Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
With respect Alistair, I think you`ve been mis-judging a few things lately. Boris is popular - at least for a politician - I`m certain of this.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
It depends on what theory of voting you believe in. If you believe most people vote for the least worst candidate anyone but Corbyn could give Boris a run for his money.
Boris's and the Tory's luck / misfortune since 2015 has been the leadership of the other parties - and I say misfortune as it was Corbyn doing nothing which probably won Boris the referendum and cost Cameron and Osbourne their jobs.
"The old leaders were so much better than the current rubbish" is a neverending mantra
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
Also heard Thought For The Day by Dr Guli Francis-Dehqani. I'm very disappointed to discover that she's a doctor of philosophy, and not men's undercarriages.
She started with men`s danglers, and went up in the world from there?
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
With respect Alistair, I think you`ve been mis-judging a few things lately. Boris is popular - at least for a politician - I`m certain of this.
Boris was unpopular, but decisively more popular than Jeremy.
Even if he does a good job over the next few years (like, say, Thatcher 83-87 or Blair 97-01) his ratings are likely to drift down over the next few years. Simply because every decision he takes will go against the wishes of someone in his current coalition.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
He is just a comfort blanket for people who want 2015 back. (Possibly) Privately educated, Oxford University grad who went on to be a human rights lawyer then campaigned to get Brexit overturned. The reasons for him being leader seem better suited to fighting the election just gone (he might appeal to wavering Tories who might vote Lib Dem) than one in five years time
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Morning all. Gosh, some value added from Guido. One does not get to say that too often. I'm pleased that Long Bailey is going for it. She is a far more credible standard bearer for the continuation of the One Nation Socialism project than Ian Lavery would have been. I could not in a Month of Sundays have voted for Lavery as leader. I am unlikely to vote for Long Bailey either but at least it's a possibility.
It's irritating to need his cesspit of a site. How difficult would it be for the BBC or guardian to set up this spreadsheet and hire an intern to check Mps twitter twice a day?
Theres a lot of things where investing in someone good with charts and graphs or just good old data trawling would be pretty easy but a lot of the time outlets seem to decide that since a lot of political hobbyists will do it anyway, just wait for that.
Media outlets aren’t going to hire Maths graduates, when they cost three times as much as English graduates. I think the Telegraph and the Times might have one statistician each on staff, but that’s about it. BBC probably have a few, but their output will be discarded if the data doesn’t match the ‘narrative’.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
It depends on what theory of voting you believe in. If you believe most people vote for the least worst candidate anyone but Corbyn could give Boris a run for his money.
Boris's and the Tory's luck / misfortune since 2015 has been the leadership of the other parties - and I say misfortune as it was Corbyn doing nothing which probably won Boris the referendum and cost Cameron and Osbourne their jobs.
"The old leaders were so much better than the current rubbish" is a neverending mantra
That's not what I'm saying - I don't care about Cameron and co. What I'm saying is that Brexit and everything connected to it could plausible be pinned on the election of Corbyn as Leader and his complete disinterest in campaigning on the referendum.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
The Australian government has turned down the UK’s offer of a post-Brexit trade agreement that included visa-free work and travel between the two countries.
Trade minister Simon Birmingham said full free movement would not be accepted because it could cause an exodus of highly trained workers to the UK and an influx of unskilled British workers to Sydney and Melbourne. Last year, ministers in New Zealand voiced similar fears of a brain drain.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
If Labour elect Bailey, effectively McDonnell will continue to run the show, so that is the last horse they should pick. That she will have Momentum and the big Unions in her camp will make her hard to beat. My money is on Bailey winning this but Labour should choose Nandy. She has some potential to develop.
The Australian government has turned down the UK’s offer of a post-Brexit trade agreement that included visa-free work and travel between the two countries.
Trade minister Simon Birmingham said full free movement would not be accepted because it could cause an exodus of highly trained workers to the UK and an influx of unskilled British workers to Sydney and Melbourne. Last year, ministers in New Zealand voiced similar fears of a brain drain.
Everyone else has seen how FoM works in the EU and rejects it unreservedly.
Immigration policy everywhere is going in future to be based on skills and earning potential, no-one will accept immigrants that depress local wages at the bottom of the scale, nor people who could become a burden on the host state.
The Australian government has turned down the UK’s offer of a post-Brexit trade agreement that included visa-free work and travel between the two countries.
Trade minister Simon Birmingham said full free movement would not be accepted because it could cause an exodus of highly trained workers to the UK and an influx of unskilled British workers to Sydney and Melbourne. Last year, ministers in New Zealand voiced similar fears of a brain drain.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best. He had thousands of youngsters singing his name at Glastonbury, a remarkable thing for a politician, and achieved Labour's 2nd best amount of votes ever. I am not defending him from the pov of a supporter. I just think it is complacent to assume that those enthused by Corbyn, and they do exist, 2017 did happen, are necessarily Labour voters in 2024 with a centrist in charge
And how nice to see budgets taking their normal place back in the spring rather than just before Christmas as they were under miser Hammond.
There goes the chance of making any big accounting or tax changes in a hurry though.
Previously when budgets were in the Spring everything was paper based so you could update things immediately as manual instructions were sent out. Nowadays everything is computerised and software has lead times of at least months if not years.
That doesn't mean the Chancellor cannot make fundamental changes - it does mean he can't make fundamental changes that kick off 3 weeks later.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
I thought that too, however in the blue collar circles I mix with here in South Wales he is seen as hugely likeable and competent. It surprises me as traditionally he would have been viewed as dislikeable for being both English and a toff. He transcends class and national identity, I would say his popularity has improved markedly since the election as well. There is no accounting for taste.
Much less popular with women, though, I understand. Particularly older women. As far as men are concerned he's seen, I suspect as a 'character'. However, such a reputation doesn't always last.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
Clement Attlee - Oxford, Barrister Harold Wilson - Oxford, Don Tony Blair - Oxford, Pupil Barrister
It really is irrelevant if they can communicate effectively. Wilson smoked cigars and enjoyed a brandy, in private, but it as pipes and pints in public.
The question I have about Starmer is as he has so far not displayed the leadership qualities of a Blair, does he have the managerial qualities of an Attlee? - And if he does, is there a similar pool of talent for him to draw upon?
However, my initial gut reaction when I heard he'd topped that members poll was "Oh, they want to win". RLB can be a "true socialist" in opposition for as long as she likes - but she's not getting anywhere near government.
If Labour elect Bailey, effectively McDonnell will continue to run the show, so that is the last horse they should pick. That she will have Momentum and the big Unions in her camp will make her hard to beat. My money is on Bailey winning this but Labour should choose Nandy. She has some potential to develop.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
*Hard-hat Man waves*
WE ❤ BORIS
Marquee_Mark: but what do you make of Stuart`s post below (9:10). The polling looks off to me.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
Clement Attlee - Oxford, Barrister Harold Wilson - Oxford, Don Tony Blair - Oxford, Pupil Barrister
It really is irrelevant if they can communicate effectively. Wilson smoked cigars and enjoyed a brandy, in private, but it as pipes and pints in public.
The question I have about Starmer is as he has so far not displayed the leadership qualities of a Blair, does he have the managerial qualities of an Attlee? - And if he does, is there a similar pool of talent for him to draw upon?
However, my initial gut reaction when I heard he'd topped that members poll was "Oh, they want to win". RLB can be a "true socialist" in opposition for as long as she likes - but she's not getting anywhere near government.
I tried to make it quite clear with the line
"I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's"
that I am not saying people wont vote for him because of his background, but that it is as far removed from 21st Century working class lifestyle as Boris Johnson's and David Cameron's. So is passing the 11 plus and going to Grammar School, it is a choice most working class kids don't have.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
I prefer to look at actual votes, and Labour never get more than what Corbyn got. There are excuses after every election as to why another leader will do better but, unless its Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn, they don't.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
Jeremy Corbyn just led Labour to its most crushing defeat in our lifetimes. Racking up a good vote count did him no good whatsoever because a lot more people voted in a way to keep him out of power. This isn't flowery language. That is, as you would say, a raw fact.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best.
Well it wasn't. He took the Labour seat count below that of Michael Foot's.
I would guess that Johnson’s approval and popularity ratings have risen significantly since the election.
And set to rise further when we leave the EU.
31/1 is going to be big. Worth coming down to London to witness it. I assume crowds from both sides will be vocal round parliament.
I’m trying to find a way to be there - and I live 3,500 miles away!
I`ve just booked a hotel and the train. It will be a hoot just to lurk in the background somewhere.
If you could spend a couple of days in the Reigate public library to check whether existing pupils were charged fees when Starmer's school went private, that would be handy too, especially if Boris legislates against public schoolboys becoming prime minister.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
With respect Alistair, I think you`ve been mis-judging a few things lately. Boris is popular - at least for a politician - I`m certain of this.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
With respect Alistair, I think you`ve been mis-judging a few things lately. Boris is popular - at least for a politician - I`m certain of this.
Not in Scotland.
Optimism isn’t a good trait for politicians north of the border it seems.
Starmer Obama really seems to have caught the collective imagination. Everyone is fascinated by his rags-to-riches story, his high principles and galactic legal career, his selfless and unwavering commitment to public service. (Boris, with his problematic love affairs and interesting allocations of taxpayers' money, is starting to look rather tacky in comparison.) This could be the Age of Keir.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
Clement Attlee - Oxford, Barrister Harold Wilson - Oxford, Don Tony Blair - Oxford, Pupil Barrister
It really is irrelevant if they can communicate effectively. Wilson smoked cigars and enjoyed a brandy, in private, but it as pipes and pints in public.
The question I have about Starmer is as he has so far not displayed the leadership qualities of a Blair, does he have the managerial qualities of an Attlee? - And if he does, is there a similar pool of talent for him to draw upon?
However, my initial gut reaction when I heard he'd topped that members poll was "Oh, they want to win". RLB can be a "true socialist" in opposition for as long as she likes - but she's not getting anywhere near government.
That members poll is great. Led to some some great odds from the bookies. Hard to see how Bailey can be beaten she is starting the game 2-0 up. If she is going to be beaten the opponent is going to have to play very hard and effective. Can't see Starmer calling out McDonnell myself, Nandy might we will see.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
Lib Dems 33-1 most seats is a joke, should be 5,000-1.
Any other would allow for the emergence of a British 'en marche', though the fortunes of TIG don't suggest that that's particularly likely.
The electoral system in Britain doesn not favour centrists like in France.
In France you can become President with less than 20% as long as you are 2nd and the most centrist candidate, that's why it's always a very unhappy country because it rarely has a President that has public approval.
Scotland rarely has a Prime Minister with public approval.
I think I’m right in saying that seven PMs since WWII had a purality of the votes in Scotland. I’m not sure I would describe that as “rarely”.
Scotland rarely gets the governments it votes for. Scots have voted for Labour or the SNP at every Westminster election since 1955, but by the time of the 2024 election will have had Conservative governments they didn’t want for 47 of the previous 69 years.
England always decides what government everyone else gets. Most of the time (roughly seven years out of ten since the Second World War) that’s been a government Scotland has rejected.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
Clement Attlee - Oxford, Barrister Harold Wilson - Oxford, Don Tony Blair - Oxford, Pupil Barrister
It really is irrelevant if they can communicate effectively. Wilson smoked cigars and enjoyed a brandy, in private, but it as pipes and pints in public.
The question I have about Starmer is as he has so far not displayed the leadership qualities of a Blair, does he have the managerial qualities of an Attlee? - And if he does, is there a similar pool of talent for him to draw upon?
However, my initial gut reaction when I heard he'd topped that members poll was "Oh, they want to win". RLB can be a "true socialist" in opposition for as long as she likes - but she's not getting anywhere near government.
I tried to make it quite clear with the line
"I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's"
that I am not saying people wont vote for him because of his background, but that it is as far removed from 21st Century working class lifestyle as Boris Johnson's and David Cameron's. So is passing the 11 plus and going to Grammar School, it is a choice most working class kids don't have.
Maybe he will bring them back?
You can be of a totally different background to a demographic but still gain support from them.
But to do so you have to show empathy towards them or at least be able to fake it convincingly.
Whether Keir 'Continuity Miliband' Starmer can do that I don't know.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
It`s not. The 2015 election process took 4 months. They have shortened it this time.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
No. It _became_ fee paying while he was there. We have no idea if pupils who were there when this happened all of a sudden had to pay fees. My guess? Nope.
Big difference. We get you have a thing about his supposed non working class origins because you don't like the fact that they are actually working class by any and every definition of the words. Just realise that and move on.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
It`s not. The 2015 election process took 4 months. They have shortened it this time.
Huge amounts of complacency among Conservatives on here. They're under the delusion that Boris Johnson is popular. He was re-elected as a pretty unpopular Prime Minister (installed largely by the epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn). Unless he turns that around, his opponent is only going to need to be distinctly average to cause him major problems.
Is Corbyn's unpopularity a fact? He got millions more votes in General Election's than other, more moderate Labour leaders. I think it is complacent to assume they would have done better
There was rather a lot of polling on it, and it wasn't the sort of marginal matter where the polls were likely to be relevantly adrift.
You're assuming that people cast votes for a party rather than against one.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best.
Well it wasn't. He took the Labour seat count below that of Michael Foot's.
Yes it was, because we are talking about votes. Don't be disingenuous, it's not all about winning little arguments
Really, the 2019 GE was just the 2015 one with UKIP votes going to the Tories because Labour had the same policy; 2015 No Referendum to Remain, 2019 another referendum to Remain.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
I think the Conservatives have demonstrated that coronations are a bad idea.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best.
Well it wasn't. He took the Labour seat count below that of Michael Foot's.
Yes it was, because we are talking about votes. Don't be disingenuous, it's not all about winning little arguments
Really, the 2019 GE was just the 2015 one with UKIP votes going to the Tories because Labour had the same policy; 2015 No Referendum to Remain, 2019 another referendum to Remain. The lead
But that's exactly my point. The present system does not differentiate between votes cast for someone and votes cast against someone else. You're treating Labour votes as votes for Jeremy Corbyn when there is plenty of evidence that Boris Johnson was loathed by a lot of people. And votes cast for the Conservatives as votes cast for Boris Johnson, when there is plenty of evidence that Jeremy Corbyn was loathed by even more people.
Counting votes in the current system is a pointless metric if all it shows is that you've comprehensively lost a beauty contest with the Hunchback of Notre Dame.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
RLB is the Corbyn/McDonnell annointed one. It starts and ends there.
I admit that I seem to have misjudged the labour membership though. I thought that the above would be sufficient for her to be a sound bet for next leader (and backed her ages ago at 28/1. She is my best outcome in this race (from a betting perspective). However, it`s now becoming clear (I think) that the membership leans much more to the soft-left than I thought, so have a feeling that I`m about to lose this bet.
I`m not laying her yet though because I think her odds may shorten a bit when the unions come out for her.
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
No. It _became_ fee paying while he was there. We have no idea if pupils who were there when this happened all of a sudden had to pay fees. My guess? Nope.
Big difference. We get you have a thing about his supposed non working class origins because you don't like the fact that they are actually working class by any and every definition of the words. Just realise that and move on.
Actually if that is what you think then you don't get it, & I wouldn't use "we" to suggest everyone else is with you unless you want to appear conceited.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best.
Well it wasn't. He took the Labour seat count below that of Michael Foot's.
Yes it was, because we are talking about votes. Don't be disingenuous, it's not all about winning little arguments
Really, the 2019 GE was just the 2015 one with UKIP votes going to the Tories because Labour had the same policy; 2015 No Referendum to Remain, 2019 another referendum to Remain. The lead
But that's exactly my point. The present system does not differentiate between votes cast for someone and votes cast against someone else. You're treating Labour votes as votes for Jeremy Corbyn when there is plenty of evidence that Boris Johnson was loathed by a lot of people. And votes cast for the Conservatives as votes cast for Boris Johnson, when there is plenty of evidence that Jeremy Corbyn was loathed by even more people.
Counting votes in the current system is a pointless metric if all it shows is that you've comprehensively lost a beauty contest with the Hunchback of Notre Dame.
PM Cameron was loathed by a lot of people too, so was Margaret Thatcher, but the LoTos didn't get the amount of votes that Corbyn did.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Well it was fee paying while he was there, but yes impressive enough credentials. For all that, my point is that I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's.
No. It _became_ fee paying while he was there. We have no idea if pupils who were there when this happened all of a sudden had to pay fees. My guess? Nope.
Big difference. We get you have a thing about his supposed non working class origins because you don't like the fact that they are actually working class by any and every definition of the words. Just realise that and move on.
Actually if that is what you think then you don't get it, & I wouldn't use "we" to suggest everyone else is with you unless you want to appear conceited.
Perfectly obvious you have a **** on your shoulder about it and as for the "we" there was another poster upthread (pause: @Wulfrun_Phil) who said exactly the same thing to you. So "we" is perfectly justified.
But as with all things on PB, people can read our exchanges and come to their own conclusions.
I simply don’t understand Long-Bailey’s attraction. She seems to be the Left’s version of a Yvette Cooper - over-hyped but with nothing to say and no substance to her. I can see something in the others but RL-B? Nah.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
I think the Conservatives have demonstrated that coronations are a bad idea.
I am not assuming anything, I am just looking at the raw facts.There is a tendency on PB to ignore those in favour of flowery arguments that disguise the truth in a logically consistent but incorrect fashion.
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
I'd suggest the pertinent raw fact, as I would say, was his opponent honouring the referendum result, whilst he had his hands tied by people who wouldn't/couldn't accept they lost
That's supposition (and flowery argument). The epic unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn is something that you really ought to take into account.
His worst election result was better than Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband's best.
Well it wasn't. He took the Labour seat count below that of Michael Foot's.
Yes it was, because we are talking about votes. Don't be disingenuous, it's not all about winning little arguments
Really, the 2019 GE was just the 2015 one with UKIP votes going to the Tories because Labour had the same policy; 2015 No Referendum to Remain, 2019 another referendum to Remain. The lead
But that's exactly my point. The present system does not differentiate between votes cast for someone and votes cast against someone else. You're treating Labour votes as votes for Jeremy Corbyn when there is plenty of evidence that Boris Johnson was loathed by a lot of people. And votes cast for the Conservatives as votes cast for Boris Johnson, when there is plenty of evidence that Jeremy Corbyn was loathed by even more people.
Counting votes in the current system is a pointless metric if all it shows is that you've comprehensively lost a beauty contest with the Hunchback of Notre Dame.
PM Cameron was loathed by a lot of people too, so was Margaret Thatcher, but the LoTos didn't get the amount of votes that Corbyn did.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
And I - who voted Remain - truly do get it. However, most Remainers have not grasped the extent of the disapproval in the country over MPs monkeying around, trying to dishonour the referendum result (despite saying they would honour it).
I think that the referendum was a monumental mistake (you`ll disagree) , but once granted you cannot go from representative democracy to direct democracy and then back to representative democracy.
Talking of student debt, according to the BBC, if Jackson Carlaw wins the SCon leadership election he is going to ditch their long-standing opposition to free university tuition. That’ll make all Ruth Davidson’s wind-baggery on the topic look rather daft.
Lib Dems 33-1 most seats is a joke, should be 5,000-1.
Any other would allow for the emergence of a British 'en marche', though the fortunes of TIG don't suggest that that's particularly likely.
The electoral system in Britain doesn not favour centrists like in France.
In France you can become President with less than 20% as long as you are 2nd and the most centrist candidate, that's why it's always a very unhappy country because it rarely has a President that has public approval.
Scotland rarely has a Prime Minister with public approval.
I think I’m right in saying that seven PMs since WWII had a purality of the votes in Scotland. I’m not sure I would describe that as “rarely”.
Scotland rarely gets the governments it votes for. Scots have voted for Labour or the SNP at every Westminster election since 1955, but by the time of the 2024 election will have had Conservative governments they didn’t want for 47 of the previous 69 years.
England always decides what government everyone else gets. Most of the time (roughly seven years out of ten since the Second World War) that’s been a government Scotland has rejected.
Anyone going to judge me for pointing out the irony that the last Conservative government was only able to be formed because of the 12 extra MPs it won in Scotland?
Clever-dick Uber remainer scolding Starmer vs continuity Corbyn thicko Beccy from accounts.
This really is a clash for the ages.
Tis why they need Nandy.....
Yep, I agree, Marquee-Mark.
Starmer will be pummelled for years about his role in the Benn "surrender" Act. Remainer-in chief. A gift for the Tories. Do you agree?
Born in 1962 in Southwark at a time when Southwark really was a place to avoid. Father worked in a factory, mother a nurse. Passed 11+ to enter a (then) non-fee paying grammar school. An undergraduate at Leeds, graduating with 1st class honours, at a time before degree grade inflation. That achievement and not the standard undergraduate route was his way in to Oxford as a postgraduate. The causes he fought as a barrister were a testament to his beliefs and origins. Named QC of the Year in 2007 prior to being made DPP in 2008. Chose a career in politics on retirement as DPP in 2013 over far more lucrative options that must have been available.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background. .
.
No. It _became_ fee paying while he was there. We have no idea if pupils who were there when this happened all of a sudden had to pay fees. My guess? Nope.
Big difference. We get you have a thing about his supposed non working class origins because you don't like the fact that they are actually working class by any and every definition of the words. Just realise that and move on.
Actually if that is what you think then you don't get it, & I wouldn't use "we" to suggest everyone else is with you unless you want to appear conceited.
Perfectly obvious you have a **** on your shoulder about it and as for the "we" there was another poster upthread (pause: @Wulfrun_Phil) who said exactly the same thing to you. So "we" is perfectly justified.
But as with all things on PB, people can read our exchanges and come to their own conclusions.
I am sure they can. There is nothing for me to have a chip (assuming the asterisks meant that?) on my shoulder about at all by the way. It's possible I could vote for Starmer in 2024, I am just airing my views as to how I see the perceptions.
My point is that working class people see Keir Starmer as no more relatable and "one of us" than Boris Johnson despite their different upbringings. Labour inclined voters desperately tried to make Ed Miliband a comprehensive schoolboy to David Camerons toff, and that didn't work either.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
Some Dutch Uni's..... notably, IIRC Maastricht ...... do some at least of their teaching in English. But of course attending those may well be more difficult in the near future.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
"if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either." Not true. You are still liable - you have to let Student Debt Co that you are moving abroad and you are liable to pay.
Apropos of nothing, I came across the most bizarre accent yesterday. I wanted to use a local undertaker, rather than the Co-op. The main man has the broadest Derbyshire accent you could ever wish to hear. Everything is "mi duck".
His assistant is from Mississippi, but she has been in Derbyshire for many years. Her southern drawl combined with the picked up "mi duck" is just hilarious!
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
"if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either." Not true. You are still liable - you have to let Student Debt Co that you are moving abroad and you are liable to pay.
My understanding..... which may well be wrong ....... is that if you don't tell and don't pay, or even if you do tell, there's SFA the SDC can, or do, do.
Talking of student debt, according to the BBC, if Jackson Carlaw wins the SCon leadership election he is going to ditch their long-standing opposition to free university tuition. That’ll make all Ruth Davidson’s wind-baggery on the topic look rather daft.
Apropos of nothing, I came across the most bizarre accent yesterday. I wanted to use a local undertaker, rather than the Co-op. The main man has the broadest Derbyshire accent you could ever wish to hear. Everything is "mi duck".
His assistant is from Mississippi, but she has been in Derbyshire for many years. Her southern drawl combined with the picked up "mi duck" is just hilarious!
Everything going smoothly, I trust. It's a time when one really doesn't want hassle.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
You do pay abroad. At least you are supposed to. My friend who works at CERN just had to pay a big lump sum when they cottoned on.
I’m sure that one is supposed to declare their annual income, but anecdata from somewhere with no personal income tax nor official version of a P60 suggests that’s it’s very uncommon indeed!
Meanwhile the 30 year clock ticks and the 9% is fixed, so after a decade living broad someone returns with a big house deposit and accepts the ‘tax’ on earnings.
Mr. Mark, I have vague memories of going to primary school with a girl whose accent with a mixture of Liverpudlian and Geordie (and possibly something else). It was distinctive.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
"if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either." Not true. You are still liable - you have to let Student Debt Co that you are moving abroad and you are liable to pay.
My understanding..... which may well be wrong ....... is that if you don't tell and don't pay, or even if you do tell, there's SFA the SDC can, or do, do.
You`d be picked out at customs if you tried to re-enter UK. Rubber gloves and everything.
PM Cameron was loathed by a lot of people too, so was Margaret Thatcher, but the LoTos didn't get the amount of votes that Corbyn did.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
There is - @Stuartinromford has already linked to it - clear evidence that Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron had markedly better approval ratings than Boris Johnson at the time of the election. Boris Johnson was historically unpopular for the better-liked of the leaders of the two main parties. You don't see it because you like him.
On the eve of the election, polls predicting Boris Johnson would win the election were also finding that a fresh referendum would result in a clear Remain win. The public remains unconvinced by Brexit.
The Conservatives are going to draw all the wrong lessons from the last election, that much is now clear.
PM Cameron was loathed by a lot of people too, so was Margaret Thatcher, but the LoTos didn't get the amount of votes that Corbyn did.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
There is - @Stuartinromford has already linked to it - clear evidence that Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron had markedly better approval ratings than Boris Johnson at the time of the election. Boris Johnson was historically unpopular for the better-liked of the leaders of the two main parties. You don't see it because you like him.
On the eve of the election, polls predicting Boris Johnson would win the election were also finding that a fresh referendum would result in a clear Remain win. The public remains unconvinced by Brexit.
The Conservatives are going to draw all the wrong lessons from the last election, that much is now clear.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
Nope a graduate tax would be continually paid by high achievers and it's not.
It is! Earn over £25k and you pay enhanced income tax rates (9% enhancement). (Though the graduate tax ends after 30 years and on death if sooner.)
It's not - once you've paid what you owe that's the end of your payments. Were it a tax it would be 9% a year for 30 years or death.
Well - in theory yes - but for you to have actually repaid it you would need to be earning a very high salary indeed - see Moneysavingexpert calculator. If you earn £250k pa + you may repay - but if this happens you will have been disadvantaged over lower paid graduates who will after 30 years be relieved and therefore will have paid less.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
Because the ONS is dropping £10bn+ of bad student debt on the government borrowing every year.
And because inter-generational inequality is a bad thing for the country and damaging to the Conservative party's future prospects.
So 50% of students going to university is an expensive way of hiding youth unemployment/
Yep thought as much.
Blame Blair and Cameron for that.
We'd be better off reducing the number of crap universities and funding more technical education and training.
We would be better off actually road mapping and directing people to the training that is available online for free (or minimal cost - Udemy courses are usually £10 or so if you find a voucher).
The issue is that companies expect qualifications and use it as the initial recruitment filter. Which is why a lot of jobs that were previously a level courses require a degree and more clueful firms now offer degree apprenticeships.
Btw given the chose between the 2 go for a degree apprenticeship everytime - you will be years ahead of your contemporaries and without the debt.
Apropos of nothing, I came across the most bizarre accent yesterday. I wanted to use a local undertaker, rather than the Co-op. The main man has the broadest Derbyshire accent you could ever wish to hear. Everything is "mi duck".
His assistant is from Mississippi, but she has been in Derbyshire for many years. Her southern drawl combined with the picked up "mi duck" is just hilarious!
Everything going smoothly, I trust. It's a time when one really doesn't want hassle.
Thank you sir, going as well as can be hoped. Death is an area of life I've never had to get involved in before. As someone else warned, it's just the amount of admin, made all the more so because of the very peculiar state of affairs my mother left behind. That's going to take an age to resolve.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
"if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either." Not true. You are still liable - you have to let Student Debt Co that you are moving abroad and you are liable to pay.
My understanding..... which may well be wrong ....... is that if you don't tell and don't pay, or even if you do tell, there's SFA the SDC can, or do, do.
You`d be picked out at customs if you tried to re-enter UK. Rubber gloves and everything.
Can they do that for a civil debt? People of whom I am aware seem to go and from, for example, Spain without let or hindrance.
PM Cameron was loathed by a lot of people too, so was Margaret Thatcher, but the LoTos didn't get the amount of votes that Corbyn did.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
There is - @Stuartinromford has already linked to it - clear evidence that Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron had markedly better approval ratings than Boris Johnson at the time of the election. Boris Johnson was historically unpopular for the better-liked of the leaders of the two main parties. You don't see it because you like him.
On the eve of the election, polls predicting Boris Johnson would win the election were also finding that a fresh referendum would result in a clear Remain win. The public remains unconvinced by Brexit.
The Conservatives are going to draw all the wrong lessons from the last election, that much is now clear.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
But only to graduates who both studied and work in the UK.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
"if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either." Not true. You are still liable - you have to let Student Debt Co that you are moving abroad and you are liable to pay.
My understanding..... which may well be wrong ....... is that if you don't tell and don't pay, or even if you do tell, there's SFA the SDC can, or do, do.
You`d be picked out at customs if you tried to re-enter UK. Rubber gloves and everything.
Can they do that for a civil debt? People of whom I am aware seem to go and from, for example, Spain without let or hindrance.
I would think that it is a form of tax evasion. Could also flout money laundering laws. Serious stuff.
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
Nope a graduate tax would be continually paid by high achievers and it's not.
It is! Earn over £25k and you pay enhanced income tax rates (9% enhancement). (Though the graduate tax ends after 30 years and on death if sooner.)
It's not - once you've paid what you owe that's the end of your payments. Were it a tax it would be 9% a year for 30 years or death.
Well - in theory yes - but for you to have actually repaid it you would need to be earning a very high salary indeed - see Moneysavingexpert calculator. If you earn £250k pa + you may repay - but if this happens you will have been disadvantaged over lower paid graduates who will after 30 years be relieved and therefore will have paid less.
It's only 9% because it starts at too high an income threshold and ends for the higher earners. Just bang 2% or whatever onto the basic rate that kicks in when the basic rate kicks in, and make it 3% or whatever the calculation needs to be.
Of course this only applies to tuition fees, not maintenance loans...
Why should he reduce student debt - the students willingly signed up and committed to it.
It`s not a debt it`s a graduate tax. It`s been badly communicated. Let`s not dance round this one again.
Nope a graduate tax would be continually paid by high achievers and it's not.
It is! Earn over £25k and you pay enhanced income tax rates (9% enhancement). (Though the graduate tax ends after 30 years and on death if sooner.)
It's not - once you've paid what you owe that's the end of your payments. Were it a tax it would be 9% a year for 30 years or death.
Well - in theory yes - but for you to have actually repaid it you would need to be earning a very high salary indeed - see Moneysavingexpert calculator. If you earn £250k pa + you may repay - but if this happens you will have been disadvantaged over lower paid graduates who will after 30 years be relieved and therefore will have paid less.
It's only 9% because it starts at too high an income threshold and ends for the higher earners. Just bang 2% or whatever onto the basic rate that kicks in when the basic rate kicks in, and make it 3% or whatever the calculation needs to be.
Of course this only applies to tuition fees, not maintenance loans...
If they did as you suggest, then this would be a big revenue loss to the exchequer, and virtually all debt would extinguish after 30 years.
Regarding tuition fees/maintainance loans - they are treated the same. Maybe you mean maintainance grants? They used to be non-repayable but this changed a while back.
Apropos of nothing, I came across the most bizarre accent yesterday. I wanted to use a local undertaker, rather than the Co-op. The main man has the broadest Derbyshire accent you could ever wish to hear. Everything is "mi duck".
His assistant is from Mississippi, but she has been in Derbyshire for many years. Her southern drawl combined with the picked up "mi duck" is just hilarious!
Everything going smoothly, I trust. It's a time when one really doesn't want hassle.
Thank you sir, going as well as can be hoped. Death is an area of life I've never had to get involved in before. As someone else warned, it's just the amount of admin, made all the more so because of the very peculiar state of affairs my mother left behind. That's going to take an age to resolve.
Oh dear, not fun. Deal with the funeral etc first, worry about other matters afterwards. Bro-in-law had to deal with his aunts funeral. Everything was going OK until it was realised that to actually have the cremation the signature of the doctor who saw her last (or something like that) was required. Unfortunately this wasn't discovered until the day before the funeral and when someone went to see the doctor he was on his day off and wasn't co-operative. So, on the actual day of the funeral it had to be postponed. Unfortunately for us Essex people it was in NW Lancs and we were two-thirds the way there before we were told that it was off.
Comments
You're assuming that his own vote count was down to him rather than greater antipathy to his opponent. I suggest that is a brave assumption.
Do not listen, @isam , do not listen.
Reject the toxic cliche that "North London progressives" are the enemy of the white working class. Don't fall for it. We are not.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1214473418692812800?s=20
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/01/labours-far-left-is-a-personality-cult-without-the-personality/
https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/06/the-killer-polling-numbers-for-corbyn-the-pre-election-ipsos-mori-leader-ratings/
Boris was unpopular, but decisively more popular than Jeremy.
Even if he does a good job over the next few years (like, say, Thatcher 83-87 or Blair 97-01) his ratings are likely to drift down over the next few years. Simply because every decision he takes will go against the wishes of someone in his current coalition.
That shows talent, principle and achievement in spite of rather than because his background.
And as someone who voted Leave I don't give a damn about his record on Brexit, given that he's been clear that we must move on. Brexit is history and it's not going to define the 2024 election.
Trade minister Simon Birmingham said full free movement would not be accepted because it could cause an exodus of highly trained workers to the UK and an influx of unskilled British workers to Sydney and Melbourne. Last year, ministers in New Zealand voiced similar fears of a brain drain.
https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/australia-rejects-visa-free-immigration-deal-with-uk/
Immigration policy everywhere is going in future to be based on skills and earning potential, no-one will accept immigrants that depress local wages at the bottom of the scale, nor people who could become a burden on the host state.
Previously when budgets were in the Spring everything was paper based so you could update things immediately as manual instructions were sent out. Nowadays everything is computerised and software has lead times of at least months if not years.
That doesn't mean the Chancellor cannot make fundamental changes - it does mean he can't make fundamental changes that kick off 3 weeks later.
Edit: 100
As far as men are concerned he's seen, I suspect as a 'character'. However, such a reputation doesn't always last.
Edited:FFS.
And PC 1, DUP 1, SF 2, SDLP 1, GPE&W 9, SGP 6, ALL 1.
Only the UUP and Labour have never had a woman in the top job.
Harold Wilson - Oxford, Don
Tony Blair - Oxford, Pupil Barrister
It really is irrelevant if they can communicate effectively. Wilson smoked cigars and enjoyed a brandy, in private, but it as pipes and pints in public.
The question I have about Starmer is as he has so far not displayed the leadership qualities of a Blair, does he have the managerial qualities of an Attlee? - And if he does, is there a similar pool of talent for him to draw upon?
However, my initial gut reaction when I heard he'd topped that members poll was "Oh, they want to win". RLB can be a "true socialist" in opposition for as long as she likes - but she's not getting anywhere near government.
WE ❤ BORIS
"I just dont see Human Rights lawyers who went to Oxford getting the "one of us" vote from White van men any more than Eton educated genuine posho's"
that I am not saying people wont vote for him because of his background, but that it is as far removed from 21st Century working class lifestyle as Boris Johnson's and David Cameron's. So is passing the 11 plus and going to Grammar School, it is a choice most working class kids don't have.
Maybe he will bring them back?
BF have a market and Rayner is 1/4 which looks way too short to me. I`ve laid this a bit already.
And why 3 months for the contest? Seems absurdly long.
England always decides what government everyone else gets. Most of the time (roughly seven years out of ten since the Second World War) that’s been a government Scotland has rejected.
But to do so you have to show empathy towards them or at least be able to fake it convincingly.
Whether Keir 'Continuity Miliband' Starmer can do that I don't know.
But Ed Miliband certainly failed.
Big difference. We get you have a thing about his supposed non working class origins because you don't like the fact that they are actually working class by any and every definition of the words. Just realise that and move on.
The ONS has given him £10bn+ a year to reduce it.
Really, the 2019 GE was just the 2015 one with UKIP votes going to the Tories because Labour had the same policy; 2015 No Referendum to Remain, 2019 another referendum to Remain.
What more could one desire?
Counting votes in the current system is a pointless metric if all it shows is that you've comprehensively lost a beauty contest with the Hunchback of Notre Dame.
I admit that I seem to have misjudged the labour membership though. I thought that the above would be sufficient for her to be a sound bet for next leader (and backed her ages ago at 28/1. She is my best outcome in this race (from a betting perspective). However, it`s now becoming clear (I think) that the membership leans much more to the soft-left than I thought, so have a feeling that I`m about to lose this bet.
I`m not laying her yet though because I think her odds may shorten a bit when the unions come out for her.
Let`s not dance round this one again.
(Maybe I`ve answered my own question?)
And because inter-generational inequality is a bad thing for the country and damaging to the Conservative party's future prospects.
Anyway, it was all about Brexit, I can see it now.The reluctance to accept it was the will of the people needs a decoy, and it is JC
Yep thought as much.
https://twitter.com/GolbaxB/status/1214487698808938496
But as with all things on PB, people can read our exchanges and come to their own conclusions.
I think that the referendum was a monumental mistake (you`ll disagree) , but once granted you cannot go from representative democracy to direct democracy and then back to representative democracy.
We'd be better off reducing the number of crap universities and funding more technical education and training.
If you studied abroad you don’t pay it, and if you studied in the UK and move abroad, you don’t pay it either.
It makes expatriatism much more attractive than it would otherwise be.
My point is that working class people see Keir Starmer as no more relatable and "one of us" than Boris Johnson despite their different upbringings. Labour inclined voters desperately tried to make Ed Miliband a comprehensive schoolboy to David Camerons toff, and that didn't work either.
But of course attending those may well be more difficult in the near future.
His assistant is from Mississippi, but she has been in Derbyshire for many years. Her southern drawl combined with the picked up "mi duck" is just hilarious!
https://twitter.com/WaddellCooks/status/1214272458028732416?s=20
(Mind you, I always thought 'bungs for the middle class the poor pay for' was supposed to be Tory practice - but there you go, the SNP pinched it..)
Meanwhile the 30 year clock ticks and the 9% is fixed, so after a decade living broad someone returns with a big house deposit and accepts the ‘tax’ on earnings.
On the eve of the election, polls predicting Boris Johnson would win the election were also finding that a fresh referendum would result in a clear Remain win. The public remains unconvinced by Brexit.
The Conservatives are going to draw all the wrong lessons from the last election, that much is now clear.
The issue is that companies expect qualifications and use it as the initial recruitment filter. Which is why a lot of jobs that were previously a level courses require a degree and more clueful firms now offer degree apprenticeships.
Btw given the chose between the 2 go for a degree apprenticeship everytime - you will be years ahead of your contemporaries and without the debt.
Of course this only applies to tuition fees, not maintenance loans...
Regarding tuition fees/maintainance loans - they are treated the same. Maybe you mean maintainance grants? They used to be non-repayable but this changed a while back.
Bro-in-law had to deal with his aunts funeral. Everything was going OK until it was realised that to actually have the cremation the signature of the doctor who saw her last (or something like that) was required. Unfortunately this wasn't discovered until the day before the funeral and when someone went to see the doctor he was on his day off and wasn't co-operative. So, on the actual day of the funeral it had to be postponed. Unfortunately for us Essex people it was in NW Lancs and we were two-thirds the way there before we were told that it was off.