Johnson is never going to be able to install EU27 customs officers in NI ports against UVF opposition. Him and whose army? But wait...Jeremy Corbyn said questionable stuff about NI in the 1970s...
Very surprised to see the results on government spending .
Johnson 48 Corbyn 43
I thought that would be a big win for Johnson .
On the one hand Labour's totally fiscally incontinent. On the other, as my husband always likes to remind me, there's a lot of poverty out there. Even if voters have seen through the promises of all this free stuff, there's a lot of people who are just desperate for some stuff full stop.
The sluggish performance of the economy is sufficient for the better off and, more generally, keeps the wealthier parts of the country ticking over nicely, but it's no use to those who have little. If the GDP growth rate had been ticking along at 3% p.a. for the last few years then Theresa May would probably have got her majority in the first place, and even if she hadn't then the Con-Lab gap right now would be enormous.
Black swans don't care about days of the week. The Zinoviev letter came out on a Saturday, four days before a Wednesday election. This time, could it be the Russia Report? The irony!
Anybody betting on a LAB majority is barmy. Since losing Scotland at GE2015 the chances, even with a bright voter-friendly new leader, of LAB forming a majority government are miniscule.
There is no path to a Labour majority.
None.
Sir John Curtice memorably said: so close to zero as effectively zero.
That of course is different to Labour being able to form a Government and supply the next PM, and I wonder if some may be getting confused.
Correct. A swing of 5% to Labour would result in a Labour majority, but a swing of 1% for a Labour minority government.
In theory the 2017 election results was close to the middle, Conservatives needing a lead of 6% for a majority and Labour a lead of 7% to get a majority.
Short of a Labour landslide in England it's almost impossible for Labour to get a majority whilst the SNP cockblock them in Scotland.
Black swans don't care about days of the week. The Zinoviev letter came out on a Saturday, four days before a Wednesday election. This time, could it be the Russia Report? The irony!
And in fact a double helping of irony, given that the use of the forged Zinoviev letter involved a heavy dose of anti-Semitism.
For those confident Conservatives and despairing Socialists, news that demonstrates that the most extreme outsider can defeat the favourite. In the London Chess Classic Maxime Vachier-Lagrave beat world champion Magnus Carlsen. In the GE this would be the equivalent of the Greens winning a majority!
MVL is world number 4 and the 7th highest rated chess player of all time. He is in no way an extreme outsider Hes been rated world number 2 at his highest
He is a good player but not even near Carlsen. Carlsen is currently on a 105 unbeaten run in classic chess. And Carlsen is even more dominant at blitz and armageddon chess than in the long version. You are making the mistake of looking at rankings to evaluate winning chances. This often fails in chess (Kasparov, Fischer - and Capablanca going back a century - are examples) because one player may be utterly dominant. And that is Carlsen. He even drew Gawain Jones (a world top 100 player) last year after blundering a full piece in the opening. To give perspective. The 100+ rating point gap between Carlsen and V-L is the equivalent of the gap between a decent grandmaster and an IM (say 500 ranking places).
Utter nonsense. Yes Carlsen is a great champion and dominant rapid player but then again in St Louis rapid and Blitz this year he finished mid table and was frankly abject for his own standards. Carlsen also lost the rapid play off against Ding (who MVL is playing in the final) in the Sinquefield cup a couple of months ago. 100 points FIDE is about 14 points difference on the English rating system which would put the odds on any game about 70/30 in favour of the higher player. My rating is about 1200 below Carlsen, so I'm not likely to beat him but MVL has every chance. Carlsen doesn't just win every tournament he turns up at, 3 this year I've mentioned he fell. His standard run is impressive (although mostly drawn of course) the last person to beat him in standard play was Mamedyarov.
MVLs win was the equivalent of Labour gain Putney this time round
If you have a 1600 rating you should know better. V-L is a fine player but unable to beat Carlsen at standard chess, meaning he had to rely on a win at blitz. I believe the last time he beat Carlsen in a standard game was over 2 years ago in St Louis and that was only the second time in 15 years. Quoting the 70/30 is misleading as some may think it implies MVL would come out on top 30% of the time. He has actually won less than 10% of the time (2 out of 24) at standard chess. Don't get me wrong. I would much rather work through a game by V-L than, say, Caruana (another fine player but more Karpov than Kasparov), but any sane money will always be on Carlsen in a match between them.
The British electorate is tacking ever more to the economic left and the Tories are doing nothing to intellectually challenge it.
One day that is going to very badly catch up with them.
I think you're right but the direction of travel is generational rather than generalized.
The poorest and those under-30 struggling to buy a home have little to lose from kicking the table over and the Tories are fortunate at this election to have Brexit to campaign on.
They won't have Brexit to tempt the wwc at the next election so they need to visibly pump cash in to the poorest areas whilst at the same time building hundreds of thousands of homes to help the younger generation to have a stake in society rather than being left marooned on the outside getting angrier.
If the Tories don't get it right we could have a raging socialist government in 2024.
Very surprised to see the results on government spending .
Johnson 48 Corbyn 43
I thought that would be a big win for Johnson .
The British electorate is tacking ever more to the economic left and the Tories are doing nothing to intellectually challenge it.
One day that is going to very badly catch up with them.
I am not sure about this. I suspect you are conflating tacking to the economic left with being tired of austerity. They are not the same thing even if, in the short term , they may converge.
That was pretty funny. The Labour position is not actually that bad, but the relative lack of senior people within the party who will fight for the deal they plan to negotiate really undercuts the message a bit.
Comments
The sluggish performance of the economy is sufficient for the better off and, more generally, keeps the wealthier parts of the country ticking over nicely, but it's no use to those who have little. If the GDP growth rate had been ticking along at 3% p.a. for the last few years then Theresa May would probably have got her majority in the first place, and even if she hadn't then the Con-Lab gap right now would be enormous.
One day that is going to very badly catch up with them.
The poorest and those under-30 struggling to buy a home have little to lose from kicking the table over and the Tories are fortunate at this election to have Brexit to campaign on.
They won't have Brexit to tempt the wwc at the next election so they need to visibly pump cash in to the poorest areas whilst at the same time building hundreds of thousands of homes to help the younger generation to have a stake in society rather than being left marooned on the outside getting angrier.
If the Tories don't get it right we could have a raging socialist government in 2024.
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1203073688133865473