politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The true purpose of GE2017 will be confirmed in the CON candid

Bromptonaut said:

perdix said:

Bromptonaut said:

Meanwhile the EU quietly gets on with the job of sidelining the UK.

twitter.com/hendopolis/status/854797735194746885

This is nothing new. The protectionism of France and Germany has never favoured the UK.

Economic illiteracy of PB Tories knows no bounds.

What could possibly have happened in 1973 that gave a big and long-lasting boost to the UK economy?

https://twitter.com/dexeugov/status/852534216025939968

Have you got a chart that splits EU and non-EU?

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Pong said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The Betfair Sportsbook price on the Conservatives in Birmingham Edgbaston is astonishingly generous - I've backed it from 11/10 and it's still 4/5. Without Gisela Stuart for Labour, this must surely be closer to 2/5 or shorter.

Didn't the constituency vote heavily for remain?

It voted Remain. I'm not sure the average Edgbastonian is a natural supporter of Jeremy Corbyn though. A seat held by Labour at the last election against the odds on a huge personal vote looks exposed with a large further adverse swing and without that personal vote.

Is she definitely not standing? She was being somewhat ambiguous on R4 yesterday morning. Need to speak to my Constituency party etc.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-edgbaston-mp-gisela-stuart-12916429

Another loss. Not on the Osborne scale of course but another distinctive and interesting voice lost from the Commons. There are far too few people of talent in UK politics these days. It looks as if after this election there may be even fewer.

Apart from her backing for Brexit what was distinctive and interesting about Gisela Stuart? She seemed a straight down the line moderate Labour MP to me.

This eulogising of Gisela shows the Tory love of the turncoat. The rats are never quite as attractive when they turn the other way.

Just imagine the Tory clamour for a Damehood for Kate Hoey if she gave up her seat!

Others in her own party remember her canoodling with Nigel Farage at the time he brought out his 'Syrian Refugee' poster.

RobD said:

Bromptonaut said:

perdix said:

Bromptonaut said:

Meanwhile the EU quietly gets on with the job of sidelining the UK.

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/854797735194746885

This is nothing new. The protectionism of France and Germany has never favoured the UK.

Economic illiteracy of PB Tories knows no bounds.

What could possibly have happened in 1973 that gave a big and long-lasting boost to the UK economy?

https://twitter.com/dexeugov/status/852534216025939968

Have you got a chart that splits EU and non-EU?

Are you implying that EU membership is no barrier to non-EU trade and possibly quite the opposite? That we don't need to leave to 'go global'?

OT Christies has an auction of "geopolitical snapshots" including posters and leaflets covering international and British politics from the 1930s to the 80s (when you could join Labour for £3).

https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/uprising-geopolitical-snapshots-20th-century/lots/344

Sean_F said:

hamiltonace said:

TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.

What are Mail saying?

"Shoot the Traitors?"

Basically. I'm glad its cost the Tories at least one vote.

Roger said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Pong said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The Betfair Sportsbook price on the Conservatives in Birmingham Edgbaston is astonishingly generous - I've backed it from 11/10 and it's still 4/5. Without Gisela Stuart for Labour, this must surely be closer to 2/5 or shorter.

Didn't the constituency vote heavily for remain?

It voted Remain. I'm not sure the average Edgbastonian is a natural supporter of Jeremy Corbyn though. A seat held by Labour at the last election against the odds on a huge personal vote looks exposed with a large further adverse swing and without that personal vote.

Is she definitely not standing? She was being somewhat ambiguous on R4 yesterday morning. Need to speak to my Constituency party etc.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-edgbaston-mp-gisela-stuart-12916429

Another loss. Not on the Osborne scale of course but another distinctive and interesting voice lost from the Commons. There are far too few people of talent in UK politics these days. It looks as if after this election there may be even fewer.

Apart from her backing for Brexit what was distinctive and interesting about Gisela Stuart? She seemed a straight down the line moderate Labour MP to me.

This eulogising of Gisela shows the Tory love of the turncoat. The rats are never quite as attractive when they turn the other way.

Just imagine the Tory clamour for a Damehood for Kate Hoey if she gave up her seat!

Others in her own party remember her canoodling with Nigel Farage at the time he brought out his 'Syrian Refugee' poster.

This.

Good morning, everyone.

On that graph: if you were looking at the line alone, you'd probably put the start of the upturn around 1953 or so.

From there to roughly 1994 the graph follows (with bobbling, of course) a pretty much straight line.

Roger said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Pong said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The Betfair Sportsbook price on the Conservatives in Birmingham Edgbaston is astonishingly generous - I've backed it from 11/10 and it's still 4/5. Without Gisela Stuart for Labour, this must surely be closer to 2/5 or shorter.

Didn't the constituency vote heavily for remain?

It voted Remain. I'm not sure the average Edgbastonian is a natural supporter of Jeremy Corbyn though. A seat held by Labour at the last election against the odds on a huge personal vote looks exposed with a large further adverse swing and without that personal vote.

Is she definitely not standing? She was being somewhat ambiguous on R4 yesterday morning. Need to speak to my Constituency party etc.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-edgbaston-mp-gisela-stuart-12916429

Another loss. Not on the Osborne scale of course but another distinctive and interesting voice lost from the Commons. There are far too few people of talent in UK politics these days. It looks as if after this election there may be even fewer.

Apart from her backing for Brexit what was distinctive and interesting about Gisela Stuart? She seemed a straight down the line moderate Labour MP to me.

This eulogising of Gisela shows the Tory love of the turncoat. The rats are never quite as attractive when they turn the other way.

Just imagine the Tory clamour for a Damehood for Kate Hoey if she gave up her seat!

Others in her own party remember her canoodling with Nigel Farage at the time he brought out his 'Syrian Refugee' poster.

She's not a turncoat. She took the other side in the referendum from the Tory leadership and the same one as the Labour leadership, deep down.

Scott_P said:

hamiltonace said:

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

The Brexiteer in my solid Tory constituency will also not be getting my vote this time round

We are all shocked!

kle4 said:

Scott_P said:

hamiltonace said:

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

The Brexiteer in my solid Tory constituency will also not be getting my vote this time round

I'm guessing it didn't take an awful mail headline to sway you.

Just a Faisal Islam tweet.

Scott_P said:

hamiltonace said:

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

The Brexiteer in my solid Tory constituency will also not be getting my vote this time round

We are leaving the EU. Get over it.

kle4 said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.

I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.

IMHO, the unpopularity of the Labour party in many working class Leave constituencies puts seats in play that shouldn't be in play. IMO, all but 90 or so Labour seats are vulnerable (I'm not forecasting 140 Labour losses, but I am forecasting losses up to the 91st safest seat).

I think they might lose some of those seats, that even on a 20 point Tory lead should on paper be safe, but they'll also hold ones that people think are good as gone. The lds are getting a bit carried away and the Tories will also pile up votes where they don't need them.

As was discussed yesterday, Curtice doesn't seem to think it need be that conclusive given the extent of so many safe Lab seats.

david_herdson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Getting rid of the triple lock is a bold move. It shows a certain hubris and complacency to start doing massive diarrhetic shits on your core vote assuming they have nowhere else to go.

They won't care about the triple lock as long as the increases come anyway. What getting rid of the pledge does do is give wriggle room if there's a legitimate reason to cut back, such as a recession.

Or a day with a Y in it.

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic it was a bloody disgrace that the CPS leaked to Channel 4 news the other day.

As I said at the time. Doesn't surprise me though - politicised incompetence is a key behavioural skill within the CPS. It genuinely surprises me that Starmer has such enthusiastic supporters here given his background there.

rogerh said:

I presume that it is too late for the CONS to rush through the new constituency boundaries?

Afraid so, still being consulted on.

On topic, things can have more than one purpose.

I presume it is too late for the CONS to rush through the proposed constituency boundary changes?

Just a side-note to this election stuff: if Corbyn does toddle off afterwards, assuming he loses, it must make the odds on Sadiq Khan becoming leader rather longer.

CarlottaVance said:

Bromptonaut said:

CarlottaVance said:

Bromptonaut said:

Meanwhile the EU quietly gets on with the job of sidelining the UK.

//twitter.com/hendopolis/status/854797735194746885

The howls of outrage that the EU plan to cut us off from data have been deafening........so I expect they won't mind when we do the same.......

And you post that as though excluding each other from valuable sources of information were somehow to be celebrated.

And there's me thinking the Tories were the soi-disant party of economic growth.

The furore from the REMAINERS that the UK might not share data with the EU in the absence of an agreement has not been matched when the EU plans the same.

Funny that.

The silence is deafening.

FF43 said:

Sean_F said:

hamiltonace said:

TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.

What are Mail saying?

"Shoot the Traitors?"

I guess if you voted Remain because you genuinely estimate that to to be in your country's interest, but accept a decision not to on democratic grounds, you're not going to be happy to be seen as saboteur to be crushed. It depends on whether you reckon Theresa May thinks of you like that too. She probably wouldn't use those words, of course. Her rhetoric justifying the election was pretty authoritarian and very similar to that of Erdogan's justification of his referendum, even if the effects will be different.

I would not compare her to erdogan, but while she does not go as inflammatory as the Mail, her attitude and language make clear she Regards opposition of any kind as illegitimate, and she stirs up the media rhetoric, I have to assume intentionally. She 'warned' the judges not to go against democracy according to the telegraph when her own lawyers conceded they were doing their job, she is still calling out the lords for disruption when in fact they didn't, they did their job, and backed down when the commons rejected the changes they suggested, and so on.

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

david_herdson said:

foxinsoxuk said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.

I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.

The best constituency bets are likely to be in Labour held seats with a strong vote for both Con and UKIP. I have just had a punt on Tories take Dagenham on Sportsbook. 11/4 seemed good odds.

I appreciate that I have a huge vested interest in it as the constituency's Conservative Association's chairman but let me mention Hemsworth. This used to be absolutely rock-solid Labour - it had a 70% Lab share in 1997 and as high as 85% in the 1960s - but times have changed. Trickett only won 51% in 2015, with Con and UKIP in the low 20s a piece. It was heavily Leave and ticks the boxes matching the other demographics that have seen disproportional swings since the last GE. I'm not saying it'll be a gain. It probably won't be a target and will have such activist support as is willing asked to help out in Wakefield, Dewsbury and Morley & Outwood. But it's the sort of seat which if the 20+ poll leads remain, might come onto the radar.

The potential for a shift in WWC support away from Labour to the Tories (some via UKIP) is definitely there and could dramatically impact some Labour seats that look, on the face of it, to be impervious.

I suspect like many are saying on here that we will see closer-run contests in LD/Tory battleground seats in the South, and Tory/Lab battleground seats in London, and some wild swings in constituencies in the Midlands and the North.

Labour's electoral coalition could lose one of its biggest components in this election. Whether that's permanent or not, tricky to say. I think May potentially has a large personal vote, more than anything (the leadership and Brexit factors are in play here). As I said last night, you could not imagine Cameron targeting the Labour North with anything like the chances of success.

Sean_F said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

I guess I was shocked that more than half those who identify with a mainstream party have such views. Also 46% believing premarital sex is morally unacceptable I thought was pretty shocking given the age we live in now.

TOPPING said:

kle4 said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

If the lost UKIP votes are ex-Tories returning to the fold, doesn't that mainly mean much bigger Tory majorities in seats they already hold? Obviously, the Tories are going to win a number of Labour-held marginals, but I suspect that a lot if their extra votes are going to come in seats they already hold. That may mean Labour closer to 170/180 seats than 140/150.

I think there is an element of truth in that. I banged on and on in 2015 about how the UKIP vote was likely to make the Tory vote more efficient than it had been in 2010 and an unwind of it is not likely to help in a lot of seats. But some Tories with smallish majorities facing Lib Dems will be glad of it as will some Tory challengers hunting down Labour majorities smaller than the UKIP vote in their constituencies last time out.

IMHO, the unpopularity of the Labour party in many working class Leave constituencies puts seats in play that shouldn't be in play. IMO, all but 90 or so Labour seats are vulnerable (I'm not forecasting 140 Labour losses, but I am forecasting losses up to the 91st safest seat).

I think they might lose some of those seats, that even on a 20 point Tory lead should on paper be safe, but they'll also hold ones that people think are good as gone. The lds are getting a bit carried away and the Tories will also pile up votes where they don't need them.

As was discussed yesterday, Curtice doesn't seem to think it need be that conclusive given the extent of so many safe Lab seats.

The more cautious Tories are prepping for 50-80 it seems. Shirt of major changes orid forbid Diane Abbott being correct, that looks solid, it's the 130 maj crowd who will be disappointed

Novo said:

If it were to emerge that 10 Downing Street had been tipped off by someone within CPS that prosecutions were likely - it would be deeply damaging to the Conservatives and Mrs May's reputation.

Perhaps No 10 overheard them gossiping to C4 news?

The_Apocalypse said:

Sean_F said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

I guess I was shocked that more than half those who identify with a mainstream party have such views. Also 46% believing premarital sex is morally unacceptable I thought was pretty shocking given the age we live in now.

Yes, but the median age of the population is 40, the moral attitudes of the younger generations are often very different to those of the older generations.

The_Apocalypse said:

Sean_F said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

I guess I was shocked that more than half those who identify with a mainstream party have such views. Also 46% believing premarital sex is morally unacceptable I thought was pretty shocking given the age we live in now.

Joking aside, the opinions of US Republicans are in line with public opinion in the world as a whole.

kle4 said:

Novo said:

If it were to emerge that 10 Downing Street had been tipped off by someone within CPS that prosecutions were likely - it would be deeply damaging to the Conservatives and Mrs May's reputation.

Damaging, yes, but deeply? Less clear. People forgive or ignore a lot if they line one side enough, or dislike the other. Heck, politicians under outright investigation in France could still win the presidency, if they're lucky. May's so far ahead, she can afford a hit so long as it's a one off.

You must be new here. Hyperbole is the name of the game on PB.

hamiltonace said:

TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.

Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP

SandyRentool said:

Thanks for letting me know Scott. However, I tend to get info directly from my CLP secretary.

Oh, and the reason for the '2018' tag is that we were gearing up for the all-out elections to Leeds City Council next year. Not because we don't know what year it is.

So is Ed Balls standing or not?

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

A majority of Tory voters opposed gay marriage when the bill legalising it was passed, most GOP voters also oppose abortion too in that poll and a plurality oppose pre marital sex as well

HYUFD said:

hamiltonace said:

TM seems to have calculated that enough remain Tories will stay with her to target UKIP and Labour leavers with her Brexit policy.

I am not one of those who will stay. I may be a Conservative party member but I am voting Lib Dem this election after the Daily Mail headlines today. My seat is SNP solid so it will make little difference but it is the principle.

I never thought I would see the split up of the UK but today is the first day that I can imagine it happening.

Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNP

I agree as people hate the uncertainity that SNP has created.

SandyRentool said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/leedslabour2018/status/854936759301439488

Thanks for letting me know Scott. However, I tend to get info directly from my CLP secretary.

Oh, and the reason for the '2018' tag is that we were gearing up for the all-out elections to Leeds City Council next year. Not because we don't know what year it is.

Hey, Sandy, all the jokes about the current Labour Party and time are about them being stuck in the 1970s or the age of the dinosaurs (delete as appropriate).

I would actually be glad to think Labour have moved on a year - by then Corbyn and Macdonnell will have left the party or been expelled and unable to damage it further!!!

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Novo, welcome to pb.com.

Ms. Apocalypse, well, quite. It's a huge and disconcerting cultural difference.

I don't have the link, alas, but some time ago (maybe 3-4 years) a friend from the US who lives in the UK, and has done for some time, shared a study of attitudes towards atheism.

I think the question people (theists from America) were asked was regarding the sort of people with whom they'd like to accept a lift. Rapists and atheists came equal last.

Being an open atheist would be a bar to getting elected in the US, outside of some very Blue districts.

glw said:

Bromptonaut said:

Economic illiteracy of PB Tories knows no bounds.

What could possibly have happened in 1973 that gave a big and long-lasting boost to the UK economy?

Are you attributing that to one thing? Because that would be truly economically illiterate.

Over the last few decades global trade barriers have come down, currencies are now generally free floating, telecommunications advances have made a huge difference to trade, containerisation and ever larger ships have dramatically cut costs, and labour costs in developing economies are tiny.

I would put EU membership quite far down the list of significant changes to UK trade.

On a scale of 0 to 0, how significant do you think the opportunity is from signing 'our own trade deals' versus those negotiated through the EU?

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I'll just leave this here:

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/854948690489987072

24% may yet be a giddy aspiration for Labour come 8 June.

Would it really make a difference? They may not know about his past but they surely already know he's a dishonest bully with a very limited intellect. If they're still willing to vote for him with that cleared up, then surely the rest will just be shrugged at?

I'd be more worried, if I were Labour, that his policy offerings on tax, housing and public spending will spook potential voters fearing an imminent Fourth Great Depression (while we're still stuck in number 3).

I don't think the man in the street thinks of corbyn as a dishonest bully. Outside of him having the occasional petulant moan at a press conference all they'll have seen of him is a rather soothing, gentle manner. And since he was plucked from obscurity most won't know about his past views and if he has been dishonest.

The man in the street may think him a fool, but not dishonest or a bully in my opinion.

tlg86 said:

Why are bookies still offering odds on the Gorton by-election?

It is still going ahead, I understood.

(((Dan Hodges)))‏ @DPJHodges
Yesterday McDonnell said Labour would target anyone earning over £70,000. Today Thornberry won't back him. And so it begins...

The_Apocalypse said:

Sean_F said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

I guess I was shocked that more than half those who identify with a mainstream party have such views. Also 46% believing premarital sex is morally unacceptable I thought was pretty shocking given the age we live in now.

If you are a strict Catholic or evangelical Christian or Muslim you would also hold those views

ydoethur said:

SandyRentool said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/leedslabour2018/status/854936759301439488

Thanks for letting me know Scott. However, I tend to get info directly from my CLP secretary.

Oh, and the reason for the '2018' tag is that we were gearing up for the all-out elections to Leeds City Council next year. Not because we don't know what year it is.

Hey, Sandy, all the jokes about the current Labour Party and time are about them being stuck in the 1970s or the age of the dinosaurs (delete as appropriate).

I would actually be glad to think Labour have moved on a year - by then Corbyn and Macdonnell will have left the party or been expelled and unable to damage it further!!!

It did occur to me yesterday that our job in Leeds next year will likely be a lot easier in a post-Corbyn world.

williamglenn said:

On a scale of 0 to 0, how significant do you think the opportunity is form signing 'our own trade deals' versus those negotiated through the EU?

I'm not interested in discussing this with a person whose posting could be automated as "X is bad for Brexit".

Sandpit said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Sean_F said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Also, this is off-topic, but given the reaction to what may Tim Farron's views on homosexuality (even though he voted for Gay marriage) I wonder how the GOP are thought of on here, given that according to Pew Research, 54% of them think homosexuality is morally unacceptable.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/15/whats-morally-acceptable-it-depends-on-where-in-the-world-you-live

I'm surprised that number is so low.

I guess I was shocked that more than half those who identify with a mainstream party have such views. Also 46% believing premarital sex is morally unacceptable I thought was pretty shocking given the age we live in now.

Yes, but the median age of the population is 40, the moral attitudes of the younger generations are often very different to those of the older generations.

Oh yes, I'd agree with you there. Polling (by pew again) shows that the younger GOPers are generally more to left than older GOPers, and that they are more supportive of gay marriage. Hopefully they'll take the party in a bit of a more moderate direction in the future. The party have had issues in recent years with Millenials (1980s to mid 1990s voters) who appear to be more firmly Democrat/Dem leaning than previous generations of younger voters. I think their stances on gay marriage, climate change and what some GOPers have said regarding gender roles have played a part in this.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/25/the-gops-millennial-problem-runs-deep/

''But in addition to the generation’s Democratic tendency, Millennials who identify with the GOP are also less conservative than Republicans in other generations: Among the roughly one-third of Millennials who affiliate with or lean Republican, just 31% have a mix of political values that are right-of-center, while about half (51%) take a mix of liberal and conservative positions and 18% have consistently or mostly liberal views. Among all Republicans and Republican leaners, 53% have conservative views; in the two oldest generations, Silents and Boomers, about two-thirds are consistently or mostly conservative.

In short, not only are Millennials less likely than older generations to identify as Republicans, but even those who do express significantly less conservative values than do their elders.''

foxinsoxuk said:

tlg86 said:

Why are bookies still offering odds on the Gorton by-election?

It is still going ahead, I understood.

The writ is to be cancelled soon.

williamglenn said:

RobD said:

williamglenn said:

glw said:

Bromptonaut said:

Economic illiteracy of PB Tories knows no bounds.

What could possibly have happened in 1973 that gave a big and long-lasting boost to the UK economy?

Are you attributing that to one thing? Because that would be truly economically illiterate.

Over the last few decades global trade barriers have come down, currencies are now generally free floating, telecommunications advances have made a huge difference to trade, containerisation and ever larger ships have dramatically cut costs, and labour costs in developing economies are tiny.

I would put EU membership quite far down the list of significant changes to UK trade.

On a scale of 0 to 0, how significant do you think the opportunity is form signing 'our own trade deals' versus those negotiated through the EU?

Makes you wonder why any country not in the EU would negotiate trade deals.

They don't have the luxury of having the EU work for them. People who don't have cleaners still need to mop the floor.

Yet they still negotiate trade deals.

foxinsoxuk said:

tlg86 said:

Why are bookies still offering odds on the Gorton by-election?

It is still going ahead, I understood.

Last I heard is that parliament now needs to give the ARO the power it previously said she already had. So there are two hurdles to go through before it is formally cancelled; until then it is formally on.

kle4 said:

TOPPING said:

david_herdson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Getting rid of the triple lock is a bold move. It shows a certain hubris and complacency to start doing massive diarrhetic shits on your core vote assuming they have nowhere else to go.

They won't care about the triple lock as long as the increases come anyway. What getting rid of the pledge does do is give wriggle room if there's a legitimate reason to cut back, such as a recession.

Or a day with a Y in it.

Good. It might be risky to assume that core vote has nowhere to go, but from what I've read on here the policy is unsustainable, a grey vote bribe, and better she drop it, take some hit and still win, than win then drop it. So wiggle room a good thing.

The triple lock was slowly returning the state pension to its real value in 1979 vs average incomes. It's a f*** you to anyone aged 55 or over and approaching an age where they may be reliant almost entirely on the state pension of c. £7.5 k per year. Median income of those of working age £26k per year?

She's been experimenting with a lower pitch voice too, it's early years Thatcher ... Aargh.

CarlottaVance said:

(((Dan Hodges)))‏ @DPJHodges
Yesterday McDonnell said Labour would target anyone earning over £70,000. Today Thornberry won't back him. And so it begins...

Suggest we all order this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Grocery/Bulk-Grains-Organic-Yellow-Popcorn/B001KW90YY/

ToryJim said:

foxinsoxuk said:

tlg86 said:

Why are bookies still offering odds on the Gorton by-election?

It is still going ahead, I understood.

It can't you cannot have an election to a Parliament that no longer exists.

The counter writ has not yet been moved I think.