It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning
1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept.
2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea.
3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag.
4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
Scary. Some would argue that people (the minority who vote Johnson) get what they deserve (the majority who voted for others have to follow suit). Proportional representation would somewhat alleviate this and provide for choice of better decision-makers...
And if Labour somehow pull this one out of the fire... Some would argue that people (the minority who vote Corbyn) get what they deserve (the majority who voted for others have to follow suit). Proportional representation would somewhat alleviate this and provide for choice of better decision-makers...
This election is very largely about who frightens the pants off the voters the most. And you'll hear no argument from me about PR: it would free the large majority of the electorate from being forced to pick the lesser of two evils all the time (even assuming that we have a meaningful choice, given that most of us live in safe seats.)
It prevents the electorate choosing an evil government if that is what they want Karl Popper described it well
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
A government represents parliament not a party. So it needs to have the confidence of parliament, that is normally found by party numbers, but it could be led by anyone as we saw with theories of Bercow taking over as PM.
Sure, a GoNU is a possibility - but only with a majority. My point is a different one: how can we end up with a minority LP government (assuming that LP win fewer seats than CP)? Seems to me that in this scenario the SNP/LDs will have to buddy-up with LP in some way, or a GoNU, or there will have to be a further GE.
Depending on the numbers SNP & LDs will have to vote for Labour in a VONC, yes. Abstention is unlikely to be enough. They dont need to do anything else to support a minority govt.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
It won't, you've misunderstood.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
A government represents parliament not a party. So it needs to have the confidence of parliament, that is normally found by party numbers, but it could be led by anyone as we saw with theories of Bercow taking over as PM.
Sure, a GoNU is a possibility - but only with a majority. My point is a different one: how can we end up with a minority LP government (assuming that LP win fewer seats than CP)? Seems to me that in this scenario the SNP/LDs will have to buddy-up with LP in some way, or a GoNU, or there will have to be a further GE.
Depending on the numbers SNP & LDs will have to vote for Labour in a VONC, yes. Abstention is unlikely to be enough. They dont need to do anything else to support a minority govt.
Yes they do. If the VONC then there would need to be a Vote of Confidence or 14 days later we're in a new election campaign.
Yes, this could be the key chart of the whole election, while 23% of 2017 Labour Leave voters are voting Tory now, barely any 2017 Tory Remain voters are voting for Corbyn Labour
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
It won't, you've misunderstood.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
Thats precisely what they did in October so it is certainly possible. For the tories around 315-320 seats they could run on a minority basis on Johnsons deal or no deal. Below that they would get Vonc'ed out unless Johnson switched to a 2nd ref, not sure he would be willing to do that so may just hand over the reigns.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
It won't, you've misunderstood.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
Because they wouldn`t be able to "Get Brexit Done" and would prefer a further GE to limping along like before?
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
Latest GFS model run shows heavy snow Tuesday and Wednesday north of the M4. In some ways I think this is more problematic. As this is now in the 7 day range it's starting to look more likely.
ECM (the lesser but nonetheless good European model) has now come on board, as it usually does when the GFS leads the way.
The answer is not that good. January 2015, a series of massive SNP poll leads. People on the thread posting they couldn't see he SNP getting north of 25 seats. The bookies seat line in the mid twenties.
One poster seemed pretty shrewd though. The late, lamented antifrank seemed to know what was up.
Interesting commentary by Oborne in The Guardian, re: pro Johnson coverage in the BBC news. Mentions Laura's reliance on private briefings by Cummings and imbalanced coverage of IFS report. BBC covered criticism of Labour 10 times more than they did Cons. His analysis is BBC not pro Tory so much as traditionally pro Government. He hopes this is the case rather than the BBC currying favour with the future government
Well, given Labour want to increase government spending 30 times the level Boris wants, 10 times the negative stories looks unfair to Boris.
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
It’s not just house price inflation, the caution around deposits and stress testing income by the lenders (at the behest of government) puts a very large barrier to ownership. People are paying more in rent than the equivalent in mortgage even after stress tested at 6%.
How do you loosen this without sparking another boom?
It is not deposits and borrowing that makes houses expensive. It is high prices. Stop the government props (subsidies/handouts/welfare to house owners to use the language of free marketeers) and the balance between asset owners and employees will gradually be restored.
No, help to buy has helped people on the housing ladder as has shared ownership, without that fewer could afford a deposit or get a mortgage
is it me, or has the election campaign drifted way off BREXIT (just like 2017)?
No it's not just you.
People are completely bored with Brexit and want it gone - I suspect a lot no longer care about the end result for it will be what it will be and forced upon them by others - for that is the result of any election where the Government scores less than 50%.
However, this election is the worst I can remember. One side has no policies and the other is throwing money around like it grows on trees.
People are not bored of Brexit in the slightest, or theyd have has much more a reaction to the endless deadlock. What it is is that brexit has taken up most political news for years so people dont need to hear it endlessly in the campaign and can focus on other things .
Interesting commentary by Oborne in The Guardian, re: pro Johnson coverage in the BBC news. Mentions Laura's reliance on private briefings by Cummings and imbalanced coverage of IFS report. BBC covered criticism of Labour 10 times more than they did Cons. His analysis is BBC not pro Tory so much as traditionally pro Government. He hopes this is the case rather than the BBC currying favour with the future government
Well, given Labour want to increase government spending 30 times the level Boris wants, 10 times the negative stories looks unfair to Boris.
Did they mention the IFS praise for the LibDem’s comparatively sensible proposals that were both prudent and redistributive?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
It won't, you've misunderstood.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
Thats precisely what they did in October so it is certainly possible. For the tories around 315-320 seats they could run on a minority basis on Johnsons deal or no deal. Below that they would get Vonc'ed out unless Johnson switched to a 2nd ref, not sure he would be willing to do that so may just hand over the reigns.
Get VONC`d in favour of what? I understand how we get to a CP minority government, but still cannot see how we get to a minority Labour government if they win fewer seats than the Tories. I think that this is not possibile, and so LDs will come under tremendous pressure to ally with LP in some way. I`m finding it hard to see how we could end up with a scenario in which Corbyn is PM (assuming LP win fewer seats than CP). Laying Corbyn as next PM would be value if I`m right.
Personally I wrote this election off a good while back. My journey into the LibDems is looking beyond the coming Tory win towards what happens when the left behind areas realise that The Brexit was as much of a chimera as any other false hope they have been offered. When Brexit makes their lives even worse than they are now, they will be ready to listen to sane and moderate voices addressing their real issues with real answers. Such a voice in the past could just as easily have come from the centre right (Major) as centre left (Blair). Now? Tories are hard right. Labour are hard left. Leaving a gaping chasm in the middle that the LibDems have to quickly grow up to settle on all of. We can be a party that happily encompasses Michael Hesletine and Chuka Umunna and Layla Moran. All parties are coalitions, or they were until Labour and Conservative decided to purge all but the zealous.
Working class Leave areas will culturally never vote LD, the LDs need middle class Remain and soft Leave areas to win
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
It’s not just house price inflation, the caution around deposits and stress testing income by the lenders (at the behest of government) puts a very large barrier to ownership. People are paying more in rent than the equivalent in mortgage even after stress tested at 6%.
How do you loosen this without sparking another boom?
It is not deposits and borrowing that makes houses expensive. It is high prices. Stop the government props (subsidies/handouts/welfare to house owners to use the language of free marketeers) and the balance between asset owners and employees will gradually be restored.
No, help to buy has helped people on the housing ladder as has shared ownership, without that fewer could afford a deposit or get a mortgage
It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning
1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept.
2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea.
3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag.
4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
Value added by that post zero.
But i feel your pain
That is unusually grumpy, Charles, even for you.
His post made me go onto All 4 and watch the bloody thing. So it’s added some value for me, at least.
Charles put his haughtiness setting at 11 and dictated the post to his butler.
Value added by that post zero. But I feel your class war pain
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
By 34 over 50% are home owners according to the ONS.
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
By 34 over 50% are home owners according to the ONS.
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
They being senior politicians. Some untruths are more egregious than others but it is very easy to find examples of politicians on any side doing that, so I'd be wary of getting a high horse unless really confident the other side dont do the same thing. But perhaps he was present but not involved in the authoring.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/jo-swinson-corbyn-hung-parliament-lib-dems-support-labour Not sure Bogdanor has been listening. He asks: Will the LibDems really vote against a Corbyn government? No - we'll abstain. As we would a similar vote for aminoroty Tory government. He goes on to suggest that we would support such a minority government on a case by case basis - yes, we've already said that as well. Neither Johnson nor Corbyn is fit to be PM. One of them almost certainly will become PM, I for one couldn't endorse either of them. Either will have some issues worth supporting as all governments do - so support those issues. It's pretty simple once you set aside the "if you don't back Lab/Con you're Con/Lab" nonsense. I know its nonsense because as a happy little apparatchik I used to say it.
What I can`t get my head round is this: If CP wins most seats but fail to win majority, can`t form any coalitions and refuse to run on a minority basis, then how can Labour be permitted to run on an minority basis with fewer seats than the Tories? This doesn`t seem right.
It won't, you've misunderstood.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
Thats precisely what they did in October so it is certainly possible. For the tories around 315-320 seats they could run on a minority basis on Johnsons deal or no deal. Below that they would get Vonc'ed out unless Johnson switched to a 2nd ref, not sure he would be willing to do that so may just hand over the reigns.
Get VONC`d in favour of what? I understand how we get to a CP minority government, but still cannot see how we get to a minority Labour government if they win fewer seats than the Tories. I think that this is not possibile, and so LDs will come under tremendous pressure to ally with LP in some way. I`m finding it hard to see how we could end up with a scenario in which Corbyn is PM (assuming LP win fewer seats than CP). Laying Corbyn as next PM would be value if I`m right.
Depends on how quickly the next election comes around and whether Corbyn decides to go for third time lucky!
There seems to be a widespread assumption that if Bozo gets a working majority, politics returns to its pre-2010 “stability” and all the turbulence post-2016 disappears. That may be right, but I can envisage some scenarios where it isn’t. (Although tbf in some of them Bozo doesn’t make it to another election himself)
It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning
1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept.
2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea.
3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag.
4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
Value added by that post zero.
But i feel your pain
That is unusually grumpy, Charles, even for you.
His post made me go onto All 4 and watch the bloody thing. So it’s added some value for me, at least.
Charles put his haughtiness setting at 11 and dictated the post to his butler.
Value added by that post zero. But I feel your class war pain
Value added by that post zero. Oh look, I can do it too.
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
Now back to a 5% swing from Labour to the Tories then with Kantar
But regionally......
Big swing to the Tories in the North and Midlands and North Wales, none at all in London and the South I expect (Remainers tactical voting heaviest in the latter)
For all the talk of 2017 repeats and 'ICM ties in with my conversations' gubbins, kantar supports a Tory landslide, especially with differential turnout as suggested by the focus groups we keep seeing. We are much closer to landslide than hung parliament imo and the north and Midlands are showing the first signs of a Scotland style meltdown. Labour are about to get humped
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
By 34 over 50% are home owners according to the ONS.
The reaction to the London Bridge attack is special. Normally we hear about fears of a backlash against Muslims. This time we're hearing about fears of a backlash against terrorists!
Lol!
Boris Johnsons ratings will rise by Saturday and YouGov will show an increased Tory lead. Watch this space
In which seat has BXP got the best chance? Betfair`s 1.25 BXP "under 0.5 seats" looks value to me.
There is also free money at BXP 0-9 seats, which was 1.11 when I spotted it and last time i looked was still 1.03
You can get evens if you sell BXP seats on Sporting index @ 1, although obviously with massive downside risk. Can be arbitraged by betting on BXP over 0.5 on Betfair, as long as you have 100% confidence they won't get past say 4 or 5. For the brave only. This is not advice.
For all the talk of 2017 repeats and 'ICM ties in with my conversations' gubbins, kantar supports a Tory landslide, especially with differential turnout as suggested by the focus groups we keep seeing. We are much closer to landslide than hung parliament imo and the north and Midlands are showing the first signs of a Scotland style meltdown. Labour are about to get humped
Yes. Labour are rising (if they are) in the south (safe tory) or London (few marginals)
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Biggest drop is 25-34 y/olds from 36.9% to 25.4%. It's actually risen for the 65+ age group, up from 70.5% to 74.5%.
By 34 over 50% are home owners according to the ONS.
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
They being senior politicians. Some untruths are more egregious than others but it is very easy to find examples of politicians on any side doing that, so I'd be wary of getting a high horse unless really confident the other side dont do the same thing. But perhaps he was present but not involved in the authoring.
Not sure that is advocating privatisation. It looks like an extension of th3 current free at the point of use model - just private and charitable providers
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
The reaction to the London Bridge attack is special. Normally we hear about fears of a backlash against Muslims. This time we're hearing about fears of a backlash against terrorists!
Lol!
Boris Johnsons ratings will rise by Saturday and YouGov will show an increased Tory lead. Watch this space
Don't count on it. This has all happened on the Tories' watch.
is it me, or has the election campaign drifted way off BREXIT (just like 2017)?
No it's not just you.
People are completely bored with Brexit and want it gone - I suspect a lot no longer care about the end result for it will be what it will be and forced upon them by others - for that is the result of any election where the Government scores less than 50%. However, this election is the worst I can remember. One side has no policies and the other is throwing money around like it grows on trees.
People are not bored of Brexit in the slightest, or theyd have has much more a reaction to the endless deadlock. What it is is that brexit has taken up most political news for years so people dont need to hear it endlessly in the campaign and can focus on other things .
Actually, it is that the great bulk of voters had decided their vote on the gounds of Brexit before the election was even called. Not-Labour Leavers, not-Tory Remainers. Not-Labour Leavers greatly outweigh Not-Tory Remainers - especially in the marginals (and for Labour, their second tier not-so-marginal defences too). There are undecideds out there. They will break in the final days very disproportionately against Labour. Reason? Corbyn. This is my take from hitting the doorsteps in the SW. I suspect it will be of broader national application. (You talk to lots of retirees with a Midlands twang. Can't see why those still back there should be culturally much different.) Two and a half years of blocking Brexit has already decided this outcome. The anger is there. As I've previously reported. This is the reason why I'm as certain as I can be that the Tories will get a majority. If there is to be a surprise this time for the Commentariat, it is on the size of Boris's majority. The exit poll could yet leave Labour white with dread.
For all the talk of 2017 repeats and 'ICM ties in with my conversations' gubbins, kantar supports a Tory landslide, especially with differential turnout as suggested by the focus groups we keep seeing. We are much closer to landslide than hung parliament imo and the north and Midlands are showing the first signs of a Scotland style meltdown. Labour are about to get humped
Yes. Labour are rising (if they are) in the south (safe tory) or London (few marginals)
I'm starting to think Labour are fecked
Yes, if the tory lead next thursday is in line with the current polling average, labour will be sub 200 imo with dozens of northern and Midland seats crumbling away
If you read SO every day, you really would think everyone loathed Boris, if you read me, you'd think everyone loathed Corbyn. Viewpoints on here are not necessarily the views of the electorate.
If you read SO every day, you really would think everyone loathed Boris, if you read me, you'd think everyone loathed Corbyn. Viewpoints on here are not necessarily the views of the electorate.
Ive never encountered such hostility to an individual on the doorstep as i have for Corbyn. Remarkable, as a Con it makes me shudder a little at how much support for the Cons will disappear if Labour choose a leader who has greater appeal.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Good morning all. The Kantar poll looks extremely good for the Tories and it does appear the Labour surge may be petering out. Presumably Labour will respond with more giveaways and something on existing student debt seems favourite. The Tories have not responded at all to Labour's pledges other than to critique them. That being so their private polling must be pretty solid where it counts.
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
Easington isn't going blue. If it is, labour are not in treble figures
It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning
1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept.
2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea.
3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag.
4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
Value added by that post zero.
But i feel your pain
That is unusually grumpy, Charles, even for you.
His post made me go onto All 4 and watch the bloody thing. So it’s added some value for me, at least.
Charles put his haughtiness setting at 11 and dictated the post to his butler.
Value added by that post zero. But I feel your class war pain
Value added by that post zero. Oh look, I can do it too.
Wow - if you have money on Laura Pidcock then perhaps time to lay. On LBC she was just laughing at the prospect of job losses related to the minimum wage. Apparently if you raise the minimum wage then business benefits because people have more money to spend in their shops. It would be fairly easy to burst that bubble with facts on minimum wage by sector looking at retail but the real kicker was she was laughing at the question calling it spurious. This is the Shadow employment minister!
They being senior politicians. Some untruths are more egregious than others but it is very easy to find examples of politicians on any side doing that, so I'd be wary of getting a high horse unless really confident the other side dont do the same thing. But perhaps he was present but not involved in the authoring.
Or he is working with a different definition of privatisation from you, one where the patient has to pay for their own treatment either by insurance or from their own pocket. Having large parts of the health service delivered by organisations not owned by the state is, after all, what currently happens. This article appears to be discussing changing the mix not the basic recipe.
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
is it me, or has the election campaign drifted way off BREXIT (just like 2017)?
Not if you listen to that C4 focus group. How we got to the stage where Bozo is though more trustworthy than their former political choice is remarkable. And the potential for anger if the Tories deliver a Brexit for the rich is great.
Yes it shall be Brexit for the rich, followed by a lurch to Corbynism and further disaster as the working class realise they have been played for fools by Johnson. So we shall get the worst of both worlds. And if its a hung parliament no deal becomes more likely than ever.
There is actually a lot of thinking going on about northern towns in a post-Brexit world. Genuine out-of-the-box stuff like economic free zones and free ports, where small to medium sized businesses and their employees are exempted from a whole range of taxes to encourage them to locate there. There’s also real enthusiasm for the Northern Powerhouse concept within government, they know that the Conservatives have found Themselves popular with certain new demographics due to Brexit, and want to make sure they keep those people on board for the next election.
Wow - if you have money on Laura Pidcock then perhaps time to lay. On LBC she was just laughing at the prospect of job losses related to the minimum wage. Apparently if you raise the minimum wage then business benefits because people have more money to spend in their shops. It would be fairly easy to burst that bubble with facts on minimum wage by sector looking at retail but the real kicker was she was laughing at the question calling it spurious. This is the Shadow employment minister!
Fortunately she is very unlikely to be returned to parliament
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
It was sat on Reddit for a whole month before Labour "leaked it".
In an election full of lies - independent sources adding to them doesn't really matter.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation.
Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
But that’s not what’s being reported. And basically why you’re wrong.
Wow - if you have money on Laura Pidcock then perhaps time to lay. On LBC she was just laughing at the prospect of job losses related to the minimum wage. Apparently if you raise the minimum wage then business benefits because people have more money to spend in their shops. It would be fairly easy to burst that bubble with facts on minimum wage by sector looking at retail but the real kicker was she was laughing at the question calling it spurious. This is the Shadow employment minister!
Fortunately she is very unlikely to be returned to parliament
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
I don’t think there will be mass tactical voting this time: the stakes are too high, and the outcome of this election too uncertain.
If you read SO every day, you really would think everyone loathed Boris, if you read me, you'd think everyone loathed Corbyn. Viewpoints on here are not necessarily the views of the electorate.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Then the NHS is already privatised, and has been since it was formed: GPs after all form the backbone of it and they operate just as you have described.
It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning 1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept. 2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea. 3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag. 4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
Value added by that post zero. But i feel your pain
That is unusually grumpy, Charles, even for you. His post made me go onto All 4 and watch the bloody thing. So it’s added some value for me, at least.
Those making judgments about value might profitably take a look at their own posts.
Come now, who has not had their life enhanced by the hundreds, nay thousands, of posts on the Chuck family tree.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation.
Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
Handing them over to Nuffield on 20-year franchises wouldn't be privatisation either, I suppose. Until it happened.
Wow - if you have money on Laura Pidcock then perhaps time to lay. On LBC she was just laughing at the prospect of job losses related to the minimum wage. Apparently if you raise the minimum wage then business benefits because people have more money to spend in their shops. It would be fairly easy to burst that bubble with facts on minimum wage by sector looking at retail but the real kicker was she was laughing at the question calling it spurious. This is the Shadow employment minister!
Fortunately she is very unlikely to be returned to parliament
It's not great but nor is it that 2:1 con:lab split I keep hearing about. However that channel 4 focus group has taken years from my life. I think I now understand modern campaigning
1) Compose a trite slogan, must be less than 4 letters so as to be memorable by people who find their pin number a difficult concept.
2) Regurgitate it enough times so it is retained just long enough to give these people the impression it is their original idea.
3) Make sure very slight variations of this idea are written in 80pt block capitals in your local tax exiles rag.
4) Profit. Your low information, high emotion voter will now believe that 'Brexit will hurt the wealthy more than them' and that 'Johnson is a trustworthy, straight talking man of the people' and more than likely they assume they invented this stuff.
You must have missed the Labour comfort blanket of, “Our NHS”. Or is the right sort of lie?
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
It was sat on Reddit for a whole month before Labour "leaked it".
In an election full of lies - independent sources adding to them doesn't really matter.
It may be easy for you to say that but it was not a good look, maybe made worse by Laura Pidcock who is so lightweight
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
BiB - That's because most people don't understand the difference between privatization and out-sourcing. The infrastructure and rolling stock were genuinely privatized in that they were sold off, the former being renationalised after the Railtrack fiasco. If the train services had genuinely been sold off, there wouldn't be much of a rail network in rural parts of the country as the buyers would have finished what Beeching started!
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
Where did you hear that Easington might go Tory? MRP has Lab 47%, Con 25%, BRX 16%, LD 7%, Oth 4%.
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
It was sat on Reddit for a whole month before Labour "leaked it".
In an election full of lies - independent sources adding to them doesn't really matter.
If you read SO every day, you really would think everyone loathed Boris, if you read me, you'd think everyone loathed Corbyn. Viewpoints on here are not necessarily the views of the electorate.
The first no shit Sherlock moment of the day, but definitely not the last.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation.
Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
But that’s not what’s being reported. And basically why you’re wrong.
Sorry, you are wrong. Wikipedia says:
Privatization (or privatisation in British English) can mean different things including moving something from the public sector into the private sector. ... Government functions and services may also be privatized (which may also be known as "franchising" or "out-sourcing"); in this case, private entities are tasked with the implementation of government programs or performance of government services that had previously been the purview of state-run agencies.
That's a winning coalition I reckon in, perhaps five to ten years. Graduates alone are something like 25% of the population.
Shows how important it is for the Tories to be seen to be enabling home ownership among this group.
Feeling like you have a stake in society and having something to 'protect' (home and family) is one of the major triggers that gradually moves young adults from the fiery idealism of youth to a more Conservative friendly position.
You inspired me to check the data. Since 2007, home ownership is down from 56.3% to 51.6% (Resolution Foundation data - goes up to 2017).
Even if no one in Scotland, Wales or NI owns their own home, that is well above the Resolution Foundation claim. Spin going on, methinks. I do not believe the Resolution Foundation number as a representation of "Home Ownership" as traditionally defined, and I expect it has some unusual definition. Can you help? If we talk about numbers rather than %, to dodge the decline narrative, OO homes were up by 300k 2017 to 2018.
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
It could be dubbed the Bristol West or more alluringly the ‘Debonairre’ effect. At the last election Labour in what was dubbed recently as a four way marginal labour racked up a majority of 38k with 65% vote share whilst the greens Tories and Libdems languished in the teens. If their manifesto has been particularly attractive to those in seats they already hold, or to those in seats they can never win rather than marginals then anything could happen. I imagine the Tories are pleased in a way that the media have changed their narrative from landslide to narrowing gap.
is it me, or has the election campaign drifted way off BREXIT (just like 2017)?
Not if you listen to that C4 focus group. How we got to the stage where Bozo is though more trustworthy than their former political choice is remarkable. And the potential for anger if the Tories deliver a Brexit for the rich is great.
Yes it shall be Brexit for the rich, followed by a lurch to Corbynism and further disaster as the working class realise they have been played for fools by Johnson. So we shall get the worst of both worlds. And if its a hung parliament no deal becomes more likely than ever.
There is actually a lot of thinking going on about northern towns in a post-Brexit world. Genuine out-of-the-box stuff like economic free zones and free ports, where small to medium sized businesses and their employees are exempted from a whole range of taxes to encourage them to locate there. There’s also real enthusiasm for the Northern Powerhouse concept within government, they know that the Conservatives have found Themselves popular with certain new demographics due to Brexit, and want to make sure they keep those people on board for the next election.
If Boris does get his majority and starts delivering. Allays fears about the NHS by improving standards. Implements stuff to give growth to towns moribund for decades under Labour local fiefdoms. Isn't generally a boorish twat. Then the NEXT election could be terminal for Labour.
Putting Kantar into my model leads to no change: Tories four short of a notional majority (I know, I know). The BXP is squeezed to almost nothing. I suspect those who now claim they'll vote BXP will actually vote BXP or not vote at all rather than vote tactically. Nevertheless I've stuck with my assumption that some (30%) will switch to Con and none to Lab. It only makes one seat difference to Con.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS. It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Better was Raab on R4 this morning first saying it was written years ago, and anyway there were several other authors... and then "I never wrote that".
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
That’s not privatisation.
Of course it is.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation.
Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
Handing them over to Nuffield on 20-year franchises wouldn't be privatisation either, I suppose. Until it happened.
Correct. The owner letting operation of its asset on a fixed contract IS NOT PRIVATISATION. If I let my house to you on a fixed term contract and have you pay my mortgage do you own the property or do I? I absolutely do not support long term contracts with people like Nuffield but just like Virgin trains handing the keys back to the owner this weekend after 22 years a contract is not a sale. It's a contract. I think people know this. Labour seem to think people are stupid which is why Labour are getting shellacked.
Putting Kantar into my model leads to no change: Tories four short of a notional majority (I know, I know). The BXP is squeezed to almost nothing. I suspect those who now claim they'll vote BXP will actually vote BXP or not vote at all rather than vote tactically. Nevertheless I've stuck with my assumption that some (30%) will switch to Con and none to Lab. It only makes one seat difference to Con.
I find it difficult to believe no majority on a 44 v 32 poll to be honest
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
It was sat on Reddit for a whole month before Labour "leaked it".
In an election full of lies - independent sources adding to them doesn't really matter.
I don't see the words - leaked it to Corbyn in that short article.
Yes - the information was taken by someone and put online. The statement that it was leaked to Corbyn is however a clear lie based on the facts within that article.
And I'm sorry but in this day and age the default rule for any information is that it will be "leaked".
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
Where did you hear that Easington might go Tory? MRP has Lab 47%, Con 25%, BRX 16%, LD 7%, Oth 4%.
It came up on a thread yesreday afternoon. Twiter rumours.
"Commissioning and control of budgets should be delegated to the lowest level possible - ....the patient... and their doctor" That is just bizarre. GP fundholding is bad enough - in many practices it has been used to ramp up GP incomes while reducing significantly the amount of work they do.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS. It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation. Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
Handing them over to Nuffield on 20-year franchises wouldn't be privatisation either, I suppose. Until it happened.
Correct. The owner letting operation of its asset on a fixed contract IS NOT PRIVATISATION...
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
Where did you hear that Easington might go Tory? MRP has Lab 47%, Con 25%, BRX 16%, LD 7%, Oth 4%.
It came up on a thread yesreday afternoon. Twiter rumours.
If easington went you'd have to start looking at Jarrow, Gateshead, Wansbeck, South Shields......
Question. If the polls aren't narrowing. If the word on the ground that Labour are shedding a million of the leave votes isn't showing signs of being false. If the swathe of seats across the NE and Midlands that are going blue like NW Durham and Easington are real.
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
Where did you hear that Easington might go Tory? MRP has Lab 47%, Con 25%, BRX 16%, LD 7%, Oth 4%.
It came up on a thread yesreday afternoon. Twiter rumours.
Let's face it, it is unlikely. These sort of rumours swirl around in the hours after the polls close - and rarely amount to much. But it maybe feeds into the notion of Labour nervousness that such rumours weren't squashed by firmly pointing and laughing at them
The poll put support for the Conservatives at 44%, up one point from a week earlier, while Labour was unchanged on 32%. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were up one point on 15%, while the Brexit Party was down one point on 2%.
Kantar surveyed 1,096 people online between Nov. 28 and Dec. 2.
Putting Kantar into my model leads to no change: Tories four short of a notional majority (I know, I know). The BXP is squeezed to almost nothing. I suspect those who now claim they'll vote BXP will actually vote BXP or not vote at all rather than vote tactically. Nevertheless I've stuck with my assumption that some (30%) will switch to Con and none to Lab. It only makes one seat difference to Con.
I find it difficult to believe no majority on a 44 v 32 poll to be honest
Flavible gives a Tory maj of 100 and ElectoralCalculus 60.
LOL, is that from the genuine Labour account? Someone on £82k currently pays £20,300 in income tax and £5,600 in NI, according to my tax calculator - a total of £498.20 a week.
Those interested in a Tory landslide might do well to look at the Conservative seats 2 market on Betfair exchange.
Ladbrokes (last time I checked) offered only 2/1 on a Tory majority > 100 seats (in other words, 375 seats+) but you can back every 10 seat band on above 380 seats on this Exchange market for at least 4/1 going up to 8/1 or 9/1 for Tory seats north of 400.
That compares as better than both PaddyPower and Ladbrokes.
To pay off the Tories need to achieve a majority of at least 110 but if you believe a landslide is possible and they’ll gain about 70 Labour seats (with a handful of losses elsewhere) then it’s worth looking at.
No. It’s not. It’s using private companies to provide services, based on price, within the umbrella of the NHS. It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
No, it seems you don't. The model of using private firms to provide a regulated public service in combination with state owned entities is exactly the one used in the rail industry, and nobody says that hasn't been privatised, or at least part privatised. Similarly some council services like bin collections.
Sorry. You’re fighting a losing battle. This does not show “privatisation” in the way you want it to be portrayed. Using internal private services under the umbrella of the NHS is not privatisation. Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
Handing them over to Nuffield on 20-year franchises wouldn't be privatisation either, I suppose. Until it happened.
Correct. The owner letting operation of its asset on a fixed contract IS NOT PRIVATISATION...
Yes, PFI turned out really well.
Wasn't that more about keeping public borrowing off the books?
Putting Kantar into my model leads to no change: Tories four short of a notional majority (I know, I know). The BXP is squeezed to almost nothing. I suspect those who now claim they'll vote BXP will actually vote BXP or not vote at all rather than vote tactically. Nevertheless I've stuck with my assumption that some (30%) will switch to Con and none to Lab. It only makes one seat difference to Con.
I find it difficult to believe no majority on a 44 v 32 poll to be honest
The Kantar poll has only 10% weight in my model. The moving average is Con/Lab/LD/BXP 42.6/32.1/13.8/3.6/3.1 I believe there is massive tactical voting going on, particularly LD for Lab, but also the other way (Wimbledon in play for LDs?).
Comments
Karl Popper described it well
Imagine if Johnson gets a higher share than May, or more votes than Major. There will be some former Tories very upset about that indeed I'm sure.
Mr. Thompson, if that happens, a lot of people will also draw the wrong conclusions from it.
Best result remains a 100 seat Conservative majority, Corbyn axed and replaced by someone who isn't crackers, and Boris Johnson loses his seat.
Betfair`s 1.25 BXP "under 0.5 seats" looks value to me.
If Labour+SNP+PC+Green < Tories (or maybe even Tories+DUP) and the Lib Dems abstain then we would get a Tory minority government taking issues through on a case by case basis as we had before the election.
Why would the Conservative Party refuse to run on a minority basis?
ECM (the lesser but nonetheless good European model) has now come on board, as it usually does when the GFS leads the way.
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/2196/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-ipsos-mori-phone-poll-has-snp-with-28-lead-in-scotland/p1
The answer is not that good. January 2015, a series of massive SNP poll leads. People on the thread posting they couldn't see he SNP getting north of 25 seats. The bookies seat line in the mid twenties.
One poster seemed pretty shrewd though. The late, lamented antifrank seemed to know what was up.
https://twitter.com/Dannythefink/status/1201778126885466112?s=20
I think that this is not possibile, and so LDs will come under tremendous pressure to ally with LP in some way. I`m finding it hard to see how we could end up with a scenario in which Corbyn is PM (assuming LP win fewer seats than CP).
Laying Corbyn as next PM would be value if I`m right.
It's not even funny anymore, they just lie and lie
But I feel your class war pain
65% of homes were owner occupied in 2017
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/milestonesjourneyingintoadulthood/2019-02-18
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/home-ownership-rate
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/data/housing/
But perhaps he was present but not involved in the authoring.
There seems to be a widespread assumption that if Bozo gets a working majority, politics returns to its pre-2010 “stability” and all the turbulence post-2016 disappears. That may be right, but I can envisage some scenarios where it isn’t. (Although tbf in some of them Bozo doesn’t make it to another election himself)
Oh look, I can do it too.
It seems you don’t know what “privatisation”actually means and entails.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1199812713100263424?s=20
We are much closer to landslide than hung parliament imo and the north and Midlands are showing the first signs of a Scotland style meltdown. Labour are about to get humped
Boris Johnsons ratings will rise by Saturday and YouGov will show an increased Tory lead. Watch this space
Can be arbitraged by betting on BXP over 0.5 on Betfair, as long as you have 100% confidence they won't get past say 4 or 5.
For the brave only. This is not advice.
I'm starting to think Labour are fecked
Why cant people see this?
At which point in the last week does the tsunami of tactical voting start to show? Corbyn isn't getting near Number 10. So Tories who hate Johnson and Labour who hate Corbyn don't have to hold their nose. And those people who don't want a blue tidal wave or a red one. When do they wake up and look at who the challenger is to Raab and Pidcock and go "I'm voting for them"?
A Tory MP in Easington. Holy Shit.
There are undecideds out there. They will break in the final days very disproportionately against Labour. Reason? Corbyn. This is my take from hitting the doorsteps in the SW. I suspect it will be of broader national application. (You talk to lots of retirees with a Midlands twang. Can't see why those still back there should be culturally much different.)
Two and a half years of blocking Brexit has already decided this outcome. The anger is there. As I've previously reported.
This is the reason why I'm as certain as I can be that the Tories will get a majority. If there is to be a surprise this time for the Commentariat, it is on the size of Boris's majority. The exit poll could yet leave Labour white with dread.
Viewpoints on here are not necessarily the views of the electorate.
The Kantar poll looks extremely good for the Tories and it does appear the Labour surge may be petering out. Presumably Labour will respond with more giveaways and something on existing student debt seems favourite.
The Tories have not responded at all to Labour's pledges other than to critique them. That being so their private polling must be pretty solid where it counts.
Just switched on tv and saw Kay Burley having a real go at laura Pidcock over the leaked NHS report used by Corbyn
I did not realise that the accusation that Russia leaked it to Corbyn is coming from independent sources, not the conservatives
In the context of NATO, Trump and security this does not help labour at all
Could the last few days of this campaign see Corbyn declared a real threat to UK security and especially the five eyes alliance with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, US and UK
There’s also real enthusiasm for the Northern Powerhouse concept within government, they know that the Conservatives have found Themselves popular with certain new demographics due to Brexit, and want to make sure they keep those people on board for the next election.
In an election full of lies - independent sources adding to them doesn't really matter.
Now - taking hospitals and selling them to Nuffield Health under a franchise and them being run as Nuffield Health hospitals, with that companies management and control - that’s privatisation.
But that’s not what’s being reported. And basically why you’re wrong.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ry90s0oDXu6_LhDKNiI6fXaSFJsfMBaAXI6cZ8XhqQ8/edit#gid=0
No-one is going to take the risk.
The impossible dream....
"Were you up for Pidcock?"
If the train services had genuinely been sold off, there wouldn't be much of a rail network in rural parts of the country as the buyers would have finished what Beeching started!
https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1Y6206
Privatization (or privatisation in British English) can mean different things including moving something from the public sector into the private sector. ... Government functions and services may also be privatized (which may also be known as "franchising" or "out-sourcing"); in this case, private entities are tasked with the implementation of government programs or performance of government services that had previously been the purview of state-run agencies.
According to ONS, Home Ownership in England is 64%. English Housing Survey, which is the gold standard survey on housing.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/817623/EHS_2017-18_Home_ownership_report.pdf
Even if no one in Scotland, Wales or NI owns their own home, that is well above the Resolution Foundation claim.
Spin going on, methinks. I do not believe the Resolution Foundation number as a representation of "Home Ownership" as traditionally defined, and I expect it has some unusual definition. Can you help?
If we talk about numbers rather than %, to dodge the decline narrative, OO homes were up by 300k 2017 to 2018.
It says a lot how we choose our stats :-) .
Tories four short of a notional majority (I know, I know).
The BXP is squeezed to almost nothing. I suspect those who now claim they'll vote BXP will actually vote BXP or not vote at all rather than vote tactically. Nevertheless I've stuck with my assumption that some (30%) will switch to Con and none to Lab. It only makes one seat difference to Con.
I think people know this. Labour seem to think people are stupid which is why Labour are getting shellacked.
Yes - the information was taken by someone and put online. The statement that it was leaked to Corbyn is however a clear lie based on the facts within that article.
And I'm sorry but in this day and age the default rule for any information is that it will be "leaked".
That is just bizarre.
GP fundholding is bad enough - in many practices it has been used to ramp up GP incomes while reducing significantly the amount of work they do.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1201727768364539904?s=20
Someone on £82k currently pays £20,300 in income tax and £5,600 in NI, according to my tax calculator - a total of £498.20 a week.
Those interested in a Tory landslide might do well to look at the Conservative seats 2 market on Betfair exchange.
Ladbrokes (last time I checked) offered only 2/1 on a Tory majority > 100 seats (in other words, 375 seats+) but you can back every 10 seat band on above 380 seats on this Exchange market for at least 4/1 going up to 8/1 or 9/1 for Tory seats north of 400.
That compares as better than both PaddyPower and Ladbrokes.
To pay off the Tories need to achieve a majority of at least 110 but if you believe a landslide is possible and they’ll gain about 70 Labour seats (with a handful of losses elsewhere) then it’s worth looking at.
Con/Lab/LD/BXP 42.6/32.1/13.8/3.6/3.1
I believe there is massive tactical voting going on, particularly LD for Lab, but also the other way (Wimbledon in play for LDs?).