Are all Cabinet meetings like this or had someone tipped off Boris's script-writer that the cameras would be there?
This amazing, unchallenged assertion that 'the people' 'lent' their votes to the tories. To increase their share by 1%.
In how many of the new Tory Northern seats did their vote go up by just 1%?
In NuL, @Tissue_Price increased the Tory vote by 2,391 or 11.3% of the 2017 vote. Ian Levy in Blyth Valley increased the Tory vote by 1,585 or 10% of the 2017 number. In Bassetlaw it went up by 5,463 or 24.2%
It's fine. You guys like the Northern Irish can be safely ignored for the next few years. You have devolution just go about minding your own business and we can mind ours.
Maybe next generation there'll be a hung Parliament or Lab victory where your MPs matter.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
We saw lots of polls during the campaign where Tories were miles ahead with men and only neck and neck with woman. Clearly there is a shy lady Tory vote.
Johnson was presumably delighted to be neck and neck with woman?
Incidentally, I do hope that the government is successful in doing something positive for areas of the country which have been neglected. It is long overdue. It will be fascinating to watch. But it is not going to stop me asking questions about what they are up to and whether they will keep their promises.
And if PB Tories don’t like it, too bad. We don’t live in a one party state and no-one is or should think themselves beyond challenge.
What's not to like? So far the rhetoric is fine - it's the deeds that matter.
In fact, a remarkably comprehensive victory for the Conservatives. They led among full time workers, part-time workers, the retired, while only trailing with the unemployed and students. They led among the rich, people on average incomes, and the poor.
Just us pesky Jocks peeing on their/your chips..
It's fine. You guys like the Northern Irish can be safely ignored for the next few years. You have devolution just go about minding your own business and we can mind ours.
Maybe next generation there'll be a hung Parliament or Lab victory where your MPs matter.
Pray silence for The (English) People's Government...
How we all giggled at HYUFD's tanks in Glasgow/Gibraltar comments. Not so much now.
Incidentally, I do hope that the government is successful in doing something positive for areas of the country which have been neglected. It is long overdue. It will be fascinating to watch. But it is not going to stop me asking questions about what they are up to and whether they will keep their promises.
And if PB Tories don’t like it, too bad. We don’t live in a one party state and no-one is or should think themselves beyond challenge.
What's not to like? So far the rhetoric is fine - it's the deeds that matter.
In fact, a remarkably comprehensive victory for the Conservatives. They led among full time workers, part-time workers, the retired, while only trailing with the unemployed and students. They led among the rich, people on average incomes, and the poor.
Just us pesky Jocks peeing on their/your chips..
It's fine. You guys like the Northern Irish can be safely ignored for the next few years. You have devolution just go about minding your own business and we can mind ours.
Maybe next generation there'll be a hung Parliament or Lab victory where your MPs matter.
Pray silence for The (English) People's Government...
How we all giggled at HYUFD's tanks in Glasgow/Gibraltar comments. Not so much now.
HYUFD's imagination runs away from him. Its not going to happen.
I for one do like it. The country and good governance needs rigorous questioning and if it's not coming Labour and the Lib Dems then it should be welcomed from other sources.
But in a reciprocal sense of fairness if the answers to your questions are better from the Tories than other sources then I would hope you reward them with your vote next time.
There's at least one management theory that says that a good management team needs an 'Eeyore'; someone who points out possible pitfalls, and generally ensures that the over-enthusiastic do not charge ahead regardless. Prof Parkinson points out the dangers of not having such a person, and the dangers of not keeping them informed.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
Or is my withered brain missing something obvious?
No. Even if turnout was identical across all age groups the Tories would still have had a massive lead. There simply aren't that many aged 18-24 which is the only group that Lab had a large lead in. The lead for Lab in 25-49 is quite small compared to the middle aged and elderly bands.
If the Tories came up with some sensible stuff on things like student loan repayment and housing, they could probably do even better.
1. Fear/dislike of Corbyn’s Labour. 2. Wanting to get Brexit over with.
What happens at the next election will depend on how much 1 is still a factor and on how 2 has been implemented and whether it has harmed the economy or those parts of it on whose votes the Tories will depend.
Labour currently looks as if it intends being helpful to the Tories re 1.
On 2 the Tories are hoping that bunging money at their new voters will see them through. They are less clear on (a) how Brexit and these supposed new FTAs will help (@HYUFD made a fool of himself on the previous thread re US FTAs and financial services) and (b) if not, where the money to pay for all these goodies will come from.
Incidentally, I do hope that the government is successful in doing something positive for areas of the country which have been neglected. It is long overdue. It will be fascinating to watch. But it is not going to stop me asking questions about what they are up to and whether they will keep their promises.
And if PB Tories don’t like it, too bad. We don’t live in a one party state and no-one is or should think themselves beyond challenge.
I for one do like it. The country and good governance needs rigorous questioning and if it's not coming Labour and the Lib Dems then it should be welcomed from other sources.
But in a reciprocal sense of fairness if the answers to your questions are better from the Tories than other sources then I would hope you reward them with your vote next time.
I have voted for all the main parties in my time. I will judge the Tories at the next GE. For the moment, not only do they have no credit in the bank with me but they are quite significantly in deficit.
So let’s see what happens. I think it will be a very interesting time in politics.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
Or is my withered brain missing something obvious?
No. Even if turnout was identical across all age groups the Tories would still have had a massive lead. There simply aren't that many aged 18-24 which is the only group that Lab had a large lead in. The lead for Lab in 25-49 is quite small compared to the middle aged and elderly bands.
If the Tories came up with some sensible stuff on things like student loan repayment and housing, they could probably do even better.
That's an excellent idea.
Magic money tree
No just sensible stuff. Not crazy money tree stuff.
EG one sensible thing the government has done is Help to Buy which identified the challenge for too many to get on the housing ladder was the deposit and dealt with that. It also identified that housebuilding wasn't happening at a quick enough rate and gave an encouragement to build more homes.
Thanks to Help to Buy (which isn't costing the government money) we have record levels of house building and home ownership rates are increasing again for the first time in decades.
Smart politics. Not just throwing money at problems.
I for one do like it. The country and good governance needs rigorous questioning and if it's not coming Labour and the Lib Dems then it should be welcomed from other sources.
But in a reciprocal sense of fairness if the answers to your questions are better from the Tories than other sources then I would hope you reward them with your vote next time.
There's at least one management theory that says that a good management team needs an 'Eeyore'; someone who points out possible pitfalls, and generally ensures that the over-enthusiastic do not charge ahead regardless. Prof Parkinson points out the dangers of not having such a person, and the dangers of not keeping them informed.
Or, as in the Roman world, a slave muttering “Remember, sire, that you are mortal.”
That the Tories won 46% of Lib Dem Leavers and 33% of Labour Leavers is surely more significant than that the Lib Dems won 22% of Tory Remainers and Labour won *% of Tory Remainers.
Wonder if that has anything to do with the rest of us not wanting to pay for the WASPI bribe.
Labour went from marketing themselves as understanding inter-generational unfairness in 2017 to nonsense like that and free broadband.
I thought it was really interesting that even on the left wing youth show "The Last Leg", the free broadband idea was widely panned. They really hated the idea of the government controlling the access to the internet.
Are all Cabinet meetings like this or had someone tipped off Boris's script-writer that the cameras would be there?
This amazing, unchallenged assertion that 'the people' 'lent' their votes to the tories. To increase their share by 1%.
In how many of the new Tory Northern seats did their vote go up by just 1%?
In NuL, @Tissue_Price increased the Tory vote by 2,391 or 11.3% of the 2017 vote. Ian Levy in Blyth Valley increased the Tory vote by 1,585 or 10% of the 2017 number. In Bassetlaw it went up by 5,463 or 24.2%
I could go on.
Indeed, in the North the tories have doen well. But the bulk of the 'lending' was from Labour to others (non Lab non Con).
Blyth valley others up from 6.8% to 16.4% Bassetlaw others up from 4.1% to 17.2% N-U-L others up from 3.8% to 11.7%
A lot of work to be done to stop Labour loan repayments in these seats.
Is there any evidence that RLB is or is not a Marxist? Or indeed whether she is on record as supporting our enemies?
Evidence? I don't recall seeing any evidence but we know the Corbyn cohort think highly of her and are, everso gently, promoting her, so I suspect that is a fair indication, if not of Marxism then something to the wide left of central.
Google says she is a practising Catholic, which might temper any hard leftwingery. Other than that she is rather opaque. A bit Green, a bit right-on...
I get that "taking her whip from Rome", to paraphrase the other prominent Catholic in the Commons, might push her rightwards on social issues (although I bet it doesn't), but does it say much about her economic positions? As far as I can tell, she's Continuity McDonnell in that arena.
I'm just guessing. A glimpse at her voting record gives little away. She comes across as mainstream left, not hard left, so I am not yet sure why Corbs and McD are so keen on her
If the advisors and other key background people remain the same, you get the same policies and the same control over the party. Is there any evidence that she has ever had or uttered any independent thought? Until we see evidence otherwise, it is safe to assume that with her you will get continuity Corbynism.
I expect the term 'Corbynist' to be widely used by the tories over the next 5 years. The tories have never had a good bogeyman to refer back to, Blair being mainly a nemesis of the left.
I wonder if the Tories will keep on the services of the folk from down under. They seem to be very effective at working out the correct messaging.
Effective messaging. Correct implies legal, decent, honest and truthful and there have already been doubts raised about that.
I don't know. New Labour were the masters of it and it served them well for 3 terms.
If you cannot see that having all parties (not to mention foreign interlopers) spreading lies through under-the-radar social media campaigns is undesirable, you might at least reflect it is unprecedented even in the Blair era.
Insiders believe [Scottish] Labour faces two obstacles even bigger than indyref2. One is a growing disconnect between the party and its remaining supporters.
Leonard and his fellow Corbynistas are said to have a romantic, sentimental view of working class voters that is increasingly out of date.
The second barrier is the leader himself.
Leonard’s public utterances are peppered with references to Keir Hardie and Mary Barbour, historical figures of importance to the Labour movement, but strangers to anyone outside the party bubble.
Leonard gives the impression of being in love with the past, ignorant of the present and bewildered by the future. The hallmark of his undistinguished leadership is paralysing nostalgia.
Holyrood 2021 is about survival for Scottish Labour, not growth, with some senior figures believing they could return fewer than 15 MSPs. A new position on indyref2 is unlikely to arrest the decline.
On the other hand, it is hardly 'The People's Brexit'....
The people have voted for it a minimum of twice and arguably four times. Once via direct democracy in a referendum where an outright majority voted for it - and now for a specific deal via a landslide/thumping majority under representative democracy.
One could extend to 4 times its been voted for by including 2015 (a majority for holding the referendum) and 2016 (an overwhelming majority of MPs elected on a 'Brexit must be done' platform in both Labour and Tories though that Parliament failed to do it).
I for one do like it. The country and good governance needs rigorous questioning and if it's not coming Labour and the Lib Dems then it should be welcomed from other sources.
But in a reciprocal sense of fairness if the answers to your questions are better from the Tories than other sources then I would hope you reward them with your vote next time.
There's at least one management theory that says that a good management team needs an 'Eeyore'; someone who points out possible pitfalls, and generally ensures that the over-enthusiastic do not charge ahead regardless. Prof Parkinson points out the dangers of not having such a person, and the dangers of not keeping them informed.
Or, as in the Roman world, a slave muttering “Remember, sire, that you are mortal.”
If you cannot see that having all parties (not to mention foreign interlopers) spreading lies through under-the-radar social media campaigns is undesirable, you might at least reflect it is unprecedented even in the Blair era.
On the other hand, it is hardly 'The People's Brexit'....
The people have voted for it a minimum of twice and arguably four times. Once via direct democracy in a referendum where an outright majority voted for it - and now for a specific deal via a landslide/thumping majority under representative democracy.
One could extend to 4 times its been voted for by including 2015 (a majority for holding the referendum) and 2016 (an overwhelming majority of MPs elected on a 'Brexit must be done' platform in both Labour and Tories though that Parliament failed to do it).
You are missing my point. It's not about stopping Brexit - that is long gone. And I acknowledged several times (before the election) that Parliament ought to have approved the WA (May's and Johnson's).
I'm merely pointing out that whatever trade agreement Johnson ends up with is unlikely to have the unalloyed appreciation or even backing of a majority of the electorate.
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
While I understand the SNP's principled stance against the HoL - perhaps a more constructive approach might be to send Peers (eg Salmond, post trial, Robertson etc) to provide a further platform for "Stronger for Scotland" and campaign for abolition - there's some serious political talent relegated to RT.Today.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
Yup. Tory Remainers are, I think I read, the most economically right wing part of the electorate, so we're never going to swing behind Corbyn in significant numbers.
If you cannot see that having all parties (not to mention foreign interlopers) spreading lies through under-the-radar social media campaigns is undesirable, you might at least reflect it is unprecedented even in the Blair era.
And remember, in the old days, if Labour put up a poster saying Boris is wrong then the Conservatives would see it and put up their own poster saying No, it's Corbyn who is wrong.
Nowadays, Labour can say whatever it likes to 238 shelf-stackers in Birmingham under the age of 40 who holidayed in Magaluf and the Conservatives will not even know they've said it. That is what makes micro-targeted social media campaigning so insidious. The main parties sent thousands of *different* adverts to different groups, automatically generated and tailored to the recipients. We are not in Kansas anymore.
For old times' sake and because we won't be able to say it for much longer — despite Brexit.
Hadn't happened yet! And look at vacancies, Labour market leading indicator and down 7% on a year ago, worst since 2009. Unemployment likely to be going up just as Brexit happens.
On the other hand, it is hardly 'The People's Brexit'....
The people have voted for it a minimum of twice and arguably four times. Once via direct democracy in a referendum where an outright majority voted for it - and now for a specific deal via a landslide/thumping majority under representative democracy.
One could extend to 4 times its been voted for by including 2015 (a majority for holding the referendum) and 2016 (an overwhelming majority of MPs elected on a 'Brexit must be done' platform in both Labour and Tories though that Parliament failed to do it).
You are missing my point. It's not about stopping Brexit - that is long gone. And I acknowledged several times (before the election) that Parliament ought to have approved the WA (May's and Johnson's).
I'm merely pointing out that whatever trade agreement Johnson ends up with is unlikely to have the unalloyed appreciation or even backing of a majority of the electorate.
I don't see the significance of that? The idea of Brexit is not to have unalloyed appreciation going forwards, it is to take back control. If you don't like the trade agreement and want it renegotiated then post-Brexit you can elect a government seeking to renegotiate it.
If you're satisfied that the agreement is OK then you can worry about other issues.
While I understand the SNP's principled stance against the HoL - perhaps a more constructive approach might be to send Peers (eg Salmond, post trial, Robertson etc) to provide a further platform for "Stronger for Scotland" and campaign for abolition - there's some serious political talent relegated to RT.Today.
Ain't gonna happen.
In any case (as reflected on here) constructiveness isn't really on the agenda - from shut up and go away to we'll shit on your fish suppers pretty much represents the gamut of where the BJ party is at currently on Scotland.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
For old times' sake and because we won't be able to say it for much longer — despite Brexit.
Hadn't happened yet! And look at vacancies, Labour market leading indicator and down 7% on a year ago, worst since 2009. Unemployment likely to be going up just as Brexit happens.
Soon the phoney war will be over and anything that happens, be it good or ill, will unavoidably be "because of Brexit".
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
We shall see, lets hope you are right. Corbynomics was never a realistic proposition at the GE, but hung parliament and 2nd ref was. Markets have swung back to my view that neither is a good outcome after the initial swing.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
We shall see, lets hope you are right. Corbynomics was never a realistic proposition at the GE, but hung parliament and 2nd ref was. Markets have swung back to my view that neither is a good outcome after the initial swing.
The Tories and Labour now more the parties of average earners, the LDs the party of the rich and the Brexit Party and SNP the parties of the poor
Voting LD is the ultimate virtue signal.
You can show how “nice” you are, but they aren’t threatening in the way Labour are. And, if you earn a very high income, it doesn’t really matter if they win anyway.
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
Yup. Tory Remainers are, I think I read, the most economically right wing part of the electorate, so we're never going to swing behind Corbyn in significant numbers.
And without Tory Remainers Labour can never win a majority, many of those Tory Remainers will have voted for Blair
While I understand the SNP's principled stance against the HoL - perhaps a more constructive approach might be to send Peers (eg Salmond, post trial, Robertson etc) to provide a further platform for "Stronger for Scotland" and campaign for abolition - there's some serious political talent relegated to RT.Today.
Ain't gonna happen.
In any case (as reflected on here) constructiveness isn't really on the agenda - from shut up and go away to we'll shit on your fish suppers pretty much represents the gamut of where the BJ party is at currently on Scotland.
Writes the person who wants to piss on our chips...
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
We shall see, lets hope you are right. Corbynomics was never a realistic proposition at the GE, but hung parliament and 2nd ref was. Markets have swung back to my view that neither is a good outcome after the initial swing.
Sterling is not an indicator of good or bad.
Im sure youd be saying that if Corbynomics was being implemented and the £ dropped 15%.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
I call BS. People campaigning against a position make all sorts of outrageous grandstanding claims. Doesn't mean they meant it. Especially since that was notably not claimed during the election campaign.
I suspect even the authors of that absurd claim would have been horrified at the idea of a Corbyn victory last week if it had occurred.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
Or is my withered brain missing something obvious?
No. Even if turnout was identical across all age groups the Tories would still have had a massive lead. There simply aren't that many aged 18-24 which is the only group that Lab had a large lead in. The lead for Lab in 25-49 is quite small compared to the middle aged and elderly bands.
I appreciate that the age bands there were chosen to represent different life-stages e.g. 18-24 is "students and young people" though the reality is the majority of them are young workers and students the minority, 65+ is "retired" but in reality some of them will be working part-time and there will be plenty of retired people in the 50-64 class and so on.
Broad-brush they're still useful categories but the charts can be misleading as eg 18-24 is only a very small sliver of the voting population!
Taking them as proportions of all adults 18+ (I don't know if data is available on UK citizens / eligible voters only) we get
18-24 = 11% 25-49 = 42% 50-64 = 24% 65+ = 23%
I had to do some interpolation but these should be accurate to the nearest percent or so.
A really good rule of thumb is a "rectangular" age distribution that becomes "triangular" once you get past 60 - any 5-year age band of the UK 18+ population represents around 8% of the 18+ population until you start including people aged 60+, at which point you start knocking 1% off, and then you subtract a further 1% for each 5-year band you go up. So for example, by the 80-84 year old band you have subtracted 1% at ages 60, 65, 70, 75 and 80 so in total have knocked off 5% and the age-band contains only 8% - 5% = 3%.
For a bit more accuracy, to account for fluctuations in birth rates etc over time, you need to slightly ramp up any 5-year band aged between mid-40s and mid-50s ramp to 9%. And today's teenagers went through a temporary population dip so when that cohort gets into adulthood their 5-year age-bands will be 7% rather than 8%.
Sort of on topic, it strikes me HMG have determined the EU will fight pretty dirty on the full FTA in their interests so they want to send a message the UK will do the same.
Fire with fire.
So I expect some pretty aggressive negotiating and messaging for the next 7 months until finally both sides walk out of the European Council (or its anteroom) shaking hands.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
We shall see, lets hope you are right. Corbynomics was never a realistic proposition at the GE, but hung parliament and 2nd ref was. Markets have swung back to my view that neither is a good outcome after the initial swing.
Sterling is not an indicator of good or bad.
Im sure youd be saying that if Corbynomics was being implemented and the £ dropped 15%.
If Corbynomics was being implemented there'd be far more than just Sterling to worry about!
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
That data suggests Boris has 3 routes to a GE5 victory:
a) Retain the labour Leave votes that were "lent". b) Gain the Labour Leave votes that went to "others" this time around - principally BXP. Once tribal voters have broken the cycle once, if BJ delivers some gain to the former red wall, he has an opportunity to secure more. c) Regain the Conservative Leave voters who went to Lib Dem.
I think all of these are plausible prospects if the new government works flat out on widening opportunity and infrastructure investment.
BJ has framed the delivery in really simple terms for voters to audit in GE2024. Did he deliver:
Get Brexit Done 20k more police 50k more nurses 40 hospitals (started) Levelled-up school funding Spread opportunity
It's a pledge card without chiseling it on a lump of granite.
Sort of on topic, it strikes me HMG have determined the EU will fight pretty dirty on the full FTA in their interests so they want to send a message the UK will do the same.
Fire with fire.
So I expect some pretty aggressive negotiating and messaging for the next 7 months until finally both sides walk out of the European Council (or its anteroom) shaking hands.
I presume the government won't be employing the services of those responsible for 3 years of negotiations under May.
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
That data suggests Boris has 3 routes to a GE5 victory:
a) Retain the labour Leave votes that were "lent". b) Gain the Labour Leave votes that went to "others" this time around - principally BXP. Once tribal voters have broken the cycle once, if BJ delivers some gain to the former red wall, he has an opportunity to secure more. c) Regain the Conservative Leave voters who went to Lib Dem.
I think all of these are plausible prospects if the new government works flat out on widening opportunity and infrastructure investment.
BJ has framed the delivery in really simple terms for voters to audit in GE2024. Did he deliver:
Get Brexit Done 20k more police 50k more nurses 40 hospitals (started) Levelled-up school funding Spread opportunity
It's a pledge card without chiseling it on a lump of granite.
The danger is he gets some proportion of a) and c), but not a large enough concentration of each.
So the £ has sunk pretty much back to where it was before the Tories won.
I was surprised that the currency markets saw a Johnson Brexit as better than a 2nd ref, it was swings and roundabouts imo, both had their challenges and issues which were fairly reflected in the £ pre election.
That may be swings and roundabouts but any Brexit is better than Corbyn's nationalise anything that moves and tax corporations to the hilt shady economics.
We shall see, lets hope you are right. Corbynomics was never a realistic proposition at the GE, but hung parliament and 2nd ref was. Markets have swung back to my view that neither is a good outcome after the initial swing.
Sterling is not an indicator of good or bad.
Im sure youd be saying that if Corbynomics was being implemented and the £ dropped 15%.
If Corbynomics was being implemented there'd be far more than just Sterling to worry about!
I wonder why you didnt rebut any of the Tory fanboys cheering the £ going up 3% by informing them sterling wasnt an indicator of good or bad? When the Ministry for Propaganda is created you should be hired.
While I understand the SNP's principled stance against the HoL - perhaps a more constructive approach might be to send Peers (eg Salmond, post trial, Robertson etc) to provide a further platform for "Stronger for Scotland" and campaign for abolition - there's some serious political talent relegated to RT.Today.
Ain't gonna happen.
In any case (as reflected on here) constructiveness isn't really on the agenda - from shut up and go away to we'll shit on your fish suppers pretty much represents the gamut of where the BJ party is at currently on Scotland.
Writes the person who wants to piss on our chips...
I believe pissing on someone's chips is a fairly well known metaphor even outwith the purlieus of Scotland. However if you're telling me that shitting on people's fish suppers is common usage in the circles you move in I'm happy to accept that.
The Tories and Labour now more the parties of average earners, the LDs the party of the rich and the Brexit Party and SNP the parties of the poor
Voting LD is the ultimate virtue signal.
You can show how “nice” you are, but they aren’t threatening in the way Labour are. And, if you earn a very high income, it doesn’t really matter if they win anyway.
You can vote whichever way you want and tell people differently so voting for virtue signalling sounds bizarre.
I'm finding it hard to reconcile the above data, where Labour lost in all income brackets, with the below data, which shows they won easily in all age groups up to 50
Or is my withered brain missing something obvious?
No. Even if turnout was identical across all age groups the Tories would still have had a massive lead. There simply aren't that many aged 18-24 which is the only group that Lab had a large lead in. The lead for Lab in 25-49 is quite small compared to the middle aged and elderly bands.
Using my age band % data with Philip's assumption of constant turnout (so we can see what effect age-differential turn-out has) I get the Tory lead over Labour would have been:
18-24 = 11% of voters on 34 pt Lab lead, worth 3.7 pts to Lab 25-49 = 42% of voters on 9 pt Lab lead, worth 3.8 pts to Lab 50-64 = 24% of voters on 24 pt Con lead, worth 5.8 pts to Con 65+ = 23% of voters on 47 pt Con lead, worth 10.8 pts to Con
That nets out to 9 points lead to Con, so on the YouGov figures that suggests there's about a 3 points difference which could be differential turnout.
While I understand the SNP's principled stance against the HoL - perhaps a more constructive approach might be to send Peers (eg Salmond, post trial, Robertson etc) to provide a further platform for "Stronger for Scotland" and campaign for abolition - there's some serious political talent relegated to RT.Today.
Ain't gonna happen.
In any case (as reflected on here) constructiveness isn't really on the agenda - from shut up and go away to we'll shit on your fish suppers pretty much represents the gamut of where the BJ party is at currently on Scotland.
Writes the person who wants to piss on our chips...
I believe pissing on someone's chips is a fairly well known metaphor even outwith the purlieus of Scotland. However if you're telling me that shitting on people's fish suppers is common usage in the circles you move in I'm happy to accept that.
Was always 'salt 'n' soss' in the old days. Now it's shit and piss.
The devastating figures for Labour there are while the LDs were able to win 22% of 2017 Tory Remainers they barely won any while losing 33% of 2017 Labour Leave voters to the Tories.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
Yup. Tory Remainers are, I think I read, the most economically right wing part of the electorate, so we're never going to swing behind Corbyn in significant numbers.
And without Tory Remainers Labour can never win a majority, many of those Tory Remainers will have voted for Blair
Some of them. They're not generally centrists in an economic sense though, as I noted above. They are actually in many cases previously nailed on Tories who just think that Brexit is crazy. I actually know some of these people - it's interesting that Brexit seems to have revealed a more meaningful divide in political views, since basically all my Tory friends have abandoned the party over Brexit.
The Long Bailey moves look to be correlated to the Rayner price which has moved in. Some speculation she might go for it herself ? Starmer has moved in with that relatively favourable Labour list poll I think.
Comments
In NuL, @Tissue_Price increased the Tory vote by 2,391 or 11.3% of the 2017 vote.
Ian Levy in Blyth Valley increased the Tory vote by 1,585 or 10% of the 2017 number.
In Bassetlaw it went up by 5,463 or 24.2%
I could go on.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/16/university-launches-investigation-lecturer-tweets-tory-voters/
How we all giggled at HYUFD's tanks in Glasgow/Gibraltar comments. Not so much now.
Prof Parkinson points out the dangers of not having such a person, and the dangers of not keeping them informed.
https://twitter.com/BBCBusiness/status/1206901616835735552?s=20
Bozo's deal 49.2%
Second referendum: 49.4%
"ENGLAND REJECTS TORY BREXIT!!!"
So let’s see what happens. I think it will be a very interesting time in politics.
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1206854106977095681
EG one sensible thing the government has done is Help to Buy which identified the challenge for too many to get on the housing ladder was the deposit and dealt with that. It also identified that housebuilding wasn't happening at a quick enough rate and gave an encouragement to build more homes.
Thanks to Help to Buy (which isn't costing the government money) we have record levels of house building and home ownership rates are increasing again for the first time in decades.
Smart politics. Not just throwing money at problems.
https://twitter.com/hiltonholloway/status/1206607236824481797?s=20
https://twitter.com/nickfthilton/status/1206883862535704576?s=20
Ref2: 37.0%
Revoke: 12.4%
No Deal: 2.0%
Big win for the Deal, no?
Blyth valley others up from 6.8% to 16.4%
Bassetlaw others up from 4.1% to 17.2%
N-U-L others up from 3.8% to 11.7%
A lot of work to be done to stop Labour loan repayments in these seats.
https://twitter.com/nickfthilton/status/1205943257773092864
On the other hand, it is hardly 'The People's Brexit'....
Leonard and his fellow Corbynistas are said to have a romantic, sentimental view of working class voters that is increasingly out of date.
The second barrier is the leader himself.
Leonard’s public utterances are peppered with references to Keir Hardie and Mary Barbour, historical figures of importance to the Labour movement, but strangers to anyone outside the party bubble.
Leonard gives the impression of being in love with the past, ignorant of the present and bewildered by the future. The hallmark of his undistinguished leadership is paralysing nostalgia.
Holyrood 2021 is about survival for Scottish Labour, not growth, with some senior figures believing they could return fewer than 15 MSPs. A new position on indyref2 is unlikely to arrest the decline.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-labours-problems-run-deeper-21112705?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
One could extend to 4 times its been voted for by including 2015 (a majority for holding the referendum) and 2016 (an overwhelming majority of MPs elected on a 'Brexit must be done' platform in both Labour and Tories though that Parliament failed to do it).
Including this tweet - https://twitter.com/XanderYarney/status/1201812290284195842
Which Mr Yarney soon followed up with this one https://twitter.com/XanderYarney/status/1206904382165540865?s=20
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50820280#
It's not about stopping Brexit - that is long gone. And I acknowledged several times (before the election) that Parliament ought to have approved the WA (May's and Johnson's).
I'm merely pointing out that whatever trade agreement Johnson ends up with is unlikely to have the unalloyed appreciation or even backing of a majority of the electorate.
They clearly need a more centrist leader
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50726500
And remember, in the old days, if Labour put up a poster saying Boris is wrong then the Conservatives would see it and put up their own poster saying No, it's Corbyn who is wrong.
Nowadays, Labour can say whatever it likes to 238 shelf-stackers in Birmingham under the age of 40 who holidayed in Magaluf and the Conservatives will not even know they've said it. That is what makes micro-targeted social media campaigning so insidious. The main parties sent thousands of *different* adverts to different groups, automatically generated and tailored to the recipients. We are not in Kansas anymore.
(apols if already posted, haven't had time to look through the thread).
https://twitter.com/leonardocarella/status/1206912571640602624
And look at vacancies, Labour market leading indicator and down 7% on a year ago, worst since 2009. Unemployment likely to be going up just as Brexit happens.
If you're satisfied that the agreement is OK then you can worry about other issues.
I backed Balls EdM and Chuka at long odds
In any case (as reflected on here) constructiveness isn't really on the agenda - from shut up and go away to we'll shit on your fish suppers pretty much represents the gamut of where the BJ party is at currently on Scotland.
Corbyn better than no-deal Brexit, say investment banks as anti-capitalist Labour wins unlikely new City fans
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/09/03/corbyn-better-no-deal-brexit-say-investment-banks-anti-capitalist/
You can show how “nice” you are, but they aren’t threatening in the way Labour are. And, if you earn a very high income, it doesn’t really matter if they win anyway.
It's the politics Britain deserves.
I suspect even the authors of that absurd claim would have been horrified at the idea of a Corbyn victory last week if it had occurred.
Broad-brush they're still useful categories but the charts can be misleading as eg 18-24 is only a very small sliver of the voting population!
Taking them as proportions of all adults 18+ (I don't know if data is available on UK citizens / eligible voters only) we get
18-24 = 11%
25-49 = 42%
50-64 = 24%
65+ = 23%
I had to do some interpolation but these should be accurate to the nearest percent or so.
A really good rule of thumb is a "rectangular" age distribution that becomes "triangular" once you get past 60 - any 5-year age band of the UK 18+ population represents around 8% of the 18+ population until you start including people aged 60+, at which point you start knocking 1% off, and then you subtract a further 1% for each 5-year band you go up. So for example, by the 80-84 year old band you have subtracted 1% at ages 60, 65, 70, 75 and 80 so in total have knocked off 5% and the age-band contains only 8% - 5% = 3%.
For a bit more accuracy, to account for fluctuations in birth rates etc over time, you need to slightly ramp up any 5-year band aged between mid-40s and mid-50s ramp to 9%. And today's teenagers went through a temporary population dip so when that cohort gets into adulthood their 5-year age-bands will be 7% rather than 8%.
Data source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/populationestimatesforukenglandandwalesscotlandandnorthernireland
Fire with fire.
So I expect some pretty aggressive negotiating and messaging for the next 7 months until finally both sides walk out of the European Council (or its anteroom) shaking hands.
a) Retain the labour Leave votes that were "lent".
b) Gain the Labour Leave votes that went to "others" this time around - principally BXP. Once tribal voters have broken the cycle once, if BJ delivers some gain to the former red wall, he has an opportunity to secure more.
c) Regain the Conservative Leave voters who went to Lib Dem.
I think all of these are plausible prospects if the new government works flat out on widening opportunity and infrastructure investment.
BJ has framed the delivery in really simple terms for voters to audit in GE2024. Did he deliver:
Get Brexit Done
20k more police
50k more nurses
40 hospitals (started)
Levelled-up school funding
Spread opportunity
It's a pledge card without chiseling it on a lump of granite.
18-24 = 11% of voters on 34 pt Lab lead, worth 3.7 pts to Lab
25-49 = 42% of voters on 9 pt Lab lead, worth 3.8 pts to Lab
50-64 = 24% of voters on 24 pt Con lead, worth 5.8 pts to Con
65+ = 23% of voters on 47 pt Con lead, worth 10.8 pts to Con
That nets out to 9 points lead to Con, so on the YouGov figures that suggests there's about a 3 points difference which could be differential turnout.
She must have to eat and drink everything through a straw.
Starmer has moved in with that relatively favourable Labour list poll I think.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1206883424864276480?s=20