The Republican candidates for mayor face a steep climb when it comes to winning the general election in November, but they're at least making the primary interesting.
Their first live televised debate Wednesday was heavy on theatrics, finger-pointing and personal attacks. "Curtis, you're a clown,” said Fernando Mateo. “And you're making a mockery of this very important primary."
The debate did take on a circus-like atmosphere, as Mateo and Curtis Sliwa repeatedly went out of their way to tear each other down. Each tried to frame himself as the true Republican and true supporter of law enforcement.
Mateo said of Sliwa: "He is partly responsible for bail reform and defund the police because he supported and endorsed every single Democrat that voted for those laws."
In response, Sliwa pointed to remarks Mateo had made after La Marina, the Inwood restaurant he co-owned, was shut down by police. "You publicly said on Hot 97, the morning radio program, that all those cops responsible for that, they should have their heads cut off like snakes,” Sliwa said.
"All of a sudden,” he added, “you've discovered you have love for the police."
Both candidates support adding police officers, including on the subway. Sliwa points to his experience as founder of the Guardian Angels.
"You don't ride the subways,” he told Mateo. “I ride the subways every day."
Mateo later shot back: "Curtis Sliwa is a subway rider. That's all he knows how to do, communicate with the subway homeless people, because that's what he takes pride in. And he communicates with his 13 cats and his 14 litter boxes in his house."
The candidates actually agreed on many of the policy questions posed, including on education, street space and speed cameras. But Mateo — an advocate for cab drivers and bodega owners — has more closely tied himself to Trump, even falsely stating Trump won the November election.
Both men broke debate rules and brought out props: Mateo his “Trumpy Bear" stuffed animal, and Sliwa a photograph of Mateo posing with Mayor Bill de Blasio.
Mateo raised money for the mayor, but on Wednesday he defended his fundraising, saying many business people donate across party lines.
As for Sliwa, he opposed Trump and is a relative newcomer to the Republican party, as Mateo pointed out. "Curtis is a clown,” Mateo said. “I think his red beret is too tight on him. He never voted for Trump. He never supported the president that really backed law enforcement." Sliwa clarified: "I never voted for Hillary. I never voted for Joe Biden. I went independent."
So, what you're saying is that whichever Democrat wins the nomination is in with a good shout?
Yes, that’s literally the article I posted. Well done for, er, re-posting it.
I guess we’ll have to take Philip “Guru” Thompson’s view that it is dodgy over the British Election Study’s.
No I am saying that @Gardenwalker and the New Statesman's spin is dodgy, not the BES.
Please find me a single citation from the BES referring to Students as "workers" as opposed to "working age". I doubt they're that stupid, unlike some others.
The data is in there, raw. The convoluted attempts to throw shade and mid is all your own work.
Yes the data is "all people" or "excluding retirees".
The data is NOT as you lied about "workers" versus all people. You told a bare faced lie, or you didn't understand the figures, one or the other.
I’ll let sane PBers decide.
The data presents two views - “all voters” versus “voters excluding retirees”.
I literally have no idea what Philip Thompson’s issue is, but with experience of his various posts on here I also couldn’t give a shit.
Yes lets see if a single sane PBer thinks "voters excluding retirees" also excludes Students or the Unemployed. 🤦♂️
You might think if it was "voters excluding retirees, Students and the Unemployed" it would say so, but not in the mystical realms of @Gardenwalker where Students and the Unemployed do not exist. Or perhaps they're all retirees?
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
If only there was a term for when people misreport things.....
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
And yet, if there was no retired vote, Labour would be in government.
So yes, it is the retired propping the Conservatives up.
As I understand it, the passion for Tory voting in this cohort is higher than pretty much ever.
Anyway my point is this. We spend a lot of time, and commentators write many pieces, about appealing to the left behind.
It may be simpler. Labour holds no appeal for old people (especially old English people) and they happen to be the key voting bloc.
You're back to huge simplifications again.
Once people own their own home, own their own cars, start their own families, and live in the Shires, more of them tend to vote Conservative than not.
I’m not disputing that.
You seem blithely uninterested at the very stark age divide that has developed in voting preference, and the interesting implications that has on governments deciding whether or not to promote economy-enhancing policy.
No, I'm not uninterested in it (still less blithely, and have said it's an issue upthread) but I draw different conclusions to you.
The movement won't be inexorably in one direction either - I could see some of the existing Labour-heavy coherts moving in the opposite direction in 15-20 years time, for example.
In the media there is lots of talk about the Scottish nationalists, about Labour losing the red wall, about Brexit changing voting patterns - but the biggest change in voting patterns, the electoral triumph of the old over the young, a fracture in voting patterns that must surely reflect other divides in our society between the age groups - this change does not receive nearly as much notice or comment.
True, and I suspect it started with student loans, sky high housing costs and was turbo-boosted by a values schism over Brexit.
My experience of under 30s (talking to them in real life, and not on social media) is that they are a bit Wokey but aren't really socialist; fundamentally, they want choice, a good job, their own home, and a nice, stable and inclusive society.
Also, once you get them off social media, they are fundamentally rational and even convinceable on the most sensitive subjects.
Youth-whisperer Casino Royale finds the under 30s “fundamentally rational”. What a relief!
If you have a problem with your kid mate, just give me a call.
The eldest is only 6. Not quite old enough to be persuaded that Thatcher would have definitely definitely supported Boris.
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
The left don’t consider poor pensioners to be working class anymore as including them means the working class are voting Tory and voted for Brexit .
Your persistence on this point indicates you have some flesh in the game.
I know you’re not retired yourself, so I assume it is because you need the elderly vote to lend some kind of popular legitimacy to your anti-immigrant views.
If you think the route back to electoral popularity for Labour is to epouse pro-immigration views then I have a bridge to sell you.
I haven’t said it is?
I merely note that Isam seems to be triggered by the data I present, and am speculating as to why.
You also seem a bit touchy about it.
No. But you seem to be very touchy about anyone who doesn't take your black and white conclusions about the data at face value.
If I’m touchy it is because while some posters seem interested in what look to be counter-intuitive findings, others use it as lever to spout bolleaux about “the left”.
If all this board is good for is moaning about “the left” or “the right”, it is not v interesting.
I agree with that but I don't think that's what I was saying.
The Conservatives have solid leads amongst those aged over 38-42 and this corroborates with my experience at work in my professional life.
If you take the working age for half the population nowadays as basically 22-65 and the crossover age is 39, then there's little realistic way a dominant majority of workers could be Labour.
The New Statesman with an agenda to push and gullible people here pushing it for their own agenda have a figure they wanted by including the extremely slanted 18-21 demographic which warps the picture.
I certainly wouldn't trust the New Statesman alone.
I'm open-minded about any data but I'd want to see the full open set, the methodology used to compile it and the weightings and filters applied.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
I just don’t think that you should use ‘working class’ when you mean ‘working age’ - I couldn’t care less who I share my views with, that’s just the way it is
Rumours that Johnson will put back the 21st unlocking stage...
Adam Brooks @EssexPR · 2h Then they face the anger of the Nation, this indicates they have no belief in the vaccine. It will signal that normality can just be pushed back every time scientists kick and scream on TV.
This will be unforgivable
If that happens Boris needs to go.
Having trawled a bit it’s no more than a discussion about a two week delay if the data takes a turn for the worse, and I assume that is not cases but deaths and hospitals.
If the data for hospitalisations* and deaths took a turn for the worse to the extent that it actually justified delay (as opposed to just a rise from a very low base that was unlikely to be sustained in serious numbers) then it would be difficult to justify maintaining the restrictions at current levels, let alone loosening them.
A two week delay would have very little impact whatsoever, given how low our figures are.
I also would like to know more about "hospitalisations". I have a suspicion that a lot of hospitalisations at the moment could be just people with positive test + mild symptoms, visiting hospitals as a precaution.
I posted earlier about the England only data. Quite instructive that there is little or no increase in English hospitals despite the increased cases and hot spots. I think this will hold for the next 12 days and Boris will be able to hit the target.
And it was revealed today that 40% of the covid "deaths" are actually people who covid was not a cause of death.
So, basically halve the nightly figure appearing on BBC News at Ten.
You know it really shows my age that seeing you write 'BBC News at Ten" still jars.
For so much of my life 'News at Ten' was the sole prerogative of ITN
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
And yet, if there was no retired vote, Labour would be in government.
So yes, it is the retired propping the Conservatives up.
As I understand it, the passion for Tory voting in this cohort is higher than pretty much ever.
Anyway my point is this. We spend a lot of time, and commentators write many pieces, about appealing to the left behind.
It may be simpler. Labour holds no appeal for old people (especially old English people) and they happen to be the key voting bloc.
You're back to huge simplifications again.
Once people own their own home, own their own cars, start their own families, and live in the Shires, more of them tend to vote Conservative than not.
I’m not disputing that.
You seem blithely uninterested at the very stark age divide that has developed in voting preference, and the interesting implications that has on governments deciding whether or not to promote economy-enhancing policy.
No, I'm not uninterested in it (still less blithely, and have said it's an issue upthread) but I draw different conclusions to you.
The movement won't be inexorably in one direction either - I could see some of the existing Labour-heavy coherts moving in the opposite direction in 15-20 years time, for example.
In the media there is lots of talk about the Scottish nationalists, about Labour losing the red wall, about Brexit changing voting patterns - but the biggest change in voting patterns, the electoral triumph of the old over the young, a fracture in voting patterns that must surely reflect other divides in our society between the age groups - this change does not receive nearly as much notice or comment.
True, and I suspect it started with student loans, sky high housing costs and was turbo-boosted by a values schism over Brexit.
My experience of under 30s (talking to them in real life, and not on social media) is that they are a bit Wokey but aren't really socialist; fundamentally, they want choice, a good job, their own home, and a nice, stable and inclusive society.
Also, once you get them off social media, they are fundamentally rational and even convinceable on the most sensitive subjects.
I guess I'm more interested in the other end of the divide - why do the Tories now win such huge landslides among the old?
The obvious answer - and I don't know whether it is true - is that the Tories sheltered them from austerity, and so they have done what they've always accused Labour of seeking to do. They've created a client vote that they buy with taxpayer's money.
Huge accumulation of wealth from the ridiculous house price inflation of the nineties and noughties plays a significant role too. They want to keep it and not pay for their own care in their dotage. Hence no oven ready social care plan will see the light of day.
Yes, that’s literally the article I posted. Well done for, er, re-posting it.
I guess we’ll have to take Philip “Guru” Thompson’s view that it is dodgy over the British Election Study’s.
No I am saying that @Gardenwalker and the New Statesman's spin is dodgy, not the BES.
Please find me a single citation from the BES referring to Students as "workers" as opposed to "working age". I doubt they're that stupid, unlike some others.
The data is in there, raw. The convoluted attempts to throw shade and mid is all your own work.
Yes the data is "all people" or "excluding retirees".
The data is NOT as you lied about "workers" versus all people. You told a bare faced lie, or you didn't understand the figures, one or the other.
I’ll let sane PBers decide.
The data presents two views - “all voters” versus “voters excluding retirees”.
I literally have no idea what Philip Thompson’s issue is, but with experience of his various posts on here I also couldn’t give a shit.
Yes lets see if a single sane PBer thinks "voters excluding retirees" also excludes Students or the Unemployed. 🤦♂️
You might think if it was "voters excluding retirees, Students and the Unemployed" it would say so, but not in the mystical realms of @Gardenwalker where Students and the Unemployed do not exist. Or perhaps they're all retirees?
I literally have no idea what you’re talking about and I imagine most PBers don’t either.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The government is facing a surprise rebellion next week that could force it to reverse its cuts to the foreign aid budget, the BBC has learned.
The problem is that the UK doesn't do foreign aid like, for example, the French. So it could be used to advance British influence and interests, instead it seems to be used to try and alleviate pain and suffering and hunger and the like.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
I doubt this very much.
But, also, I have no theory for why house prices in the north and midlands are booming, when we’ve been told it’s all about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon.
What *is* driving house prices in the north and midlands?
There's plenty of people form London and the south-east moving northwards.
But as they're not media types they don't get reported in the media.
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
And yet, if there was no retired vote, Labour would be in government.
So yes, it is the retired propping the Conservatives up.
As I understand it, the passion for Tory voting in this cohort is higher than pretty much ever.
Anyway my point is this. We spend a lot of time, and commentators write many pieces, about appealing to the left behind.
It may be simpler. Labour holds no appeal for old people (especially old English people) and they happen to be the key voting bloc.
You're back to huge simplifications again.
Once people own their own home, own their own cars, start their own families, and live in the Shires, more of them tend to vote Conservative than not.
I’m not disputing that.
You seem blithely uninterested at the very stark age divide that has developed in voting preference, and the interesting implications that has on governments deciding whether or not to promote economy-enhancing policy.
No, I'm not uninterested in it (still less blithely, and have said it's an issue upthread) but I draw different conclusions to you.
The movement won't be inexorably in one direction either - I could see some of the existing Labour-heavy coherts moving in the opposite direction in 15-20 years time, for example.
In the media there is lots of talk about the Scottish nationalists, about Labour losing the red wall, about Brexit changing voting patterns - but the biggest change in voting patterns, the electoral triumph of the old over the young, a fracture in voting patterns that must surely reflect other divides in our society between the age groups - this change does not receive nearly as much notice or comment.
True, and I suspect it started with student loans, sky high housing costs and was turbo-boosted by a values schism over Brexit.
My experience of under 30s (talking to them in real life, and not on social media) is that they are a bit Wokey but aren't really socialist; fundamentally, they want choice, a good job, their own home, and a nice, stable and inclusive society.
Also, once you get them off social media, they are fundamentally rational and even convinceable on the most sensitive subjects.
Youth-whisperer Casino Royale finds the under 30s “fundamentally rational”. What a relief!
If you have a problem with your kid mate, just give me a call.
The eldest is only 6. Not quite old enough to be persuaded that Thatcher would have definitely definitely supported Boris.
Not an issue for primary school kids.
I'll just go full @IanB2 and start talking about The Clown.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Watched the interview. My feeling was that it humanised him quite a bit and, speaking personally, made me think he is an impressive man to go from his background to where he is, via the career he's had. My fear is, his achievements won't necessarily be properly understood by the general viewing public and that it probably didn't change any minds. Still, he should keep going with this kind of thing and the attempt to reach people where they are is admirable. I keep seeing stuff online from the Labour left annoyed that he agreed to be interviewed by Morgan (Saint Jeremy would never stoop to this kind of thing) and that he would listen to Blair. The interview certainly annoyed some of the right people! That said, I am predisposed to him and think I'll probably vote Labour at the next general, so I am not neutral on this.
I haven’t watched it, but why do you say it was impressive to go from his background to become DPP? He went to a grammar school, did he not? It doesn’t seem out of the ordinary that he’d go on to have a good professional career.
It could be a generational thing now that you mention it - Grammars were well before my time and so I often overlook the things they could do for social mobility. I'm fairly certain he will have lacked some of the advantages of his peers. Also , afaik, Leeds is not a distinguished law school and he still managed to rise pretty high. The whole story just feels like, through force of will and his own hard work and competence he rose to the top of his profession. I would recommend going back to watch the interview, it was very light on politics but I watched it for its potential political implications.
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
And yet, if there was no retired vote, Labour would be in government.
So yes, it is the retired propping the Conservatives up.
As I understand it, the passion for Tory voting in this cohort is higher than pretty much ever.
Anyway my point is this. We spend a lot of time, and commentators write many pieces, about appealing to the left behind.
It may be simpler. Labour holds no appeal for old people (especially old English people) and they happen to be the key voting bloc.
You're back to huge simplifications again.
Once people own their own home, own their own cars, start their own families, and live in the Shires, more of them tend to vote Conservative than not.
I’m not disputing that.
You seem blithely uninterested at the very stark age divide that has developed in voting preference, and the interesting implications that has on governments deciding whether or not to promote economy-enhancing policy.
No, I'm not uninterested in it (still less blithely, and have said it's an issue upthread) but I draw different conclusions to you.
The movement won't be inexorably in one direction either - I could see some of the existing Labour-heavy coherts moving in the opposite direction in 15-20 years time, for example.
In the media there is lots of talk about the Scottish nationalists, about Labour losing the red wall, about Brexit changing voting patterns - but the biggest change in voting patterns, the electoral triumph of the old over the young, a fracture in voting patterns that must surely reflect other divides in our society between the age groups - this change does not receive nearly as much notice or comment.
This is an important point (and not really a party political one):
The real "gap" is between those who have assets and savings (the old), and those who do not (the young).
We saw this in Italy, where retirees have kept the country in the Euro (to protect the savings of the old), even though it's meant terrible employment prospects for the young.
With society continuing to age, this intergenerational issue is only going to get worse.
Watched the interview. My feeling was that it humanised him quite a bit and, speaking personally, made me think he is an impressive man to go from his background to where he is, via the career he's had. My fear is, his achievements won't necessarily be properly understood by the general viewing public and that it probably didn't change any minds. Still, he should keep going with this kind of thing and the attempt to reach people where they are is admirable. I keep seeing stuff online from the Labour left annoyed that he agreed to be interviewed by Morgan (Saint Jeremy would never stoop to this kind of thing) and that he would listen to Blair. The interview certainly annoyed some of the right people! That said, I am predisposed to him and think I'll probably vote Labour at the next general, so I am not neutral on this.
Why is necessary for someone to try to humanise themselves when they're quite clearly already a human being? Something I don't understand.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
Data shows that voters support the Tories over Labour once they hit 39.
Anyway, I'm bored of going round in circles on this now.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
Yes, that’s literally the article I posted. Well done for, er, re-posting it.
I guess we’ll have to take Philip “Guru” Thompson’s view that it is dodgy over the British Election Study’s.
No I am saying that @Gardenwalker and the New Statesman's spin is dodgy, not the BES.
Please find me a single citation from the BES referring to Students as "workers" as opposed to "working age". I doubt they're that stupid, unlike some others.
The data is in there, raw. The convoluted attempts to throw shade and mid is all your own work.
Yes the data is "all people" or "excluding retirees".
The data is NOT as you lied about "workers" versus all people. You told a bare faced lie, or you didn't understand the figures, one or the other.
I’ll let sane PBers decide.
The data presents two views - “all voters” versus “voters excluding retirees”.
I literally have no idea what Philip Thompson’s issue is, but with experience of his various posts on here I also couldn’t give a shit.
Yes lets see if a single sane PBer thinks "voters excluding retirees" also excludes Students or the Unemployed. 🤦♂️
You might think if it was "voters excluding retirees, Students and the Unemployed" it would say so, but not in the mystical realms of @Gardenwalker where Students and the Unemployed do not exist. Or perhaps they're all retirees?
I literally have no idea what you’re talking about and I imagine most PBers don’t either.
Really? Are you too thick to understand a simple point.
You and the New Statesmen span the "excluding retirees" data to mean "workers". I think we can agree that the Unemployed are not "workers". I would expect most people would not class full time Students as workers instead of students. And I expect most people would class people of retirement age who are still working as workers.
I asked you if the "excluding retirees" data included Students and you said "No". But the reporting from the NS does not mention excluding Students so I see no reason to believe it does.
You falsely reported the data. Students are heavily Labour dominated, we all know that, but since 39 is crossover point a majority of working age years are plurality Tory voting not Labour voting. Excluding Students and not just Retirees, I rather expect that will be true of workers in general too but that data was not presented.
You falsely claimed this was not about Students. It is.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
Is there a variant identified thus far which scientists haven’t feared might be “resistant” (whatever precisely that means) to vaccines?
It is not the “working class” who voted for the Tories.
It is the elderly, who tend to be concentrated in economically backward areas like Hartlepool.
I thought the Tories had a huge lead in C2DEs?
They tend to be OLD. Economically inactive.
Hence voting to preserve their own wealth and ethnic hygiene at the expense of their grandkids’ life chances.
I think we have the answer.
It's a great figleaf to allow you to reinforce your own prejudices.
Happens to be true though, doesn’t it?
The statistics on wealth accumulation for the under 30s are simply terrifying. Old people don’t seem to care, or at least vote parties and policies that make the situation ever worse.
Perhaps this is simply what happens when a demos ages so much that the economically inactive (ie retired) form the decisive bloc.
I agree that the leads for Labour amongst the under 35s are so pronounced, particularly amongst women, that they're bound to cause a problem for the Conservatives in 15-20 years time.
However, it's a gross simplification to say it's just the retired propping the Conservatives up. The truth is the Tories have sizeable leads for anyone over 40 years old, and there are more of them than any other electoral age group.
And yet, if there was no retired vote, Labour would be in government.
So yes, it is the retired propping the Conservatives up.
As I understand it, the passion for Tory voting in this cohort is higher than pretty much ever.
Anyway my point is this. We spend a lot of time, and commentators write many pieces, about appealing to the left behind.
It may be simpler. Labour holds no appeal for old people (especially old English people) and they happen to be the key voting bloc.
You're back to huge simplifications again.
Once people own their own home, own their own cars, start their own families, and live in the Shires, more of them tend to vote Conservative than not.
I’m not disputing that.
You seem blithely uninterested at the very stark age divide that has developed in voting preference, and the interesting implications that has on governments deciding whether or not to promote economy-enhancing policy.
No, I'm not uninterested in it (still less blithely, and have said it's an issue upthread) but I draw different conclusions to you.
The movement won't be inexorably in one direction either - I could see some of the existing Labour-heavy coherts moving in the opposite direction in 15-20 years time, for example.
In the media there is lots of talk about the Scottish nationalists, about Labour losing the red wall, about Brexit changing voting patterns - but the biggest change in voting patterns, the electoral triumph of the old over the young, a fracture in voting patterns that must surely reflect other divides in our society between the age groups - this change does not receive nearly as much notice or comment.
This is an important point (and not really a party political one):
The real "gap" is between those who have assets and savings (the old), and those who do not (the young).
We saw this in Italy, where retirees have kept the country in the Euro (to protect the savings of the old), even though it's meant terrible employment prospects for the young.
With society continuing to age, this intergenerational issue is only going to get worse.
This essential fact is why we cannot expect a pro-economic growth for a generation.
Nor one interested in housing costs, the burden of social care, wealth disparities, etc.
There should be a word for this. Italification? Berlusconomics?
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
I doubt this very much.
But, also, I have no theory for why house prices in the north and midlands are booming, when we’ve been told it’s all about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon.
What *is* driving house prices in the north and midlands?
I think it is affordability, Fox Jr has become a homeowner in the fashionable Clarendon Park area of Leicester aged 26, while in an entry level job. You don't see that down South.
Leicesters population is expanding too.
Also mortgage rates of course. And the first time buyer support schemes.
And the insane Stamp Duty holiday bubble.
Plus costs of newbuild - as has been noted labour rates and material costs are adjusting, eg buffers of timber supplies in Scandinavian countries are not what they were 12 months ago, ructions in the insulation manufacturing industry - uncertainty around Grenfell outcomes but also manufacturing was limited in the lockdown. Demand is high as building is on a bit of a boom.
A few months and it will stabilise. Quite how it will stabilise, though ... ?
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
I doubt this very much.
But, also, I have no theory for why house prices in the north and midlands are booming, when we’ve been told it’s all about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon.
What *is* driving house prices in the north and midlands?
Yes, I was puzzled by this.
I suspect there is a large amount of anecdata about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon - people who move there tend to be visible to people who write articles about it in broadsheet newspapers. But they aren't necessarily representative.
TBH I think it is a huge push to call Northern house prices "booming".
The highest 12 month rise of any region - Yorkshire - 14%, only just reaches the increase in national average increase every year between 1997 and 2007, which was 13.5% *every year for ten years*.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
There was no evidence of a decline in the Tory vote in the London assembly and mayoral elections.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
Increasingly the views of the elderly are congruous with the Conservative Party, and the Young with Labour and Greens. Interestingly the LibDem vote is fairly even across all age ranges. There are exceptions of course amongst individuals, but it is a striking change from what historically was a small effect.
It works on a micro scale too. Looking at the ratio of over 65s to under 65s in a constituency seems pretty strongly predictive of which way its vote is moving.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Fair point. Having a garden and being in the country has kept me sane this year.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
I doubt this very much.
But, also, I have no theory for why house prices in the north and midlands are booming, when we’ve been told it’s all about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon.
What *is* driving house prices in the north and midlands?
Yes, I was puzzled by this.
I suspect there is a large amount of anecdata about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon - people who move there tend to be visible to people who write articles about it in broadsheet newspapers. But they aren't necessarily representative.
TBH I think it is a huge push to call Northern house prices "booming".
The highest 12 month rise of any region - Yorkshire - 14%, only just reaches the increase in national average increase every year between 1997 and 2007, which was 13.5% *every year for ten years*.
I think it is largely a catch up phenomenon. Waves of hose price inflation start in London, and then spread across the country. Usually peak rates of increase in the North and Midlands is predictive of the peak being reached.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
Yes I don’t follow that either. A lot of people seem to hold the view that the Government can be simultaneously unpopular for delaying lockdowns last year, and taking ages to relax one this year.
I sometimes wonder if, by being attacked from both sides, the Government has found the “Goldilocks zone” in which most people say “they must be treading the careful central path”.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
That's not what you said. You said workers nor working age.
I corrected you and said working-age not workers.
Now that I've shown you were wrong, you're trying to backtrack and bullshit your way out of the hole you dug my pretending you were saying what I said all along. 🤦♂️
Do you have the decency to admit that this data is about the working age (which includes Students and the Unemployed as I said) and not about workers like you originally said? Do you have the decency to own up to your mistake?
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
What evidence is there that it will be unpopular with them?
Especially since one of the biggest changes of allowing opening up is allowing nightclubs to reopen. What evidence is there that the unvaccinated under 30s are opposed to nightclubs reopening yet?
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Young people have always preferred Labour, and older people the Conservatives. It probably doesn't have much to do with the current/recent circumstances.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Except a plurality of working age people 39+ support the Tories.
I wonder if anything could have happened in 2010 to have made students start supporting the Labour Party once more? 🤔 Basically anyone under 30 if they went to uni will have done so after the Tories and Lib Dems trebled tuition fees and not (as I did) when Labour introduced them then went to war in Iraq.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Of course the problem with reversing the relative comfort of the retired is the 50+ group who want to have what current retirees have in a few years time. Add them in and it’s a lot of voters. Very hard to break the cycle.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
Had a school friend in Canada took a 14 hour round trip to judo class every Saturday. No one else was surprised in the slightest.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
I doubt this very much.
But, also, I have no theory for why house prices in the north and midlands are booming, when we’ve been told it’s all about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon.
What *is* driving house prices in the north and midlands?
Yes, I was puzzled by this.
I suspect there is a large amount of anecdata about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon - people who move there tend to be visible to people who write articles about it in broadsheet newspapers. But they aren't necessarily representative.
TBH I think it is a huge push to call Northern house prices "booming".
The highest 12 month rise of any region - Yorkshire - 14%, only just reaches the increase in national average increase every year between 1997 and 2007, which was 13.5% *every year for ten years*.
I think it is largely a catch up phenomenon. Waves of hose price inflation start in London, and then spread across the country. Usually peak rates of increase in the North and Midlands is predictive of the peak being reached.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
It is important that there is a Waitrose which does not seem to be much represented in the red wall seats.
I am rather pleased there isn’t one in Liverpool. The ones I went to when I lived in London and the south were overpriced and the punters were ignorant tools. The only saving grace was it was the only place I could get Jamaican blue mountain coffee.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Indeed. Its an amusing bait and switch to start saying workers, lash out at people who say "no, working age" then start using working age like the people correcting you said all along.
Anyone who wants to prove anything by excluding the retired but including students solely proves that they're a shill for the Labour Party. That is all.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
It is important that there is a Waitrose which does not seem to be much represented in the red wall seats.
I am rather pleased there isn’t one in Liverpool. The ones I went to when I lived in London and the south were overpriced and the punters were ignorant tools. The only saving grace was it was the only place I could get Jamaican blue mountain coffee.
There's one in Formby according to the map I just looked at.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
If I were to vote exclusively on economic grounds, I would vote Conservative in order to maintain and consolidate my wealth in the run up to retiring in a decades time. In my job I am immune to the adverse economic effects of Brexit, indeed it protects me from foreign competition.
I don't vote on economic grounds, and think the young are getting a very raw deal economically and socially under this government. I shall dance on its grave when it falls.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Not really. I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
In what ways are younger people going to be forced into taking more risks ?
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Young people have always preferred Labour, and older people the Conservatives. It probably doesn't have much to do with the current/recent circumstances.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
So even in this analysis, Labour won all DEs under 65 and all groups under 34.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
The FT story doesn’t even say that the government is planning to delay two weeks, in fact it suggests they are very keen to go with 21 June. It is based on a single briefing from a single source who is speculating that 5 July could be a fallback option. It’s all a lot of nothing much.
The final decision on 21st June will not be announced until 14th June. That leaves us with another 12 days to fill with meaningless speculation. It's what the media do best.
And (I think) fortunately, the situation will be a lot clearer in 12 days time than it is now.
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
Yes. There seems to be a little groupthink that delaying in June will be politically unpopular. Nay unsustainable. Polling does not corroborate this view.
My fear is that unlocking (even if it's a bit premature, and it's too early to tell on that) will be popular with two groups: Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.) The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
The problematic aspect of the situation would be if, say, furlough was ended and younger people were forced to return to higher-risk, customer-facing work before they had the opportunity to be double-dosed.
Watched the interview. My feeling was that it humanised him quite a bit and, speaking personally, made me think he is an impressive man to go from his background to where he is, via the career he's had. My fear is, his achievements won't necessarily be properly understood by the general viewing public and that it probably didn't change any minds. Still, he should keep going with this kind of thing and the attempt to reach people where they are is admirable. I keep seeing stuff online from the Labour left annoyed that he agreed to be interviewed by Morgan (Saint Jeremy would never stoop to this kind of thing) and that he would listen to Blair. The interview certainly annoyed some of the right people! That said, I am predisposed to him and think I'll probably vote Labour at the next general, so I am not neutral on this.
Why is necessary for someone to try to humanise themselves when they're quite clearly already a human being? Something I don't understand.
Well, 2/3 of his predecessors have had noted charisma problems. Thinking of the some of the descriptions applied to Brown and Miliband, in particular.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
Had a school friend in Canada took a 14 hour round trip to judo class every Saturday. No one else was surprised in the slightest.
I was on holiday in LA once and a friend drove down from Reno, NV (8 hours) to pick me up to go to his place in Tahoe, rather than have me fly. He didn't think anything of it. A totally different sense of distance.
A big problem for the Tories may be if it turns out Red Wall voters like Boris in particular but not necessarily future Tory leaders. That could leave them in a bit of a sticky situation when he hands over to someone else, especially if the Conservatives have started losing seats in the south of England.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Indeed. Its an amusing bait and switch to start saying workers, lash out at people who say "no, working age" then start using working age like the people correcting you said all along.
Anyone who wants to prove anything by excluding the retired but including students solely proves that they're a shill for the Labour Party. That is all.
To show how television is in touch with the current political pulse...
- just switched onto Newsnight - interviewed the shadow schools minister whom never even heard of plus Damian Hinds, who is as relevant as a chocolate tea pot; - then on ITV and Preston interviewing David Miliband...FFS....
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Young people have always preferred Labour, and older people the Conservatives. It probably doesn't have much to do with the current/recent circumstances.
The difference is much, much larger now than it was in the past.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Not really. I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
You said ‘working class’ not ‘workers’. My only reason for commenting in response was to point out that ‘working class’ includes a large proportion of the retired, and other posters before you have ignored this to claim, for one example, that it wasn’t the ‘working class’ that decided Brexit
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
Had a school friend in Canada took a 14 hour round trip to judo class every Saturday. No one else was surprised in the slightest.
I will be interested to know how Canada are managing their vaccine roll out outside the few big cities. Such a vast country and lots and lots of rural towns / communities miles from anywhere.
I have driven it coast to coast twice, just enormous...but not even really gone that far North where there still people.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
It is important that there is a Waitrose which does not seem to be much represented in the red wall seats.
I am rather pleased there isn’t one in Liverpool. The ones I went to when I lived in London and the south were overpriced and the punters were ignorant tools. The only saving grace was it was the only place I could get Jamaican blue mountain coffee.
There's one in Formby according to the map I just looked at.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
So even in this analysis, Labour won all DEs under 65 and all groups under 34.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
Now you've been forced to backtrack to "all groups under 34" when the point always made was that crossover age was 39. Hmm funny that.
So yes, Labour don't win "workers" they win students and the young in general.
The Tories currently win from when people become settled down with kids and a mortgage etc decades before they retire.
Funny that! Any data that includes students but excludes the retired is absolutely meaningless, but you've realised that so won't be repeating your "workers" claims any more hopefully. Glad that we could educate you on the difference tonight.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Not really. I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
You said ‘working class’ not ‘workers’. My only reason for commenting in response was to point out that ‘working class’ includes a large proportion of the retired, and other posters before you have ignored this to claim, for one example, that it wasn’t the ‘working class’ that decided Brexit
Perhaps then we simply need a better word to describe the working-age, working class.
I still maintain, based on that data, that it is the retired - not the working class (even if many working class are retired) wot swung it.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Not really. I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
You said ‘working class’ not ‘workers’. My only reason for commenting in response was to point out that ‘working class’ includes a large proportion of the retired, and other posters before you have ignored this to claim, for one example, that it wasn’t the ‘working class’ that decided Brexit
Exactly.
Students are Students not workers by any normal definitions.
Retired working class people are still working class and multimillionare ABs are not by any normal definition.
Rewriting phrases to mean what you want them to mean is Newspeak not truth.
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
A big problem for the Tories may be if it turns out Red Wall voters like Boris in particular but not necessarily future Tory leaders. That could leave them in a bit of a sticky situation when he hands over to someone else, especially if the Conservatives have started losing seats in the south of England.
Not so much of a problem as their hatred of a Labour and what it represents is far stronger than their dislike of the Tories. The Tories haven’t told them for years that they are a bunch of racist, ignorant, xenophobic scum. Guess which party has...
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
So even in this analysis, Labour won all DEs under 65 and all groups under 34.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
Now you've been forced to backtrack to "all groups under 34" when the point always made was that crossover age was 39. Hmm funny that.
So yes, Labour don't win "workers" they win students and the young in general.
The Tories currently win from when people become settled down with kids and a mortgage etc decades before they retire.
Funny that! Any data that includes students but excludes the retired is absolutely meaningless, but you've realised that so won't be repeating your "workers" claims any more hopefully. Glad that we could educate you on the difference tonight.
I was responding to @HYUFD’s post using his breakdowns.
You haven’t educated me, and as far as I can recall you never have. I tend to skip your diatribes unless they are directed at me.
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
I found it an incredible moment of relief....that even if you were fairly low risk before, you chances of serious illness in 3 weeks time is really down to hit by a bus type thing.
I just crappy for 3 days, but it was more meh, I don't feel up to doing much work, I will just watch the telly, man-flu type feeling.
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
Good luck. The jab makes you feel rough for a day or so in my experience but that's it, Covid can be much worse.
I have a friend my own age who got married just before I did and now has 2 young girls like myself who very nearly died from it, spent weeks in ICU on a ventilator and he is still trying to recover from it. That really brought home that this can be deadly serious and not a joke even for people in their thirties.
I noted the disproportionately high house price rises in the north of England and the Midlands and wondered, of we are seeing a phenomenon similar to that in the USA where conservative-minded people are leaving liberal states such as New York and California for the likes of Texas and Florida.
Is there any evidence we could be seeing Conservative-minded voters leaving the south and trying to settle in the new heartlands of the north and midlands with the advantages remote working provides?
It is important that there is a Waitrose which does not seem to be much represented in the red wall seats.
I am rather pleased there isn’t one in Liverpool. The ones I went to when I lived in London and the south were overpriced and the punters were ignorant tools. The only saving grace was it was the only place I could get Jamaican blue mountain coffee.
There's one in Formby according to the map I just looked at.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
Had a school friend in Canada took a 14 hour round trip to judo class every Saturday. No one else was surprised in the slightest.
I will be interested to know how Canada are managing their vaccine roll out outside the few big cities. Such a vast country and lots and lots of rural towns / communities miles from anywhere.
I have driven it coast to coast twice, just enormous...but not even really gone that far North where there still people.
Driving North really gives an idea of size. Psychologically you are aware East West is a bloody long way. It takes 6 days by train FFS. But Calgary to Edmonton takes forever. Then keep going North. The settlements get smaller, the Lakes bigger. And imperceptibly it is further and further to the next hamlet. And yet. You aren't even close to the Arctic yet.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
I’ll take your use of ‘working age group’ as an implicit apology, and forgive your earlier temper
Not really. I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
You said ‘working class’ not ‘workers’. My only reason for commenting in response was to point out that ‘working class’ includes a large proportion of the retired, and other posters before you have ignored this to claim, for one example, that it wasn’t the ‘working class’ that decided Brexit
Perhaps then we simply need a better word to describe the working-age, working class.
I still maintain, based on that data, that it is the retired - not the working class (even if many working class are retired) wot swung it.
That would be very difficult - non graduates between 18-64 would vote very differently to graduates in the same age bracket. I would almost, though not definitely, hesitate to call graduates ‘working class’ now. But I don’t know, it is complicated.
I think I do consider non graduates working class actually. In my area, none of my friends, and none of my Saturday football team went to university - they are mostly white van men. The people I met at work almost all did. That is probably more of a definitive measure of, or than, class nowadays
A big problem for the Tories may be if it turns out Red Wall voters like Boris in particular but not necessarily future Tory leaders. That could leave them in a bit of a sticky situation when he hands over to someone else, especially if the Conservatives have started losing seats in the south of England.
See Labour and Blair’s voters. Everything comes back round eventually. And that’s a good thing.
We’re within ten years of the “is the Tory Party in terminal decline” debate restarting. Already, if you’re a 21 year old wannabe politician I reckon you should be thinking of joining Labour (but being mates with, and not too cruel to, the LibDems).
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
So even in this analysis, Labour won all DEs under 65 and all groups under 34.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
Now you've been forced to backtrack to "all groups under 34" when the point always made was that crossover age was 39. Hmm funny that.
So yes, Labour don't win "workers" they win students and the young in general.
The Tories currently win from when people become settled down with kids and a mortgage etc decades before they retire.
Funny that! Any data that includes students but excludes the retired is absolutely meaningless, but you've realised that so won't be repeating your "workers" claims any more hopefully. Glad that we could educate you on the difference tonight.
I was responding to @HYUFD’s post using his breakdowns.
You haven’t educated me, and as far as I can recall you never have. I tend to skip your diatribes unless they are directed at me.
Bullshit.
You've backtracked from "workers" to "working age" which was the point in dispute. Anyone with an iota of self-respect would admit they said workers and admit they made a mistake.
I guess you just don't have any self-respect so fair enough. Its difficult to own up to being wrong even when its their in black and white.
It seems “If you’re not a socialist when you’re 18 you’ve got no heart - if you’re still a socialist when you’re 40 you’ve got no brains” has been written tonight right here before our eyes.
What an original concept, who knew?
It has always been true to a degree, but don't you recognise that the age differential in voting has increased significantly over the last decade?
The interesting point made upthread is that this has opened up since 2010.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Young people have always preferred Labour, and older people the Conservatives. It probably doesn't have much to do with the current/recent circumstances.
The difference is much, much larger now than it was in the past.
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
I found it an incredible moment of relief....that even if you were fairly low risk before, you chances of serious illness in 3 weeks time is really down to hit by a bus type thing.
I just crappy for 3 days, but it was more meh, I don't feel up to doing much work, I will just watch the telly, man-flu type feeling.
Yeah most people say that. I just have this feat of being ridiculously ill, but like you say, most people say it’s more like a bit of a hangover
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
I’m amazed how focused everyone else on here seems to be on foreign holidays. It’s also a big thing for the press, whereas amongst my friends and family we’ve all written off foreign holidays this year and we’re pretty comfortable with that. I haven’t seen the polling to tell me if I’m in an odd minority but my instinct is that most people are in my camp.
It isn't to me either. However, i think if you live in an urban environment, litte to no garden and not close to the sea, probably is a bit higher on your wish list
Where in the UK is not close to the sea?
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
Well in the UK a lot of people have a weird perception of close i.e. what it takes more than an hour...too much hassle...or well we need to plan that, whole weekend trip jobbie.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
Had a school friend in Canada took a 14 hour round trip to judo class every Saturday. No one else was surprised in the slightest.
I will be interested to know how Canada are managing their vaccine roll out outside the few big cities. Such a vast country and lots and lots of rural towns / communities miles from anywhere.
I have driven it coast to coast twice, just enormous...but not even really gone that far North where there still people.
Oh. And Canada, like Australia, is quite urbanised as a percentage. Most provinces are helicoptering in a vaccine team and doing the whole settlement in an hour or so. Then on to the next. Relatively easy when everyone knows everyone.
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
Good luck. The jab makes you feel rough for a day or so in my experience but that's it, Covid can be much worse.
I have a friend my own age who got married just before I did and now has 2 young girls like myself who very nearly died from it, spent weeks in ICU on a ventilator and he is still trying to recover from it. That really brought home that this can be deadly serious and not a joke even for people in their thirties.
Yes, good luck @isam - I don't know which one you'll have, but I was fine. I don't know anyone who died from it either (well, my next door neighbour's Dad did - he was down in the stats - but he was very ill and probably wouldn't have seen the month out even without covid). And I don't know anyone who'sbeen hospitalised. But I do know plenty of people who have had it - in their 30s, 40s and 50s - and declared it the worst illness they'd ever had by some way. And what's more, you will be doing a noble thing.
I think the reason @isam, @Casino_Royale and @Philip_Thompson are all frothing is that they are invested in the idea that the Tories are supported by the “mean”, “everyday” British voter.
Among whom they naturally include their fine selves.
Data that shows that the Tories win largely because they have the elderly retiree vote sewn up discomforts them because they have to confront the fact that they hold essentially geriatric views.
The data shows crossover at 39. Which if your working age is 22 to 64 means for 17 years (22 to 38) a plurality vote Labour, while for 25 years (39 to 64) a plurality vote Tory. Even taking a working age from 18, which isn't true for half the country nowadays, its still a majority of working years voting Tory.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
The article is about the retiree vote. Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this. Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Right, so its not about workers then. Glad we can agree.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
I have nothing to backtrack over. You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
IPSOS Mori has the Tories winning all classes amongst over 65s in 2019 and the Tories won ABs, C1s and C2s amongst 35-54s with Labour winning DEs amongst that age group.
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
So even in this analysis, Labour won all DEs under 65 and all groups under 34.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
Now you've been forced to backtrack to "all groups under 34" when the point always made was that crossover age was 39. Hmm funny that.
So yes, Labour don't win "workers" they win students and the young in general.
The Tories currently win from when people become settled down with kids and a mortgage etc decades before they retire.
Funny that! Any data that includes students but excludes the retired is absolutely meaningless, but you've realised that so won't be repeating your "workers" claims any more hopefully. Glad that we could educate you on the difference tonight.
I was responding to @HYUFD’s post using his breakdowns.
You haven’t educated me, and as far as I can recall you never have. I tend to skip your diatribes unless they are directed at me.
Bullshit.
You've backtracked from "workers" to "working age" which was the point in dispute. Anyone with an iota of self-respect would admit they said workers and admit they made a mistake.
I guess you just don't have any self-respect so fair enough. Its difficult to own up to being wrong even when its their in black and white.
As I suggested to @isam upthread, “workers” and “working age” is a natural conflation and probably holds, statistically.
You are getting your knickers in a knot over trivia.
The essential point is age trumps class as an explanatory factor.
It seems to be a very sensitive point because it threatens this idea that the “working class” have gone wholesale off Labour which is a comforting narrative for Tory stooges like yourself but doesn’t appear to be totally true.
Degree/no degree could well be the new middle or upper/working class divide. The difference in attitudes is stark, in my experience, and I divided my time between both groups for the last twenty odd years
I booked my jab for tomorrow and I have to admit I am not looking forward to it one bit. Most of my friend felt rough for a day or two afterwards, although mainly those who have had Covid - my parents and in laws, none of whom had Covid, had no side effects.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
I found it an incredible moment of relief....that even if you were fairly low risk before, you chances of serious illness in 3 weeks time is really down to hit by a bus type thing.
I just crappy for 3 days, but it was more meh, I don't feel up to doing much work, I will just watch the telly, man-flu type feeling.
Yeah most people say that. I just have this feat of being ridiculously ill, but like you say, most people say it’s more like a bit of a hangover
You’ll be fine. I think a lot (but not all) of the people who claim to have been super ill are the same people who take to their bed for a sniffle and call everything “the flu”.
Comments
You might think if it was "voters excluding retirees, Students and the Unemployed" it would say so, but not in the mystical realms of @Gardenwalker where Students and the Unemployed do not exist. Or perhaps they're all retirees?
Not quite old enough to be persuaded that Thatcher would have definitely definitely supported Boris.
I'm open-minded about any data but I'd want to see the full open set, the methodology used to compile it and the weightings and filters applied.
For so much of my life 'News at Ten' was the sole prerogative of ITN
Hence no oven ready social care plan will see the light of day.
Excluding retirees but not excluding students is just plain bullshit and doesn't demonstrate anything other than how slanted students are. Great going, you proved nothing except you have no integrity and do not understand data. Well done.
But as they're not media types they don't get reported in the media.
I'll just go full @IanB2 and start talking about The Clown.
Not any other vote.
I’m very sorry you don’t seem to understand this.
Like I speculate earlier; it seems to stem from psychological anxieties.
Also , afaik, Leeds is not a distinguished law school and he still managed to rise pretty high. The whole story just feels like, through force of will and his own hard work and competence he rose to the top of his profession. I would recommend going back to watch the interview, it was very light on politics but I watched it for its potential political implications.
The real "gap" is between those who have assets and savings (the old), and those who do not (the young).
We saw this in Italy, where retirees have kept the country in the Euro (to protect the savings of the old), even though it's meant terrible employment prospects for the young.
With society continuing to age, this intergenerational issue is only going to get worse.
The number of covid hospital admissions in England for the seven days ending 24/05/21 was 616.
Anyway, I'm bored of going round in circles on this now.
Goodnight.
Foreign holidays are under threat because ministers are worried about a new Covid variant, the Mail can reveal. Scientists have alerted ministers to the mutant strain – thought to have originated in Nepal – which has apparently spread to Europe. They fear the strain is resistant to vaccines.
You and the New Statesmen span the "excluding retirees" data to mean "workers". I think we can agree that the Unemployed are not "workers". I would expect most people would not class full time Students as workers instead of students. And I expect most people would class people of retirement age who are still working as workers.
I asked you if the "excluding retirees" data included Students and you said "No". But the reporting from the NS does not mention excluding Students so I see no reason to believe it does.
You falsely reported the data. Students are heavily Labour dominated, we all know that, but since 39 is crossover point a majority of working age years are plurality Tory voting not Labour voting. Excluding Students and not just Retirees, I rather expect that will be true of workers in general too but that data was not presented.
You falsely claimed this was not about Students. It is.
You lied and said it was about workers. It wasn't. If your claim was that the Retired are heavily Tory voting, everyone knows that. Students are heavily Labour voting. Workers are the swing group in the middle that becomes plurality Tory at 39 at the last election.
Workers are in the middle, actually working and neither students nor retired. You have NOT presented that data so do NOT claim this is about workers. Stop trying to backtrack now, at least have the decency to admit you were wrong.
Nor one interested in housing costs, the burden of social care, wealth disparities, etc.
There should be a word for this.
Italification? Berlusconomics?
And the insane Stamp Duty holiday bubble.
Plus costs of newbuild - as has been noted labour rates and material costs are adjusting, eg buffers of timber supplies in Scandinavian countries are not what they were 12 months ago, ructions in the insulation manufacturing industry - uncertainty around Grenfell outcomes but also manufacturing was limited in the lockdown. Demand is high as building is on a bit of a boom.
A few months and it will stabilise. Quite how it will stabilise, though ... ?
The kind of people who are good at plotting data on logarithmic axes currently have cases doubling every fortnight;
https://twitter.com/BristOliver/status/1400106541030723590?s=20
That'll be on the basis of the current combination of restrictions, vaccination, and variants.
If that trend continues for the next fortnight, there's no way we will do a complete unlocking. Even if it were medically sustainable, it wouldn't be politically sustainable.
I don't know if the trend will continue, though it does look like the combination of delta Covid and a vaccination programme that isn't accelerating quite as much as might have been hoped means that there's a trickier calculation to be made than previously thought. The ideal would be to have cases continuing to fall or stay low as you transfer the load of keeping people safe from restrictions to vaccination... and that's not quite happening yet.
I went to the beach over the weekend. We rented a hut by the beach, invited my parents and had a fantastic time.
No airplanes necessary. Almost as if anyone in this country could travel to a coastal town in England, Scotland or Wales or many other holiday destinations without flying and with nothing other than a car. Or trains if you're that way inclined.
I suspect there is a large amount of anecdata about Londoners moving to Gloucestershire and Devon - people who move there tend to be visible to people who write articles about it in broadsheet newspapers. But they aren't necessarily representative.
TBH I think it is a huge push to call Northern house prices "booming".
The highest 12 month rise of any region - Yorkshire - 14%, only just reaches the increase in national average increase every year between 1997 and 2007, which was 13.5% *every year for ten years*.
I remember taking an American friend striaght from Heathrow to Northumberland coast when they arrived for a day trip...and everybody I knew thought I was crazy... my American friend said oh we are going to do a short road trip, cool.
You are incredibly boring.
Working-age low income earners don’t appear to prefer Tories. It’s really that simple.
If you think excluding students from the data fundamentally changes this, I can’t say for sure, but given their numbers I doubt it.
It works on a micro scale too. Looking at the ratio of over 65s to under 65s in a constituency seems pretty strongly predictive of which way its vote is moving.
See points made by @rcs1000 and others.
Polling does not corroborate this view.
What an original concept, who knew?
The highest 12 month rise of any region - Yorkshire - 14%, only just reaches the increase in national average increase every year between 1997 and 2007, which was 13.5% *every year for ten years*.
I think it is largely a catch up phenomenon. Waves of hose price inflation start in London, and then spread across the country. Usually peak rates of increase in the North and Midlands is predictive of the peak being reached.
I sometimes wonder if, by being attacked from both sides, the Government has found the “Goldilocks zone” in which most people say “they must be treading the careful central path”.
I corrected you and said working-age not workers.
Now that I've shown you were wrong, you're trying to backtrack and bullshit your way out of the hole you dug my pretending you were saying what I said all along. 🤦♂️
Do you have the decency to admit that this data is about the working age (which includes Students and the Unemployed as I said) and not about workers like you originally said? Do you have the decency to own up to your mistake?
CDU/CSU 25.1%
Green 23.1%
SPD 14.4%
FDP 12.3%
AfD 11.2%
Left 7.1%
Others 6.9%
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundestagswahl_2021/Umfragen_und_Prognosen#Mittelwerte_der_jeweils_aktuellen_Umfrage_aller_Institute
Those who are older and already securely immune. (No condemnation, it's right that they had their jabs earlier.)
The "Research Group" wing of the Conservative party.
It will be unpopular with those whose immunity is still building up. Numerically, that's still quite a lot of people, but they aren't the ones who the government courts.
Which takes us back to the question of whether having such a strong age profile on party affiliation is a good thing. Especially when it involves the retired imposing policies on the rest.
The working age group have experienced austerity, stagnant wages, continued house price inflation (on balance bad for this group) and brexit (an economic retardant).
The elderly have been fully protected if not stuffed with cash.
Especially since one of the biggest changes of allowing opening up is allowing nightclubs to reopen. What evidence is there that the unvaccinated under 30s are opposed to nightclubs reopening yet?
https://theelders.org/who-we-are
NEW: Colombia reports 27,000 new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase on record, and 511 new deaths
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/who-approves-sinovac-covid-19-vaccine-2nd-chinese-made-dose-listed-2021-06-01/
Labour won all classes amongst 18 to 34s though so it is really only students and under 35s not yet on the property ladder Labour won, once workers neared 40 and got on the property ladder they voted Tory (with only those low paid workers or the unemployed still in social housing or renting over 40 in social class DE sticking with Labour).
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
I wonder if anything could have happened in 2010 to have made students start supporting the Labour Party once more? 🤔 Basically anyone under 30 if they went to uni will have done so after the Tories and Lib Dems trebled tuition fees and not (as I did) when Labour introduced them then went to war in Iraq.
No one else was surprised in the slightest.
Those quotes should be the other way around.
Anyone who wants to prove anything by excluding the retired but including students solely proves that they're a shill for the Labour Party. That is all.
I don't vote on economic grounds, and think the young are getting a very raw deal economically and socially under this government. I shall dance on its grave when it falls.
I think it is probably fair to conflate “working age group” with “workers” given
a) student numbers are probably too low to make a difference
b) high employment / low unemployment figures.
https://timothylikeszebras.wordpress.com/2019/11/26/the-old-people-are-coming/
The difference is one of degree- the age:voting intention gradient is much much steeper since about 2010, and massively so in 2019.
There has definitely a been a shift toward the Tories among the working class (and the New Statesman article does not try to hide this) but...age trumps class.
I don’t think I’ve ever voted Labour.
- just switched onto Newsnight - interviewed the shadow schools minister whom never even heard of plus Damian Hinds, who is as relevant as a chocolate tea pot;
- then on ITV and Preston interviewing David Miliband...FFS....
https://timothylikeszebras.wordpress.com/2019/11/26/the-old-people-are-coming/
I was as much surprised at how relatively small the difference was in the past, as by how large it has now become.
I have driven it coast to coast twice, just enormous...but not even really gone that far North where there still people.
So yes, Labour don't win "workers" they win students and the young in general.
The Tories currently win from when people become settled down with kids and a mortgage etc decades before they retire.
Funny that! Any data that includes students but excludes the retired is absolutely meaningless, but you've realised that so won't be repeating your "workers" claims any more hopefully. Glad that we could educate you on the difference tonight.
I still maintain, based on that data, that it is the retired - not the working class (even if many working class are retired) wot swung it.
Students are Students not workers by any normal definitions.
Retired working class people are still working class and multimillionare ABs are not by any normal definition.
Rewriting phrases to mean what you want them to mean is Newspeak not truth.
Thinking about the pandemic, it dawned on me I don’t know anyone who died, or even went to hospital, through having it. I can’t help feeling I’m being forced into something don’t really want to do
You haven’t educated me, and as far as I can recall you never have. I tend to skip your diatribes unless they are directed at me.
I just crappy for 3 days, but it was more meh, I don't feel up to doing much work, I will just watch the telly, man-flu type feeling.
I have a friend my own age who got married just before I did and now has 2 young girls like myself who very nearly died from it, spent weeks in ICU on a ventilator and he is still trying to recover from it. That really brought home that this can be deadly serious and not a joke even for people in their thirties.
But Calgary to Edmonton takes forever. Then keep going North. The settlements get smaller, the Lakes bigger. And imperceptibly it is further and further to the next hamlet.
And yet. You aren't even close to the Arctic yet.
I think I do consider non graduates working class actually. In my area, none of my friends, and none of my Saturday football team went to university - they are mostly white van men. The people I met at work almost all did. That is probably more of a definitive measure of, or than, class nowadays
We’re within ten years of the “is the Tory Party in terminal decline” debate restarting. Already, if you’re a 21 year old wannabe politician I reckon you should be thinking of joining Labour (but being mates with, and not too cruel to, the LibDems).
You've backtracked from "workers" to "working age" which was the point in dispute. Anyone with an iota of self-respect would admit they said workers and admit they made a mistake.
I guess you just don't have any self-respect so fair enough. Its difficult to own up to being wrong even when its their in black and white.
No qualifications:
Con 59%
Lab 23%
LD 7%
Oth 11%
Other qualifications:
Con 47%
Lab 33%
LD 10%
Oth 10%
Degree or higher:
Lab 39%
Con 34%
LD 17%
Oth 10%
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
Most provinces are helicoptering in a vaccine team and doing the whole settlement in an hour or so. Then on to the next.
Relatively easy when everyone knows everyone.
I don't know anyone who died from it either (well, my next door neighbour's Dad did - he was down in the stats - but he was very ill and probably wouldn't have seen the month out even without covid). And I don't know anyone who'sbeen hospitalised. But I do know plenty of people who have had it - in their 30s, 40s and 50s - and declared it the worst illness they'd ever had by some way.
And what's more, you will be doing a noble thing.
You are getting your knickers in a knot over trivia.
The essential point is age trumps class as an explanatory factor.
It seems to be a very sensitive point because it threatens this idea that the “working class” have gone wholesale off Labour which is a comforting narrative for Tory stooges like yourself but doesn’t appear to be totally true.