The reason most people don't go on the tube but do go to pubs etc is not because the tube is not thought safe but because they dont like wearing masks. If they acknowledge that without pressing the mask thing then more people will use public transport again.
The tube probably has a younger average age than the population .The younger the population is then the more likely they are not going on public transport because they dont like wearing masks not because they think it is not safe. Why else are beaches crowded , pubs and restaurants full etc but not public transport? Its the compulsory nature of having to wear a mask that is the problem and definitely not the solution to reducing gridlock
I've gone to the local shops far less since masks came in - for that very reason.
I now only do essential grocery shopping, or shop online, or go to pubs and restaurants (where they aren't necessary).
Same here and have an hospital appointment this afternoon where normally I would take the tram but using my car as I really dont like having to wear a mask for up to an hour on a tram or train. I switched my leaisure activities around as well , no longer go to the cinema but go swimming as leisure centres dont treat you like a leper as you enter
I will be interested to see whether @MaxPB's analysis reflects the reality, it would be great news if so
Hard to see it being wrong on the EOTHO offer. Even averaging out bookings over the days of the week reservations were up compared to the same time last year (which is quite amazing, when you think about it).
ID cards are not necessarily a bad idea but of course it's Cummings so what he really wants is to mine our data and give the contracts to his friends
No, ID cards are a terrible idea.
A single sign on for government services is a good idea, providing that Ms @Cyclefree or a well-known privacy advocate is involved in setting it up to avoid the big database.
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
You’d think that the UK was the only country to reopen schools the way Johnson is using it as great progress even before he knows if it will be a success.
At least reopening schools is actually news. Starmer didn't have anything new to talk about so he dug out the stale leftovers from the news of a month ago and put that in the microwave instead.
And everyone who enjoyed that dish at the time sang his praise for it again. Because that's new.
It is tragic how you thought that was a good PMQs performance for Johnson
I don't. I never said I did.
I thought it was absolutely dull. I don't think anything that happened in this PMQs will be remembered by this time next month let alone in 3.75 years time.
I'm very confused, was Johnson's gotcha on Starmer for the exams seriously "will you congratulate the students on their hard work"
Wut
QTWAIN.
Johnson accurately pointed out that Labour was opposed to teacher assessed grades and had agreed with Ofqual. Labour said teacher assessed grades would be the wrong thing to do. Captain Hindsight then changed to saying the grades were wrong at the same time as everyone else did and is trying to score points on the government's u-turn when the Labour government in Wales and the Labour Party under Starmer had made the identically same u-turn!
But why let facts get in the way of childishly giggling "hee hee hee you made a u-turn"
Somebody is upset their man got destroyed today
Not really. I stand by what I said earlier - reheated stale old arguments. Nobody will change their minds.
People attacking the government for u-turns 3 weeks ago or whenever it was are still doing so. People who didn't aren't. Has anyone changed or been influenced by PMQs today?
One drop, then two then three. Eventually the bucket overflows.
Oh indeed but this is same dripping wet nonsense we were dealing with weeks ago.
I appreciate there was no PMQs at the time so Starmer couldn't get his digs in, in the Commons, at the time . . . but was there nothing new to talk about? Nothing about the return to schools, the future of the economy, forthcoming issues?
Nah just repeat the same drops that we've all heard repeatedly already. That'll change people's minds!
The point is that we are seeing it in real time on this very board. Erstwhile Conservatives, and swing voters are realising that loudly expressed boosting, failure to even attempt to answer the question, dead cats, and pre-prepared allegations simply isn't that impressive. Most of the public, unlike PBers, haven't noticed yet. But hoping they never will is not a reliable strategy.
I will be interested to see whether @MaxPB's analysis reflects the reality, it would be great news if so
Hard to see it being wrong on the EOTHO offer. Even averaging out bookings over the days of the week reservations were up compared to the same time last year (which is quite amazing, when you think about it).
Did anyone book a pub lunch midweek this time last year?
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
Fascinating thank you. Sounds like good news if so, hope you're right.
On topic, the odds on Harris and Pence should be the other way around, the one that is the incumbent Vice President should be the shortest odds.
Anyhoo aren't we in the window where as per Betfair's terms and conditions the winner can only be either Trump or Biden*, as they will be the ones on the ballot papers/electoral college electors**
*I'm excluding third party candidates
**Faithless voters won't count.
No. It is wrong to suppose that Betfair are accepting bets on candidates who can't win. Excluding third parties and disregarding faithless voters, the winner according to BF's Ts&Cs does NOT have to be one of Trump and Biden.
Here's why. Assume it's Trump who leaves the race, although it could be Biden. So if Trump leaves the race and the RNC choose let's say Pence for the sake of argument, then if some or all states say Trump must nonetheless "stay on the ballot paper", then the GOP will say that a vote for "Trump" means a vote for Pence in those states. Then if "Trump" i.e. Pence wins pluralities in enough states to bag 270 ECVs on the assumption of no faithless electors, the "projected" EC winner according to Betfair's Ts&Cs will be PENCE. It doesn't matter whether you call an EC vote for Pence "faithless" or not. The Ts&Cs say that events "subsequent" to a person becoming the PROJECTED winner are not taken into account.
We went through this in 2016 when someone people thought Hillary Clinton had weeks to live and it was too late to take her off the ballot papers.
If she had withdrawn/died and the Dems won, Betfair wouldn't pay out on a Paine victory in the electoral college, even if he won the electoral college 538-0.
Plus there's this.
There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.
Someone of us remember how much of a pain Betfair were over the Theresa May exit date market, and the effort and time it took to get stuff sorted.
Many people didn't.
If this doesn't scare you, from Betfair's Ts&Cs
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. ...
..If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
I still disagree. Betfair don't pay out on anything that happens in the actual electoral college. The question of whether they would have paid out, or will pay out, on anyone's victory in the EC is moot. It's the projected victory they pay out on. They say that in the first two sentences of what you quote.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
Found the data on transport usage -
Food for thought among the London centric, I think
This is like a single sign on for government services? I think such a system is used in many other countries.
Which countries require your sign on to be a pint?
Perhaps Cummings envisions personalised tax rates. Make alcohol more expensive for people with a drinking problem.
Higher taxes for those who voted for higher taxes would be wonderful, and a fine acknowledgement of their democratic will. As would lower taxes for those who voted for lower taxes. Everyone's happy!
The Tories are above 40% because - well everyone knows tax rises are coming. People are just hoping those tax rises won't disproportionately affect them. Soon as the tax rises hit the Tories are sub 40 with Labour taking a lead I think.
On topic, the odds on Harris and Pence should be the other way around, the one that is the incumbent Vice President should be the shortest odds.
Anyhoo aren't we in the window where as per Betfair's terms and conditions the winner can only be either Trump or Biden*, as they will be the ones on the ballot papers/electoral college electors**
*I'm excluding third party candidates
**Faithless voters won't count.
No. It is wrong to suppose that Betfair are accepting bets on candidates who can't win. Excluding third parties and disregarding faithless voters, the winner according to BF's Ts&Cs does NOT have to be one of Trump and Biden.
Here's why. Assume it's Trump who leaves the race, although it could be Biden. So if Trump leaves the race and the RNC choose let's say Pence for the sake of argument, then if some or all states say Trump must nonetheless "stay on the ballot paper", then the GOP will say that a vote for "Trump" means a vote for Pence in those states. Then if "Trump" i.e. Pence wins pluralities in enough states to bag 270 ECVs on the assumption of no faithless electors, the "projected" EC winner according to Betfair's Ts&Cs will be PENCE. It doesn't matter whether you call an EC vote for Pence "faithless" or not. The Ts&Cs say that events "subsequent" to a person becoming the PROJECTED winner are not taken into account.
We went through this in 2016 when someone people thought Hillary Clinton had weeks to live and it was too late to take her off the ballot papers.
If she had withdrawn/died and the Dems won, Betfair wouldn't pay out on a Paine victory in the electoral college, even if he won the electoral college 538-0.
Plus there's this.
There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.
Someone of us remember how much of a pain Betfair were over the Theresa May exit date market, and the effort and time it took to get stuff sorted.
Many people didn't.
If this doesn't scare you, from Betfair's Ts&Cs
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. ...
..If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
I still disagree. Betfair don't pay out on anything that happens in the actual electoral college. The question of whether they would have paid out, or will pay out, on anyone's victory in the EC is moot. It's the projected victory they pay out on. They say that in the first two sentences of what you quote.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
On your last sentence, Betfair said exactly that in 2016.
Polls moving well for Trump in the critical states. Forget the national vote, its the individual states, no good Biden getting 65 - 70% in New York etc, Trump seems to be ahead in the marginal areas, which won him the election last time. It is not just one pollster now, its becoming a steady drift. Lets be fair Biden does not look the ticket really, does he, very staid, no inspiratriuon for the young to go out and vote.Over the past week seems as if Trump has picked up the undecided, presumably the violence in Wisconsin. The Oregon sitiation died not seem to have any impact on the national situation. 4 more years, God help us.
So with the exception of the Trafalgar Group who are these "not just one" pollsters?
Trafalgar Group had Trump ahead in Michigan and Pennsylvania and Florida in 2016 too, no other pollster had Trump ahead in all those 3 states and without them Trump would have lost
You keep saying that. But if you want to look at the track record from 2016 (which is anyway of questionable value) the honest question to ask would be which pollster was closest in those states - (and other states)? For example, I think there were 8 pollsters who got the Florida result closer than Trafalgar in 2016 in their last polls before the election.
So what, you don't get EC votes by voteshare margin you get EC votes by winning a state even if you win by only 1 vote.
Trafalgar Group as I said was the only pollster who correctly forecast Trump was ahead in enough states to win the Electoral College and the Presidency.
Which doesn't make them right, their polls were awfully wrong and by coincidence not accuracy got the right result.
Every single pollster last time said that Trump was within margin of error of being the winner in Florida. Every single pollster was more accurate in Florida than Trafalgar.
So what, the only thing that mattered was forecasting who won the state, which Trafalgar did in Florida but also Michigan and Pennsylvania which other pollsters did not.
Now that might mean you can pay more attention to Trafalgar Group's Michigan and Pennsylvania polls this year and look at other pollsters for Florida polling but that does not dispute the fact Trafalgar Group were correct in 2016 in calling the winner
You are making an assumption that getting an error that happened to fall on the right side of the line in a handful of US States in 2016 means they have a particularly predictive force this time around.
Does this mean that you think whoever got the last UK General Election closer is likely to always get the subsequent one closest? (Hint - doesn't usually work out that way).
So the UK pollster which was closest in 2017 was also nearly spot on in 2019 too
2019: Opinium closest 2017: tie - Survation/Kantor closest 2015: All wrong (with published polls; non-published polls don't count for forecasting purposes); ComRes and Opinium least worst. 2010: ICM closest 2005: NOP closest
You're totally ignoring that the actual error in most Trafalgar polls is greater than most other polls. They happened to err in the right direction in one election in appropriate States. They were absymal in 2018.
These aren't horoscopes. It's not arcane magic. You don't pick the pattern of the constellations. It's statistics, and the mechanics of polling. You don't seem to give a stuff about what's behind it as long as you can pick out something that fits whatever-it-is you've decided in advance.
Does the "H" stand for "Hedgehog"?
In 2015 Survation's final poll also had the Tories ahead by 6% but they decided not to publish it as it was so out of sync but ended up correct.
2018 was a midterm, not like with like with presidential elections especially when Trafalgar are clearly best at identifying Trump voters in key rustbelt swing states
Aren't governments continually looking for money down the back of proverbial sofa? Isn't selling our data to private companies another way of raising a quick buck?
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
Found the data on transport usage -
Food for thought among the London centric, I think
Wow so pretty much back at 100% for most of the country.
And people were claiming here yesterday that Boris was lying for saying that huge numbers of people had gone back to work. I said here that the roads seem as busy as they were preCOVID and this demonstrates it.
The country exists outside of London not that you'd know it from people saying "look at this empty Tube, nobody is working!"
On topic, the odds on Harris and Pence should be the other way around, the one that is the incumbent Vice President should be the shortest odds.
Anyhoo aren't we in the window where as per Betfair's terms and conditions the winner can only be either Trump or Biden*, as they will be the ones on the ballot papers/electoral college electors**
*I'm excluding third party candidates
**Faithless voters won't count.
No. It is wrong to suppose that Betfair are accepting bets on candidates who can't win. Excluding third parties and disregarding faithless voters, the winner according to BF's Ts&Cs does NOT have to be one of Trump and Biden.
Here's why. Assume it's Trump who leaves the race, although it could be Biden. So if Trump leaves the race and the RNC choose let's say Pence for the sake of argument, then if some or all states say Trump must nonetheless "stay on the ballot paper", then the GOP will say that a vote for "Trump" means a vote for Pence in those states. Then if "Trump" i.e. Pence wins pluralities in enough states to bag 270 ECVs on the assumption of no faithless electors, the "projected" EC winner according to Betfair's Ts&Cs will be PENCE. It doesn't matter whether you call an EC vote for Pence "faithless" or not. The Ts&Cs say that events "subsequent" to a person becoming the PROJECTED winner are not taken into account.
We went through this in 2016 when someone people thought Hillary Clinton had weeks to live and it was too late to take her off the ballot papers.
If she had withdrawn/died and the Dems won, Betfair wouldn't pay out on a Paine victory in the electoral college, even if he won the electoral college 538-0.
Plus there's this.
There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.
Someone of us remember how much of a pain Betfair were over the Theresa May exit date market, and the effort and time it took to get stuff sorted.
Many people didn't.
If this doesn't scare you, from Betfair's Ts&Cs
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. ...
..If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
I still disagree. Betfair don't pay out on anything that happens in the actual electoral college. The question of whether they would have paid out, or will pay out, on anyone's victory in the EC is moot. It's the projected victory they pay out on. They say that in the first two sentences of what you quote.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
On your last sentence, Betfair said exactly that in 2016.
I'm surprised. But if that is so this time round, then why are Betfair showing me big green numbers against Pence and other non-Trump GOP candidates and Harris too, the same big green numbers they showed me before I clicked OK to place the bets?
You have me sufficiently worried to take a screenshot for the eventuality that I might have to wave it later.
This is like a single sign on for government services? I think such a system is used in many other countries.
Which countries require your sign on to be a pint?
Perhaps Cummings envisions personalised tax rates. Make alcohol more expensive for people with a drinking problem.
Higher taxes for those who voted for higher taxes would be wonderful, and a fine acknowledgement of their democratic will. As would lower taxes for those who voted for lower taxes. Everyone's happy!
What delight! I can keep my red passport and you fuckers get Boris's blue one!
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
Found the data on transport usage -
Food for thought among the London centric, I think
Wow so pretty much back at 100% for most of the country.
And people were claiming here yesterday that Boris was lying for saying that huge numbers of people had gone back to work. I said here that the roads seem as busy as they were preCOVID and this demonstrates it.
The country exists outside of London not that you'd know it from people saying "look at this empty Tube, nobody is working!"
But the buses are empty in the bits of Islington that Guardian columnists aspire to live in.
This is like a single sign on for government services? I think such a system is used in many other countries.
Which countries require your sign on to be a pint?
Perhaps Cummings envisions personalised tax rates. Make alcohol more expensive for people with a drinking problem.
Higher taxes for those who voted for higher taxes would be wonderful, and a fine acknowledgement of their democratic will. As would lower taxes for those who voted for lower taxes. Everyone's happy!
What delight! I can keep my red passport and you fuckers get Boris's blue one!
On topic, the odds on Harris and Pence should be the other way around, the one that is the incumbent Vice President should be the shortest odds.
Anyhoo aren't we in the window where as per Betfair's terms and conditions the winner can only be either Trump or Biden*, as they will be the ones on the ballot papers/electoral college electors**
*I'm excluding third party candidates
**Faithless voters won't count.
No. It is wrong to suppose that Betfair are accepting bets on candidates who can't win. Excluding third parties and disregarding faithless voters, the winner according to BF's Ts&Cs does NOT have to be one of Trump and Biden.
Here's why. Assume it's Trump who leaves the race, although it could be Biden. So if Trump leaves the race and the RNC choose let's say Pence for the sake of argument, then if some or all states say Trump must nonetheless "stay on the ballot paper", then the GOP will say that a vote for "Trump" means a vote for Pence in those states. Then if "Trump" i.e. Pence wins pluralities in enough states to bag 270 ECVs on the assumption of no faithless electors, the "projected" EC winner according to Betfair's Ts&Cs will be PENCE. It doesn't matter whether you call an EC vote for Pence "faithless" or not. The Ts&Cs say that events "subsequent" to a person becoming the PROJECTED winner are not taken into account.
We went through this in 2016 when someone people thought Hillary Clinton had weeks to live and it was too late to take her off the ballot papers.
If she had withdrawn/died and the Dems won, Betfair wouldn't pay out on a Paine victory in the electoral college, even if he won the electoral college 538-0.
Plus there's this.
There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.
Someone of us remember how much of a pain Betfair were over the Theresa May exit date market, and the effort and time it took to get stuff sorted.
Many people didn't.
If this doesn't scare you, from Betfair's Ts&Cs
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. ...
..If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
I still disagree. Betfair don't pay out on anything that happens in the actual electoral college. The question of whether they would have paid out, or will pay out, on anyone's victory in the EC is moot. It's the projected victory they pay out on. They say that in the first two sentences of what you quote.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
On your last sentence, Betfair said exactly that in 2016.
I'm surprised. But if that is so this time round, then why are Betfair showing me big green numbers against Pence and other non-Trump GOP candidates and Harris too, the same big green numbers they showed me before I clicked OK to place the bets?
The Tories are above 40% because - well everyone knows tax rises are coming. People are just hoping those tax rises won't disproportionately affect them. Soon as the tax rises hit the Tories are sub 40 with Labour taking a lead I think.
Which is why Tory MPs will likely vote down any budget with significant tax rises
You’d think that the UK was the only country to reopen schools the way Johnson is using it as great progress even before he knows if it will be a success.
At least reopening schools is actually news. Starmer didn't have anything new to talk about so he dug out the stale leftovers from the news of a month ago and put that in the microwave instead.
And everyone who enjoyed that dish at the time sang his praise for it again. Because that's new.
Anything Starmer said or did was pretty much irrelevant: so you are right, but off the point. The point was Johnson floundering about like Theresa May on mogadon, saying that pupils are returning to school "in record numbers" (!!) and playing the "surprised he doesn't congratulate them" card and then taking it to a whole excruciating new level with the IRA stuff. Starmer just thwacked out some dull and returnable serves, the result was all from unforced errors. The protagonists were Johnson and Hoyle. It was utterly terrible, and it will be a turning point not to the electorate which elects the government, but the one which elects the tory leader.
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
Found the data on transport usage -
Food for thought among the London centric, I think
Wow so pretty much back at 100% for most of the country.
And people were claiming here yesterday that Boris was lying for saying that huge numbers of people had gone back to work. I said here that the roads seem as busy as they were preCOVID and this demonstrates it.
The country exists outside of London not that you'd know it from people saying "look at this empty Tube, nobody is working!"
But the buses are empty in the bits of Islington that Guardian columnists aspire to live in.
Everyone is happy to get into their socially distanced cars, lorries and vans; less so hop onto public transport. Who knew !
So when will the news turn to the latest series of Noel Edmond's Game Show?
It had consistently high ratings in the news last year but for this year we don't seem to be talking about it at all. It must be due a come back soon though.
I will be interested to see whether @MaxPB's analysis reflects the reality, it would be great news if so
One can only hope, though I would like to point out that my optimism has already come through in the sentiment based indices and in the official statistics for June. My team is certainly doing a better job of this than the Bank of England at the moment, and we're not actually forecasters just been handed the job of doing it because we're good with real time data analysis.
I'm very confused, was Johnson's gotcha on Starmer for the exams seriously "will you congratulate the students on their hard work"
Wut
QTWAIN.
Johnson accurately pointed out that Labour was opposed to teacher assessed grades and had agreed with Ofqual. Labour said teacher assessed grades would be the wrong thing to do. Captain Hindsight then changed to saying the grades were wrong at the same time as everyone else did and is trying to score points on the government's u-turn when the Labour government in Wales and the Labour Party under Starmer had made the identically same u-turn!
But why let facts get in the way of childishly giggling "hee hee hee you made a u-turn"
Somebody is upset their man got destroyed today
Not really. I stand by what I said earlier - reheated stale old arguments. Nobody will change their minds.
People attacking the government for u-turns 3 weeks ago or whenever it was are still doing so. People who didn't aren't. Has anyone changed or been influenced by PMQs today?
One drop, then two then three. Eventually the bucket overflows.
Oh indeed but this is same dripping wet nonsense we were dealing with weeks ago.
I appreciate there was no PMQs at the time so Starmer couldn't get his digs in, in the Commons, at the time . . . but was there nothing new to talk about? Nothing about the return to schools, the future of the economy, forthcoming issues?
Nah just repeat the same drops that we've all heard repeatedly already. That'll change people's minds!
The point is that we are seeing it in real time on this very board. Erstwhile Conservatives, and swing voters are realising that loudly expressed boosting, failure to even attempt to answer the question, dead cats, and pre-prepared allegations simply isn't that impressive. Most of the public, unlike PBers, haven't noticed yet. But hoping they never will is not a reliable strategy.
And it's likely that most voters won't change their minds. Between 1992 and 1997, the Conservatives kept around three-quarters of their vote.
Suppose the weekend's 40:40 is right. In fact, let's be cautious, and ease it to 42:38 for the Conservatives. Add 5 % to the Labour share and take 5 % off the Conservative share, so the shares are 37:43. That's a solid Labour plurality, enough for SKS to say to the SNP, "Do you really want to actively vote for the Tories? I didn't think so, so back in your box."
Now, I'm not saying that will happen, or that I want it to happen. But it's not impossible, and it doesn't need a national Damascene conversion. Erosion, which is definitely happening, is enough.
Just seen some new forecasts come through for Q3. City consensus looks like 17%, European and American banks closer to 15%, UK banks (and UK branches of European banks) closer to 20%. There isn't usually such a big spread but I think European banks especially have underestimated the scale of WFH in the UK and are misunderstanding the real-time indicators showing that public transport use is still only 55% of the prior year.
One of our guys thinks that the £500m EOTHO spend has got close to a 9x economic multiplier based on transaction data we've received from POS and merchant services companies. He says it's the single most successful economic policy of the last 50 years. He thinks the chancellor should extend it for non franchise restaurants with 50 or fewer locations until the end of the year, essentially locking out the big chains like McDonalds and KFC but allowing smaller chains and independents to continue benefiting. It would also cut the cost of the policy by 50-60%.
July GDP data is going to be a very big day for the UK, it should show that the UK is currently the fastest growing global economy and is having the best bounceback and give us a sense of where we're headed by December.
I presume we have another week or so to wait for that?
It's the old Keynesian dictum of don't raise taxes during a recession. Perfect cover for Sir Keir to oppose them.
It's a very easy time for him. He can oppose anything specific safe and secure that he has cover from it being seen as partisan as Tory backbenchers will protest, whilst insisting generally he will support worthy things.
No 10 plans to create online “ID cards” for British citizens as Dominic Cummings tries to revolutionise the use of data across government.
Under proposals announced yesterday each person will be assigned a unique digital identity to help them with such tasks as registering with a new GP.
The details have yet to be finalised but it is understood that legislation could be amended to remove the need for landlords to check tenants’ immigration documents. Witnesses would no longer have to attend signings on property deals in person, and bar owners would be able to digitally verify drinkers’ ages.
What happens to all my data? Who has access to it? Who can they share it with? What can they do with it?
I definitely dont want mandatory ID cards. I can see benefits in replacing my NHS number, NI number, passport number, driving licence number, govt gateway numbers with a single number. If we are just adding yet another number it is bonkers.
The bigger issue is that the NI database and the NHS database (and probably many others) are full of duplicate entries and errors which are almost impossible to correct.
There's a definite huge advantage to a single login online to access all government services, but as with the last ID card proposal it needs to be done in a way that doesn't involve a massive tracking database behind it. The government, of course, would love the big database. All governments and their civil servants love big databases.
There is already a single log-in: the Government Gateway number.
ID cards don’t work without a big database behind them, regardless of whether they’re physical or digital.
They fundamentally change the balance of power between the state and the citizen - in the state’s favour. Just no.
And it displays a remarkable level of cognitive dissonance.
The crocodile tears over this on the soft-left over the past 24 hours have been instructive and very revealing. However, not all soft-left comics aren't able to recognise the obsessions and tedium of their own side when it comes to comedy:
The reason most people don't go on the tube but do go to pubs etc is not because the tube is not thought safe but because they dont like wearing masks. If they acknowledge that without pressing the mask thing then more people will use public transport again.
The tube probably has a younger average age than the population .The younger the population is then the more likely they are not going on public transport because they dont like wearing masks not because they think it is not safe. Why else are beaches crowded , pubs and restaurants full etc but not public transport? Its the compulsory nature of having to wear a mask that is the problem and definitely not the solution to reducing gridlock
From my experience of the Tube a fortnight ago - the few people on it seem incapable of understanding that a mask should cover both the mouth and nose and many were happy to just wear it around their neck.
The reason most people don't go on the tube but do go to pubs etc is not because the tube is not thought safe but because they dont like wearing masks. If they acknowledge that without pressing the mask thing then more people will use public transport again.
The tube probably has a younger average age than the population .The younger the population is then the more likely they are not going on public transport because they dont like wearing masks not because they think it is not safe. Why else are beaches crowded , pubs and restaurants full etc but not public transport? Its the compulsory nature of having to wear a mask that is the problem and definitely not the solution to reducing gridlock
Got any polling on that? Seems like an obvious and easy thing to poll. If you haven't, I can think of a few relevant differences between pubs and beaches vs underground trains, other than the mask/no mask thing.
On why the Tube is still empty, it's simple - no one has anywhere to go. Offices are still mostly not open, the ones that are will be at around 30-40% of maximum capacity and even then only a handful of people will be going in person each day. There are also no tourists in London which is another huge proportion of Tube usage that has simply disappeared. Until there is a vaccine and tourists return and offices are back to 100% of capacity people just haven't got any reason to use it.
You’d think that the UK was the only country to reopen schools the way Johnson is using it as great progress even before he knows if it will be a success.
At least reopening schools is actually news. Starmer didn't have anything new to talk about so he dug out the stale leftovers from the news of a month ago and put that in the microwave instead.
And everyone who enjoyed that dish at the time sang his praise for it again. Because that's new.
Anything Starmer said or did was pretty much irrelevant: so you are right, but off the point. The point was Johnson floundering about like Theresa May on mogadon, saying that pupils are returning to school "in record numbers" (!!) and playing the "surprised he doesn't congratulate them" card and then taking it to a whole excruciating new level with the IRA stuff. Starmer just thwacked out some dull and returnable serves, the result was all from unforced errors. The protagonists were Johnson and Hoyle. It was utterly terrible, and it will be a turning point not to the electorate which elects the government, but the one which elects the tory leader.
Pupils are returning to schools in "record [post-pandemic] numbers" this week. Not sure how that's an unforced error, its a major success and he's right to talk about it. My daughter started back at her school this morning and when I dropped her off I was both surprised how busy and how well organised it was - plenty of social distancing between parents which I had been concerned about. The school is expecting everyone back as far as I know which is remarkable. People here have been saying for months that the return to school would be a disaster and now that it isn't you laugh at Boris for pointing it out? Pull the other one!
As for Boris's future frankly the most significant development for me wasn't the stale arguments in PMQs today - it is the @MaxPB 's analysis. If that turns out to be accurate then the Government could win a lot of kudos for handling the economic side of this well and that is going to be a major issue when it comes to the next election, not stories like what was discussed at PMQs today.
You’d think that the UK was the only country to reopen schools the way Johnson is using it as great progress even before he knows if it will be a success.
At least reopening schools is actually news. Starmer didn't have anything new to talk about so he dug out the stale leftovers from the news of a month ago and put that in the microwave instead.
And everyone who enjoyed that dish at the time sang his praise for it again. Because that's new.
Anything Starmer said or did was pretty much irrelevant: so you are right, but off the point. The point was Johnson floundering about like Theresa May on mogadon, saying that pupils are returning to school "in record numbers" (!!) and playing the "surprised he doesn't congratulate them" card and then taking it to a whole excruciating new level with the IRA stuff. Starmer just thwacked out some dull and returnable serves, the result was all from unforced errors. The protagonists were Johnson and Hoyle. It was utterly terrible, and it will be a turning point not to the electorate which elects the government, but the one which elects the tory leader.
Spot on. The PMQs was nothing to do with whether Starmer was good, bad or indifferent - that's a matter of opinion. But that BJ was absolutely terrible is a fact. He is really struggling, and Tory MPs will be seeing this and thinking.....
LOL at Boris referring to Starmer as Captain Hindsight. Its so true.
Not that it matters much, but Johnson undermined his own position with that quip. U-Turns aren't of themselves a bad thing. You try something; it doesn't try work; you try something else. But if you accuse people of hindsight when they point out it didn't in fact work, you neutralise your justification for making the U-Turn. People then will ask what you are doing. The point of U-Turns is that you are acting in hindsight, correcting a mistake that became apparent later on.
The Tories are above 40% because - well everyone knows tax rises are coming. People are just hoping those tax rises won't disproportionately affect them. Soon as the tax rises hit the Tories are sub 40 with Labour taking a lead I think.
I generally agree except I dont think everyone does know rises are coming. People can be remarkably surprised even by things which had lots of notice (see Waspi women). With hits from labour and many in their own party the tory rating could plummet at any tax rise. Oh sure, everyone says they'll agree in a time of need, but that's nonsense.
On topic, the odds on Harris and Pence should be the other way around, the one that is the incumbent Vice President should be the shortest odds.
Anyhoo aren't we in the window where as per Betfair's terms and conditions the winner can only be either Trump or Biden*, as they will be the ones on the ballot papers/electoral college electors**
*I'm excluding third party candidates
**Faithless voters won't count.
No. It is wrong to suppose that Betfair are accepting bets on candidates who can't win. Excluding third parties and disregarding faithless voters, the winner according to BF's Ts&Cs does NOT have to be one of Trump and Biden.
Here's why. Assume it's Trump who leaves the race, although it could be Biden. So if Trump leaves the race and the RNC choose let's say Pence for the sake of argument, then if some or all states say Trump must nonetheless "stay on the ballot paper", then the GOP will say that a vote for "Trump" means a vote for Pence in those states. Then if "Trump" i.e. Pence wins pluralities in enough states to bag 270 ECVs on the assumption of no faithless electors, the "projected" EC winner according to Betfair's Ts&Cs will be PENCE. It doesn't matter whether you call an EC vote for Pence "faithless" or not. The Ts&Cs say that events "subsequent" to a person becoming the PROJECTED winner are not taken into account.
We went through this in 2016 when someone people thought Hillary Clinton had weeks to live and it was too late to take her off the ballot papers.
If she had withdrawn/died and the Dems won, Betfair wouldn't pay out on a Paine victory in the electoral college, even if he won the electoral college 538-0.
Plus there's this.
There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.
Someone of us remember how much of a pain Betfair were over the Theresa May exit date market, and the effort and time it took to get stuff sorted.
Many people didn't.
If this doesn't scare you, from Betfair's Ts&Cs
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. ...
..If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
I still disagree. Betfair don't pay out on anything that happens in the actual electoral college. The question of whether they would have paid out, or will pay out, on anyone's victory in the EC is moot. It's the projected victory they pay out on. They say that in the first two sentences of what you quote.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
On your last sentence, Betfair said exactly that in 2016.
I'm surprised. But if that is so this time round, then why are Betfair showing me big green numbers against Pence and other non-Trump GOP candidates and Harris too, the same big green numbers they showed me before I clicked OK to place the bets?
Because they are an exchange.
It would be unethical for an exchange to allow a person to offer a bet, and to tell a potential taker of the bet how much they will receive if successful, when the exchange knows there is literally zero probability of them paying out to the taker of the bet.
I read all this stuff on here about the US voting system - dodgy machines, faithless electors, ECV skewing the popular vote, gerrymanding on an industrial scale, etc etc.
I am not sure that they have any right to call themselves a democracy. The whole thing strikes me as a monied stitch-up verging on the farcical ...
We are still in the 'side x wont do what we want, how unfair' territory. It might cause Scott to get tumescent but wake me up when they stop just saying press lines to each other.
You’d think that the UK was the only country to reopen schools the way Johnson is using it as great progress even before he knows if it will be a success.
At least reopening schools is actually news. Starmer didn't have anything new to talk about so he dug out the stale leftovers from the news of a month ago and put that in the microwave instead.
And everyone who enjoyed that dish at the time sang his praise for it again. Because that's new.
Anything Starmer said or did was pretty much irrelevant: so you are right, but off the point. The point was Johnson floundering about like Theresa May on mogadon, saying that pupils are returning to school "in record numbers" (!!) and playing the "surprised he doesn't congratulate them" card and then taking it to a whole excruciating new level with the IRA stuff. Starmer just thwacked out some dull and returnable serves, the result was all from unforced errors. The protagonists were Johnson and Hoyle. It was utterly terrible, and it will be a turning point not to the electorate which elects the government, but the one which elects the tory leader.
Pupils are returning to schools in "record [post-pandemic] numbers" this week. Not sure how that's an unforced error, its a major success and he's right to talk about it. My daughter started back at her school this morning and when I dropped her off I was both surprised how busy and how well organised it was - plenty of social distancing between parents which I had been concerned about. The school is expecting everyone back as far as I know which is remarkable. People here have been saying for months that the return to school would be a disaster and now that it isn't you laugh at Boris for pointing it out? Pull the other one!
As for Boris's future frankly the most significant development for me wasn't the stale arguments in PMQs today - it is the @MaxPB 's analysis. If that turns out to be accurate then the Government could win a lot of kudos for handling the economic side of this well and that is going to be a major issue when it comes to the next election, not stories like what was discussed at PMQs today.
Well I wouldn't be making any bets on it, at least not until we have July data in hand and some September data in hand.
It would be unethical for an exchange to allow a person to offer a bet, and to tell a potential taker of the bet how much they will receive if successful, when the exchange knows there is literally zero probability of them paying out to the taker of the bet.
Well that's what they effectively did with the Theresa May exit date market.
And it displays a remarkable level of cognitive dissonance.
The crocodile tears over this on the soft-left over the past 24 hours have been instructive and very revealing. However, not all soft-left comics aren't able to recognise the obsessions and tedium of their own side when it comes to comedy:
I will be interested to see whether @MaxPB's analysis reflects the reality, it would be great news if so
One can only hope, though I would like to point out that my optimism has already come through in the sentiment based indices and in the official statistics for June. My team is certainly doing a better job of this than the Bank of England at the moment, and we're not actually forecasters just been handed the job of doing it because we're good with real time data analysis.
"The future is already here – it’s just not evenly distributed yet.’
Cal me cynical but I think that's a deliberate 'mistake' by Sunak. I know I know.
When I worked for one bank, they had a course on what to do if the press started camping outside. The trainer said that the press gaggle always has one (at least) with a long lens looking for exposed papers.
Further - that if you accidentally got caught by this, most people would assume it was deliberate. Since it's a well known way of floating a story.
It would be unethical for an exchange to allow a person to offer a bet, and to tell a potential taker of the bet how much they will receive if successful, when the exchange knows there is literally zero probability of them paying out to the taker of the bet.
Well that's what they effectively did with the Theresa May exit date market.
What an absolute dumpster fire that market was. All Betfair needs to do is avoid creating a false market, they failed miserably on that occasion.
Comments
This was.
https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/1301120693153804289
dire.
A single sign on for government services is a good idea, providing that Ms @Cyclefree or a well-known privacy advocate is involved in setting it up to avoid the big database.
Good.
Opportunity missed if he didn't.
I thought it was absolutely dull. I don't think anything that happened in this PMQs will be remembered by this time next month let alone in 3.75 years time.
Clever. Very clever.
Erstwhile Conservatives, and swing voters are realising that loudly expressed boosting, failure to even attempt to answer the question, dead cats, and pre-prepared allegations simply isn't that impressive.
Most of the public, unlike PBers, haven't noticed yet.
But hoping they never will is not a reliable strategy.
Who says "projected" means it is assumed that ECVs will be both "faithful" and "for a person whose name is printed on the ballot paper even if they died in September"?
Food for thought among the London centric, I think
Higher taxes for those who voted for higher taxes would be wonderful, and a fine acknowledgement of their democratic will. As would lower taxes for those who voted for lower taxes. Everyone's happy!
https://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Final-Phone-Poll-2.pdf
2018 was a midterm, not like with like with presidential elections especially when Trafalgar are clearly best at identifying Trump voters in key rustbelt swing states
And people were claiming here yesterday that Boris was lying for saying that huge numbers of people had gone back to work. I said here that the roads seem as busy as they were preCOVID and this demonstrates it.
The country exists outside of London not that you'd know it from people saying "look at this empty Tube, nobody is working!"
I suspect they go between 37 and about 42 for a while
You have me sufficiently worried to take a screenshot for the eventuality that I might have to wave it later.
EU sticks to its guns: good
UK sticks to its guns: bad
Who knew !
It had consistently high ratings in the news last year but for this year we don't seem to be talking about it at all. It must be due a come back soon though.
Suppose the weekend's 40:40 is right. In fact, let's be cautious, and ease it to 42:38 for the Conservatives. Add 5 % to the Labour share and take 5 % off the Conservative share, so the shares are 37:43. That's a solid Labour plurality, enough for SKS to say to the SNP, "Do you really want to actively vote for the Tories? I didn't think so, so back in your box."
Now, I'm not saying that will happen, or that I want it to happen. But it's not impossible, and it doesn't need a national Damascene conversion. Erosion, which is definitely happening, is enough.
PMQs was the perfect overture for that meeting...
ID cards don’t work without a big database behind them, regardless of whether they’re physical or digital.
They fundamentally change the balance of power between the state and the citizen - in the state’s favour. Just no.
As for Boris's future frankly the most significant development for me wasn't the stale arguments in PMQs today - it is the @MaxPB 's analysis. If that turns out to be accurate then the Government could win a lot of kudos for handling the economic side of this well and that is going to be a major issue when it comes to the next election, not stories like what was discussed at PMQs today.
I am not sure that they have any right to call themselves a democracy. The whole thing strikes me as a monied stitch-up verging on the farcical ...
POBWAS.
https://twitter.com/DrZoeHyde/status/1296101982592065537
This is just disingenuous claptrap.
Further - that if you accidentally got caught by this, most people would assume it was deliberate. Since it's a well known way of floating a story.
Labour are all in favour of tax rises but not any the Tories do then they will oppose them. Even if its one they'd previously advocated.