My take on Starmer is that he is part of the problem for Labour, not the solution.
It is mentioned downthread that the 2019 GE was about Corbyn, not so much Brexit. Sorry but that is rubbish.
Corbyn did well in 2017 when both parties lied about their commitment to Brexit, that GE was not about Brexit at all and the red wall did not seem too fussed about Corbyn and his links with supposed terrorists, Marxism etc
Fast forward to 2019 and it was all about Brexit, though I concede that Boris was a much more charismatic opponent than May.
When the 2024 GE comes around and Starmer is banging on about rejoining the EU, free movement of people, possibly the Euro and Schengen then he has about as much chance of regaining those seats as I do of being PM.
If the Tories mess up Brexit you will see the emergence of the Brexit Party in some form or other, they would definitely take votes in those constituencies that Labour need to win back. It's possible they may split the Tory vote and allow Labour back in, but not with Starmer in charge.
Labour missed a massive opportunity in not voting Lisa Nandy as leader.
Your lack of understanding of some basic realities is embarrassing. Come here, ask a local to show you the places where manufacturing output rose under Thatcher. It wasn't any of the towns you claim to know about. Locally to me Thatcher did her famous walk in the wilderness. Did the Head Wrightsons Steelworks have (a) higher output or (b) lower output when it was a steelworks and not a business park of half-let offices? How about the pit towns across the Durham coalfield where industrial jobs have 20 years later been replaced by warehouses.
How did the removal of manufacturing output and their replacement with rubble and eventually warehouses have anything to do with changes to transition controls 20 years years later?
Warehouses staffed by a lot of people from Eastern Europe if local experience is anything to go by.
Once upon a time, before the Brexit wars, even the Guardian noticed this - even if it was just to have a dig at Next...
'Instead of doctors, they send police to kill us': locked-down Rio faces deadly raids
Maria Diva do Nascimento was worried as she set off for her job at one of Rio de Janeiro’s biggest hospitals wearing a face mask she hoped would keep her alive.
It had been two days since she had heard from her son Allyson, a 20-year-old drug trafficker whose job made social isolation impossible.
The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?
Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.
However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.
Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.
I suspect it varies around the country.
In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.
I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.
BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:
It is not so many years ago that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove - yet both are now comfortably Labour.In 1966 Labour came within 3000 votes of taking Cheltenham - though there was no Liberal that year.
Can you be a bit more specific on when it was that 'that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove'?
Labour lost its deposit at the Enfield Southgate by election held in December 1984 following the death of Anthony Berry in the Brighton bombing outrage. Portillo was elected as the new MP. There was also a by election at Hove in November 1973 when Tim Sainsbury was first elected. In both cases the Deposit threshold was still 12.5% - rather than the 5% we have seen since the mid-1980s.
Thanks and exactly. 2 by-elections and 1 GE and on old rules. These are 36 and 46 years ago. They have no relevance to today, it's a different world.
I am not sure he will. After the post-pandemic crash and post- no deal crash the single market, and all its trappings will not be so unappealing, particularly if it is packaged and labelled as something else.
He will just take us into the something else, his voting coalition will demand it.
The single market is not going to disappear
By 2024 we will have had a brutal education as a nation about how world trade works. Going into a big trade block for our own protection will appeal in ways that today's "lets tear up every trade deal with everyone" position appeals.
We aren't going to rejoin the EU. But joining the EEA to act as a free trade Bulwark against the feckless Europeans? That can be positively spun. Especially after a few years of 30%+ tariffs and every country proposing a trade deal doing outrageous things like insisting we obey their own trade laws and standards.
I rather suspect the education we get will be quite the opposite!
As the EU looks set for years more wrangling and arguing between the wealthy north and poorly south, with bailouts and malaise ongoing in Europe we will see them and think "thank goodness that is not us".
Your side have been saying we'll be worse off than the Europeans since I was a child. I grew up reading articles about how because the UK wasn't joining the Euro the UK was going to suffer. I became an adult early in Tony Blair's governance and did my thesis on whether Britain should join the Euro. These debates are not new yet for every decade this century so far the UK has done better than the Eurozone - and the next few years look set to be the same.
If in 2024 the UK is growing while the Eurozone is still stuck in a quagmire with arguments between struggling Italy/Spain and rich Netherland/Germany then why would the public want to touch that with a ten foot bargepole?
Problem is that I made a point about how no trade deals with anyone will work and you tried to prove me wrong by talking about the EU. We have left the EU. How the EU does will have little impact over our experience of trying to exclusively use WTO whilst avoiding what that means (via GATT24) despite the head of the WTO saying we're talking bollocks about how the WTO works.
The very basis of the "no deal go WTO" strategy is based on a fundamental ignorance of how the WTO works according to the head of the WTO. Perhaps we will be surprised and discover that Iain Duncan Smith is right about how the WTO works and the man running the WTO is wrong about how the WTO works. Perhaps not...
I'm speaking about the EU because that's our neighbour that people will see on the news.
If the UK economy is growing and the Eurozone is mired in malaise do you think the public are going to want to move closer back to Europe?
If the UK economy is growing it will be vs the pit the virus is making us all slide into. 30%+ tariffs and swathes of red tape will make us grow faster or slower than if we didn't have said tariffs and red tape?
Well we can compare directly with the Eurozone.
So long as we have a Tory government I think local control, long regulations and a free floating currency and local Central Bank will enable us to grow faster than the Eurozone.
What impact do you see swathes of red tape and large tariffs having?
If it happens negative so I hope it doesn't happen.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
'Instead of doctors, they send police to kill us': locked-down Rio faces deadly raids
Maria Diva do Nascimento was worried as she set off for her job at one of Rio de Janeiro’s biggest hospitals wearing a face mask she hoped would keep her alive.
It had been two days since she had heard from her son Allyson, a 20-year-old drug trafficker whose job made social isolation impossible.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
Yeah, sure. The fact that families with children were not able to get accommodation at the same time that taxpayers (many of whom were themselves without spare bedrooms) were subsidising people in the same area to have more accommodation than they needed doesn't need to be mentioned, even in passing, by the left.
You believe the measure was driven by fairness more than by deficit reduction?
I think so. There is a lot about council housing that seems unfair to many. Some of that is down to lies, myths, misunderstandings and exaggerations but some of it is real and unfair.
Coronavirus lockdown measures in Scotland could begin to be lifted from 28 May, the first minister has announced.
Nicola Sturgeon said the easing of restrictions would mean people would be able to meet up with others outside their household and be allowed more outdoor activities.
'Instead of doctors, they send police to kill us': locked-down Rio faces deadly raids
Maria Diva do Nascimento was worried as she set off for her job at one of Rio de Janeiro’s biggest hospitals wearing a face mask she hoped would keep her alive.
It had been two days since she had heard from her son Allyson, a 20-year-old drug trafficker whose job made social isolation impossible.
The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?
Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.
However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.
Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
Labour's loss of working class voters in former mining areas and the towns does look like a permanent shift. The huge rightward swing in seats like Don Valley, Rother Valley, Sedgefield, over the course of twenty years looks like a very profound shift in public opinion in those areas.
Conversely, the Conservatives' loss of better off voters in big cities looks as if it permanent, too, but so far, the trade off has worked to the Conservatives' advantage.
But the bulk of the shift in seats such as Sedgefield, Grimsby, Scunthorpe, Blyth Valley and Workington occurred in a single election - 2019. As evidence , that is far too thin to be seen as permanent.
I am unconvinced by the policy, which I see as an example of Tory-virtue signalling, but I'm open to evidence.
Well quite.
However in many areas getting a council house is akin to winning the lottery. The first debate we need to have is more fundamental - social housing: what are we trying to achieve?
The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?
Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.
However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.
Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.
I suspect it varies around the country.
In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.
I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.
BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:
It is not so many years ago that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove - yet both are now comfortably Labour.In 1966 Labour came within 3000 votes of taking Cheltenham - though there was no Liberal that year.
Can you be a bit more specific on when it was that 'that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove'?
Labour lost its deposit at the Enfield Southgate by election held in December 1984 following the death of Anthony Berry in the Brighton bombing outrage. Portillo was elected as the new MP. There was also a by election at Hove in November 1973 when Tim Sainsbury was first elected. In both cases the Deposit threshold was still 12.5% - rather than the 5% we have seen since the mid-1980s.
Thanks and exactly. 2 by-elections and 1 GE and on old rules. These are 36 and 46 years ago. They have no relevance to today, it's a different world.
Labour's ousting of Portillo in 1997 was a major shock - and whilst Labour held on comfortably in 2001 the seat reverted to Tory hands in 2005. This rather confirmed the view that it would only fall to Labour in landslide years. That changed in 2017. Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
'Instead of doctors, they send police to kill us': locked-down Rio faces deadly raids
Maria Diva do Nascimento was worried as she set off for her job at one of Rio de Janeiro’s biggest hospitals wearing a face mask she hoped would keep her alive.
It had been two days since she had heard from her son Allyson, a 20-year-old drug trafficker whose job made social isolation impossible.
What impact do you see swathes of red tape and large tariffs having?
If it happens negative so I hope it doesn't happen.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
The question is how we avoid it. Brexiteers have endlessly parroted "GATT24" as the solution. This - as the head of the WTO has pointed out - is bollocks. Going WTO means that the UK is hit by the bound rates - the ceilings when you have no trade agreements and no agreed schedules of tariffs. Something so appealing that no other country in the world does so.
If the positives are to outweigh the financial disaster of both huge tariffs and huge costs of stopping vehicles to check goods then they must be absolutely massive. Can you give me a few examples?
The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?
Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.
However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.
Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.
I suspect it varies around the country.
In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.
I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.
BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:
It is not so many years ago that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove - yet both are now comfortably Labour.In 1966 Labour came within 3000 votes of taking Cheltenham - though there was no Liberal that year.
Can you be a bit more specific on when it was that 'that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove'?
Labour lost its deposit at the Enfield Southgate by election held in December 1984 following the death of Anthony Berry in the Brighton bombing outrage. Portillo was elected as the new MP. There was also a by election at Hove in November 1973 when Tim Sainsbury was first elected. In both cases the Deposit threshold was still 12.5% - rather than the 5% we have seen since the mid-1980s.
Thanks and exactly. 2 by-elections and 1 GE and on old rules. These are 36 and 46 years ago. They have no relevance to today, it's a different world.
Labour's ousting of Portillo in 1997 was a major shock - and whilst Labour held on comfortably in 2001 the seat reverted to Tory hands in 2005. This rather confirmed the view that it would only fall to Labour in landslide years. That changed in 2017. Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
White working class ex industrial and coastal town seats like Bolsover, Mansfield and Grimsby are now solidly Tory.
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Gove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
Yeah, sure. The fact that families with children were not able to get accommodation at the same time that taxpayers (many of whom were themselves without spare bedrooms) were subsidising people in the same area to have more accommodation than they needed doesn't need to be mentioned, even in passing, by the left.
You believe the measure was driven by fairness more than by deficit reduction?
It was driven be efficiency. Efficient use of public money and efficient use of the social housing stock.
My take on Starmer is that he is part of the problem for Labour, not the solution.
It is mentioned downthread that the 2019 GE was about Corbyn, not so much Brexit. Sorry but that is rubbish.
Corbyn did well in 2017 when both parties lied about their commitment to Brexit, that GE was not about Brexit at all and the red wall did not seem too fussed about Corbyn and his links with supposed terrorists, Marxism etc
Fast forward to 2019 and it was all about Brexit, though I concede that Boris was a much more charismatic opponent than May.
When the 2024 GE comes around and Starmer is banging on about rejoining the EU, free movement of people, possibly the Euro and Schengen then he has about as much chance of regaining those seats as I do of being PM.
If the Tories mess up Brexit you will see the emergence of the Brexit Party in some form or other, they would definitely take votes in those constituencies that Labour need to win back. It's possible they may split the Tory vote and allow Labour back in, but not with Starmer in charge.
Labour missed a massive opportunity in not voting Lisa Nandy as leader.
I totally disagree , Sir Keir Starmer looks to be as a possible PM. People can see that not just Labour voters. As for him campaigning to re -join the E U, no chance.
What impact do you see swathes of red tape and large tariffs having?
If it happens negative so I hope it doesn't happen.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
The question is how we avoid it. Brexiteers have endlessly parroted "GATT24" as the solution. This - as the head of the WTO has pointed out - is bollocks. Going WTO means that the UK is hit by the bound rates - the ceilings when you have no trade agreements and no agreed schedules of tariffs. Something so appealing that no other country in the world does so.
If the positives are to outweigh the financial disaster of both huge tariffs and huge costs of stopping vehicles to check goods then they must be absolutely massive. Can you give me a few examples?
Tariffs aren't massive. The average tariff from memory is about 3% if that. The currency can swing by more than that. If there is a 3% tariff but our currency has fallen by 5% then are our exporters more or less competitive?
The advantages are that we can control our own laws and money and if our government displeases us we can kick it out.
My take on Starmer is that he is part of the problem for Labour, not the solution.
It is mentioned downthread that the 2019 GE was about Corbyn, not so much Brexit. Sorry but that is rubbish.
Corbyn did well in 2017 when both parties lied about their commitment to Brexit, that GE was not about Brexit at all and the red wall did not seem too fussed about Corbyn and his links with supposed terrorists, Marxism etc
Fast forward to 2019 and it was all about Brexit, though I concede that Boris was a much more charismatic opponent than May.
When the 2024 GE comes around and Starmer is banging on about rejoining the EU, free movement of people, possibly the Euro and Schengen then he has about as much chance of regaining those seats as I do of being PM.
If the Tories mess up Brexit you will see the emergence of the Brexit Party in some form or other, they would definitely take votes in those constituencies that Labour need to win back. It's possible they may split the Tory vote and allow Labour back in, but not with Starmer in charge.
Labour missed a massive opportunity in not voting Lisa Nandy as leader.
Starmer will rejoin the single market, he is not likely to rejoin the full EU, especially with the Euro.
However Labour has more chance of winning middle class Tory Remainers in London and the South and more prosperous suburbs in the North and Midlands like Altrincham and Sale West and Broxtowe than it does of beating Boris in white working class Leave seats like Grimsby, Ashfield and Mansfield.
In that sense Starmer was a better pick for them than Nandy
Labour's ousting of Portillo in 1997 was a major shock - and whilst Labour held on comfortably in 2001 the seat reverted to Tory hands in 2005. This rather confirmed the view that it would only fall to Labour in landslide years. That changed in 2017. Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
Labour's problem up north remains that the Labour brand is so tarnished. A lot of work is needed by Starmer to wipe away the shame of Corbynism, but its much deeper than that. Absolute Power corrupts absolutely and there are too many places where Labour have ruled since the Danelaw (and the reverse it true in many southern towns). Voters eventually have enough and vote for a change which so often proves to be a disappointment. Where a "we listened, we've changed" approach can regain trust.
The acute challenge faced by Labour is that in many of these places the CLP is run by Corbynite nutters...
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
Blimey Philip this is your lockdown game, right? You come on to PB with a particular transparently obvious and self-evident truth in mind. The sun rises in the East, for example. And then you spend all of your evidently otherwise vacant day arguing that the sun rises in the west. And to your immense credit you don't allow yourself to be deflected or interrupted.
It is certainly impressive but also rather a waste of everyone's time.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
If you truly believe that Boris Johnson did not go back on a 'no ifs no buts' commitment that under him there would be no border in the Irish Sea, this makes you a rather special sort of person. I doubt there are more than a dozen like you in the whole country.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
If you truly believe that Boris Johnson did not go back on a 'no ifs no buts' commitment that under him there would be no border in the Irish Sea, this makes you a rather special sort of person. I doubt there are more than a dozen like you in the whole country.
The original internet definition of a troll was someone who came onto chatrooms, such as they were then, and then subtly tried to subvert them by arguing known illogicalities so everyone was diverted from the key arguments and ideally trying to get the existing chatroom members to turn on each other, the overall aim being to bring the chatroom into disarray.
I really do think that @Philip_Thompson is doing this. Because no one could be that dense in what are otherwise fairly straightforward, easy-to-grasp issues.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
Blimey Philip this is your lockdown game, right? You come on to PB with a particular transparently obvious and self-evident truth in mind. The sun rises in the East, for example. And then you spend all of your evidently otherwise vacant day arguing that the sun rises in the west. And to your immense credit you don't allow yourself to be deflected or interrupted.
It is certainly impressive but also rather a waste of everyone's time.
We nearly had to do a GoFundMe to get him a new keyboard after he wore his out explaining how Johnson didn't actually send the letter that he did send.
Which even describes the popularity of 'Latin rhythms'.
It shows the power of a true super spreader, a 4hr workshop for dance teachers who then go across the nation to teach dozens of classes per week, each with dozens of people in close contact indoors.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
The difficulty lies in that PT is one of the few Brexiteers where from there 2018/early 2019 position the final deal was better than Mays deal, so for him it is an improvement. On the positions the PM and nearly all the cabinet laid out before they were in power, the final deal is a surrender compared to Mays deal.
Sure, that's fine. No problem somebody arguing it's a better deal because it allows GB to do proper Brexit. But it's clear that Johnson misled people on the Irish Sea border. Rather than deny this - and look silly since it's undeniable - if I were Philip I would acknowledge it but say that deceiving the likes of the DUP was smart, ruthless politics and the end justified the means.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
Blimey Philip this is your lockdown game, right? You come on to PB with a particular transparently obvious and self-evident truth in mind. The sun rises in the East, for example. And then you spend all of your evidently otherwise vacant day arguing that the sun rises in the west. And to your immense credit you don't allow yourself to be deflected or interrupted.
It is certainly impressive but also rather a waste of everyone's time.
We nearly had to do a GoFundMe to get him a new keyboard after he wore his out explaining how Johnson didn't actually send the letter that he did send.
That was a funny one I have to admit. A classic PB moment.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
On a similar note, driving through Blyth and Ashington, the amount of flags and other pro-NHS merchandise is verging on the ridiculous. The government will have to tread carefully on the NHS if they want to retain their new “red wall” voters. Brexit is not everything.
Meanwhile, in app news, uh-oh: twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1262357454643499008?s=20
Having downloaded it to have a look at it, I noted that since its initial roll out, not a single update has been pushed. That is incredibly unlikely for an app that is still actively being developed.
I see we are back to the old dividing lines on Brexit...
Rachel Reeves: “We’re saying they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to a secure deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal, so that means taking the time that is necessary but it’s up to government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… that is getting a good deal and a good deal by the end of this year. If they are not in a position to do that then they need to come back and expand the timetable.”
Children don't need their own bedroom. My own children have bunk beds and are quite happy with it, I see no reason they need their own bedroom. So I'm happy to practice as I preach.
My children also had bunkbeds. Then my son hit puberty and likes to masturbate all the bloody time, so sharing a room with his 8 year old sister wasn't a good idea...
My children aren't that old and are both of the same gender but surely the misnamed "bedroom tax" wouldn't apply there? If one child is aged 10 or more and is of a different gender to their sibling they're not expected to share a room.
No the issue with the Bedroom Tax was that in so many places there literally were no alternative homes to move into. "You have a Spare Bedroom". OK find me a 2 bed house then. "There are only 3 bed houses available. Your fault, you will pay". And that the rules were as usual with recent Tory welfare policies arbitrary and cruel - your child just died? Pay the tax. You have children who don't live with you but need a bedroom for you to have access? Pay the tax. You sleep in separate rooms cos your partner is chronically sick and has lots of medical equipment? Pay the tax.
It is absolutely staggering - but very revealing - that you don't bother to mention, even in passing, the government's motivation for charging people a bit more for extra rooms they no longer need.
We can rectify that.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
How much was being spent on a "City crash and bailout" by the Tories?
Don't be so literal, Philip.
We're talking about the consequent fiscal hole that George and David were busting a gut to fill - by slashing benefits.
Don't be so literal meaning don't use facts?
Fine you can use lies and myths like the City was being bailed out in 2010 causing the deficit of 2010 . . . But just know what you are saying is "literally" not true.
I'd rather deal with literal facts.
Now you've regressed from literal to anal.
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
I see we are back to the old dividing lines on Brexit...
Rachel Reeves: “We’re saying they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to a secure deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal, so that means taking the time that is necessary but it’s up to government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… that is getting a good deal and a good deal by the end of this year. If they are not in a position to do that then they need to come back and expand the timetable.”
For those who think no deal Brexit is rubbish (which I would certainly be part of) if we are going to get no deal, when do they prefer it happening?
1 - 2020? 2 - A later date before the end of the parliament?
Im clearly 1, as its easier to make the economic adjustments coming out of the covid19 crash than it will be when we have already started our recovery.
Most seem to prefer 2 - why? Is it in the hope it never happens?
Children don't need their own bedroom. My own children have bunk beds and are quite happy with it, I see no reason they need their own bedroom. So I'm happy to practice as I preach.
My children also had bunkbeds. Then my son hit puberty and likes to masturbate all the bloody time, so sharing a room with his 8 year old sister wasn't a good idea...
My children aren't that old and are both of the same gender but surely the misnamed "bedroom tax" wouldn't apply there? If one child is aged 10 or more and is of a different gender to their sibling they're not expected to share a room.
No the issue with the Bedroom Tax was that in so many places there literally were no alternative homes to move into. "You have a Spare Bedroom". OK find me a 2 bed house then. "There are only 3 bed houses available. Your fault, you will pay". And that the rules were as usual with recent Tory welfare policies arbitrary and cruel - your child just died? Pay the tax. You have children who don't live with you but need a bedroom for you to have access? Pay the tax. You sleep in separate rooms cos your partner is chronically sick and has lots of medical equipment? Pay the tax.
It is absolutely staggering - but very revealing - that you don't bother to mention, even in passing, the government's motivation for charging people a bit more for extra rooms they no longer need.
We can rectify that.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
How much was being spent on a "City crash and bailout" by the Tories?
Don't be so literal, Philip.
We're talking about the consequent fiscal hole that George and David were busting a gut to fill - by slashing benefits.
Don't be so literal meaning don't use facts?
Fine you can use lies and myths like the City was being bailed out in 2010 causing the deficit of 2010 . . . But just know what you are saying is "literally" not true.
I'd rather deal with literal facts.
Now you've regressed from literal to anal.
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
They were grappling with the deficit. The deficit was the fact that the government was spending £4 for every £3 in taxes it took.
Of that £4 in spending per £3 in taxes, just how much do you think was the cost of the bailout?
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Hove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse.
Did you really mean that, young HY? Gove solidly Labour?
Hove, sorry
Are you sure you don´t have any inside information on this? It would be much more fun if it were really Gove. And fun is the trademake of the Boris Johnson administration , innit? That was why the people elected him.
I see we are back to the old dividing lines on Brexit...
Rachel Reeves: “We’re saying they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to a secure deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal, so that means taking the time that is necessary but it’s up to government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… that is getting a good deal and a good deal by the end of this year. If they are not in a position to do that then they need to come back and expand the timetable.”
For those who think no deal Brexit is rubbish (which I would certainly be part of) if we are going to get no deal, when do they prefer it happening?
1 - 2020? 2 - A later date before the end of the parliament?
Im clearly 1, as its easier to make the economic adjustments coming out of the covid19 crash than it will be when we have already started our recovery.
Most seem to prefer 2 - why? Is it in the hope it never happens?
I agree with you. I don't want it to happen, I'd rather have a deal, but if we're going to have it then better now than later.
Children don't need their own bedroom. My own children have bunk beds and are quite happy with it, I see no reason they need their own bedroom. So I'm happy to practice as I preach.
My children also had bunkbeds. Then my son hit puberty and likes to masturbate all the bloody time, so sharing a room with his 8 year old sister wasn't a good idea...
My children aren't that old and are both of the same gender but surely the misnamed "bedroom tax" wouldn't apply there? If one child is aged 10 or more and is of a different gender to their sibling they're not expected to share a room.
No the issue with the Bedroom Tax was that in so many places there literally were no alternative homes to move into. "You have a Spare Bedroom". OK find me a 2 bed house then. "There are only 3 bed houses available. Your fault, you will pay". And that the rules were as usual with recent Tory welfare policies arbitrary and cruel - your child just died? Pay the tax. You have children who don't live with you but need a bedroom for you to have access? Pay the tax. You sleep in separate rooms cos your partner is chronically sick and has lots of medical equipment? Pay the tax.
It is absolutely staggering - but very revealing - that you don't bother to mention, even in passing, the government's motivation for charging people a bit more for extra rooms they no longer need.
We can rectify that.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
How much was being spent on a "City crash and bailout" by the Tories?
Don't be so literal, Philip.
We're talking about the consequent fiscal hole that George and David were busting a gut to fill - by slashing benefits.
Don't be so literal meaning don't use facts?
Fine you can use lies and myths like the City was being bailed out in 2010 causing the deficit of 2010 . . . But just know what you are saying is "literally" not true.
I'd rather deal with literal facts.
Now you've regressed from literal to anal.
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
They were grappling with the deficit. The deficit was the fact that the government was spending £4 for every £3 in taxes it took.
Of that £4 in spending per £3 in taxes, just how much do you think was the cost of the bailout?
Surely the bailout money was borrowed and thus the interest payments were contributing to the size of the deficit?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Wrong, the Tories had a comfortable 15% poll lead last weekend and Boris still leads Starmer as preferred PM
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
Blimey Philip this is your lockdown game, right? You come on to PB with a particular transparently obvious and self-evident truth in mind. The sun rises in the East, for example. And then you spend all of your evidently otherwise vacant day arguing that the sun rises in the west. And to your immense credit you don't allow yourself to be deflected or interrupted.
It is certainly impressive but also rather a waste of everyone's time.
We nearly had to do a GoFundMe to get him a new keyboard after he wore his out explaining how Johnson didn't actually send the letter that he did send.
I don't know. My personal favourite, from a long list, is the championing of the government's complete and wholesale changing of the rules which, actually, remained wholly unchanged.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
Yeah, sure. The fact that families with children were not able to get accommodation at the same time that taxpayers (many of whom were themselves without spare bedrooms) were subsidising people in the same area to have more accommodation than they needed doesn't need to be mentioned, even in passing, by the left.
Has there ever been a cost/benefit analysis of the policy since its inception ?
I don't know, but no-one ever attacks it on the basis that it isn't terribly effective, they attack on the basis that it shows the the evil Tories deliberately wanted to screw over the poor. Perhaps if they started by acknowledging the entirely good intentions behind the policy, we might then be able to move on to a sensible discussion of effectiveness. That would be a great step forward, in this and in other political controversies.
FWIW personally I don't think that Tories are evil. I just think they have a particular worldview that tends to see people as more of the author of their own misfortunes than they actually are. That, combined with a puzzling inattention to detail - so for instance, penalising people for living in houses that are too large with the intention of persuading them to move somewhere smaller, without first ascertaining whether there is anywhere smaller for them to move to, and then persevering with the policy even when it is clear that it's not working as it was meant to. And it does seem a bit odd to be so blind to the hardship it has caused. Maybe they think people are putting it on? Like I say, not evil, perhaps a bit incurious, a bit indifferent to what happens to people that they don't feel much connection to. Lots of them went to private or selective schools, I don't know if that's maybe a factor? Perhaps some trauma in their own early lives?
Children don't need their own bedroom. My own children have bunk beds and are quite happy with it, I see no reason they need their own bedroom. So I'm happy to practice as I preach.
My children also had bunkbeds. Then my son hit puberty and likes to masturbate all the bloody time, so sharing a room with his 8 year old sister wasn't a good idea...
My children aren't that old and are both of the same gender but surely the misnamed "bedroom tax" wouldn't apply there? If one child is aged 10 or more and is of a different gender to their sibling they're not expected to share a room.
No the issue with the Bedroom Tax was that in so many places there literally were no alternative homes to move into. "You have a Spare Bedroom". OK find me a 2 bed house then. "There are only 3 bed houses available. Your fault, you will pay". And that the rules were as usual with recent Tory welfare policies arbitrary and cruel - your child just died? Pay the tax. You have children who don't live with you but need a bedroom for you to have access? Pay the tax. You sleep in separate rooms cos your partner is chronically sick and has lots of medical equipment? Pay the tax.
It is absolutely staggering - but very revealing - that you don't bother to mention, even in passing, the government's motivation for charging people a bit more for extra rooms they no longer need.
We can rectify that.
It was to ensure that the costs of the City crash and bailout were loaded onto those with the broadest shoulders - people on benefits.
How much was being spent on a "City crash and bailout" by the Tories?
Don't be so literal, Philip.
We're talking about the consequent fiscal hole that George and David were busting a gut to fill - by slashing benefits.
Don't be so literal meaning don't use facts?
Fine you can use lies and myths like the City was being bailed out in 2010 causing the deficit of 2010 . . . But just know what you are saying is "literally" not true.
I'd rather deal with literal facts.
Now you've regressed from literal to anal.
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
They were grappling with the deficit. The deficit was the fact that the government was spending £4 for every £3 in taxes it took.
Of that £4 in spending per £3 in taxes, just how much do you think was the cost of the bailout?
Surely the bailout money was borrowed and thus the interest payments were contributing to the size of the deficit?
The interest payments were yes. How many pounds or pennies of the £4 do you think were going on interest payments to the bailout?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Labour's ousting of Portillo in 1997 was a major shock - and whilst Labour held on comfortably in 2001 the seat reverted to Tory hands in 2005. This rather confirmed the view that it would only fall to Labour in landslide years. That changed in 2017. Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
Labour's problem up north remains that the Labour brand is so tarnished. A lot of work is needed by Starmer to wipe away the shame of Corbynism, but its much deeper than that. Absolute Power corrupts absolutely and there are too many places where Labour have ruled since the Danelaw (and the reverse it true in many southern towns). Voters eventually have enough and vote for a change which so often proves to be a disappointment. Where a "we listened, we've changed" approach can regain trust.
The acute challenge faced by Labour is that in many of these places the CLP is run by Corbynite nutters...
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Hove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse.
Did you really mean that, young HY? Gove solidly Labour?
Hove, sorry
Are you sure you don´t have any inside information on this? It would be much more fun if it were really Gove. And fun is the trademake of the Boris Johnson administration , innit? That was why the people elected him.
Predictive text.
Hove and Enfield Southgate elected a Tory MP under Cameron at least once but have elected Labour MPs since Cameron left.
They are unlikely to vote Tory again until a pro single market Tory leader is elected, which is at least a generation away
The D-W test for serial correlation brings back memories of a misspent youth. Just an observation about the elections data: it is always a good idea to plot it to get an overall idea about it. And there is a glaring outlier in the longer dataset, namely the elections of 1929 and 1931, which we can see in the upper left of the graph here.
Of course that does not affect the DW calculations for the post WWII periods. But omitting those observations could have a material impact on the rejection or otherwise of the no-serial-correlation null hypothesis. A historian may be able to tell us whether the special conditions at the time would justify leaving those years out - of course the depression must have been a factor.
It reminds me of the excellent link to Berkson's paradox we were treated to at the weekend.
One pedantic point - the variable was seat share, not vote share. But this doesn't affect what you're saying.
You can, of course, omit outliers, but I must admit I hate doing so, unless I'm absolutely convinced that they are due to special conditions unlikely to be repeated. There are few enough observations in this time series anyway. The 1929 election wouldn't have been affected by the Great Depression, which hadn't got going yet (it was in May, the Wall Street Crash was in October).
Indeed. And the danger in omitting outliers due to special circumstances is that you can create special circumstances for almost any election.
2019, of course, was the Brexit election. We can omit it because that's not a variable that's going to repeat. 2017 was the Election That The Tories Blew. The one that May seemed to take every possible opportunity to hand votes to Labour. Obviously, they'll have learned from that and we can't expect any future election to be as perfectly pushed towards Labour (as 2019 showed). 2015 happened in the wake of the first peacetime Coalition since the Thirties. We can't possibly take any lessons from that for "normal" elections. 2010 happened in the aftermath of the Great Financial Crash. If 1931 can't be taken as relevant, certainly neither can 2010.
So, in the post 1997 landscape, only '97, '01, and '05 can count as relevant. from which we can conclude that the natural state of things is a strong working Labour majority...
(For the avoidance of doubt, I certainly don't believe this. The main point is that when you start discarding data as not relevant for special circumstances, you've got to be damn sure of it and it's incredibly easy to discard almost any data)
Btw the proper way to deal with outliers in statistical models is to downweight them, so that you are not throwing the data away but the results are skewed less by one or two questionable points. Of course this introduces the next question, "by how much do I downweight the outliers?"
You have to be really careful because there's lots of ways to get it wrong. Essentially then outliers increase uncertainty, but that's not the same as not being able to draw any conclusions, only that they are tentative conclusions.
One famous example where discarding an outlier lied to error was with the 1987 Great Storm. An aircraft observation over the Bay of Biscay was discarded because it was so far out compared to what was expected. When it was included in re-runs after the event it made a large difference.
Modern data assimilation systems can make more nuanced judgements but the essential problem remains: when is an outlier bad data and when is it a sign of something dramatic and real?
On a similar note, driving through Blyth and Ashington, the amount of flags and other pro-NHS merchandise is verging on the ridiculous. The government will have to tread carefully on the NHS if they want to retain their new “red wall” voters. Brexit is not everything.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Wrong, the Tories had a comfortable 15% poll lead last weekend and Boris still leads Starmer as preferred PM
And what relevance does this have? As usual you just repute the point you thought I made, rather than what point I actually made. I said the polls were “starting to turn”, which they are. Boris’s approval rating is starting to decline. Keir Starmer has nothing to do with this.
On a similar note, driving through Blyth and Ashington, the amount of flags and other pro-NHS merchandise is verging on the ridiculous. The government will have to tread carefully on the NHS if they want to retain their new “red wall” voters. Brexit is not everything.
On a similar note, driving through Blyth and Ashington, the amount of flags and other pro-NHS merchandise is verging on the ridiculous. The government will have to tread carefully on the NHS if they want to retain their new “red wall” voters. Brexit is not everything.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Wrong, the Tories had a comfortable 15% poll lead last weekend and Boris still leads Starmer as preferred PM
And what relevance does this have? As usual you just repute the point you thought I made, rather than what point I actually made. I said the polls were “starting to turn”, which they are. Boris’s approval rating is starting to decline. Keir Starmer has nothing to do with this.
They aren't to any significant degree, the latest poll gives a 1.5% swing to the Tories since GE 2019
I see we are back to the old dividing lines on Brexit...
Rachel Reeves: “We’re saying they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to a secure deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal, so that means taking the time that is necessary but it’s up to government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… that is getting a good deal and a good deal by the end of this year. If they are not in a position to do that then they need to come back and expand the timetable.”
For those who think no deal Brexit is rubbish (which I would certainly be part of) if we are going to get no deal, when do they prefer it happening?
1 - 2020? 2 - A later date before the end of the parliament?
Im clearly 1, as its easier to make the economic adjustments coming out of the covid19 crash than it will be when we have already started our recovery.
Most seem to prefer 2 - why? Is it in the hope it never happens?
Starmer seems, in fairness, to have seen that trap despite or possibly because of the bizarre positions he got Labour in when Shadow Brexit Secretary. His position now is that there should not be an extension. The not so subliminal message is that I accept that this is happening and if this is why you didn't vote Labour the last time please come home.
For me, the last thing that the economy needs is a prolonged period of uncertainty about the terms of trade. Almost any terms of trade, even WTO, is better than that uncertainty but a deal with free market access is best of all.
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
Fairer allocation of social housing was never going to save much if any money, so I doubt "austerity" was a significant driver.
Occasionally governments do actually do things on principle.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Wrong, the Tories had a comfortable 15% poll lead last weekend and Boris still leads Starmer as preferred PM
And what relevance does this have? As usual you just repute the point you thought I made, rather than what point I actually made. I said the polls were “starting to turn”, which they are. Boris’s approval rating is starting to decline. Keir Starmer has nothing to do with this.
They aren't to any significant degree, the latest poll gives a 1.5% swing to the Tories since GE 2019
Boris’s approval rating is declining. You might not like it but it’s a fact.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Boris needs northern wall Leave voters more than he needs the DUP
He lied to both of them
No he didn't. The Irish border solution was based upon the principle of devolution which has long existed and was put up before the General Election.
Fig leaf.
If devolution is a fig leaf why did Tony Blair introduce it? Do you want it to be abolished?
Devolution isn't a fig leaf. But offering this as a valid rationale for Johnson accepting the border that he previously ruled out as unconscionable certainly is.
Its perfectly acceptable. In fact the principle that Stormont could agree to differences from GB was agreed all along.
If it was agreed all along why did Johnson say it was unacceptable?
Because May was looking to impose the backstop without Stormont getting a say or a way out of it. That was unacceptable.
Boris fixed that. He agreed a new arrangement and Stormont can vote to end those arrangements if they're not happy with them.
Any other question?
Only the same one -
Why did Johnson he would 'never never never' accept a border in the Irish Sea?
Because he wouldn't accept it.
Instead he got a border between the UK as a whole and the EU, but with special devolved arrangements for NI that Stormont can end if they don't like it.
He said he would never accept it. There were no caveats. Indeed he got a standing ovation for the strength and resolution of his rhetoric on this issue. Which is exactly what it proved to be.
You need to accept this in your heart and mind even if you can't do so in an internet conversation with me.
He didn't accept it. It never happened.
Trying to pretend devolved arrangements are a border is absurd.
If you truly believe that Boris Johnson did not go back on a 'no ifs no buts' commitment that under him there would be no border in the Irish Sea, this makes you a rather special sort of person. I doubt there are more than a dozen like you in the whole country.
I truly believe it.
I truly believe that having Stormont agree to special arrangements is no more a border than having Holyrood agree to special arrangements for a devolved matter.
Plus I've been consistent since before Boris resigned from May's government that the principle for me was democracy. May's backstop was undemocratic - a Stormont-determined special arrangement is democratic. If NI isn't happy with the arrangements then Stormont can and should end them.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
What impact do you see swathes of red tape and large tariffs having?
If it happens negative so I hope it doesn't happen.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
The question is how we avoid it. Brexiteers have endlessly parroted "GATT24" as the solution. This - as the head of the WTO has pointed out - is bollocks. Going WTO means that the UK is hit by the bound rates - the ceilings when you have no trade agreements and no agreed schedules of tariffs. Something so appealing that no other country in the world does so.
If the positives are to outweigh the financial disaster of both huge tariffs and huge costs of stopping vehicles to check goods then they must be absolutely massive. Can you give me a few examples?
Tariffs aren't massive. The average tariff from memory is about 3% if that. The currency can swing by more than that. If there is a 3% tariff but our currency has fallen by 5% then are our exporters more or less competitive?
The advantages are that we can control our own laws and money and if our government displeases us we can kick it out.
There’s far too much attention given to tariffs and far too little to the non-tariff barriers and the inevitable tsunami of extra admin and paperwork.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
Yes. Let's hope that SKS realises that he needs to give the old socialism thing one more push. That should bump the party's ratings up a tadge.
What impact do you see swathes of red tape and large tariffs having?
If it happens negative so I hope it doesn't happen.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
The question is how we avoid it. Brexiteers have endlessly parroted "GATT24" as the solution. This - as the head of the WTO has pointed out - is bollocks. Going WTO means that the UK is hit by the bound rates - the ceilings when you have no trade agreements and no agreed schedules of tariffs. Something so appealing that no other country in the world does so.
If the positives are to outweigh the financial disaster of both huge tariffs and huge costs of stopping vehicles to check goods then they must be absolutely massive. Can you give me a few examples?
Tariffs aren't massive. The average tariff from memory is about 3% if that. The currency can swing by more than that. If there is a 3% tariff but our currency has fallen by 5% then are our exporters more or less competitive?
The advantages are that we can control our own laws and money and if our government displeases us we can kick it out.
There’s far too much attention given to tariffs and far too little to the non-tariff barriers and the inevitable tsunami of extra admin and paperwork.
Admin and paperwork that UK companies will, and will be expected to do, far more thouroughly than competitor countries. And then be really disappointed when they find out there is no redress for more powerful countries breaking the WTO rules, but will be when we break the rules against them.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
I think you will be more in touch with red wall voters in the North than HYUFD.
I do however fear once you have voted Tory once it is easy to justify sticking with it especially if you are a Brexiteer that wants immigration limited.
Hope i am wrong and we win back all the red wall seats and more in 2024
I thought the reopening was meant to be tied into track and trace. It looks like the Gov't is pushing ahead with the whole reopening plan before track and trace is sorted though ?
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Hove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse.
Did you really mean that, young HY? Gove solidly Labour?
Hove, sorry
Are you sure you don´t have any inside information on this? It would be much more fun if it were really Gove. And fun is the trademake of the Boris Johnson administration , innit? That was why the people elected him.
Predictive text. Hove and Enfield Southgate elected a Tory MP under Cameron at least once but have elected Labour MPs since Cameron left. They are unlikely to vote Tory again until a pro single market Tory leader is elected, which is at least a generation away
A prediction eh, young HY? It might be a good idea to share it with your colleagues in Hove.
They could then stand aside to leave it to the Lib Dems to take the seat from Labour. It is, after all, what used to happen in Bolton West - an arrangement set up by no less than Churchill himself. This was discussed on here the other day.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
So why are Boris’s approval ratings declining?
Because those who didn't vote Tory a few months ago are not backing him as much or are more willing to say negative. Not because those who did have changed.
I thought the reopening was meant to be tied into track and trace. It looks like the Gov't is pushing ahead with the whole reopening plan before track and trace is sorted though ?
That is what I have been complaining about for the last week. 3 conditions: mass testing: tickish; fast testing: nope; a working app for tracing: nope. One condition out of 3. A rise in the number of cases is almost inevitable. And what do we do then?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
I think you will be more in touch with red wall voters in the North than HYUFD.
I do however fear once you have voted Tory once it is easy to justify sticking with it especially if you are a Brexiteer that wants immigration limited.
Hope i am wrong and we win back all the red wall seats and more in 2024
2021 LE will give us an early indication I expect
I live in what was the red wall. I see no changes yet.
Why isnt there a secretary of state for test track and trace? One should have been appointed in April, it is that important.
Add it to Hancocks long list of failings
No idea why it would be added to his list of responsibilities, he must have the biggest workload already.
Its an NHS app.
I know, but if you have a team of 20 managers and due to unforeseen circumstances one of them ends up with 30% of the work/responsibility on his own, ffs dont give him more responsibilities?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
So why are Boris’s approval ratings declining?
Because those who didn't vote Tory a few months ago are not backing him as much or are more willing to say negative. Not because those who did have changed.
Well the Brexit supporting Tory voters I have on Facebook are constantly posting anti Boris memes. They seem to have changed their mind, but clearly it does not fit your narrative.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
I think you will be more in touch with red wall voters in the North than HYUFD.
I do however fear once you have voted Tory once it is easy to justify sticking with it especially if you are a Brexiteer that wants immigration limited.
Hope i am wrong and we win back all the red wall seats and more in 2024
2021 LE will give us an early indication I expect
I live in what was the red wall. I see no changes yet.
As do I. Why is your anecdotal view more valid than mine?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
I think you will be more in touch with red wall voters in the North than HYUFD.
I do however fear once you have voted Tory once it is easy to justify sticking with it especially if you are a Brexiteer that wants immigration limited.
Hope i am wrong and we win back all the red wall seats and more in 2024
2021 LE will give us an early indication I expect
I live in what was the red wall. I see no changes yet.
How would you have done? You have been following the government's rules, as amended (not) last week and stayed at home to save lives and protect the NHS.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
So why are Boris’s approval ratings declining?
Because those who didn't vote Tory a few months ago are not backing him as much or are more willing to say negative. Not because those who did have changed.
Well the Brexit supporting Tory voters I have on Facebook are constantly posting anti Boris memes. They seem to have changed their mind, but clearly it does not fit your narrative.
Were they posting pro Boris memes before December's election?
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
So why are Boris’s approval ratings declining?
Because those who didn't vote Tory a few months ago are not backing him as much or are more willing to say negative. Not because those who did have changed.
Well the Brexit supporting Tory voters I have on Facebook are constantly posting anti Boris memes. They seem to have changed their mind, but clearly it does not fit your narrative.
Were they posting pro Boris memes before December's election?
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
Fairer allocation of social housing was never going to save much if any money, so I doubt "austerity" was a significant driver.
Occasionally governments do actually do things on principle.
OK.
Nevertheless I think all bar one can agree that although the Coalition did not assume office until 2010 they were not exempt from having to deal with the consequential costs of the 2008 bank crash.
Totally O/T, I don't know if people have been watching the Last Dance (documentary series of Jordan / Chicago Bulls).
No idea if it was by design, but basically every main protagonist (bar the coach, Phil Jackson), come off as absolute massive docuhebags.
Apparently, Jordan's own production company was responsible for the series, so probably not.
As I have no interest in basketball this bit from the review gives me little interest in watching the thing.
https://slate.com/culture/2020/05/the-last-dance-michael-jordan-bulls-wizards.html ...For a 10-part documentary that promised unprecedented access into Jordan’s world, that scene says it all: There is no getting to know “the real Michael Jordan.” Or, more precisely, this is who he is: an emotionally walled-off, dickish, phenomenal basketball player who doesn’t have much to give off the court. The big question I had going into The Last Dance was, “Is there anything more to Michael Jordan than basketball?” If this documentary is the final word on his legacy, the answer is: apparently not...
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
Fairer allocation of social housing was never going to save much if any money, so I doubt "austerity" was a significant driver.
Occasionally governments do actually do things on principle.
OK.
Nevertheless I think all bar one can agree that although the Coalition did not assume office until 2010 they were not exempt from having to deal with the consequential costs of the 2008 bank crash.
Indeed. And the consequential costs of Brown borrowing during a boom.
How much of government expenditure in 2010 do you think was due to bank bailouts? What proportion of expenditure?
I thought the reopening was meant to be tied into track and trace. It looks like the Gov't is pushing ahead with the whole reopening plan before track and trace is sorted though ?
That is what I have been complaining about for the last week. 3 conditions: mass testing: tickish; fast testing: nope; a working app for tracing: nope. One condition out of 3. A rise in the number of cases is almost inevitable. And what do we do then?
I think we should be able to turn some of the "mass" part of the testing into "fast", but we still need a working system which includes an app.
I thought the reopening was meant to be tied into track and trace. It looks like the Gov't is pushing ahead with the whole reopening plan before track and trace is sorted though ?
That is what I have been complaining about for the last week. 3 conditions: mass testing: tickish; fast testing: nope; a working app for tracing: nope. One condition out of 3. A rise in the number of cases is almost inevitable. And what do we do then?
I think the government will have a few weeks of grace because many people will be wary of sending their kids to school, etc, and that may keep sufficient lid on things until they can sort out the contact tracing.
I noted a week ago that anecdotally new northern Brexiteer Tory voters were started to turn on the Government and @HYUFD told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, from his flat in Essex. It’s nice that the polling is starting to prove me right.
Which polling?
Boris’s approval ratings.
OK but VI still worse for Labour than GE 2019
Lets hope that is about to change
I don’t think anyone is really paying attention to party politics at the moment, and who can blame them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
They clearly still are overall otherwise the Tories would not be polling at a higher voteshare than they have got at any general election since 1959
So why are Boris’s approval ratings declining?
Because those who didn't vote Tory a few months ago are not backing him as much or are more willing to say negative. Not because those who did have changed.
Well the Brexit supporting Tory voters I have on Facebook are constantly posting anti Boris memes. They seem to have changed their mind, but clearly it does not fit your narrative.
Were they posting pro Boris memes before December's election?
Yes.
Fair enough.
On my Facebook anti Boris memes are being shared by the same usual suspects who would share them last December too.
The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?
Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.
However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.
Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.
I suspect it varies around the country.
In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.
I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.
BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:
It is not so many years ago that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove - yet both are now comfortably Labour.In 1966 Labour came within 3000 votes of taking Cheltenham - though there was no Liberal that year.
Can you be a bit more specific on when it was that 'that Labour lost its deposit in Enfield Southgate and Hove'?
Labour lost its deposit at the Enfield Southgate by election held in December 1984 following the death of Anthony Berry in the Brighton bombing outrage. Portillo was elected as the new MP. There was also a by election at Hove in November 1973 when Tim Sainsbury was first elected. In both cases the Deposit threshold was still 12.5% - rather than the 5% we have seen since the mid-1980s.
Thanks and exactly. 2 by-elections and 1 GE and on old rules. These are 36 and 46 years ago. They have no relevance to today, it's a different world.
Labour's ousting of Portillo in 1997 was a major shock - and whilst Labour held on comfortably in 2001 the seat reverted to Tory hands in 2005. This rather confirmed the view that it would only fall to Labour in landslide years. That changed in 2017. Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
White working class ex industrial and coastal town seats like Bolsover, Mansfield and Grimsby are now solidly Tory.
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Gove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse
Such seats are not 'solidly' Tory on the basis of a single election win - regardless of the majority on that occasion. Only in the event of the pattern being repeated over several elections can such a judgement reasonably be made. Seats such as Sittingbourne & Sheppey, Thanet South, Dover, Stevenage, Watford ,Hemel Hempstead, Welwyn & Hatfield may have appeared 'solidly' Labour in 1997 & 2001 but were clearly not so.
Comments
It is mentioned downthread that the 2019 GE was about Corbyn, not so much Brexit. Sorry but that is rubbish.
Corbyn did well in 2017 when both parties lied about their commitment to Brexit, that GE was not about Brexit at all and the red wall did not seem too fussed about Corbyn and his links with supposed terrorists, Marxism etc
Fast forward to 2019 and it was all about Brexit, though I concede that Boris was a much more charismatic opponent than May.
When the 2024 GE comes around and Starmer is banging on about rejoining the EU, free movement of people, possibly the Euro and Schengen then he has about as much chance of regaining those seats as I do of being PM.
If the Tories mess up Brexit you will see the emergence of the Brexit Party in some form or other, they would definitely take votes in those constituencies that Labour need to win back. It's possible they may split the Tory vote and allow Labour back in, but not with Starmer in charge.
Labour missed a massive opportunity in not voting Lisa Nandy as leader.
Once upon a time, before the Brexit wars, even the Guardian noticed this - even if it was just to have a dig at Next...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/28/next-polish-workers-british-retailer-poland-uk-minimum-wage-yorkshire-warehouse
Is there really an argument that this hasn't depressed local wages?
The police, armed like military units, go into some of the poor districts for a gun battle with the locals and then withdraw.
It's a country occupying itself, in places.
But I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.
Will somebody think of the criminals in this pandemic...
Nicola Sturgeon said the easing of restrictions would mean people would be able to meet up with others outside their household and be allowed more outdoor activities.
However in many areas getting a council house is akin to winning the lottery. The first debate we need to have is more fundamental - social housing: what are we trying to achieve?
Hove has seen more significant demographic change , but for many years was seen as a Tory v Liberal contest.
If the positives are to outweigh the financial disaster of both huge tariffs and huge costs of stopping vehicles to check goods then they must be absolutely massive. Can you give me a few examples?
Urban seats with high numbers of graduates like Enfield Southgate and Gove are now solid Labour, it is social change that is unlikely to reverse
People can see that not just Labour voters.
As for him campaigning to re -join the E U, no chance.
The advantages are that we can control our own laws and money and if our government displeases us we can kick it out.
However Labour has more chance of winning middle class Tory Remainers in London and the South and more prosperous suburbs in the North and Midlands like Altrincham and Sale West and Broxtowe than it does of beating Boris in white working class Leave seats like Grimsby, Ashfield and Mansfield.
In that sense Starmer was a better pick for them than Nandy
The acute challenge faced by Labour is that in many of these places the CLP is run by Corbynite nutters...
It is certainly impressive but also rather a waste of everyone's time.
I really do think that @Philip_Thompson is doing this. Because no one could be that dense in what are otherwise fairly straightforward, easy-to-grasp issues.
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1262357454643499008?s=20
Rachel Reeves: “We’re saying they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to a secure deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal, so that means taking the time that is necessary but it’s up to government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… that is getting a good deal and a good deal by the end of this year. If they are not in a position to do that then they need to come back and expand the timetable.”
If the Coalition were not grappling with the costs of the City crash and bailout (since it happened before they came to power) one wonders what on earth they were grappling with. Many many books will need to be rewritten.
1 - 2020?
2 - A later date before the end of the parliament?
Im clearly 1, as its easier to make the economic adjustments coming out of the covid19 crash than it will be when we have already started our recovery.
Most seem to prefer 2 - why? Is it in the hope it never happens?
Of that £4 in spending per £3 in taxes, just how much do you think was the cost of the bailout?
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1261962214824652802?s=20
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1261751866624532482?s=20
Hove and Enfield Southgate elected a Tory MP under Cameron at least once but have elected Labour MPs since Cameron left.
They are unlikely to vote Tory again until a pro single market Tory leader is elected, which is at least a generation away
One famous example where discarding an outlier lied to error was with the 1987 Great Storm. An aircraft observation over the Bay of Biscay was discarded because it was so far out compared to what was expected. When it was included in re-runs after the event it made a large difference.
Modern data assimilation systems can make more nuanced judgements but the essential problem remains: when is an outlier bad data and when is it a sign of something dramatic and real?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/15/boris-johnson-no-public-sector-pay-freeze-no-austerity-uk-emerges/
For me, the last thing that the economy needs is a prolonged period of uncertainty about the terms of trade. Almost any terms of trade, even WTO, is better than that uncertainty but a deal with free market access is best of all.
Occasionally governments do actually do things on principle.
Voting intention is irrelevant at this point.
Lets hope that is about to change
I truly believe that having Stormont agree to special arrangements is no more a border than having Holyrood agree to special arrangements for a devolved matter.
Plus I've been consistent since before Boris resigned from May's government that the principle for me was democracy. May's backstop was undemocratic - a Stormont-determined special arrangement is democratic. If NI isn't happy with the arrangements then Stormont can and should end them.
Anecdotally nobody is saying they support Labour, the are simply criticizing the Government, and rightly so.
I make no prediction for what is going to happen, I’m merely telling @HYUFD that his precious “red wall” Tory voters, that he knows nothing about, aren’t very happy with his man’s performance.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/COVID-19-daily-announced-deaths-18-May-2020.xlsx
Last Monday, it was 18 / 76 / 45
So 115 vs 139.
I do however fear once you have voted Tory once it is easy to justify sticking with it especially if you are a Brexiteer that wants immigration limited.
Hope i am wrong and we win back all the red wall seats and more in 2024
2021 LE will give us an early indication I expect
It looks like the Gov't is pushing ahead with the whole reopening plan before track and trace is sorted though ?
They could then stand aside to leave it to the Lib Dems to take the seat from Labour. It is, after all, what used to happen in Bolton West - an arrangement set up by no less than Churchill himself. This was discussed on here the other day.
No idea if it was by design, but basically every main protagonist (bar the coach, Phil Jackson), come off as absolute massive docuhebags.
Nevertheless I think all bar one can agree that although the Coalition did not assume office until 2010 they were not exempt from having to deal with the consequential costs of the 2008 bank crash.
As I have no interest in basketball this bit from the review gives me little interest in watching the thing.
https://slate.com/culture/2020/05/the-last-dance-michael-jordan-bulls-wizards.html
...For a 10-part documentary that promised unprecedented access into Jordan’s world, that scene says it all: There is no getting to know “the real Michael Jordan.” Or, more precisely, this is who he is: an emotionally walled-off, dickish, phenomenal basketball player who doesn’t have much to give off the court. The big question I had going into The Last Dance was, “Is there anything more to Michael Jordan than basketball?” If this documentary is the final word on his legacy, the answer is: apparently not...
How much of government expenditure in 2010 do you think was due to bank bailouts? What proportion of expenditure?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/doubts-oxford-vaccine-fails-stop-coronavirus-animal-trials/
On my Facebook anti Boris memes are being shared by the same usual suspects who would share them last December too.
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1262370413537001472?s=20