politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories aim to win a landslide by trying to persuade us tha

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sandpit said:

Or they didn't buy it because the previous salesman was hammered on it by the party more trusted with the nation's finances?

That's my point. It's the medium not the message that's the problem for Labour. They need to change the public's impression of their brand.

I disagree, if anybody in a red rosette spoke of re-nationalisation and reversing tuition fees it would be met with a roll of the eyes. The wider public accepts they are unaffordable, if attractive to the gullible.

You're making my point. The problem is a red rosette. If Theresa May announced that for sound right wing economic reasons tuition fees were to be scrapped, the nation would accept it without demur.

I disagree again, the wider electorate is financially responsible, its why the Labour Party is dying, Corbyn is simply hastening its demise.

Politicians make unrealistic promises, voters have seen through it all. Its why "strong and stable" is so successful and loony financial commitments by Labour are scoffed at.

We have a government that has quietly abandoned austerity to spunk the money on Brexit. Talk to me again about the electorate's economic responsibility.

How can you say that they have abandoned austerity when the deficit fell about £18bn in the last year alone? The downward slope to balance has got less steep but we are clearly still on it.

It's a statement of fact. The government has abandoned its previous deficit reduction programme.

No it hasn't. It has modified the time that will be taken to eliminate the deficit to give more support to the economy during Brexit, in the same way that Osborne did to offset serious economic weakness in the EZ during the Coalition. That is not abandonment of the objective or the recognition of the need to reduce debt as a share of GDP.

It's abandoning the objective to do it by x. I still have the broad objective to lose weight, but since I've mostly stopped any food discipline, I've abandoned the way I intended to achieve it.

bobajobPB said:

The Dutch and German governments are not subsidising our rail network at all - they are making surpluses thanks to the vast taxpayer subsidy to franchisees. Hence our government is subsidising them. The level of ignorance on the shambles that is rail franchising may soon come to an end if it becomes an election issue!

Looks like net the subsidy is about zero.

http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/18842/rail-finance-statistical-release-2014-15.pdf

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.

Roger said:

surbiton said:

AndyJS said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.

Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.

Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.

She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.

I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.

Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.

It's Corbyn's blue suit and haircut. A very talented stylist has transformed him and made him look like a politician so people are now listening to what he's saying

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/09/28/14/jeremy-

corbyn-1.jpghttps://www.wessexscene.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Jeremy_Corbyn_No_More_War_crop1.jpg

Indeed so and just imagine what a smart tie might do in concealing that scraggy neck, still at least the vest has gone.

RobD said:

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

Those that have long memories, perhaps?

I don't know. I started commuting by rail before privatisation, and I don't remember it being as bad as it is now. Admittedly, it is Southern.

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

I'm a Southern season ticket holder. I think nationalisation is a terrible idea.

And because I'm a Southern season ticket holder I also think abolishing the Trades Union Act is a terrible idea.

RobD said:

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

Those that have long memories, perhaps?

The golden age of British Rail never existed, the railways were in a steady decline in terms of usage and investment throughout that period. The somewhat romantic view people have of the railways tends to be formed by images of the period before BR was running things. Now that's not to say things can't improve, but anyone who thinks nationalisation can't make things a lot worse is wrong.

JennyFreeman said:

It's surely blindingly obvious that they called the election in order to win a proper majority after Cameron's dithering mess. This will mean that TM won't have to push a hard Brexit, nor will the tail wag the dog. The bitter likes of Gove and Redwood will be relatively silenced.

Every single thing so far that people have interpreted as a sign TMay doesn't want a hard Brexit has turned out not to prevent her pushing for it. Those hoping she will change tack may be disappointed. You'd think with a massive majority leader's would feel able to be bolder, but they still get frit over little things.

surbiton said:

AndyJS said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.

Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.

Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.

She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.

I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.

Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.

Effective as the Tory election machine is overall, it does repel significant numbers of people. I don't find Tories particularly objectionable most of the time, but in GE mode I loathe them and would vote for the devil to make them shut up.

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sandpit said:

Or they didn't buy it because the previous salesman was hammered on it by the party more trusted with the nation's finances?

That's my point. It's the medium not the message that's the problem for Labour. They need to change the public's impression of their brand.

I disagree, if anybody in a red rosette spoke of re-nationalisation and reversing tuition fees it would be met with a roll of the eyes. The wider public accepts they are unaffordable, if attractive to the gullible.

You're making my point. The problem is a red rosette. If Theresa May announced that for sound right wing economic reasons tuition fees were to be scrapped, the nation would accept it without demur.

I disagree again, the wider electorate is financially responsible, its why the Labour Party is dying, Corbyn is simply hastening its demise.

Politicians make unrealistic promises, voters have seen through it all. Its why "strong and stable" is so successful and loony financial commitments by Labour are scoffed at.

We have a government that has quietly abandoned austerity to spunk the money on Brexit. Talk to me again about the electorate's economic responsibility.

How can you say that they have abandoned austerity when the deficit fell about £18bn in the last year alone? The downward slope to balance has got less steep but we are clearly still on it.

It's a statement of fact. The government has abandoned its previous deficit reduction programme.

No it hasn't. It has modified the time that will be taken to eliminate the deficit to give more support to the economy during Brexit, in the same way that Osborne did to offset serious economic weakness in the EZ during the Coalition. That is not abandonment of the objective or the recognition of the need to reduce debt as a share of GDP.

It's abandoning the objective to do it by x. I still have the broad objective to lose weight, but since I've mostly stopped any food discipline, I've abandoned the way I intended to achieve it.

No, it's "I've just been diagnosed with an illness that will ravage my body for an unknown amount of time, probably best not to starve myself right now"

Pulpstar said:

Sean_F said:

Labour managed 30% in 1931.

However, they were below 30% in the local elections.

The vote % and the seat distribution are two completely different things under our electoral system.

And remember the French elections just gone, polls had Macron around 61-63, nothing had him at 66. Macron was the sensible choice in that election.

When you add in normal polling errors and our FPTP system it is a heady brew for the June 8th result. Personally I have no idea how large the Tory majority might be.

That's true. My point is that winning 30% means little if your opponent far outscores you. On current polling, I'd expect about 400 Conservative seats.

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Could this be labours george osbornes inheritance tax moment ?

Tykejohnno said:

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Could this be labours george osbornes inheritance tax moment ?

The day the polls turned?

Morning all, been giving some thought to vote % for this GE, and Corbyn's apparent position.
If the Lib Dems are on about 10 and UKIP are disintegrating, given the upper limit for the SNP/PC and the limited number of Green contested seats, Labour HAVE to be on high twenties to 30 right? Anything less and May is in high 400s seats.......
I'm thinking Corbyn and Labour, in the absence of a Lib revival, have to be jn the 30-35 band with the Tories 42-50. I mean 50-30-10-change would represent a massive landslide but would see Corbyn 'maintain votes' (by default)

Chris said:

All that may be true, but I wasn't really suggesting it's going to be a massively popular policy that will win Labour the election. More that those who suffer the realities of rail travel may not find it as ridiculous as the tabloid press are going to make out.

Do you think nationalisation and stronger trade unions would make Southern run better or worse? I would say at least half the current problem is the behaviour of the rail unions, and Corbyn would give them a damn near veto over the running of the railways.

She didn't call an election because of Corbyn....She called an election to give here the clout she needs in dealing with the EU.and so no one at home or in the EU can use the excuse...' you don't even have a mandate.'

Bromptonaut said:

RobD said:

Bromptonaut said:

That creaking sound you hear? That's the sound of the Overton Window being dragged to the left.

Corbyn is way outside that window!

You have to be outside something to drag it. It's how dragging works.

Surprised he can reach.

https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/862570305717493760

Bromptonaut said:

RobD said:

Bromptonaut said:

That creaking sound you hear? That's the sound of the Overton Window being dragged to the left.

Corbyn is way outside that window!

You have to be outside something to drag it. It's how dragging works.

Actually, the sound you hear is of the cultists dragging the Labour party even further away from the left edge of the Overton Window.

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

Yes - it is a bad idea

Patrick said:

This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.

I doubt they are the target audience. They might well get a slight bump at first, there's nice sounding stuff in there, but odds are it won't move things long term.

peter_from_putney said:

surbiton said:

AndyJS said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.

Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.

Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.

She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.

I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.

Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.

It does seem to be an amazing performance in the polls by Labour, despite the widespread ridiculing of its leader and increasingly so of his second in command, John McDonnell.

It does now appear entirely possible that Labour could end winning a larger share of the vote than they achieved in the 2015 GE. Were this to be the case, the party's hierarchy would no doubt claim that it was not so much Corbyn and his team who lost the GE for Labour, but rather UKIP and possibly the SNP to a lesser extent who had handed it on a plate to the Tories. We live in strange times.

A lot of people seem to have assumed Labour must do much worse than 2015 because Corbyn is much worse than Milliband and thus find 30% poll shares hard to believe.

But also a lot of people praised the Con 2015 message of vote Ed get Nicola. I think it was a big factor in delivering the Con majority. So the underlying Labour percentage may have been 33% say rather than the 31% they got. If that's true then it's possible for the Corbyn factor to have lost Labour 10% of its support and still have them polling at 30%. So there is no anomoly to explain.

Labour share at 30-35% available at 5/1 at Corals if you're tempted. I am but not going in right now. I also don't see Labour dropping below 150 seats. It could happen but I don't think it's likely.

Theuniondivvie said:

chestnut said:

I'm intrigued to see how Corbyn's policies go down in Scotland, especially Glasgow and Dundee.

Scrapping tuition fees will be a real winner.
Of course SLab will have to hastily delete records of their previous calls to restore them.

In Scotland where you don't pay them if they go to a local uni?

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

kle4 said:

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.

Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.

I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.

I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.

I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?

notme said:

Chris said:

DearPB said:

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

I'm a Southern season ticket holder. I think nationalisation is a terrible idea.

And because I'm a Southern season ticket holder I also think abolishing the Trades Union Act is a terrible idea.

Thanks. I'd be curious to know why, if you'd like to say.

Because the dispute is not about who owns the railways it's about progressing to driver only operation of trains, which goes hand in hand with new rolling stock.

Who on earth would go back to busses with separate conductors and drivers, with the conductors sharing the responsibility for the starting and stopping of the busses?

Corbyn would.

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

May looks horribly confident to me. Almost smug. I sometimes wonder whether she should go away and send back party political broadcasts sitting by a pool with a pina colada.

Wipe the smile off her face by reducing her number of MP's by any means possible.

Bring on that cure for smugness, bring on that Coalition of Chaos, or as I prefer to call it: multi-party democracy

Very strident for this time of the morning Fox!

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

kle4 said:

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.

Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.

I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.

I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.

This really comes back to the point of the thread header. If you are convinced that Labour are going to lose badly anyway then voting Labour is a free hit showing you "care" even if you are not confident in the details. The Tories cannot take Corbyn seriously and are going to fail in asking the country to do so. They need a different tack.

notme said:

Chris said:

DearPB said:

Chris said:

I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?

If so, do they use Southern????

I'm a Southern season ticket holder. I think nationalisation is a terrible idea.

And because I'm a Southern season ticket holder I also think abolishing the Trades Union Act is a terrible idea.

Thanks. I'd be curious to know why, if you'd like to say.

Because the dispute is not about who owns the railways it's about progressing to driver only operation of trains, which goes hand in hand with new rolling stock.

Who on earth would go back to busses with separate conductors and drivers, with the conductors sharing the responsibility for the starting and stopping of the busses?

Just for a moment, I thought that was "DearPB" explaining why he thought renationalisation was a bad idea, rather than "notme" explaining why "DearPB" thought it was a bad idea!

By the way, "notme" you didn't mention whether your view of the problems at Southern - and again, apparently, the view that they were all down to the unions and that there was no problem before the dispute - were formed from experience of using Southern, or otherwise.

Chris said:

Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.

That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.

But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.

rottenborough said:

I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.

It's a PB doctrine that disagreeing with every poll is a sign that one's deluding oneself. It's what led people into bvetting on Le Pen long after it was blindingly obvious that she'd lose. Yes, the polls were slightly wrong over Brexit (a few %), but actually right about Clinton (she won most votes, but in the wrong places).

Moreover, those of us on the ground (apologies if you are in fact actively campaigning for anyone) are mostly confirming the impression - Labour is maintaining all but a fraction of its 2015 vote (which was already down to the "always Labour" plus middle-class Guardianistas) and picking up some people from across the spectrum who like Corbyn's unassuming style and dislike the Empress May stuff. We're losing a trickle (e.g. Southam) who feel strongly about Hamas and the IRA but most people struggle to distinguish Hamas from humus and feel life has moved on from the IRA. And overall the polarisation of the election is giving Labour a boost.

Equally I believe the polls showing the Tories well ahead. It's obvious on the doorstep that ex-UKIP voters are switching to them, and that's the main story of the election. Roughly 45-30 is where we're at.

https://twitter.com/mc_of_a/status/862466608098398212

https://twitter.com/louisemensch/status/862527930240577536

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

kle4 said:

felix said:

Tykejohnno said:

Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.

Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )

yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.

Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.

Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.

I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.

I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.

I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?

We lose a load of money on bets on Tories in Bootle but May still wins. Corbyn is staying whatever happens. All the interest moves on to September and party conference I guess.

isam said:

https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/862570305717493760

The Royal Navy helps defend US aircraft carriers?

It is not mentioned here
http://navaltoday.com/2017/02/14/uss-george-h-w-bush-starts-isis-strikes-from-the-med/


The GHWBCSG consists of flagship aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77), guided-missile cruisers USS Philippine Sea (CG 58) and USS Hue City (CG 66), and DESRON-22 guided-missile destroyers USS Laboon (DDG 58) and USS Truxtun (DDG 103).

On their mission in the Mediterranean, U.S. Navy ships are joined by the Danish frigate HDMS Peter Willemoes which set sail from Denmark on January 26.


But since ISIS has neither a navy, air force or anti-ship missiles, perhaps the Americans will survive without us -- that will save a few shakes of the magic money tree.

peter_from_putney said:

Assuming Theresa May wins, I'd like to see some significant changes made to her cabinet, not least by moving her CoE who has been anything but impressive so far. Apart from a couple of high-profile sackings in Osborne & Gove, she's pretty much continued with Cameron's team of senior ministers and it's high time she introduced some new faces, hopefully with fresh talent.
Unfortunately she doesn't appear to have a latter day equivalent to Margaret Thatcher's Willie Whitelaw to provide the necessary guidance.

Continuity by and large was probably a good move, although she did sack several, but after a big win is probably a good time to make more changes. I'd rather someone dull like Hammond were at the foreign office for a start, but I cannot see Boris being moved.

surbiton said:

Patrick said:

This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.

Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?

Many more than read the Independent....

RobD said:

bobajobPB said:

The Dutch and German governments are not subsidising our rail network at all - they are making surpluses thanks to the vast taxpayer subsidy to franchisees. Hence our government is subsidising them. The level of ignorance on the shambles that is rail franchising may soon come to an end if it becomes an election issue!

Looks like net the subsidy is about zero.

http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/18842/rail-finance-statistical-release-2014-15.pdf

Really? Do you also account for the huge debt burden carried by the public purse for the track? Are you really suggesting that the franchisees cover the cost of the railway? Either way, our railway is a great money spinner for the governments of Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Heads we lose, tails we lose.

NickPalmer said:

rottenborough said:

I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.

It's a PB doctrine that disagreeing with every poll is a sign that one's deluding oneself. It's what led people into bvetting on Le Pen long after it was blindingly obvious that she'd lose. Yes, the polls were slightly wrong over Brexit (a few %), but actually right about Clinton (she won most votes, but in the wrong places).

Moreover, those of us on the ground (apologies if you are in fact actively campaigning for anyone) are mostly confirming the impression - Labour is maintaining all but a fraction of its 2015 vote (which was already down to the "always Labour" plus middle-class Guardianistas) and picking up some people from across the spectrum who like Corbyn's unassuming style and dislike the Empress May stuff. We're losing a trickle (e.g. Southam) who feel strongly about Hamas and the IRA but most people struggle to distinguish Hamas from humus and feel life has moved on from the IRA. And overall the polarisation of the election is giving Labour a boost.

Equally I believe the polls showing the Tories well ahead. It's obvious on the doorstep that ex-UKIP voters are switching to them, and that's the main story of the election. Roughly 45-30 is where we're at.

To translate, Corbyn is failing to do all the things that he said his leadership would deliver: a comeback in Scotland, more engagement from the young, more votes from previous non-voters; while proving incapable of persuading any Tories or previous UKIP voters that they should vote for the party. In other words, there is no way a Corbyn-led Labour party can ever defeat the Tories.

This is the problem, basically: the entire Labour leadership team and a lot of the membership don't need a Labour government and do not fear the consequences of a Tory one. Comfortably off and sheltered from reality they are playing a wonderful game. It is unforgiveable, quite frankly.

surbiton said:

Patrick said:

This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.

Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?

Disproportionatley, those who fucking vote.

bobajobPB said:

The Dutch and German governments are not subsidising our rail network at all - they are making surpluses thanks to the vast taxpayer subsidy to franchisees. Hence our government is subsidising them. The level of ignorance on the shambles that is rail franchising may soon come to an end if it becomes an election issue!

You really are a bit dim aren't you? We do not subsidize the Dutch and German governments. We subsidize rail franchises that without subsidies would not operate. With the exception of commuter services into London and ram packed long distance services on the WCML and ECML, this means the rest of the trains.

The principle of rail franchising is to get private companies (even if they are owned by other governments) to bid for the lowest subsidy (or highest premium in the case of the South Western, West Coast and East Coast franchises) to operate the trains. The margin made by these companies is not that big. Stagecoach did quite well on the first South West Trains franchise from 1996 to 2004, but they've paid well over the odds for the last 13 years.

As an example, my season ticket from Woking is £3,100 year. About £2,200 pays for the operation of the railway and a very small profit for Stagecoach. The rest goes to the government - basically as tax (a regressive one at that) - so that @TheScreamingEagles can trundle along through the Hope Valley every morning and evening.

If we nationalize the railways, those provincial services aren't magically going to start breaking even. They'll still need to be subsidized by the tax payer and London commuters. The question that should be asked is, is the franchising system worth the hassle? Is the outcome better for passengers and the tax payer? Is it worth the bureaucracy in the DfT that assesses the bids?

Chris said:

glw said:

Chris said:

Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.

That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.

But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.

None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).

I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.

If you are old enough to remember British Rail it is unlikely you'd ask the question. As a nationalised industry it evidently believed its purpose was to provide employment to its staff and passengers were an irritating inconvenience. If you didn't like it tough luck. For those who don't remember pre-privatisation industries (3 months for a phone line, anyone? Then wait in the whole day in the forlorn hope an engineer would actually show up) I can understand the superficial attraction - but look at the responses of people who have actual experience of them.

Chris said:

glw said:

Chris said:

Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.

That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.

But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.

None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).

I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.

Personally, I'd be in favour of renationalisation if it were paired with massive infrastructure spending and a drastic increase of the network back to pre Beeching levels, but that will never happen, the car is King and it will ever be so mores the shame as a non driver.