General question: I've put on many more (small) constituency bets than I have in the past. One or two are at silly odds, most are reasonable, and many of the odds have shortened dramatically.
When other PBers are in that position (particularly in two horse race seats), do they keep the bet as is, or back the other party, to go all green?
@paulwaugh: Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn "a terrorist sympathiser" in #pmqs was a "discredit to the office of Prime Minister"
That labour source is right.
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
There is no tax free lump sum with the state pension. He can get the lump sum from the others (assuming they are defined contribution/money purchase) by going into flexible drawdown (or by buying an annuity) at age 55, or later.
He will however need to talk to his employer (or their managers) about that scheme, since it will depend on its normal retirement age and what rules it has about early payment.
The Ipsos subsamples for London and the South are by far the best that the left has had to date. A huge over-inclusion of public sector workers in the unweighted sample, mind.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
Some people are attracted mainly by the policies of the party, some by the leaders of the party and some because they identify with the party as a whole. If you had a total of ten points to allocate according to how important each of these was to you, how many points would you allocate to the (LEADERS/POLICIES/PARTY) of the Party you intend voting for?
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
@paulwaugh: Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn "a terrorist sympathiser" in #pmqs was a "discredit to the office of Prime Minister"
That labour source is right.
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
Well done, Pong.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
There is no tax free lump sum with the state pension. He can get the lump sum from the others (assuming they are defined contribution/money purchase) by going into flexible drawdown (or by buying an annuity) at age 55, or later.
He will however need to talk to his employer (or their managers) about that scheme, since it will depend on its normal retirement age and what rules it has about early payment.
Some employers with defined benefit schemes are currently offering substantial enhancements to pension fund value in order to incentivise memebers to transfer out. My own offered a 47% enhancement - I've heard of a couple over 50%. They should insist on evidence that you have taken appropriate advice, so get a good IFA who will be prepare to negotiate hard. Essentially, he will be accepting risks on future returns and inflation currently carried by the employer and he needs to be fully compensated for this. There are other advantages to setting up a personal pension pot that the advisor can tell him about, but there will be annual fees.
@PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Hours after saying he couldn't do anything to stop David Ward being a Lib Dem candidate, Tim Farron sacks David Ward.
In theory and party constitution wise Farron cannot sack a parliamentary candidate nor in theory could a Conservative leader sack a Conservative parliamentary candidate but practice is different as is shown here and as Howard did with the candidate in Arundel in 2005 .
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
It seems that many are commenting on the Brexit negotiations as if it is solely a 'win-lose' set up. In many areas, it is a 'win-win', and overall, there is no reason per se why the overall result cannot be a 'win-win' because the EU and UK clearly place different values on many of the negotiating points, so there is plenty of room for arbitrage across these exchange rates.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
@paulwaugh: Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn "a terrorist sympathiser" in #pmqs was a "discredit to the office of Prime Minister"
That labour source is right.
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
Well done, Pong.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
I hope you haven't lost someone you knew to the IRA, but if you had, you might feel differently.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
Mr. Meeks, to be honest, that's an alarming thought.
Whilst I'm relieved it's looking likely Corbyn will be crushed, landslide majorities are not, I think, good for democracy. I don't want a Conservative party on 450 seats becoming complacent, sloppy and incompetent.
But if you're in a red-blue marginal, what's the alternative? Corbyn's got to be kept out of Downing Street.
Fair go, Doc, I have long taken the view that leaving the EU would mean a reversion to WTO terms (as it has now become) and have never felt frightened by that fact. For me this is a political not an economic decision. Others, maybe including yourself, will disagree.
Nope. I have been an advocate of hard Brexit since last July, and think it mistaken to believe in soft Brexit.
I do expect Britain to change its mind in the medium term and apply for EEA membership once it has got its atavistic tantrum out of the way.
Also on topic, the sheer consistency of the recent polls stands out. Since the election was called, we've had 49:26, 49:27, 46:24, 40:29, 48:26, 48:27, 48:25, 50:25, 45:26, 48:24 and 46:25.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
o I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
It seems that many are commenting on the Brexit negotiations as if it is solely a 'win-lose' set up. In many areas, it is a 'win-win', and overall, there is no reason per se
No, I never did imagine it would be all doom and gloom, Tim. Nor is it entirely a zero-sum gain. There clearly will be some win-win situations.
There will be others that are not, however, and in those the UK's bargaining position is constrained. If you and I played poker and I was obliged to place my cards face up on the table whilst you were allowed to keep them close to your chest, who do you think would win?
Also on topic, the sheer consistency of the recent polls stands out. Since the election was called, we've had 49:26, 49:27, 46:24, 40:29, 48:26, 48:27, 48:25, 50:25, 45:26, 48:24 and 46:25.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
Feeling pretty confident in my constituency bets, to be honest.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
My sympathies, Sunil. I've been through this with my parents (and in-laws), so I can appreciate your feelings right now.
Is that right? I was looking at past election results recently and I am sure I came across a Pirate Party candidate, but I can't remember where it was.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
It seems that many are commenting on the Brexit negotiations as if it is solely a 'win-lose' set up. In many areas, it is a 'win-win', and overall, there is no reason per se why the overall result cannot be a 'win-win' because the EU and UK clearly place different values on many of the negotiating points, so there is plenty of room for arbitrage across these exchange rates.
Also on topic, the sheer consistency of the recent polls stands out. Since the election was called, we've had 49:26, 49:27, 46:24, 40:29, 48:26, 48:27, 48:25, 50:25, 45:26, 48:24 and 46:25.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
@PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Hours after saying he couldn't do anything to stop David Ward being a Lib Dem candidate, Tim Farron sacks David Ward.
Had to be done. Not quite sure where the authority to do so comes from, but we can worry about that another time. Just too many awkward fronts opening up and this one had to be shut down. I have to compare with Naz Shah - who's shown real contrition and learnt to express herself much more smartly over time - with David Ward who doesn't seem to have learned a thing.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
Having been through it myself, please accept my sincere condolences to you and your family Sunil.
Today was the first time I really felt that Mrs May enjoyed PMQs....
Just a shame about all those 'errs' and 'ums' while she shuffled through her pre-prepared attack lines to work out which one bore even a passing relevance to the question....
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
It seems that many are commenting on the Brexit negotiations as if it is solely a 'win-lose' set up. In many areas, it is a 'win-win', and overall, there is no reason per se why the overall result cannot be a 'win-win' because the EU and UK clearly place different values on many of the negotiating points, so there is plenty of room for arbitrage across these exchange rates.
Also on topic, the sheer consistency of the recent polls stands out. Since the election was called, we've had 49:26, 49:27, 46:24, 40:29, 48:26, 48:27, 48:25, 50:25, 45:26, 48:24 and 46:25.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
So labour 3-6 points behind Ed M. But the Tories well up under May rather than Cameron (8-13 points).
Killing off UKIP has helped the Tories more than Corbyn?
@paulwaugh: Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn "a terrorist sympathiser" in #pmqs was a "discredit to the office of Prime Minister"
That labour source is right.
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
Well done, Pong.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
I hope you haven't lost someone you knew to the IRA, but if you had, you might feel differently.
But May wasn't speaking in that capacity. She was speaking as PM and Conservative Party leader.
She also, I suspect, knows that whatever Corbyn's many flaws, he's not a wicked man. I doubt he's a close pal of hers, but I expect personally it's all perfectly cordial.
The terrorist sympathiser thing is in trolling territory, I'm afraid. Pong is entirely right that we all had a very hard lesson just before the Referendum that hyperbole in the heat of a campaign can have real (and wholly unintended) consequences when picked up on by oddballs with existing grievances etc.
Politicians (not just May - she's certainly not the sole offender, and nor are the Tories generally) need to appreciate they don't choose who hear's their words, and show some restraint and care in picking those words.
Mr. Meeks, to be honest, that's an alarming thought.
Whilst I'm relieved it's looking likely Corbyn will be crushed, landslide majorities are not, I think, good for democracy. I don't want a Conservative party on 450 seats becoming complacent, sloppy and incompetent.
But if you're in a red-blue marginal, what's the alternative? Corbyn's got to be kept out of Downing Street.
Pigs will indeed fly before Corbyn is elected to No 10, Morris.
Fortunately for me, I have a dilemma-free alternative. My sitting MP is a left wing Labour Brexiteer.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
o I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
It seems that many are commenting on the Brexit negotiations as if it is solely a 'win-lose' set up. In many areas, it is a 'win-win', and overall, there is no reason per se
No, I never did imagine it would be all doom and gloom, Tim. Nor is it entirely a zero-sum gain. There clearly will be some win-win situations.
There will be others that are not, however, and in those the UK's bargaining position is constrained. If you and I played poker and I was obliged to place my cards face up on the table whilst you were allowed to keep them close to your chest, who do you think would win?
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
Come off it Pong and PtP. Corbyn's invitation of IRA murderers into parliament whilst MPs were still in mourning over their colleagues and wives, as well as nursing their own injuries, from an outrage perpretated by very close associates of those he invited in, was one of the most disgusting things an MP has ever done. Add to that McDonnell's position on the IRA murderers, and Corbyn's open sympathy for Hamas murderers.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
I'm afraid you're wrong:
.49 * .21 = 10.29% .27 * .43 = 11.61%
Nope the Conservatives do lose that but cannot assume they will gain all the defectors from the other parties . Try again with Conservative defectors going half to Lab and half to LD and similar for the other parties .
@paulwaugh: Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn "a terrorist sympathiser" in #pmqs was a "discredit to the office of Prime Minister"
That labour source is right.
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
Well done, Pong.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
I hope you haven't lost someone you knew to the IRA, but if you had, you might feel differently.
Just as well the Conservatives weren't negotiating secretly with the IRA in the past ....
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
that doesn't make sense. the share isn't a predictor of how strong your and deep your support is- you could easily make the argument the other way around.
Also on topic, the sheer consistency of the recent polls stands out. Since the election was called, we've had 49:26, 49:27, 46:24, 40:29, 48:26, 48:27, 48:25, 50:25, 45:26, 48:24 and 46:25.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
I find that slightly concerning.
c. 3-5 % errors is about right. It's not like GE2015 when they all got frit and piled in on the same percentage.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
Come off it Pong and PtP. Corbyn's invitation of IRA murderers into parliament whilst MPs were still in mourning over their colleagues and wives, as well as nursing their own injuries, from an outrage perpretated by very close associates of those he invited in, was one of the most disgusting things an MP has ever done. Add to that McDonnell's position on the IRA murderers, and Corbyn's open sympathy for Hamas murderers.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
Knock it off, Richard. Two wrongs never made a right.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
The Ipsos subsamples for London and the South are by far the best that the left has had to date. A huge over-inclusion of public sector workers in the unweighted sample, mind.
Corbyn's 'Best PM' ratings are also least bad here:
May vs Corbyn 'Most capable PM'
North (ex SC): +40 Midland: +47 South: +31 London: +15 Scotland: +27
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
There is no tax free lump sum with the state pension. He can get the lump sum from the others (assuming they are defined contribution/money purchase) by going into flexible drawdown (or by buying an annuity) at age 55, or later.
He will however need to talk to his employer (or their managers) about that scheme, since it will depend on its normal retirement age and what rules it has about early payment.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
I'm afraid you're wrong:
.49 * .21 = 10.29% .27 * .43 = 11.61%
Nope the Conservatives do lose that but cannot assume they will gain all the defectors from the other parties . Try again with Conservative defectors going half to Lab and half to LD and similar for the other parties .
Thats ridiculous. You can;'t just pick and choose which party is going to lose support.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
Come off it Pong and PtP. Corbyn's invitation of IRA murderers into parliament whilst MPs were still in mourning over their colleagues and wives, as well as nursing their own injuries, from an outrage perpretated by very close associates of those he invited in, was one of the most disgusting things an MP has ever done. Add to that McDonnell's position on the IRA murderers, and Corbyn's open sympathy for Hamas murderers.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
Come off it Pong and PtP. Corbyn's invitation of IRA murderers into parliament whilst MPs were still in mourning over their colleagues and wives, as well as nursing their own injuries, from an outrage perpretated by very close associates of those he invited in, was one of the most disgusting things an MP has ever done. Add to that McDonnell's position on the IRA murderers, and Corbyn's open sympathy for Hamas murderers.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
I agree with you that Corbyn was wrong on the IRA and wrong on Hamas. But the response to that is to say, "Mr Corbyn was grossly insensitive in inviting known associates of terrorists into Parliament some years ago. He has said he understands the motivations of terrorists, and this risks detracting from the awful suffering of victims. For these reasons, and more, I think his judgment is poor, and he would be a poor PM".
A glib "I hear he's a terrorist sympathiser!" in a knock-about PMQs isn't the statesmanlike way to deal with what I fully agree is a point that has some validity and is reasonable to air. Doing it in the way it was done feeds the trolls and the oddballs.
And of course I agree that Tory MPs must have been utterly devastated by the killing of a widely liked (Labour) colleague. The point is that the escalation of language on BOTH sides of the debate wholly unintentionally made such tragic events more likely, and politicians on ALL sides need to learn from that.
Then stupidly. In any divorce, no matter how desirable (that's a question that's been aired enough for now), there are areas where two could live as cheaply as one and where both sides will be impoverished by the breaking-off of sharing.
The determination of far too many Leavers to ignore this obvious point is one of the reasons I have so little faith that negotiations are going to be undertaken with any competence.
Knock it off, Richard. Two wrongs never made a right.
Precisely my point.
In this case however, the Labour Party, having utterly lost its marbles, is putting forward as its candidates for PM and Chancellor two individuals who are fully on record as being sympathisers for the IRA at least, and for some other dodgy causes to a lesser extent. Personally I think that is an extremely relevant factor for the PM to bring up. Don't you?
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
Come off it Pong and PtP. Corbyn's invitation of IRA murderers into parliament whilst MPs were still in mourning over their colleagues and wives, as well as nursing their own injuries, from an outrage perpretated by very close associates of those he invited in, was one of the most disgusting things an MP has ever done. Add to that McDonnell's position on the IRA murderers, and Corbyn's open sympathy for Hamas murderers.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
I actually think the Tories have gone fairly light on this stuff so far. May's statement at PMQs signals what's to come, and it is perfectly legitimate. The people who don't know about Corbyn and McDonnell's previous associations MUST know the truth. They have spent all of their adult lives railing against the British state and giving succour to our enemies. Those are the facts.
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
I'm afraid you're wrong:
.49 * .21 = 10.29% .27 * .43 = 11.61%
Nope the Conservatives do lose that but cannot assume they will gain all the defectors from the other parties . Try again with Conservative defectors going half to Lab and half to LD and similar for the other parties .
Oh boy. Tory voters pretty decided. Labour not. Leadership is big issue.
This is going one way...
Sort of feels like to me one of two things will happen:
(1) Polling will stabilise at 46-49% for the Tories, and mid-20s for Labour. But, the Tory share will fall back to 42-44% on the day, and Labour will perform a bit better. Manifestos and debates clip Theresa's wings a bit. Public decide they don't want a utter rout of Labour because of need for opposition. Turnout is ok. 30-50 Tory Gains but no wipeout.
(2) Polling continues to worsen for Labour, and creeps consistently into the low 50s for the Tories, as the spotlight is put on Corbyn's past, and the media spotlight increases. Labour's manifesto is pulled to shreds, and a disaster, many senior Labourites publicly disown Corbyn, and Labour party discipline breaks down. Tories actually do clock 48-50% on the day, UKIP dissolve into nothing, Labour poll in the very low 20s, with perhaps the LDs doing a bit better. Turnout is lower. 125+ Tory gains. Labour reduced to a rump of perhaps only 90-110 MPs.
Right now I'd rate the latter as a significantly higher probability than the former.
All these Con retirements now are going to make the 600 seat boundary review an absolute nightmare. With the existing Parliament it was easy to guarantee every MP a shot at a good seat by kicking a few oldies upstairs to the red benches. With 400 Tories in the House and the retirements coming now, that's going to be a lot more difficult in 2022.
What was the reason to reduce the number of MPs and has that changed? Ministers say it will lower the "cost of politics" without reducing accountability. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12650869
It was promised by David Cameron in the wake of the expenses scandal (2009, where did eight years go?) as a reduction in the cost of politics and politicians.
To abandon (again) the Boundary Commission would cost as much as the savings that would have been made over the past few years. The boundaries are now well out of date and need updating. Some MPs (especially the new ones in June) are going to be discounted, but for politicians to keep delaying it for their own self interest makes us start to look like the US Congress.
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
I'm afraid you're wrong:
.49 * .21 = 10.29% .27 * .43 = 11.61%
Nope the Conservatives do lose that but cannot assume they will gain all the defectors from the other parties . Try again with Conservative defectors going half to Lab and half to LD and similar for the other parties .
Thats ridiculous. You can;'t just pick and choose which party is going to lose support.
You can if you're in a house of straw, on a straw chair, at a straw table, building a straw case of why Labour will win, with or without Jack Straw.
Knock it off, Richard. Two wrongs never made a right.
Precisely my point.
In this case however, the Labour Party, having utterly lost its marbles, is putting forward as its candidates for PM and Chancellor two individuals who are fully on record as being sympathisers for the IRA at least, and for some other dodgy causes to a lesser extent. Personally I think that is an extremely relevant factor for the PM to bring up. Don't you?
Quite right, Richard.
The PM is well within her rights to point out both their records.
ELBOW for week ending Sunday 23rd gave the Tories a simple average of 45.67, a lead of 19.89%. That was 9 polls including Norstat.
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
Really sorry to hear this Sunil. Condolences to your and your family.
My condolences, Cap'n Doc, to you and your mum. It can be a real bugger when a major plank in our lives is suddenly removed. At times of such loss there can be no words that bring comfort from a stranger but if you'll accept advice; let the tears fall, as they must, and then, denying nothing and taking your love and memories with you, shout, "Yo ho, my hearties, bring me that horizon!"
Are there really parties that haven't produced a dodgy bar chart at some point. I know the LDs seem the most prevalent with them, but they're practically a beloved tradition at this point.
Because there are far more Conservative voters at the moment despite those %s if everyone who said they may change their mind did do so , the Conservative support would be lower .
I'm afraid you're wrong:
.49 * .21 = 10.29% .27 * .43 = 11.61%
Nope the Conservatives do lose that but cannot assume they will gain all the defectors from the other parties . Try again with Conservative defectors going half to Lab and half to LD and similar for the other parties .
Thats ridiculous. You can;'t just pick and choose which party is going to lose support.
You can if you're in a house of straw, on a straw chair, at a straw table, building a straw case of why Labour will win, with or without Jack Straw.
Are there really parties that haven't produced a dodgy bar chart at some point. I know the LDs seem the most prevalent with them, but they're practically a beloved tradition at this point.
The Lib Dems started the traditional, but since then pretty much every other party has followed suit
You regularly hear the idea that new Conservative supporters might bottle it on the day. This suggests that isn't going to happen (and in fact the Conservatives have more scope to surprise on the upside):
Miss Vance, interesting May beats Corbyn by more in the North of England and the Midlands than in the South.
Looking good for those of us with a slew of small constituency bets...
I am in a similar position to you, Mr Dancer - feeling pretty happy with most of them. Aliiance to win Belfast South was a tremendous tip at 66/1 - but although down to 6/1, I don't really expect them to win it...
Comments
May: +92
Corbyn: +17
Farron: +45
When other PBers are in that position (particularly in two horse race seats), do they keep the bet as is, or back the other party, to go all green?
Edited extra bit: Mr. Tony, improbable indeed.
Would be amusing, though.
https://twitter.com/barristersecret/status/857225208763166720
I don't like the guy. I won't be voting for him, partly because I agree he'd be a threat to national security. But......
Jo Cox.
As home sec and now PM, she's read the intel on the far right, she knows the language and rhetoric the tommy mair types use. And - even if she doesn't care in the slightest for their support - she knows they're swinging behind her right now. Every flag-tattood, skinhead nutjob is listening to what she's saying and cheering her on in this election. A few of them are out to cause trouble and feel empowered.
We shoot terrorists. That's what we do.
What do we do to terrorist sympathizers?
The use of that phrase in parliament - by the prime minister - directed at the leader of the opposition - less than a year after one of his own MP's was murdered by a terrorist and just a month after a terrorist attempted to murder as many civilians, police and politicians as possible - absolutely discredited the office of the Prime Minister.
TBF, he didn't say he couldn't get rid of them...
I wanted to look at the individual polling tables like with the original ELBOW methodology from 2 years back, but sadly my dear old Dad passed away early on Saturday morning, quite suddenly while having his shower. He was 80. I didn't say until now because I was in the denial phase I guess.
Some people are attracted mainly by the policies of the party, some by the leaders of the party and some because they identify with the party as a whole.
If you had a total of ten points to allocate according to how important each of these was to you, how many points would you allocate to the (LEADERS/POLICIES/PARTY) of the Party you intend voting for?
Mean: LEADERS/POLICIES/PARTY
Con: 3.8 / 3.4 / 2.7
Lab: 2.4 / 4.0 / 3.0
LD: 2.0 / 4.6 / 3.2
So that Labour manifesto is going to be really important.....oh and May is really crap.....
Kindest thoughts to you and your family.
The rough and tumble of electioneering is one thing, but from a PM in the House, that whiffed.
https://twitter.com/GideonSkinner/status/857195329791418368
36% of Labour voters dissatisfied with Jeremy Corbyn.
Only 19% of Tories satisfied with Jeremy Corbyn, which means 19% listened to the question properly.
Whilst I'm relieved it's looking likely Corbyn will be crushed, landslide majorities are not, I think, good for democracy. I don't want a Conservative party on 450 seats becoming complacent, sloppy and incompetent.
But if you're in a red-blue marginal, what's the alternative? Corbyn's got to be kept out of Downing Street.
I do expect Britain to change its mind in the medium term and apply for EEA membership once it has got its atavistic tantrum out of the way.
Only Survation has the Conservatives outside 45-50 and Labour outside 24-27.
There will be others that are not, however, and in those the UK's bargaining position is constrained. If you and I played poker and I was obliged to place my cards face up on the table whilst you were allowed to keep them close to your chest, who do you think would win?
That's all I was saying, obvious as it may be.
.49 * .21 = 10.29%
.27 * .43 = 11.61%
Very sorry to hear Sunil's news.
But the Tories well up under May rather than Cameron (8-13 points).
Killing off UKIP has helped the Tories more than Corbyn?
She also, I suspect, knows that whatever Corbyn's many flaws, he's not a wicked man. I doubt he's a close pal of hers, but I expect personally it's all perfectly cordial.
The terrorist sympathiser thing is in trolling territory, I'm afraid. Pong is entirely right that we all had a very hard lesson just before the Referendum that hyperbole in the heat of a campaign can have real (and wholly unintended) consequences when picked up on by oddballs with existing grievances etc.
Politicians (not just May - she's certainly not the sole offender, and nor are the Tories generally) need to appreciate they don't choose who hear's their words, and show some restraint and care in picking those words.
Fortunately for me, I have a dilemma-free alternative. My sitting MP is a left wing Labour Brexiteer.
Can't wait to get my ballot paper.
The murder of Jo Cox by a lone nutjob has absolutely zilch to do with this. And, for the record, I can tell you that Tory MPs were absolutely devastated by it; they liked Jo and worked with her, and they also know that they are at risk (especially women MPs). Just look at the threat against Caroline Ansell for a recent example. None of that excuses Corbyn and McDonnell, who seem to work on the principle that any enemy of the UK or the US is their friend.
Cooler, six weeks.
Oooppps ....
May vs Corbyn 'Most capable PM'
North (ex SC): +40
Midland: +47
South: +31
London: +15
Scotland: +27
Does suggest bloodbath in the Midlands.....
A glib "I hear he's a terrorist sympathiser!" in a knock-about PMQs isn't the statesmanlike way to deal with what I fully agree is a point that has some validity and is reasonable to air. Doing it in the way it was done feeds the trolls and the oddballs.
And of course I agree that Tory MPs must have been utterly devastated by the killing of a widely liked (Labour) colleague. The point is that the escalation of language on BOTH sides of the debate wholly unintentionally made such tragic events more likely, and politicians on ALL sides need to learn from that.
The determination of far too many Leavers to ignore this obvious point is one of the reasons I have so little faith that negotiations are going to be undertaken with any competence.
In this case however, the Labour Party, having utterly lost its marbles, is putting forward as its candidates for PM and Chancellor two individuals who are fully on record as being sympathisers for the IRA at least, and for some other dodgy causes to a lesser extent. Personally I think that is an extremely relevant factor for the PM to bring up. Don't you?
Con goes half LD, half Lab {LD + 5.15, Lab +5.15}
Lab goes half Con, half LD {Con + 5.8, LD + 5.8}
LD goes half Lab, half Con {Lab + 2.8, Con + 2.8}
Con -10.3 + 5.8, +2.8
Lab -11.6 + 5.15 + 2.8
LD -5.6 + 5.15 + 5.8
Con 47.3, Lab 23.4, LD 18.6 ?
The PM is well within her rights to point out both their records.
My condolences, Cap'n Doc, to you and your mum. It can be a real bugger when a major plank in our lives is suddenly removed. At times of such loss there can be no words that bring comfort from a stranger but if you'll accept advice; let the tears fall, as they must, and then, denying nothing and taking your love and memories with you, shout, "Yo ho, my hearties, bring me that horizon!"
I am in a similar position to you, Mr Dancer - feeling pretty happy with most of them. Aliiance to win Belfast South was a tremendous tip at 66/1 - but although down to 6/1, I don't really expect them to win it...