politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The true purpose of GE2017 will be confirmed in the CON candid
Comments
-
The government taking more of my money off me and giving to other people. That's what not to like.NickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?0 -
Well very true – and good luck to you Nick (although I agree with tpfkar that your undoubted talents would be better used elsewhere – why bother opposing Anna whom you often praise, whom you appear to like personally, and whom you agree with on very many issues?).NickPalmer said:
I don't think I'd be a credible candidate at age 67 in a seat that I've never lived in. I agree with Anna Soubry on many issues, especially social issues and our support for Remain. But the problem with her is precisely the same thing that she used against me in 2010 - when push came to shove, I nearly always voted with the Government. I now feel that excessive loyalty wasn't in the interests of party, government or country.tpfkar said:
Good stuff Nick. But I wonder if you could be persuaded out of Broxtowe? I would vote for Soubry in a flash, because I hate what the Tories have become and want as many Tories with concerns over their party's direction elected as possible.NickPalmer said:Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
I wonder if your undoubted talents might be best deployed elsewhere?
Does Parliament need a critic who always backs down, or intelligent MPs on both sides who are willing to oppose their parties if necessary?
However, I must pick you up on your 'excessive loyalty' line. This is precisely your weakness with Corbyn – a man who you must know in your heart to be hellbent on destroying the broad church Labour Party in favour of creating a hard left niche grouping.
I wish you would stop already with the excessive loyalty when it comes to him.
That all said, and for what it's worth, despite the fact that I won't be voting Labour, I would make an exception for you did I live in Broxtowe (which I don't).
Good luck!0 -
I think UKIP is going to do very much worse this GE than their polling suggests. As a single issue party, their voters are motivated to make Brexit happen. Full-on Brexit. Logically that means a vote for the nice Mrs May - who is clearly utterly committed to full-on Brexit. I expect ex-UKIP voters to vote blue in their droves this time. In fact UKIP is a busted flush now. Farage has gone. Nutall's a Liverpudlian. May is doing the business. What's the point any more?0
-
You're more right wing than Anna Soubry.NickPalmer said:
I don't think I'd be a credible candidate at age 67 in a seat that I've never lived in. I agree with Anna Soubry on many issues, especially social issues and our support for Remain. But the problem with her is precisely the same thing that she used against me in 2010 - when push came to shove, I nearly always voted with the Government. I now feel that excessive loyalty wasn't in the interests of party, government or country.tpfkar said:
Good stuff Nick. But I wonder if you could be persuaded out of Broxtowe? I would vote for Soubry in a flash, because I hate what the Tories have become and want as many Tories with concerns over their party's direction elected as possible.NickPalmer said:Chatted to Regional Office about standing (yes I'm considering it, contrary to previous intentions - all hands to the pumps etc.). The official said drily "It's a bit quiet here really, I was preparing for World War III and all we've got is an election".
I wonder if your undoubted talents might be best deployed elsewhere?
Does Parliament need a critic who always backs down, or intelligent MPs on both sides who are willing to oppose their parties if necessary?0 -
You really do just read lines straight from your Tory HQ handbook. When the line changes, yours changes.CarlottaVance said:
The reality of subsidising middle class uni students at the expense of poor ones. The SNP record speaks for itself.....malcolmg said:
He looked at the reality not your CCHQ flyersCarlottaVance said:
You clearly have paid more attention to their rhetoric than their record...murali_s said:
I wish I could vote SNP down here in London! The only progressive party with any credibility at the moment.malcolmg said:
Hear Hear , Labour are just crap. Much as I hate the Tories , how could anyone vote for these labour dullards.ydoethur said:
FFS.rkrkrk said:There's no way VAT on schools would put two thirds out of business.
Either parents would pay more, schools would cut costs or some combination of the two.
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
Most parents who pay for private schooling have to live right on the margins in order to do so. In Bristol, at Redland school where I used to do a lot of work in music, it was e first three overnight, and place severe pressure on Lichfield. Denstone has a different model and would probably be unaffected. That's a cool 1500 extra school places needed in the state system here in just one term. The state system is already at breaking point. This policy with its concomitant vast rise in costs would smash it entirely. Classes of 75 would appear possible. Thanks a bunch for wishing that on me.
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?0 -
Mr. Palmer, I've long said that a major problem with politics in this country is the way that any disagreement is portrayed as a split, a rebellion, a challenge to a leader's authority. Likewise, interviewers go scalp-hunting rather than questioning policies.
If the media scrutinised policies rather more, and politicians rather less, we'd be much better governed.0 -
Agree with both, but especially the latter.rkrkrk said:
I don't think it's that hard. I think it hasn't been tried hard enough.YBarddCwsc said:
I think the richest 10 per cent have much more than half.rkrkrk said:
You might want to have a look at the wealth distribution in the UK?Slackbladder said:The problem with 'soaking the rich' is that there simply isn't enough of them to actually raise any meaningful money. It always seeps down to middle and average earners paying more.
I think richest ten% have about half.
The problem is that it requires very significant effort and resources to go after the very rich. Middle and average earners normally end up paying because they are easier prey.
It is hard to soak the very rich, because they can buy all the umbrellas they need.
Properly resourcing HMRC would be a good start.0 -
I remember one BBC presenter being taken apart by an expert when whining about the unfairness of a policy on "typical second home owners",,,,,OldKingCole said:
It’s notable that average household income in the UK is around £28k (stand to be corrected, of course) and that would suggest that the starting salariy/wage of many, many people is well below £70kNickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?MattW said:
There are a lot of people earning 70k everywhere ... many of them Public Sector buoyed up by nationally influenced payscales. Primary school headteachers, senior staff at secondary schools, Doctors, Nurse Consultants, managers in public services, LA senior staff - even Police Inspectors if you start looking at package values not basic salaries. Plus the usual private sector types.
It is not very unusual.0 -
Not so Malc. I think they would be a great dream ticket. Yvette as leader and Chuka as shad chan.malcolmg said:
Two cowardly donkeys who would change nothing regarding making Labour electable. One totally useless and the other a snake oil salesman who is useless.TheScreamingEagles said:Chuka Umunna and Yvette Cooper look set to stand for the Labour leadership if Jeremy Corbyn crashes to defeat, party insiders said today.
Mr Umunna, the Streatham MP, was said to have been approached by colleagues pressing him to stand, while Ms Cooper, the former shadow home secretary, was described as “working the Tea Rooms hard” to drum up support before Parliament is dissolved.
Labour MPs say there is a growing view that an experienced figure, such as one of the pair of former frontbenchers, will be needed rather than a political newcomer if there is a challenge to Mr Corbyn after the election.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/yvette-cooper-and-chuka-umunna-set-to-make-leadership-bids-if-labour-loses-election-a3518981.html0 -
@OGH: "The CPS could play a role like the FBI’s Comey in the closing campaign stages" You mean it will have no real impact?
@OGH "Whilst it is innocent until proven guilty, being charged doesn’t infer guilt, as Hillary Clinton can testify perceptions can matter more than the facts" Hillary Clinton can, and does at every occasion, testify that her failures were anyone - everyone - else's but her own. She was a dreadful candidate, a dreadful leader and there was no one factor in her defeat.
Even if there had been no Comey statement, Trump would have found some other way to get his supporters riled up at her. And Clinton had already done a spectacular job all on her own in turning off her own potential base.
Blaming Comey is like Corbyn blaming the press. Even if it had an impact, it was only one element, and it was an element all of her own making, as is his.0 -
Only thing surging for the Scons..............https://wingsoverscotland.com/blue-is-the-new-orange/0
-
Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
One of the reasons, I suggest, is the arrangement of our House of Commons. You are either with the Government, or against it. An arrnagement for ctross benches would be much more sensible.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Palmer, I've long said that a major problem with politics in this country is the way that any disagreement is portrayed as a split, a rebellion, a challenge to a leader's authority. Likewise, interviewers go scalp-hunting rather than questioning policies.
If the media scrutinised policies rather more, and politicians rather less, we'd be much better governed.0 -
A minor edit. You're welcome.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How many of the 170 plus Labour MPs are going to come on TV interviews when they will be utterly compromised by their support for him?ToryJim said:https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/status/854996348206239745
Helen Goodman being honest about the election here.0 -
Exactly , tax is far to high as it is in this country and most of it wasted.Dura_Ace said:
The government taking more of my money off me and giving to other people. That's what not to like.NickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?0 -
That worked well when the LD’s tried it.CarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
ToryJim said:
Wow! How to win friends and influence people.0 -
Bob, not impressed by either of them , Chuka is too slick and Yvette is just dire. labour are bereft of talent.bobajobPB said:
Not so Malc. I think they would be a great dream ticket. Yvette as leader and Chuka as shad chan.malcolmg said:
Two cowardly donkeys who would change nothing regarding making Labour electable. One totally useless and the other a snake oil salesman who is useless.TheScreamingEagles said:Chuka Umunna and Yvette Cooper look set to stand for the Labour leadership if Jeremy Corbyn crashes to defeat, party insiders said today.
Mr Umunna, the Streatham MP, was said to have been approached by colleagues pressing him to stand, while Ms Cooper, the former shadow home secretary, was described as “working the Tea Rooms hard” to drum up support before Parliament is dissolved.
Labour MPs say there is a growing view that an experienced figure, such as one of the pair of former frontbenchers, will be needed rather than a political newcomer if there is a challenge to Mr Corbyn after the election.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/yvette-cooper-and-chuka-umunna-set-to-make-leadership-bids-if-labour-loses-election-a3518981.html0 -
Despite offering free tuition, Scotland has the worst record than anywhere else in the UK when it comes to getting students from poorer backgrounds into university, says new report.bobajobPB said:
You really do just read lines straight from your Tory HQ handbook. When the line changes, yours changes.CarlottaVance said:
The reality of subsidising middle class uni students at the expense of poor ones. The SNP record speaks for itself.....malcolmg said:
He looked at the reality not your CCHQ flyersCarlottaVance said:
You clearly have paid more attention to their rhetoric than their record...murali_s said:
I wish I could vote SNP down here in London! The only progressive party with any credibility at the moment.malcolmg said:
Hear Hear , Labour are just crap. Much as I hate the Tories , how could anyone vote for these labour dullards.ydoethur said:
FFS.rkrkrk said:There's no way VAT on schools would put two thirds out of business.
Either parents would pay more, schools would cut costs or some combination of the two.
Most private schools run on margins of about 2%. I know there are exceptions like Eton and Harrow but they are unusual. It is a business with high overheads and low income streams. You think they could absorb a 20% rise in costs on that basis?
There is a hell of a lot of ignorance about the reality of private schooling and why it persists even though the concept is unpopular. Corbyn, for a start, doesn't get how it just about keeps the state sector afloat in this country. The majority is not based on wealthy people - it is based on middle income people for whom personal comfort is less important than the quality of their child's education. This policy would smash the model. That's clearly the intention. Well, I've no quarrel with people who oppose private education in principle. But to destroy the state sector to destroy the private sector? Criminal insanity. If by a chance in a million Corbyn wins and enacts it I'm launching a private prosecution against him for lying on his nomination papers (he still has to declare he's sane, doesn't he)?
The Access to Scotland report from social mobility charity The Sutton Trust has found there to be a narrowing of the gap between rich and poor young people entering higher education (HE) across the UK in recent years.
www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/scottish-universities-worst-in-the-uk-for-admitting-poorer-students-despite-having-no-tuition-fees-a7051521.html0 -
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
It's incredible to recall that this newspaper was once independent ... well sort of.ToryJim said:0 -
OldKingCole said:
That worked well when the LD’s tried it.CarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/
Theresa May was a target, wasn't she? That turned out well.OldKingCole said:
That worked well when the LD’s tried it.CarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Good luck, Nick, if you choose to stand. Based on current polling Soubry might expect to increase her majority to 10k. If you could keep her down to 5k that would be a good achievement.0
-
I agree UKIP are likely to collapse to 2010 figures. Not all will go to the Tories though, I suspect that probably 50% will.Patrick said:I think UKIP is going to do very much worse this GE than their polling suggests. As a single issue party, their voters are motivated to make Brexit happen. Full-on Brexit. Logically that means a vote for the nice Mrs May - who is clearly utterly committed to full-on Brexit. I expect ex-UKIP voters to vote blue in their droves this time. In fact UKIP is a busted flush now. Farage has gone. Nutall's a Liverpudlian. May is doing the business. What's the point any more?
0 -
Surely UKIP will have a crack in Broxtowe ?GarethoftheVale2 said:Good luck, Nick, if you choose to stand. Based on current polling Soubry might expect to increase her majority to 10k. If you could keep her down to 5k that would be a good achievement.
Not that they'll do anything, but maybe someone like Kilroy could liven the election up round here a bit
0 -
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?0 -
King Cole, crossbenchers in the Commons is an interesting idea, but the problem is the media, not the seating arrangements.0
-
And from about 1975 onwards the line is virtually flat for a decade.Ishmael_Z said:
I was going to say that, but I could not believe that anyone prepared to call other posters "economically illiterate" would fail to realise it. Has he posted the wrong graph, or does he have less graph-fu than the average 8 year old?Cyclefree said:
That graph shows trade increasing before 1973.Bromptonaut said:
Economic illiteracy of PB Tories knows no bounds.perdix said:
This is nothing new. The protectionism of France and Germany has never favoured the UK.Bromptonaut said:Meanwhile the EU quietly gets on with the job of sidelining the UK.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/854797735194746885
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
Snip0 -
Hard to argue with - at least until you define a little more precisely what you regard as reasonable.NickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?MattW said:
There are a lot of people earning 70k everywhere ... many of them Public Sector buoyed up by nationally influenced payscales. Primary school headteachers, senior staff at secondary schools, Doctors, Nurse Consultants, managers in public services, LA senior staff - even Police Inspectors if you start looking at package values not basic salaries. Plus the usual private sector types.
It is not very unusual.
And 'costed Labour programme' hides a potential multitude of sins.
It's very easy to talk in generalities; indeed Theresa May can sound equally reasonable. The devil is in the detail.0 -
To be fair that's a comment piece by Max Benwell (never heard of him) and not an editorial by the paper.peter_from_putney said:
It's incredible to recall that this newspaper was once independent ... well sort of.ToryJim said:0 -
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/
0 -
Yes, that's very well put. It's also an argument for Swiss-style referenda - if the voters are asked to take a view on current issues every 3 months then politicians becomes consultees instead of decision-makers, and are generally respected and more often than not their advice is accepted. Our system of making it a variety of a reality show, all about personalities that we then try to undermine, is a really crasp way of engaging people in the decisions.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Palmer, I've long said that a major problem with politics in this country is the way that any disagreement is portrayed as a split, a rebellion, a challenge to a leader's authority. Likewise, interviewers go scalp-hunting rather than questioning policies.
If the media scrutinised policies rather more, and politicians rather less, we'd be much better governed.0 -
Realistically I would think they will only push hard in, total guess, 5 seats in Scotland, with hopes of winning maybe 3? So I guess its not like it will divert resources too much on a decapitation.OldKingCole said:
That worked well when the LD’s tried it.CarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/
Despite his overblown talk on the tv debates yesterday (where I agree May is frit), Robertson seems like a good, competent sought, there are without question worse SNP MPs to go for.0 -
Attacking aspiration is a big vote loserRecidivist said:
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?0 -
NOTA/not vote at all?foxinsoxuk said:
I agree UKIP are likely to collapse to 2010 figures. Not all will go to the Tories though, I suspect that probably 50% will.Patrick said:I think UKIP is going to do very much worse this GE than their polling suggests. As a single issue party, their voters are motivated to make Brexit happen. Full-on Brexit. Logically that means a vote for the nice Mrs May - who is clearly utterly committed to full-on Brexit. I expect ex-UKIP voters to vote blue in their droves this time. In fact UKIP is a busted flush now. Farage has gone. Nutall's a Liverpudlian. May is doing the business. What's the point any more?
0 -
That will be a no then. Chortle.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Here's my source for £15k, significant capital expense increases and huge rise in private school feesydoethur said:
Rubbish from start to finish. In London the average cost is just over 15,000, countrywide it's about 13,000 and is heavily skewed by London where a very large number of private schools are (in the north it's under 10,000). Looking at the figures, the increases have been below inflation.
These facilities - have you ever actually been to a private school? I was surprised at Redland and Princethorpe (where I had an interview) to find out how many classrooms were in portacabins. Technology in the state sector is miles better too - largely thanks to Brown splurging money at it (he had his good points). The arms race is largely a myth based on the top few schools. Indeed, in my experience state schools often have far better facilities. The only cost to cut would therefore be staff salaries - and they are on average lower in the independent sector anyway although as class sizes are smaller they tend to have less work (20 books to mark instead of 37 sounds rather nice). So again, your idea of cutting costs is completely wrong.
Since around half of private schools are businesses not charities anyway and therefore not entitled to claim tax relief - three of those five I mentioned are, with one a subsidiary of the Church of England and therefore only Stafford Grammar acting as an official charity - your point is again wrong (and since Corbyn has also vowed to directly strip tax relief from schools run as charities, how you link it to this policy I am not sure).
https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-charts-that-shows-how-private-school-fees-have-exploded-a7023056.html?amp
I don't know the schools you are talking about personally but i think it's fair to say private schools generally have better facilities and grounds than state schools. If you have evidence to the contrary please share it.0 -
I would have it the other way, Umunna as leader and Cooper as Shadow Chancellor could be an electable ticket but I think Starmer is probably the most likely initial replacement for Corbyn to stabilise Labour and get it back on its feetbobajobPB said:
Not so Malc. I think they would be a great dream ticket. Yvette as leader and Chuka as shad chan.malcolmg said:
Two cowardly donkeys who would change nothing regarding making Labour electable. One totally useless and the other a snake oil salesman who is useless.TheScreamingEagles said:Chuka Umunna and Yvette Cooper look set to stand for the Labour leadership if Jeremy Corbyn crashes to defeat, party insiders said today.
Mr Umunna, the Streatham MP, was said to have been approached by colleagues pressing him to stand, while Ms Cooper, the former shadow home secretary, was described as “working the Tea Rooms hard” to drum up support before Parliament is dissolved.
Labour MPs say there is a growing view that an experienced figure, such as one of the pair of former frontbenchers, will be needed rather than a political newcomer if there is a challenge to Mr Corbyn after the election.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/yvette-cooper-and-chuka-umunna-set-to-make-leadership-bids-if-labour-loses-election-a3518981.html0 -
Past the 3 border seats gains in Scotland look very tough for the Tories to my eyes.
The SNP is still around 45%.
Edinburgh looks too remainian for the Tories to me.
So
Con 3
Lab 1
LD 1
SNP the rest maybe.0 -
Substantially. Some to everyone too.OldKingCole said:
NOTA/not vote at all?foxinsoxuk said:
I agree UKIP are likely to collapse to 2010 figures. Not all will go to the Tories though, I suspect that probably 50% will.Patrick said:I think UKIP is going to do very much worse this GE than their polling suggests. As a single issue party, their voters are motivated to make Brexit happen. Full-on Brexit. Logically that means a vote for the nice Mrs May - who is clearly utterly committed to full-on Brexit. I expect ex-UKIP voters to vote blue in their droves this time. In fact UKIP is a busted flush now. Farage has gone. Nutall's a Liverpudlian. May is doing the business. What's the point any more?
0 -
Just wonder if the bar’s set too low. If McD had gone for £100k as the marker.....Big_G_NorthWales said:
Attacking aspiration is a big vote loserRecidivist said:
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Agree, as posted earlier, that for a LOT of people, especially outside the SE corner £70k sounds a lot of money.0 -
wonder when jeremy corbyns tax returns failure will become a campaign slogan 'he cant even file his tax returns correctly, how can he run the country?"0
-
UKIP will have pockets of rabid support, but I believe have virtually no national organisation. Their best bet must be to focus on 2 or 3 seats and hit them really hard but I think they will need to be very lucky - Farage may just squeak it as he is Mr Brexit for many voters but where the right seat is - not Stoke Central perhaps somewhere on the East coast.....Not even sure it is Thanet0
-
Still waiting for your apology to the Sutton Trust,,,,,chortle....bobajobPB said:
That will be a no then. Chortle.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Are you a potential Labour voter? And even if not, wouldn't you still prefer Labour to have policies including proposals for how they'd finance the programme, rather than just promise the moon without any idea how to raise money?Dura_Ace said:
The government taking more of my money off me and giving to other people. That's what not to like.NickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?0 -
I note my seat, Stirling, is on this list of Tory targets:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
People generally support higher taxes or lower welfare for others.OldKingCole said:
Just wonder if the bar’s set too low. If McD had gone for £100k as the marker.....Big_G_NorthWales said:
Attacking aspiration is a big vote loserRecidivist said:
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?
Agree, as posted earlier, that for a LOT of people, especially outside the SE corner £70k sounds a lot of money.
£70 000-£80 000 is about 3 times national Median income. It is I suspect what most people would regard as rich.0 -
Opinion piece not a headline I suppose, unlike 'Crush the Saboteurs', but while I find Corbynista and right wing headbanger whinges on MSM to be pathetic stuff, I confess when the papers go this extreme it is so wearying.MTimT said:
All these people being told if they have doubts, why not go join the Tories already, what if they do? Although perhaps they have already.0 -
If Labour supporters think Chuka is the answer to their problems they are in even bigger trouble than I appreciated.....0
-
How is the "progressive alliance" coming then?
https://twitter.com/jamieross7/status/8550160116150968320 -
I see a new poll in France from Harris (changes from last week):
Macron 25% (+1) Le Pen 22% (NC) Fillon 19% (-1) Melenchon 19% (NC). ANother good poll for Macron, but 3% is hardly safe if you assume that he is particularly vulnerable to a polling error.0 -
Mr. Palmer, I'd probably prefer to go down a route of only having a referendum for very large changes (voting system, for example), but give MPs more freedom by having far fewer whipped votes.
Kudos for your honesty, incidentally.0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
UDI means direct rule but May saying the SNP losing seats is an excuse to block indyref2 is just as valid as Surgeon using Brexit as an excuse to call for indyref2Theuniondivvie said:
That's an unanswerable demand for UDI.ydoethur said:
Simple.Theuniondivvie said:
Just so.kle4 said:
A pretty poor one too. There were good, sound reasons for delaying the demands before the GE was called, but they don't look sustainable anymore, claiming the qualitative difference between a GE and an IndyRef is so significant as to make one ok and the other not does not stack up in my view.Theuniondivvie said:
I'm glad you see it as a mere excuse.HYUFD said:
If the SNP lose any seats though May will use that as an excuse to ignore Sturgeon's indyref2 demands for the foreseeable futurekle4 said:
Unfortunately that does not really speak to the longer term chances of the union. They did better than coukd have been dreamed last time, losing a handful of seats doesn't make them not the most popular party in Scotland and a few percentage points from victory.HYUFD said:
Unionist parties may actually gain some seats from the SNPhamiltonace 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.
I look forward to certain parties on here quantifying exactly what constitutes a decisive, strong mandate that allows a leader and her party to to follow through on their stated aims. I strongly suspect that the figures will differ south and north of the Tweed.
50%+ of the vote for separatist parties. That's an unanswerable demand for a second referendum.
You managed it handsomely last time - around 51.5%. Are you saying you are not confident of doing as well again?
The high probability of that figure being reached plus torpedoing her own argument that a referendum would be too disruptive is one of the reasons I am very surprised May went for an election.
First Indy referendum called after SNP got 45% of vote.
EU referendum called after Tories got 37% of the vote.
Of course if you're saying Tessy needs 50%+ for her as yet undefined Brexitier than a Brexity thing Brexit, I salute your consistency.0 -
We have Local Elections in a fortnight, where elected UKIP councillors, or their replacements, will be facing the electorate. IIRC losses were forecast. If those materialise as expected, then we could get an idea of what will happen to the party a month later.swing_voter said:UKIP will have pockets of rabid support, but I believe have virtually no national organisation. Their best bet must be to focus on 2 or 3 seats and hit them really hard but I think they will need to be very lucky - Farage may just squeak it as he is Mr Brexit for many voters but where the right seat is - not Stoke Central perhaps somewhere on the East coast.....Not even sure it is Thanet
0 -
Thanks! It's difficult to promise perfectly spent resources, obviously - there are no perfect projects in either public or private sectors. We've argued about HS2 in the past - I know you're a big fan, but would you like to offer a guarantee that it will come in on time, on budget, and with no mistakes? I wouldn't expect it, or think it a reasonable demand by critics.JosiasJessop said:
Experience.NickPalmer said:
Sure. I earned £100K last year myself. But lots of us in that category are willing to pay a reasonable contribuiton to the society around us that made it possible for us to be successful - and which still places too many hurdles in the way of people who could potentially be just as successful. If that's part of creating a costed Labour programme that will help people in difficulty, what's not to like?MattW said:
There are a lot of people earning 70k everywhere ... many of them Public Sector buoyed up by nationally influenced payscales. Primary school headteachers, senior staff at secondary schools, Doctors, Nurse Consultants, managers in public services, LA senior staff - even Police Inspectors if you start looking at package values not basic salaries. Plus the usual private sector types.
It is not very unusual.
Labour threw money at education and health during their time in power, and much of it was wasted or ineffective. Having a costed Labour programme is just the first step; the implementation is a heck of a lot harder.
Many people, even evil high-earners, don't mind paying more in tax as long as they think it's spent responsibly Although 'responsibly' is very much in the eye of the beholder; witness yesterday's discussion about foreign aid.
Good luck with your potential forthcoming opportunities, wherever they might be.
The splurge on the NHS and education did help a lot, though there are certainly examples of mistakes. The overall impact was a huge reduction in waiting times (now being reversed) and a substantial upgrade to school facilities.0 -
Nick, having lived in Switzerland, there is much to admire (and a bit to find creepy) about the civic-mindedness of the Swiss and how they govern themselves. But that system is based upon totally different realities than Britain - different size, different community structures, different culture and a different political history. I don't see any feasible path from what we have in Britain to that sort of structure.NickPalmer said:
Yes, that's very well put. It's also an argument for Swiss-style referenda - if the voters are asked to take a view on current issues every 3 months then politicians becomes consultees instead of decision-makers, and are generally respected and more often than not their advice is accepted. Our system of making it a variety of a reality show, all about personalities that we then try to undermine, is a really crasp way of engaging people in the decisions.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Palmer, I've long said that a major problem with politics in this country is the way that any disagreement is portrayed as a split, a rebellion, a challenge to a leader's authority. Likewise, interviewers go scalp-hunting rather than questioning policies.
If the media scrutinised policies rather more, and politicians rather less, we'd be much better governed.
Even if we did, given the number of decisions and pieces of legislation the government has to make, it is unrealistic to consult the public on all of them. How do you decide which are referendum-worthy and which are not? At the moment, our practice seems to reserve referenda for clearly constitutional issues. I rather like that threshold.0 -
Politicians (of all stripes) have projects (good or bad) on which they love to spend money. If it was that easy to take money off the very rich, it would have been done by now.rkrkrk said:
I don't think it's that hard. I think it hasn't been tried hard enough.YBarddCwsc said:
I think the richest 10 per cent have much more than half.rkrkrk said:
You might want to have a look at the wealth distribution in the UK?Slackbladder said:The problem with 'soaking the rich' is that there simply isn't enough of them to actually raise any meaningful money. It always seeps down to middle and average earners paying more.
I think richest ten% have about half.
The problem is that it requires very significant effort and resources to go after the very rich. Middle and average earners normally end up paying because they are easier prey.
It is hard to soak the very rich, because they can buy all the umbrellas they need.
Properly resourcing HMRC would be a good start.
The web is full of people saying "I don't think it's that hard".
It is always harder than a blog poster thinks.
In the case of taking money off the rich, it requires real political willpower & stamina, and no-one has done it in a generation (both in the UK and in most other Western democracies).0 -
z
That article is a satirical piece. It's not particularly funny but it's not a serious piece.kle4 said:
Opinion piece not a headline I suppose, unlike 'Crush the Saboteurs', but while I find Corbynista and right wing headbanger whinges on MSM to be pathetic stuff, I confess when the papers go this extreme it is so wearying.MTimT said:
All these people being told if they have doubts, why not go join the Tories already, what if they do? Although perhaps they have already.0 -
LibDem punters.
Remember this:
There are only 40 seats where the LibDems are less than 20% behind the winners.
Looking only at Labour seats, there are a couple with very large Remain votes: Cambridge, Bermondsey & Old Southwark, Cardiff Central, Bristol West and Hornsey & Wood Green. Of those, if the LDs were to pick up three or four, that would be a pretty good performance.
Looking at Conservative seats, there are sizeable (i.e. above 55% Remain votes) in Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton, Cheadle, Cheltenham, Oxford West & Abingdon and Bath... and... errr... that's about it*. The LibDems appear to be stronger in Leave voting Tory seats than Remain ones. That makes pickups from the Conservatives very tough.
So, let's assume that the LibDems win all the Labour Seats where there are big Remain votes and they're less than 20% behind. That's five pickups.
Let's assume every possible Conservative seats. That's another seven (including Lewes).
Let's also give them all four of the vaguely possible SNP seats.
And let's add another two seats which the LibDems remarkably pull out of the hat.
I think any normal person would agree that these are pretty bullish forecasts for the LibDems. And - assuming they keep all their current seats - that puts them on... (drumroll)...
28 seats.
And that's in a "best of all possible worlds" scenario**.
Much more likely they manage three of the five labour seats, two of the Conservative ones, and two SNP ones. We'll give them one for good luck, and assume they hold Richmond and their other seats.
That gets you to 18. And I'm still probably a bit bullish. My range on their seats would be 14 to 18.
* Lewes almost makes the cut, so that's a possible for them too.
** Assuming no total Labour meltdown.0 -
75% of Poles identify as religious, even more than the 69% in the US and Italy is also quite high at 72%foxinsoxuk said:
Parts of Eastern Europe are strongly athiestic. Supposedly the Czech Republic is the European country with the most identifying as Athiest.HYUFD said:
You are forgetting that a comfortable majority of the global population are still Christian or Muslim, atheism is still very much a minority view worldwide and the US is closer to the worldview on that than secular western Europe. Indeed Eastern Europe is as religious as the non coastal USThe_Apocalypse said:
Yes. Thankfully, in this country I think we are much less judgemental of atheists. More polling showed that while we don't think you have to be religious to be a good person (many European countries thought the same) Americans had a different view. Still, among the younger generation in America atheism is growing - so hopefully it becomes more acceptable to the American public as a whole. Sadly the religious right in the US appear to be desperate to drag the country back to the 1950s with evangelicals at the forefront of this.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.
Remarkeably considering its illegality, the same percentage of Saudis identify as Athiests than Americans, 5%.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Saudi_Arabia
As a general rule in countries and indeed within countries, religiosity is inversely related to income and education.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Importance_of_religion_by_country0 -
I meant more technically difficult.YBarddCwsc said:
Politicians (of all stripes) have projects (good or bad) on which they love to spend money. If it was that easy to take money off the very rich, it would have been done by now.rkrkrk said:
I don't think it's that hard. I think it hasn't been tried hard enough.YBarddCwsc said:
I think the richest 10 per cent have much more than half.rkrkrk said:
You might want to have a look at the wealth distribution in the UK?Slackbladder said:The problem with 'soaking the rich' is that there simply isn't enough of them to actually raise any meaningful money. It always seeps down to middle and average earners paying more.
I think richest ten% have about half.
The problem is that it requires very significant effort and resources to go after the very rich. Middle and average earners normally end up paying because they are easier prey.
It is hard to soak the very rich, because they can buy all the umbrellas they need.
Properly resourcing HMRC would be a good start.
The web is full of people saying "I don't think it's that hard".
It is always harder than a blog poster thinks.
In the case of taking money off the rich, it requires real political willpower & stamina, and no-one has done it in a generation (both in the UK and in most other Western democracies).
Politically it's tricky because the wealthy are very influential.0 -
The poll on the General Election outcome people expect speaks to the smaller parties being worth a flutter at the constituency level (Lib Dems, Greens, Plaid, maybe even UKIP if they arrest the bad narrative around them).
Such parties are squeezed in a perceived tight election. A lot of Lib Dem MPs last time experienced, "I like you, but I can't risk it" from Tory-ish people. They'd got the terrifying (in Southern England) leaflets about Sturgeon calling the shots in a chaotic Miliband administration, and it was seen as sufficiently possible (even likely) to ditch longstanding, liked MPs.
If it's seen as a foregone conclusion, not so much. People can have a May Government AND an MP who isn't Conservative lobby-fodder. Likewise, in somewhere like Rhondda, the argument that only a Labour MP can deliver Labour Government is pretty hollow if everyone knows damned well it ain't happening... so why not get Leanne Wood in for the sheer hell of it?0 -
Oh good - but we've all seens ones jus like it which are real.Paristonda said:z
That article is a satirical piece. It's not particularly funny but it's not a serious piece.kle4 said:
Opinion piece not a headline I suppose, unlike 'Crush the Saboteurs', but while I find Corbynista and right wing headbanger whinges on MSM to be pathetic stuff, I confess when the papers go this extreme it is so wearying.MTimT said:
All these people being told if they have doubts, why not go join the Tories already, what if they do? Although perhaps they have already.0 -
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Far better to target tax avoiders etc , people would see that as being fair and not just petty vindictiveness or pathetic ideology.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Attacking aspiration is a big vote loserRecidivist said:
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?0 -
Very true. But taxing the well off isn't attacking aspiration.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Attacking aspiration is a big vote loserRecidivist said:
Absolutely. The median income is about £27,000. Getting the better off to pay more tax is definitely a policy that could work to Labour's advantage if they can find a way to present it effectively.rkrkrk said:
I think you've got this wrong. 70k is about 5% of the population i think.Big_G_NorthWales said:John McDonnell has said anyone earning £70,000 + are in labour's sights for increased taxes.
Labour really do want to snuff out aspiration - interesting how media journalists will react as most will be in or near that range
To many people that sounds like big big money... Remember the fuss about MPs pay?0 -
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Yawn, is that like there would be no General Election perhapsHYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
HYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
calum said:HYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/
You forget to add your comment Calum , stunned by the idiocy of the postcalum said:HYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Lost for words !malcolmg said:calum said:HYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/
You forget to add your comment Calum , stunned by the idiocy of the postcalum said:HYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Reference the Independent story, it will be truly hilarious if Corbyn refuses to resign after reducing Labour to a rump of (say) 150.0
-
Yes as May ultimately has to decide on bothmalcolmg said:
Yawn, is that like there would be no General Election perhapsHYUFD said:
There will be no official indyref2 anytime soonmalcolmg said:
Quite true, the earthquake will be in the following referendum. Tories will get their wish and break the union. Dave may not get title of worst PM after all.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
Worried farmers, angry fishermen, whisky industry worries and local military base closures could make for an explosive cocktail - no real idea how Moray will pan out, but my instinct is to agree with you on this one.CarlottaVance said:
I think Robertson is a scalp too far, even if he is in the least Remainy constituency in Scotland and is horribly compromised on Fisheries and the EU - but voters enjoy having a "national figure" in Parliament and the earthquake is not heading in the SNP's direction this election.malcolmg said:
You want to bet on it perhapsCarlottaVance said:Talking of scalps:
EXCLUSIVE: SNP deputy leader Angus Robertson targeted on Tory election hitlist
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/409311/conservative-election-target-snp-deputy-leader/0 -
No, it really doesn't. One pretendy moan on your part doesn't balance a tsunami of criticism from the other side.OldKingCole said:
Since we both criticise the BBC I assume it’s doing a reasonable job, as far as impartiality goes. Gets it wrong sometimes, some programmes seem biased one way or another, of course.Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? I take it you don't watch or listen to the BBC, then.OldKingCole said:'Right now’ is atypical. Even in less abnormal circumstances the Centre and Centre-Left have a hard time getting sympathetic coverage of their policies.
www.biased-bbc.com0 -
I would put Aberdeenshire West as in play as well.Pulpstar said:Past the 3 border seats gains in Scotland look very tough for the Tories to my eyes.
The SNP is still around 45%.
Edinburgh looks too remainian for the Tories to me.
So
Con 3
Lab 1
LD 1
SNP the rest maybe.
Conservative block need to be 30%+ share of voting to make significant inroads beyond that, but that could put Carmichael at risk in Orkney & Shetland.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
