyn’s had said that (it turned out to be someone called Liam Moore who I’ve never heard of) Can anyone else explain why Corbyn wouldn’t answer this question? It looked terrible.
Perhaps watch again if you can bear it. Because he did answer it. He said it was an antisemitic trope.
On about the time of asking
I’m also not convinced that “it’s an anti Semitic trope” is quite the same as “yes it’s anti Semitic”. To parse words it implies that it is used be anti Semites but not inherently anti Semitic
Sturgeon say Johnson unfit to be PM but not Corbyn. I honestly thought she was better than this.
But she's correct. Corbyn might be useless but he's not an amoral crook and liar.
He absolutely is.
Liar Liar Pants on fire!
That was not a comment o Sturgeon, Corbyn or Johnson.
It was a comment on how far the standard of comments on this forum has dropped since the GE was announced. Most people here are believing and repeating what they want to believe.
Sky confirming these documents were from Theresa May's time and before Boris Johnson came into office in Downing Street
Which will make it easy for Boris to refute them by stating that the plans are no longer in effect and he will not implement them. Given that it's such an open goal, he will no doubt do so quickly.
Waits...
Waits...
Waits...
Might I suggest a visit to the BBC website. Boris's quick rebuttal is timed at 12.22pm.
Does "based on the age of household reference persons, individuals within a household who act as a reference person for all individuals in the household" mean a 30 year old living with his homeowner parents counts as a homeowner themself?
No. The household reference person is a nominated single individual in the household. In practice, this is the person who fills out the census form. Because of the different propensity by age and sex to fill out forms, this is usually a middle-aged woman. If a 30 year old male lives with his parents then the person who fills out the form will be his parent, who will usually put their own name into the box. The "household reference person" is a useful concept because it enables the other occupants to be defined in relationship to that person, thus disambiguating terms like "son of" and "lodger of"
Ok fine but if they admit they even happened then it’s not a good look .
Why?
Sky just now 'the talks are quite detailed but actually don't much mention the NHS and make it clear that the US negotiators are sensitive to the importance of the NHS in the UK'. So the documents have rebutted Corbyn's bullshit claims!
Does "based on the age of household reference persons, individuals within a household who act as a reference person for all individuals in the household" mean a 30 year old living with his homeowner parents counts as a homeowner themself?
No. The household reference person is a nominated single individual in the household. In practice, this is the person who fills out the census form. Because of the different propensity by age and sex to fill out forms, this is usually a middle-aged woman. If a 30 year old male lives with his parents then the person who fills out the form will be his parent, who will usually put their own name into the box. The "household reference person" is a useful concept because it enables the other occupants to be defined in relationship to that person, thus disambiguating terms like "son of" and "lodger of"
Thanks, still a little unclear.
So is 34 the median age of first household ownership rather than an age where half 34 year olds own and half dont own?
What worries me is the market and predictive herding around the 345-355 mark for the Tories.
It could be 40 seats higher or lower than that, and the LDs look like they’re having a shocker but there are some field reports they’re doing better than expected too.
People like @anotherrichard and myself have been warning about this since about 2010. The bean counting sect of the Conservatives poopooed the notion on the grounds young people were lining up to to pay Uni fees and have no houses.
Fix the fees and the houses and the differences will move on to other things, currently Corbyn is the only politician with the guts to say so and is getting more than his fair share of the youth vote.
So you say but the long fall in home ownership rates first was halted and now home ownership rates are increasing again. So it looks like the Tories are trying to fix the situation aren't they given that home ownership rates are going up again once more? Do you not view that as good news?
Still much further to go of course, but if over the next five years home ownership rates continue to go up rather than down then I for one believe we will be in a better situation. And I for one do not believe the current increase in home ownership rates will continue under Corbyn, do you?
What worries me is the market and predictive herding around the 345-355 mark for the Tories.
It could be 40 seats higher or lower than that, and the LDs look like they’re having a shocker but there are some field reports they’re doing better than expected too.
We might not know until 10pm tonight.
I have a lot of confidence in the YouGov MRP, but there's part of me wondering whether it will be wrong this time. Hasn't it often been the case that the best predictor for the previous election has failed at the subsequent election?
The age at which people own their own home is continuing to rise: it is not until the age of 34 that more than 50% of people live in a home they own (based on the age of household reference persons, individuals within a household who act as a reference person for all individuals in the household). In 1997, the youngest age at which more than 50% of people were homeowners was 26.
This line is interesting and a positive that we are heading back in the right direction and probably helps explain why home ownership rates have started to increase again: In 1993, the average house price was 4.9 times the average household salary of a household headed by a 16- to 24-year-old. In 2016, it was 8.2 times (a decline from its peak of 11.2 times in 2007).
Ah, the unedifying prospect of six white people telling a BAME MP that it's his party that's the racist one. I'm sure he'll eventually be derided as another Oxford PPE clone, but I really like Sunak and think he's got a good future. And (Sturgeon aside) that's a pretty gentle field he's up against.
What worries me is the market and predictive herding around the 345-355 mark for the Tories.
It could be 40 seats higher or lower than that, and the LDs look like they’re having a shocker but there are some field reports they’re doing better than expected too.
We might not know until 10pm tonight.
I will either be a lot more or a lot less nervous after 10pm tonight but I won't relax until 10pm on 12/12. And if that's like 2017 I won't relax until much, much later.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
For him to answer but he wants to frustrate Leave and (I think) he’s also a visceral heart and soul Labour voter, as Jonathan is too.
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
Well given the entirety of Cheltenham and its environs is a Lib Dem/Tory contest, the Tories will be very happy with him voting Labour.
He is in the Tewkesbury Constituency, they weigh Tory votes.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
For him to answer but he wants to frustrate Leave and (I think) he’s also a visceral heart and soul Labour voter, as Jonathan is too.
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
Well given the entirety of Cheltenham and its environs is a Lib Dem/Tory contest, the Tories will be very happy with him voting Labour.
He is in the Tewkesbury Constituency, they weigh Tory votes.
In which case why not vote Lib Dems? At least then its sending a clear message about his Remain position and a clear message to Labour to sort themselves out.
What is it with Labour and dodgy dossiers? The Tories should get a senior figure to call a press conference and hand out printed details of every meeting and every supportive statement Corbyn has ever had in relation to Britain's enemies. It would be a long list, and have the merit of actually being true...
Interesting that Con has chosen someone as low profile as Sunak. Does this tee him up for a move into a very senior position - and should he now be considered a decent possibility for next Con leader. I reckon his previous media performances must have been tested with focus groups to get chosen for this.
It explains a lot, and also why the far-Left won’t be expunged from the Labour Party as a result.
It is why I have been warning about the big Tories leads that are based upon the working class Northerners breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory because of Brexit / Corbyn.
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
I’m also on the bet that Labour get between 35-39.99% of the vote, which I still think is cracking value on exchange at over 4/1.
Why is @Peter_the_Punter backing the reds - I thought he lived in the Cotswolds which is the sort of seat Labour are never going to win in a million years ?
For him to answer but he wants to frustrate Leave and (I think) he’s also a visceral heart and soul Labour voter, as Jonathan is too.
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
Well given the entirety of Cheltenham and its environs is a Lib Dem/Tory contest, the Tories will be very happy with him voting Labour.
He is in the Tewkesbury Constituency, they weigh Tory votes.
After most people have voted Tory or Labour, we can get back to the usual business of decrying our broken political system and bemoaning that we have only two tired old parties to choose from.
Ah, the unedifying prospect of six white people telling a BAME MP that it's his party that's the racist one. I'm sure he'll eventually be derided as another Oxford PPE clone, but I really like Sunak and think he's got a good future. And (Sturgeon aside) that's a pretty gentle field he's up against.
For betters, the key takeaway will be how well RLB does in the leading slot.
It could be the night the next Labour leader is decided. Or not.
Comments
Or perhaps it is just us giving ourselves an excuse not to get involved and do the fun things instead!
Enough of them will put all that aside and convince themselves that their local candidate is actually one of the alright ones and help keep Jezza in check.
It was a comment on how far the standard of comments on this forum has dropped since the GE was announced. Most people here are believing and repeating what they want to believe.
https://twitter.com/HughSykes/status/1199659902609821697?s=20
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50543903
Their names have now been given out by a politician who could be PM and their boss in just over two weeks time.
Leaks are important but equally so is the way they are presented in the public domain.
A Christopher Hope tweet. Corbyn is a dangerous fantasist. And all over something that is nothing.
I know the Southwest is a Brexity place but Lib Dems 5-6 in St Ives ?
There is SOME swing towards them from the Tories and it's only a 312 vote margin to overcome.
LAB = enemies of Britain
I think Johnson’s plan is probably to play the US and EU off against each other in advance of the November 2020 elections to get a good EU deal, and then turn back round to the US to polish off in 2021.
If the EU Deal is full and comprehensive (which is what I think Johnson actually wants) the US deal will be thinner but there will be “something” bilateral there so a victory can be declared.
Well they probably will but it'll have even less credibility than this time.
So the point that over 50% at age 34 own their own home by the ONS stands
Moore was hiding behind the backdrop doing f8rting noises and saying nurse!, nurse! while Miller desperately tried not to crack up in front of the audience
The arid, intellectual way Miller recounted the tale was absolutely hilarious
Why is that? What damage does that do? What can we do about it?
So he is saying that it is cheap.
There are implications in these documents that suggest that sort of thing is on the table, but there's a firm denial from Boris Johnson that for his part anyway, they're open to negotiation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2019-50569827
https://twitter.com/jawj/status/1199028080217673730
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsPR/status/1199669183837081601
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/factcheck-corbyns-nhs-for-sale-claims/
And the perfect 'hello colin how are you? Yeah, oh lovely and how's Robin? Yeah, alright mate, love to the wife, yeah see ya............ c*nt'
I know you might think, as a Tory, “I would say that”, but I really mean it. And @SouthamObserver gets this.
The scale of victory doesn’t matter on the Tory side regarding a Labour comeback. The electorate is very loose these days - look at the last two years - and the next Government is likely to badly damage itself, and will have been in power for up to 15 years. It’s a ripe opportunity.
You are far more likely to win GE2024 with a centre-left leader starting from a 180 seat platform than a far-left successor leader starting from a 230 seat platform.
But you need to be willing to switch on the radiotherapy first to save the patient.
I bet the BBC are absolutely fuming. I expect them to give Team Blue and Red some incoming to dare not to respect them.
It means that US desired changes on patents make impact U.K. ability to buy generic (ie cheaper) drugs
If it’s part of you and how you define yourself and your identity it’s much easier to disassociate voting Labour from its leader, even if it’s Chairman Mao.
Fix the fees and the houses and the differences will move on to other things, currently Corbyn is the only politician with the guts to say so and is getting more than his fair share of the youth vote.
It will take a 1983-style landslide to get Labour fit for government. People who vote for Labour are delaying the day of reckoning when Labour will face reality.
If you can't vote for the Tories at least vote Lib Dem. Then at least Labour will need to look inwards and fix its problems and we can have a party suitable for government opposing the Tories - vote for Labour next time then once they've done that!
Waits...
Waits...
Waits...
In the 1980s militant was beaten by the representatives of the mass rank and file from manufacturing industry. Steel, coal, railways, docks, cars.
They are not around any more.
Won’t happen though. Visceral dislike of the Tories and loyalty to their identity with the Labour brand will win through.
It always does.
in any case it's obviously better for Labour for everybody to be talking about whether there is any significance in these US NHS discussions than about anti-semitism in the Labour Party, so the scrambling around appears to be reasonably successful.
I’m also not convinced that “it’s an anti Semitic trope” is quite the same as “yes it’s anti Semitic”. To parse words it implies that it is used be anti Semites but not inherently anti Semitic
Ok fine but if they admit they even happened then it’s not a good look .
The "household reference person" is a useful concept because it enables the other occupants to be defined in relationship to that person, thus disambiguating terms like "son of" and "lodger of"
Sky just now 'the talks are quite detailed but actually don't much mention the NHS and make it clear that the US negotiators are sensitive to the importance of the NHS in the UK'. So the documents have rebutted Corbyn's bullshit claims!
Well done for the avoidance of the obvious typo.
Or is it a typo?
Not sure about the specific question but according to the OECD the USA spent 2% of GDP on pharmaceutical spending in 2017, and the UK 1.1%.
https://data.oecd.org/healthres/pharmaceutical-spending.htm
So is 34 the median age of first household ownership rather than an age where half 34 year olds own and half dont own?
It could be 40 seats higher or lower than that, and the LDs look like they’re having a shocker but there are some field reports they’re doing better than expected too.
We might not know until 10pm tonight.
Still much further to go of course, but if over the next five years home ownership rates continue to go up rather than down then I for one believe we will be in a better situation. And I for one do not believe the current increase in home ownership rates will continue under Corbyn, do you?
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/milestonesjourneyingintoadulthood/2019-02-18
The age at which people own their own home is continuing to rise: it is not until the age of 34 that more than 50% of people live in a home they own (based on the age of household reference persons, individuals within a household who act as a reference person for all individuals in the household). In 1997, the youngest age at which more than 50% of people were homeowners was 26.
This line is interesting and a positive that we are heading back in the right direction and probably helps explain why home ownership rates have started to increase again:
In 1993, the average house price was 4.9 times the average household salary of a household headed by a 16- to 24-year-old. In 2016, it was 8.2 times (a decline from its peak of 11.2 times in 2007).
But that’s like saying the patent drug is 1,000 pounds , the generic one 200 pounds so 5 times cheaper.
In the UK there’s less disparity but both are miles cheaper .
I'm sure he'll eventually be derided as another Oxford PPE clone, but I really like Sunak and think he's got a good future. And (Sturgeon aside) that's a pretty gentle field he's up against.
Does this tee him up for a move into a very senior position - and should he now be considered a decent possibility for next Con leader.
I reckon his previous media performances must have been tested with focus groups to get chosen for this.
For betters, the key takeaway will be how well RLB does in the leading slot.
It could be the night the next Labour leader is decided. Or not.