politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The future’s not orange. The Lib Dems look set to miss out

Sean_F said:

malcolmg said:

Nemtynakht said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

We will see buyers regret in a few years time

You'll see it sooner than that in Scotland....June 9th, at a guess.....

Care to bet that Tories are not massive losers on June 8th,

You think the Tories will lose seats - well seat - in Scotland?

I am saying that SNP will be the winners in Scotland and will have most of teh seats, whethr the tories need a tandem or not is NOT winning. Tories will be massive losers in the Scottish vote. Carlotta's warped thinking that being a massiv eloser but ahead of the next massive loser is winning is pretty pathetic.
No matter how you cut it the Tories are nowhere in Scotland.

I'd say the Tories did pretty well, at least compared to the last 25 years. They're back to the kind of support they had in 1992.

Bit like saying Crystal palace did well in Premier League this year.

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Off topic, should I be worried about Wikileaks attempts to do Macron what they did to Hillary?

I has a big red next to Le Pen on Betfair.

You can have a Rogeresque NO from me.

I just needed some reassurance.

I think they've left it too late.

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Ok, which PB username does this 'expert' use?

https://twitter.com/thoughtland/status/860655619690418176

Sounds like my Scottish* boss. It's pure shellshock.

He's amazed there were ten Tory voters in Glasgow, let alone ten Tory councillors.

A Tory councillor in Shettleston???

He assumes either the voters are trolling us all, were either pissed when they voted, or didn't understand the voting system or all three.

And he's a Tory.

*Well he's lived in England since 1987

Well he's lived in England since 1987

So his experience is 30 years out of date then.

The Tories won 17% across Glasgow in 1992 (compared to 15% yesterday). After that, their vote fell to 5-7%.

frpenkridge said:

Ishmael_Z said:

malcolmg said:

The second photo on this is superb.
https://twitter.com/KINGofJOCKISTAN/status/859679250756009984/photo/1

LOL and really good photoshopping, but not an attack - could be a votewinner in some key demographics. I'm sure someone will do an 80 shilling version for your neck of the woods.

Left wing satirists, infatuated by their own brilliance, falling into the trap that led to "Super Mac" and "The Iron Lady".

Quite. Whatever did for Maggie in the end it sure wasn't Ben Elton or Spitting Image.

For that matter, it reminds of the bizarre poster ad that Labour ran in 2010 featuring Cameron as Gene Hunt. They probably did him a favour. (Edit, blast my slow typing, @Morris_Dancer got there ahead of me)

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

It was the richer end of he spectrum voting Tory.

...in Shettleston...

Not everybody there is poor knucklehead

hamiltonace said:

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Ok, which PB username does this 'expert' use?

https://twitter.com/thoughtland/status/860655619690418176

Sounds like my Scottish* boss. It's pure shellshock.

He's amazed there were ten Tory voters in Glasgow, let alone ten Tory councillors.

A Tory councillor in Shettleston???

He assumes either the voters are trolling us all, were either pissed when they voted, or didn't understand the voting system or all three.

And he's a Tory.

*Well he's lived in England since 1987

Well he's lived in England since 1987

So 30 years out of date then.

I am a boss in Glasgow area and I was still surprised as were my staff who live in east Glasgow. The tories are now the protest vote in Scotland and especially loved by young guys who support rangers. In Glasgow it is like being a millwall fan.

Thanks. Fascinating.

Morris_Dancer said:

Excellent photoshop of May, though personally I prefer the Star Wars one (where she's escorted by four red guards).

The one of her sitting on the Iron Throne after the leadership contest was good too.

I have a simple model that I think will get Con/LD seats pretty much spot on.

For the LD vote (in number of votes), I take the average of:

- one third of the way between 2015 and 2010
- the 2010 LD vote share + (Remain % * Labour vote in the constituency)

For the Con vote, I assume they get 2015 votes + 75% of the UKIP vote.

This results in the LDs gaining Twickenham and Bath, losing Carshalton and Southport, it being neck and neck in North Norfolk, and being just a few hundred votes shy in Lewes and Kingston.

So, say -1 overall against the Conservatives. (Richmond Park I haven't modelled. Despite being right wing and Leave, I could not vote for Zac. I suspect I won't be the only one.)

Against Labour, let's assume they gain Cambridge (the locals on Thursday will have been very encouraging for them), and one more.

In Scotland, they are odds on in *five* seats: O&S, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, Edinburgh West, Dumbartonshire East and Fife NE. (This is on a vote share perhaps half what they'll get in England.) In only three of these seats do the Holyrood elections point to wins. And only Edinburgh West is a 'gimme' to me. But let's be generous and assume they go +2 against the SNP.

So +2, +2, -1 = +3

From 8, that gets you to 11. From 9, it takes you to 12.

I've said 12-14 seats for a long while. That still feels about right.

JonnyJimmy said:

malcolmg said:

JonnyJimmy said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

SNP up/down 1.5%, (depending on if you use the wrong or right numbers) Tories up 150%.

1.5% of a lot is still much more than 150% of hee-haw. You need a refresher on arithmetic Rob.

7 is much more than 164?

Have you been studying Abborithmetic?

Another loser trying to use anything but the real numbers. Just for man who cannot make up his mind what his name is , 431 is a bigger number by far than 276. 155 highe ror 56% higher if you prefer. By all measures LOSERS.

You lost the only vote that actually mattered to you. And if you're unfortunate enough to have endure another, you'll lose that too.

McLOSER

Was that Johnny or Jimmy commenting there. Or did the two of you reach a consensus.

Mr. Ace, I fear the Lib Dem approach is driving into an electoral cul-de-sac.

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from.

Install as leader someone who worked at the BBC for years and has loads of mates in the media?

Lol, why are these trolling bastards trolling.

https://twitter.com/Iansinkins/status/860782647043383297

MarkHopkins said:

hamiltonace said:

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Ok, which PB username does this 'expert' use?

https://twitter.com/thoughtland/status/860655619690418176

Sounds like my Scottish* boss. It's pure shellshock.

He's amazed there were ten Tory voters in Glasgow, let alone ten Tory councillors.

A Tory councillor in Shettleston???

He assumes either the voters are trolling us all, were either pissed when they voted, or didn't understand the voting system or all three.

And he's a Tory.

*Well he's lived in England since 1987

Well he's lived in England since 1987

So 30 years out of date then.

I am a boss in Glasgow area and I was still surprised as were my staff who live in east Glasgow. The tories are now the protest vote in Scotland and especially loved by young guys who support rangers. In Glasgow it is like being a millwall fan.

Thanks. Fascinating.

Hope you are kidding

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

That has to be the biggest troll ever on here and that is saying something

malcolmg said:

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

That has to be the biggest troll ever on here and that is saying something

malcolmg said:

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

That has to be the biggest troll ever on here and that is saying something

Having a bad day Malcolm?

Not wishing to argue too much with Alastair on his analysis but there are a couple of things he has missed . The Lib Dem vote on Thursday was up around 4% on average on 2013 and around 8% on average on 2015 . There were variations though , the North of England Staffs , Notts , Lincs and northwards of there had a much smaller increase around half that . Other areas showed a much bigger increase Norfolk 6% , Dorset 7% Glos 8% on 2013 and 12 % plus on 2015 GE are typical .
This does not seem to be totally correlated with whether an area voted Leave or Remain .
Some posters have made the point that LD support is always higher in local elections . That is in fact false It was not true in 1983 for example nor in 2009 compared to the 2010 GE
The local elections do give clues on where LD gains are possible and where they are not and these often contradict the seat odds currently available . Do your own research - lots of it .

MarkHopkins said:

hamiltonace said:

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Ok, which PB username does this 'expert' use?

https://twitter.com/thoughtland/status/860655619690418176

Sounds like my Scottish* boss. It's pure shellshock.

He's amazed there were ten Tory voters in Glasgow, let alone ten Tory councillors.

A Tory councillor in Shettleston???

He assumes either the voters are trolling us all, were either pissed when they voted, or didn't understand the voting system or all three.

And he's a Tory.

*Well he's lived in England since 1987

Well he's lived in England since 1987

So 30 years out of date then.

I am a boss in Glasgow area and I was still surprised as were my staff who live in east Glasgow. The tories are now the protest vote in Scotland and especially loved by young guys who support rangers. In Glasgow it is like being a millwall fan.

Thanks. Fascinating.

Some young lads.

foxinsoxuk said:

isam said:

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

The second photo on this is superb.
https://twitter.com/KINGofJOCKISTAN/status/859679250756009984/photo/1

Absolutely brilliant

The difference between May and her predecssors is that they actually did pretend to be drinking pints of stuff they don't drink for staged "real" photo opps. She also hasn't started pretending to support West Ham Villa like Dave or thrown in an bit of faux cockney yet like Glottal Stop Gideon, which is probably why normal people from all parties seem to be ok w her

I suspect TM doesn't eat takeaway chips very often. She is a Type 1 diabetic. It is as fake as any photo stunt.

Our bet on UKIP this election looks good for me! This election is an extinction event for UKIP.

Dave was pretending to be naturally drinking a pint of Guinness backstage and a photo "just happened" to be taken... Obviously May's was a stunt, every politician does them

I am happy to make it £100 from £20 if you like?

AlastairMeeks said:

https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/860412293145923584

Westmorland Gazette.....arf! Are you worried yet, Tim?

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

"Not" actually a post I assume.

I've always found it bizarre that fptp is called fptp when there is no post. It's like deciding the winner of the 100m sprint after 42m is run.

malcolmg said:

Sean_F said:

malcolmg said:

Nemtynakht said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

We will see buyers regret in a few years time

You'll see it sooner than that in Scotland....June 9th, at a guess.....

Care to bet that Tories are not massive losers on June 8th,

You think the Tories will lose seats - well seat - in Scotland?

I am saying that SNP will be the winners in Scotland and will have most of teh seats, whethr the tories need a tandem or not is NOT winning. Tories will be massive losers in the Scottish vote. Carlotta's warped thinking that being a massiv eloser but ahead of the next massive loser is winning is pretty pathetic.
No matter how you cut it the Tories are nowhere in Scotland.

I'd say the Tories did pretty well, at least compared to the last 25 years. They're back to the kind of support they had in 1992.

Bit like saying Crystal palace did well in Premier League this year.

I'd more say the SCON are like Spurs/Liverpool this season. Not going to win the league but currently looking like back in the Champions League.

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

Wasn't dear Ruthie one of the strongest advocates of Remain?

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

Oh, they won't see it as their own decision. It's going to be about whether May gets the right deal.

Can anyone propose a deal that satisfies all the below:
- anti immigration WWC
- capitalists and big business
- people on low incomes (cross over with the first group)

Any of those gets screwed and the Tories have BETRAYED BRITAIN. Oh and the EU must also agree to it....

TheScreamingEagles said:

calum said:

malcolmg said:

Nemtynakht said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

We will see buyers regret in a few years time

You'll see it sooner than that in Scotland....June 9th, at a guess.....

Care to bet that Tories are not massive losers on June 8th,

You think the Tories will lose seats - well seat - in Scotland?

I am saying that SNP will be the winners in Scotland and will have most of teh seats, whethr the tories need a tandem or not is NOT winning. Tories will be massive losers in the Scottish vote. Carlotta's warped thinking that being a massiv eloser but ahead of the next massive loser is winning is pretty pathetic.
No matter how you cut it the Tories are nowhere in Scotland.

SCON distant 2nd - just ahead of "dead in the water" SLAB in 3rd - both way behind SNP - being spun as a great SCON victory !!

SNP standing still, Scon surging.

Look at the trend.

SNP have surged to largest party in the majority of Scottish councils, a massive surging change from 2012.

Alistair said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

"Not" actually a post I assume.

I've always found it bizarre that fptp is called fptp when there is no post. It's like deciding the winner of the 100m sprint after 42m is run.

It's more like the Long Jump. Everyone has a go, whoever gets further wins.

AlastairMeeks said:

I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of a Conservative mayor of Teesside.

I think we are too. So is he I imagine.

foxinsoxuk said:

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

Wasn't dear Ruthie one of the strongest advocates of Remain?

Yes and she did not fight the council elections on brexit. It was not mentioned.

Philip_Thompson said:

Alistair said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

"Not" actually a post I assume.

I've always found it bizarre that fptp is called fptp when there is no post. It's like deciding the winner of the 100m sprint after 42m is run.

It's more like the Long Jump. Everyone has a go, whoever gets further wins.

That's a perfect analogy, I'm calling FPTP Long Jump for now on.

And we can call any Con prosecutions for expenses fraud Red Flags. This has got legs.

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

stodge said:

Icarus said:

It is 1p on the rate of income tax

So 20p in the pound goes to 21p. 40p goes to 41p

Someone on £30,000pa pays tax on £18,500 so 1p equals £185pa about £3.55 a week.

It's an interesting idea and as with Paddy's 1p to fund education in 1992 it will have some traction. I do think the issues of funding health and especially social care need some serious debate but if we start from a view that any proposed increase in taxes is taboo we'll get precisely nowhere.

Agree with that actually. It's an honest, costed policy that doesn't rely on borrowing more money - and if they stick to the message it probably will have some traction in their target areas.

Every LD candidate needs to get behind it now though, talk about social care rather than trying to undo Brexit.

Yep, it's a great policy. Straightforward, transparent and honest.

The Tories - five years of patch-and-mend on the NHS while they dream up every stealth tax and curtail every tax relief they think they can get away with

Labour - Lots of empty posturing on the NHS while Diane Abbott does the maths

Indeed, making an honest case for tax rises to cover extra spending in a key area is good politics, there will be a market for it, especially among users (and their relatives) of those services.

The Conservatives will argue that services can be funded by increasing the size of the economy and clamping down on avoidance while cutting headline tax rates. This is what they've been doing since 2010.

Meanwhile Labour will argue for increased taxes, but only on 'the rich', and will think of 10 different things to spend the money on, while bringing out Diane Abbot and John McIRA.

Black_Rook said:

foxinsoxuk said:

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

Wasn't dear Ruthie one of the strongest advocates of Remain?

Yes, but her appeal is based primarily on her own personality, and on Unionism.

The Liberal Democrat focus on the Remain vote is tactically astute, but a strategic dead end. If they follow through with this then, once Brexit is complete, they risk ending up as the party of Rejoin, instead. And rejoining the EU will be one of those causes like the abolition of the monarchy - supported by a decent chunk of the electorate in principle, but of real importance only to an insignificant number of committed campaigners in practice.

Or electoral reform ...

SimonStClare said:

Morning all.

Excellent article Mr Meeks, many thanks. – Over the past year or so, the Lib Dems have racked up some startling results, most notably in Richmond, but also in many of the by-elections generated by Labour MPs either standing down or falling off the perch. Thursday’s relatively poor local election results was a surprise for many I suspect, as the promised gains failed to materialise. On reflection this does not bode well for them at GE2017 although I still anticipate modest net gains to almost double their present tally of MPs. One thing is for certain IMHO, draping the EU flag around the party’s shoulders has and will again, fail to produce the much hoped for dividends.

It stopped me voting for them

My wife voted for them in the locals as they are so helpful.

But, for the GE she will voting blue as the EU thing puts her completely off.

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

Because - as others have said - the unique characteristic of our voting system is that it actually has no winning post.

What does the "n" stand for?

First past the not-post, I guess.

chestnut said:

isam said:

freetochoose said:

Pretty despondent after the football last night, what a soulless place to watch football.

I hope you took my advice and laid Spurs @ 2/5

Most of my West Ham mates backed the 8/1, cant believe I didn't really, that was an amazing price.

It was a ridiculous price given West Ham's record against Spurs.

In the last nine match ups, Spurs have won just one game comfortably.

Should have backed Lanzini - nine goals in fourteen London derbies.

Paddy Power just gave me 250-1 on Spurs not finishing in the top two. If we come 3rd and City come 2nd, I am on for £5,000. If we stay where we are, the 7-1 I got on the Happy Hammers leaves me even for my annual Tottenham choke betting spree. I feel a lot better having sorted all that out!!

MarkSenior said:

Not wishing to argue too much with Alastair on his analysis but there are a couple of things he has missed . The Lib Dem vote on Thursday was up around 4% on average on 2013 and around 8% on average on 2015 . There were variations though , the North of England Staffs , Notts , Lincs and northwards of there had a much smaller increase around half that . Other areas showed a much bigger increase Norfolk 6% , Dorset 7% Glos 8% on 2013 and 12 % plus on 2015 GE are typical .
This does not seem to be totally correlated with whether an area voted Leave or Remain .
Some posters have made the point that LD support is always higher in local elections . That is in fact false It was not true in 1983 for example nor in 2009 compared to the 2010 GE
The local elections do give clues on where LD gains are possible and where they are not and these often contradict the seat odds currently available . Do your own research - lots of it .

Here's some research.

Norfolk
Mark Senior prediction - Con 47, Lab 17, LibDem 13
Actual result - Con 55, Lab 17, LibDem 11
Difference - Con +8, Lab --, LibDem -2

Dorset
Mark Senior prediction - Con 25, Lab 4, LibDem 16
Actual result - Con 32, Lab 1, LibDem 11
Difference - Con +7, Lab -3, LibDem -5

Gloucestershire
Mark Senior prediction - Con 24, Lab 9, LibDem 17
Actual result - Con 31, Lab 5, LibDem 14
Difference - Con +7, Lab -4, LibDem -3

JonCisBack said:

Any economists out there able to sensibly estimate the net effect of a 1% income tax rate rise?

If i am taxed more out of my income, I have less to spend in shops etc, so the net effect is not what it seems clearly.

For the record, I believe I am taxed enough already thanks Mr Farron :-/ NHS needs reform more than it needs new cash hosed at it. Also IMHO a solution needs to be found outside of party politics

With the assumption that all three rates would move up a penny, to 21%, 41% and 46%, the positive effect on the government's income is about £5-6bn, less the opportunity cost of VAT and possibly excise duties of what's no longer purchased due to the tax rise. For the average man on £30k that's about a pint a week. Those at the top end of the income scale will notice it a little more. Maybe half to a billion missing from other tax incomes, so £4.5-5bn extra revenue in total. If that is spent on staffing there might be another billion or so come back in payroll taxes, so back to pretty much where we started.

Given that the rise is a one-off and rates aren't expected to rise further, few major descisions would be taken based on a 1p increase in income tax - different to when the 50p rate was introduced, when the top earners saw a full 10% more of their income disappear and took often quite aggressive steps to reduce their tax bill.

While I agree with you about healthcare reform, taxes being high enough already and something like a royal commission on health and social care, it's a fair enough standalone LD policy - although I won't be voting for a party that drapes itself in the EU flag. It's a better effort than Labour who will borrow more and spend their tax increases ten times over.

calum said:

malcolmg said:

Nemtynakht said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

We will see buyers regret in a few years time

You'll see it sooner than that in Scotland....June 9th, at a guess.....

Care to bet that Tories are not massive losers on June 8th,

You think the Tories will lose seats - well seat - in Scotland?

I am saying that SNP will be the winners in Scotland and will have most of teh seats, whethr the tories need a tandem or not is NOT winning. Tories will be massive losers in the Scottish vote. Carlotta's warped thinking that being a massiv eloser but ahead of the next massive loser is winning is pretty pathetic.
No matter how you cut it the Tories are nowhere in Scotland.

SCON distant 2nd - just ahead of "dead in the water" SLAB in 3rd - both way behind SNP - being spun as a great SCON victory !!

SCON and SLAB combined well ahead of SNP though and that is all May needs to block indyref2

IanB2 said:

JonCisBack said:

Any economists out there able to sensibly estimate the net effect of a 1% income tax rate rise?

If i am taxed more out of my income, I have less to spend in shops etc, so the net effect is not what it seems clearly.

For the record, I believe I am taxed enough already thanks Mr Farron :-/ NHS needs reform more than it needs new cash hosed at it. Also IMHO a solution needs to be found outside of party politics

Yes and no. All those extra doctors and nurses will be doing that little bit of spending for you.

Ha, your comment neatly adding to the complexity of my original question!

More tax for the NHS is not necessarily a bad idea.

More "stealth taxes" as you say downthread I agree, probably is a bad idea.

But how much tax overall for a healthy economy? Taxes have gone up, and with Brexit coming threatening a slowdown in growth for a time, even higher taxes not a good idea IMHO.

HMG should just set up a crowdfunding site for the NHS. All kinds of really shit ideas seem to attract loads of money, freely donated. If everyone loves the NHS so much why not create some sort of mechanism for people to effectively volunteer to pay more tax? Could give them stuff in return like OBEs and that for big donations.

why not?

Sandpit said:

JonCisBack said:

Any economists out there able to sensibly estimate the net effect of a 1% income tax rate rise?

If i am taxed more out of my income, I have less to spend in shops etc, so the net effect is not what it seems clearly.

For the record, I believe I am taxed enough already thanks Mr Farron :-/ NHS needs reform more than it needs new cash hosed at it. Also IMHO a solution needs to be found outside of party politics

With the assumption that all three rates would move up a penny, to 21%, 41% and 46%, the positive effect on the government's income is about £5-6bn, less the opportunity cost of VAT and possibly excise duties of what's no longer purchased due to the tax rise. For the average man on £30k that's about a pint a week. Those at the top end of the income scale will notice it a little more. Maybe half to a billion missing from other tax incomes, so £4.5-5bn extra revenue in total.

Given that the rise is a one-off and rates aren't expected to rise further, few major descisions would be taken based on a 1p increase in income tax - different to when the 50p rate was introduced, when the top earners saw a full 10% more of their income disappear and took often quite aggressive steps to reduce their tax bill.

While I agree with you about healthcare reform, taxes being high enough already and something like a royal commission on health and social care, it's a fair enough standalone LD policy - although I won't be voting for a party that drapes itself in the EU flag. It's a better effort than Labour who will borrow more and spend their tax increases ten times over.

The Lib Dems should say

"Labour's not being honest about health care, and the Tories honestly don't really care"

Anecdote. A French friend surprised me last night when she said she wasn't going to her use her vote and did I want it? She voted for Hamon in R1 "because she is a socialist". She is fairly middle of the road and doesn't support his guaranteed minimum income policy. She said she thought she would either vote blank or for Scooby Doo tomorrow. She works in the private sector, and what she doesn't like about Macron is that he has promised to hire 30,000 more police. (I think it's 10,000 and he has also promised to sack a lot of people from the public sector, but anyway.) She is against that because she feels that people working in the private sector will have to pay for it. She didn't mention Le Pen at all.

Perhaps Fancy Bear are using other methods as well as the ones many of us are aware of.

Last night the fachosphere (or "patriosphere" as Le Pen calls it) were moaning that Jack Dorsey at Twitter wouldn't list anti-Macron tags as "trending". It will be interesting today to find out whether he does. Or perhaps he already has. If necessary, Russian intel could put pressure on that company.

Is the French media allowed to report that they aren't allowed to report the contents of the hacked emails?

Philip_Thompson said:

IanB2 said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

Because - as others have said - the unique characteristic of our voting system is that it actually has no winning post.

What does the "n" stand for?

None? No? Non-existent? Nowhere to be found? Not present?

I don't mind what the n stands for. I do mind that people are so lazy that they use a name that makes no sense whatsoever.

The name does make sense. The post is the election and whoever came first wins. Hence first past the post.

Nonsense.

Excellent article Alistair, personally I think the LDs will pick up enough Remain seats they used to hold to get to about 15 to 20 seats when you add up Kingston and Surbiton, Richmond Park, Twickenham, Southwark and Old Bermondsey, Lewes, Cambridge, Bath, Oxford West and Abingdon, Cheltenham, Bristol West and Edinburgh West you get to about that level though they may lose Leave voting Carshalton

How different, how very different, from Cameron.....

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/85713/government-prepared-walk-away-brexit-talks-if-bad

HYUFD said:

calum said:

malcolmg said:

Nemtynakht said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

RobD said:

Freggles said:

2017 is a good election to lose. When Brexit takes shape someone is going to be very angry and that will be directed at the government

No doubt the remainers will be unhappy.

Freggles is 100% correct , when reality hits the pitchforks will be out big time.

Not on this one. People in general and voters in particular are usually very unwilling to accept adverse outcomes are the result of their own decisions.

We will see buyers regret in a few years time

You'll see it sooner than that in Scotland....June 9th, at a guess.....

Care to bet that Tories are not massive losers on June 8th,

You think the Tories will lose seats - well seat - in Scotland?

I am saying that SNP will be the winners in Scotland and will have most of teh seats, whethr the tories need a tandem or not is NOT winning. Tories will be massive losers in the Scottish vote. Carlotta's warped thinking that being a massiv eloser but ahead of the next massive loser is winning is pretty pathetic.
No matter how you cut it the Tories are nowhere in Scotland.

SCON distant 2nd - just ahead of "dead in the water" SLAB in 3rd - both way behind SNP - being spun as a great SCON victory !!

SCON and SLAB combined well ahead of SNP though and that is all May needs to block indyref2

In that case which bloody fool said this?

“We will also be looking forward to the local elections in May, when voters across Scotland will have the chance to send a clear message to the SNP that they do not want a second independence referendum, by voting Scottish Conservative and Unionist on 4 May.”

ThreeQuidder said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IanB2 said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

ThreeQuidder said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Scott_P said:

Alistair said:

They just taken the individual candidate with the highest vote share to colour the ward. Checked across a bunch of wards.

You mean the winner under FPTP rules?

Yeah, that's not helpful for the upcoming GE AT ALL...

Pretty sure parties wouldn't​ stand two candidates in the same seat in a fptp election.

Poor quality trolling.

Poor quality trolling indeed.

Nevertheless FPTnP district and borough council elections see multiple slates of party candidates all the time.....

Can you explain why you always put an "n" in FPTP?

Because - as others have said - the unique characteristic of our voting system is that it actually has no winning post.

What does the "n" stand for?

None? No? Non-existent? Nowhere to be found? Not present?

I don't mind what the n stands for. I do mind that people are so lazy that they use a name that makes no sense whatsoever.

The name does make sense. The post is the election and whoever came first wins. Hence first past the post.

Specifically, the post is the number of seats for a majority in the parliament/council, right? As opposed to inferior voting systems where a majority is supposed to be impossible and the parties have to stitch up a deal behind closed doors after the people have voted...

No - if we used AV/PR the threshold for a majority would still be 325 seats.

"Plurality system" is a much better name for FPTP

Black_Rook said:

foxinsoxuk said:

hamiltonace said:

You have to give credit to Ruth Davidson who is possibly the most talented politician in the uk at the moment. It is also something the lib dems should learn from. Own a message and stick with it. It is way to early to write off the lib dem strategy

Wasn't dear Ruthie one of the strongest advocates of Remain?

Yes, but her appeal is based primarily on her own personality, and on Unionism.

The Liberal Democrat focus on the Remain vote is tactically astute, but a strategic dead end. If they follow through with this then, once Brexit is complete, they risk ending up as the party of Rejoin, instead. And rejoining the EU will be one of those causes like the abolition of the monarchy - supported by a decent chunk of the electorate in principle, but of real importance only to an insignificant number of committed campaigners in practice.

There won't be any serious attempt to rejoin the EU, but equally Brexit will be a seriously compromised affair. The question of how to work with the world we live in won't go away. If Conservatives keep going as the sovereigntist party of national conservativism in the mould of UKIP and the Swiss People's Party, which is not given but is the current trajectory, there is definitely a place for an internationalist, multilaterally minded party, which the Lib Dems could occupy. Currently there is no such party in British politics. Not even the Lib Dems are promoting liberalism and globalisation.

CarlottaVance said:

Sean_F said:

CarlottaVance said:

williamglenn said:

A must read speech from Barnier on citizens rights:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1236_en.htm

there must be equal treatment between all EU and UK nationals in the UK

I have no problem with that.

But currently there is unequal treatment between EU and UK nationals in the UK when it comes to non-EU family members.

Extra-territorial jurisdiction for the ECJ seems the obvious sticking point to me.

I read that as slightly more nuanced - in the EU:

For UK citizens in the EU, the European Court of Justice will play its role to ensure the application of the withdrawal agreement.

However:

Similarly in the UK, the rights in the withdrawal agreement will need to be directly enforceable and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice maintained.

Which leaves some wiggle room for joint arbitration - between the UK Supreme Court and the ECJ, for example.

Clearly in a joint agreement we can't have 'one side decides'....

So far Barnier has been one of the grown ups looking to make it work, long may that continue.

Yes, Barnier and Tusk far better than Juncker.

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

CarlottaVance said:

williamglenn said:

A must read speech from Barnier on citizens rights:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1236_en.htm

there must be equal treatment between all EU and UK nationals in the UK

I have no problem with that.

But currently there is unequal treatment between EU and UK nationals in the UK when it comes to non-EU family members.

Extra-territorial jurisdiction for the ECJ seems the obvious sticking point to me.

Mrs May's government has said it will ratify the Unified Patent Court agreement. This gives the ECJ the role of interpreting EU law when there is uncertainty over it. No reason why it can't have a similar role on citizens' rights, post-Brexit. UK courts can refer questions to it, get an answer then issue a judgement.

How does that work if the UK government passes a law that conflicts with a ruling of the ECJ (eg on employment, or pensions?)

Or applies current UK law to EU nationals as well as UK nationals?

I struggle to see how a UK government can accept two classes of permanent residents in the UK - UK citizens and EU nationals, with different rights and different recourses to redress.