politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With postal voting just starting CON maintains emphatic lead
Comments
-
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?0 -
Even I am warming to Corbyn. Good campaigner. And some (not all, far from it) decent policies that have the advantage of being easy to communicate. Railways back in public control. Everyone thinks they understand that even if they don't really understand it. That said, still think May will win big, in the end.kle4 said:
Hardly - plenty of people said there would be a poll hit, they just argue that panicking is not the answer and questioned how big a hit it would be.bobajobPB said:
I'm surprised. But kudos to you. Red faces all round.SeanT said:OK DOUBTERS.
Give me some respect. I said these policies were a dreadful example of big fucking hairy bollocks from the beginning. Right from the start. Right from the get-go.
I was right. Sadly, sadly. I was right.
HOW TO HALVE YOUR LEAD IN 48 HOURS, A SEMINAR BY THERESA MAY0 -
As you have written TAXES in capital letters, let’s hear your policy suggestion.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it’s a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.
How do you plan to pay for social care?
The only other suggestion I have heard so far is a National Care Service, which will need substantial TAXES. My rough calculation suggest if it was paid for by income TAX alone, it would need an extra 3p in the pound.0 -
Against who though ?Pulpstar said:200 deliveries or canvassing for Clegg next weekend still. He's still in desperate trouble
0 -
Or say that "lunch won't be free, but we're not sure how much it will cost in the future". Don't say "lunch is going to leave your kids without an inheritance or possibly homeless if you live in the south east".Sean_F said:
I appreciate that a free lunch is popular. But someone has to pay for it. Your view is that people who with assets above £23 k, who have to go into care homes, are the ones who should pay for it.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.0 -
There was an ICM Sun on Sunday two weeks in a row - fieldwork to 28 Apr and 5 May.RobD said:If ICM are sticking to their usual schedule, the fieldwork for their next poll should finish tomorrow, published in Monday's Guardian.
We could get an ICM Sun on Sunday in the morning and then another ICM in The Guardian a couple of days later.0 -
So now this Tweet makes sense
@theresa_may: If I lose just six seats I will lose this election and Jeremy Corbyn will be sitting down to negotiate with Europe: facebook.com/TheresaMayOffi…0 -
Yes! Thank you! Some of the posters who are saying this policy is just fine would be vitriolic if orbyn dared to propose such a policy.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.0 -
Can we have two threads? One for the foamers, and one for the sane?0
-
I think it is a good move, despite them to take a hit for it, but I agree with you on that. It's like all that stuff about Hammond being useless and needing to be sacked for proposing NI changes - she signed off on it, ok if he proposed it that's one thing, but she's the leader she has to spot it.SeanT said:
She's the fucking leader. She should tell him to shut the F up with his daft ideas. It's her failure. Sorry.RepublicanTory said:
It isn't her it is Timothy-everything i hear from those close to the campaign is that he has way too much influence, doesn't listen to anybody else and whilst very clever doesn't relate to the average person.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
If Lynton runs the campaign from now on then things will be fine-if he doesn't then we will win but it will feel like a defeat.
Same as Corbyn's defenders always blaming his critics and the media, when as the leader it is his job to overcome opponents. Which to be fair he is doing at the moment.0 -
Anyone Betting on East Renfrewshire is a braver person than I.calum said:East Ren hotting up !
https://twitter.com/LauraEastRen/status/8660249784703713320 -
Totally disagree. She needs to stick to the policies and dare all those rich, selfish homeowners in the south of England to vote for Jeremy Corbyn.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.0 -
Brexit. The second referendum pledge has been extremely poorly received.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?0 -
I hope the Thai tonight was OK....dyedwoolie said:Electoral maths suggests if May gets 46, and the polling says she ought to, she will have a big majority. The Tories just need to hammer on Corbyn, GOTV and strong and stable Brexit and convert intention to votes and she will romp home.
I wonder how the Golden Triangle would react knowing there was a True Blue buried deep underneath the wire....
I'd love Corbyn to win...he won't......but the Tories are so hypocritical....they have plunged the UK into chaos, risked the Union, Nato, the EU.... to manage their petty rightwing battles...and they have the cheek to claim Corbyn is a risk after such reckless damage they have wilfully created.....
Tories are wankers with a capital W followed by the ANKER.....and the S because they are a plurality.....
0 -
I don't propose to solve the problem because I'm not standing for Parliament.YBarddCwsc said:
As you have written TAXES in capital letters, let’s hear your policy suggestion.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it’s a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.
How do you plan to pay for social care?
The only other suggestion I have heard so far is a National Care Service, which will need substantial TAXES. My rough calculation suggest if it was paid for by income TAX alone, it would need an extra 3p in the pound.
But on the other hand I sure as hell wouldn't slip the home snatcher policy into a manifesto at the last minute without properly focus grouping it or looking at alternatives.
It's one of those problems you deal with WHEN you've won the big majority, not the sort of puppy-kicking ideas you announce as the central plank of your manifesto three weeks before a vote.
To deliver this policy as it stands, in the way it's been delivered, is an astonishing own goal.0 -
I'm not warming to him, but he has had a decent campaign - the manifesto is a spendathon, but people like the policies of course (we'll see if they think it credible), and unlike some of his shadow ministers, he's not cocked up.bobajobPB said:
Even I am warming to Corbyn. Good campaigner. And some (not all, far from it) decent policies that have the advantage of being easy to communicate. Railways back in public control. Everyone thinks they understand that even if they don't really understand it. That said, still think May will win big, in the end.kle4 said:
Hardly - plenty of people said there would be a poll hit, they just argue that panicking is not the answer and questioned how big a hit it would be.bobajobPB said:
I'm surprised. But kudos to you. Red faces all round.SeanT said:OK DOUBTERS.
Give me some respect. I said these policies were a dreadful example of big fucking hairy bollocks from the beginning. Right from the start. Right from the get-go.
I was right. Sadly, sadly. I was right.
HOW TO HALVE YOUR LEAD IN 48 HOURS, A SEMINAR BY THERESA MAY0 -
If you were to give a member of the Labour campaign a wish for the Tory manifesto that would be granted it would be something like "a policy that will piss off all the old bastards who always vote Tory". Amazingly May has given Labour that, and thrown in the WFA for free.SeanT said:Bang on. This is a policy cunningly and brilliantly designed to alienate EXACTLY the voters TMay needs. They won't read the details, they will grasp the implications (and they won't be entirely wrong).
0 -
Excellent post .I live in York a small three bed semi detached is ,220 to ,250 k.Any threat to that in any way is scary in some cases more than Corbyn.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.0 -
Who knows. My calculations say Labouranother_richard said:
Against who though ?Pulpstar said:200 deliveries or canvassing for Clegg next weekend still. He's still in desperate trouble
0 -
Clegg should be safe in Sheffield Hallam, he’s only used up 6 of his 9 lives.Pulpstar said:200 deliveries or canvassing for Clegg next weekend still. He's still in desperate trouble
0 -
How do PBers who expect to receive a substantial inheritance and don't want to lose any of it to care home expenses think the costs of care should be funded?
By the way, I object to the view of some on this site that anyone who doesn't own a home outright by the time they retire is by definition feckless, useless and lazy. The people who provide frontline care to other people's parents in care homes are unlikely to earn the type of money that would allow them to ever own £500k+ homes.
I agree that the presentation of this policy has been mishandled but there seems to be a lot of wilful misunderstanding and/or ignorance about care funding on this site.
I looked after my father in my own home in the early stages of his vascular dementia but it got to the point where I could no longer look after him safely at home and had to look at the options for residential care.0 -
Prediction: Corbyn's football tax will go down well with people who actually go to football matches. Only a tiny fraction of football fans watch the big four, so this Tranmere Rovers stuff will help him. (Whether it is in any way practical I doubt but popular? - quite possibly)0
-
It is why I am predicting huuuge polling miss.chestnut said:For anyone getting enthusiastic about Labour , a quarter of their 34% on Survation is made up of 'Others/Did Not Votes.'
OTOH one of Corbyn's seeking points was he would explictly attract DNVs sooooo maybe?0 -
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who said say nothing? It would be easy to just put one or two lines in "we will seek to reform social care and fully fund it by the end of 2022".Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
That's literally all they needed and they could have just kept the plans secret until after the election.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.0 -
I am saying this proposal is better than what exists at the moment for dementia sufferers who live in residential homes.nunu said:
Yes! Thank you! Some of the posters who are saying this policy is just fine would be vitriolic if orbyn dared to propose such a policy.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.
I say this from the experience of watching my mother decline & die from Parkison's dementia over 5 years in homes for which her family paid all the bills.
All I am asking you or kyf to do is explain what your policy is, and what it costs.
0 -
She thinks that government regulation or intervention is the answer to every problem (or not, in this case).SeanT said:
Oh good god. I think I actively hate her.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/AndrewSparrow/status/864083737167974401SeanT said:
What, in God's good name, is the "religious pay audit"?? Is this another Tory manifesto lunacy that I missed??Sean_F said:
That is bonkers, certainly.TheScreamingEagles said:
It's the religious pay audit that got me.MaxPB said:
Fwiw, one of the two donors who refused is a Brexit backer, the other was a Remainer. Both take the same (dim) view of her meddling in business regulation and the, frankly stupid, energy cap. I've known both for a while now and not seen them agree on much.TheScreamingEagles said:
If it is any consolation, I did urge him to stand again.MaxPB said:
He should have bloody stood. I can see the party getting rid as soon as Brexit is done. She will lose badly to a sane Labour party.TheScreamingEagles said:
I take no pleasure in being right on Mrs May.SeanT said:
Just one more major error from the Tories divides us from a Hung Parliament. That's how shit she is.TheScreamingEagles said:
I was right about these social care policies, but I fear you were right about TMay, and I was deluding myself. She's just Not Corbyn. That's her only appeal.
I despise her nannying policies and she isn't even any good at low, cunning politics, on the basis of this campaign, so far.
Sigh.
There's one person who is really depressed tonight.
George Osborne, if he had decided to stand again as an MP....
It'll be amusing for the likes of you and me, and the consultants in the NHS.0 -
Apart from social care, then you are on your ownMaxPB said:
She thinks that government regulation or intervention is the answer to every problem (or not, in this case).SeanT said:
Oh good god. I think I actively hate her.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/AndrewSparrow/status/864083737167974401SeanT said:
What, in God's good name, is the "religious pay audit"?? Is this another Tory manifesto lunacy that I missed??Sean_F said:
That is bonkers, certainly.TheScreamingEagles said:
It's the religious pay audit that got me.MaxPB said:
Fwiw, one of the two donors who refused is a Brexit backer, the other was a Remainer. Both take the same (dim) view of her meddling in business regulation and the, frankly stupid, energy cap. I've known both for a while now and not seen them agree on much.TheScreamingEagles said:
If it is any consolation, I did urge him to stand again.MaxPB said:
He should have bloody stood. I can see the party getting rid as soon as Brexit is done. She will lose badly to a sane Labour party.TheScreamingEagles said:
I take no pleasure in being right on Mrs May.SeanT said:
Just one more major error from the Tories divides us from a Hung Parliament. That's how shit she is.TheScreamingEagles said:
I was right about these social care policies, but I fear you were right about TMay, and I was deluding myself. She's just Not Corbyn. That's her only appeal.
I despise her nannying policies and she isn't even any good at low, cunning politics, on the basis of this campaign, so far.
Sigh.
There's one person who is really depressed tonight.
George Osborne, if he had decided to stand again as an MP....
It'll be amusing for the likes of you and me, and the consultants in the NHS.
0 -
Yup. On his grid this then ends with the tories winning a whacking majority... the frothers are doing their part to help avoid complacencykle4 said:
Well, he called 2015 right on the key issue.Scrapheap_as_was said:Where St Dan leads, certain people follow...
htt://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/8658588370473738240 -
It's embarrassing.SeanT said:Oh good god. I think I actively hate her.
All I need is the Race Relations Acts, if that.
Not once in nearly seventeen years of continuous employment have I ever thought, oh I'm getting paid less because of my background.
I'm actually getting paid a lot more than the going rate for my job.0 -
I think this discussion is really relevant to TM's care tax proposal.viewcode said:
House prices *trebled* from 1995 to 2007. That's equivalent to a 10% return pa compound for twelve years in succession. Plus it's not taxed as profit, whereas your hypothetical share portfolio would attract tax.MyBurningEars said:
As a percentage rate of return, though, over say 30 years, has it been so terribly different to equities? (NB not just stock price index, including reinvestment of dividends.) Of course for most people their main investment is in bricks and mortar rather than a share portfolio, but someone who worked hard and poured their savings into building up a portfolio and did well out of it over a couple of decades wouldn't cop the same flak as someone who benefitted from an "unearned (and by implication, undeserved) rise in house prices."viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.kyf_100 said:
You're looking at this from the wrong angle. I didn't ask how it plays out for _you_, I asked how it would look if you were that person, with the 450k home as your only major asset.
The answer probably isn't "well, I'm sitting on a 400k unearned asset, whoop-de-doo for me" the answer is probably "I grew up with nothing, worked hard all my life, now that Theresa May has come along and said she's going to take the house I raised my kids in, the house I wanted to leave to them, to pay for my old age, even though I've paid my taxes my entire life".
This is TERRIBLE for the Conservatives. And terrible with the kind of voters they should be winning over - older, lower-middle-class, small c conservative types.
Admittedly it's peak-to-trough, but it's illustrative: things really did change, and the distortion does affect things.
The flip side of the *social care problem* that TM is proposing to *fix* - is the house price/cost of living problem for care workers.
If we could halve house prices/rents - the cost of care (homecare especially) would come waaay down.
High house prices + brexit means brexit (fewer EU care workers) means care costs will remain high and probably keep on going up.
She's absolutely right to link care costs to housing assets - and especially so now we're entering brexit.
This is what the elderly voted for last June.0 -
Well it was one of Ed M's too, although Corbyn seems to be doing better with it, and maybe the fact the DNVs well, DNV in 2015 and so the Tories won shook enough of them to actually do it this time.Alistair said:
It is why I am predicting huuuge polling miss.chestnut said:For anyone getting enthusiastic about Labour , a quarter of their 34% on Survation is made up of 'Others/Did Not Votes.'
OTOH one of Corbyn's seeking points was he would explictly attract DNVs sooooo maybe?
Still behind the Tories though.0 -
Politics has made a lot of unexpected moves in recent years; lazy assumptions have been confounded. In 2010 we were told to expect close on 100 Lib Dems,but the Cleggasm fizzled. In 2015 the Tories ate the LoiDems and won a majority when NOM was supposedly nailed on. Post-2015 Labour was expected to move back to a centrist position yet ended up lurching hard left. In 2016 Remain was a dead-cert but lost. In 2017 Labour was to crash to 25% and the LibDems surge, yet what we now have is the return of two party dominance not seen since the 1970s. Corbyn may even end up with highest losing Labour vote share since Jim Callaghan in 1979.0
-
By the way, the theory that the Lib Dems do well when Labour do well is looking in tatters at the moment.0
-
I'd like to think so. But I am not optimistic.Sandpit said:
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who said say nothing? It would be easy to just put one or two lines in "we will seek to reform social care and fully fund it by the end of 2022".Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
That's literally all they needed and they could have just kept the plans secret until after the election.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.0 -
Do you know until yesterday I was a conservative voter; or rather I thought I was. I'm certainly a "Leaver".
But I've changed my mind. Not because of the social care stuff (though I do disagree with it and feel the costs should be shared) but because it's flushed out some of the views of the free marketeers, and in particular how they talk about tbe rest of us, and how little they care.
Sadly I will probably still have to vote conservative this time - but please, come back New Labour, we need you.0 -
I say the Blue Meanies.Pulpstar said:
Who knows. My calculations say Labouranother_richard said:
Against who though ?Pulpstar said:200 deliveries or canvassing for Clegg next weekend still. He's still in desperate trouble
0 -
If it's any consolation, Richard, this sane Labour voter moved that way today. Ballot paper in the post.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?
We do agree I'm sane, no?0 -
The Thai was sublime. There's no true blue here, I am ambivalent to the result as I despise the three big parties at this time. I really hate Corbyn though so I admit a part of me wants to enjoy him getting his comeuppance for being useless.tyson said:
I hope the Thai tonight was OK....dyedwoolie said:Electoral maths suggests if May gets 46, and the polling says she ought to, she will have a big majority. The Tories just need to hammer on Corbyn, GOTV and strong and stable Brexit and convert intention to votes and she will romp home.
I wonder how the Golden Triangle would react knowing there was a True Blue buried deep underneath the wire....
I'd love Corbyn to win...he won't......but the Tories are so hypocritical....they have plunged the UK into chaos, risked the Union, Nato, the EU.... to manage their petty rightwing battles...and they have the cheek to claim Corbyn is a risk after such reckless damage they have wilfully created.....
Tories are wankers with a capital W followed by the ANKER.....and the S because they are a plurality.....
I shall be a shade of Green on June 8 and looking for 2 seats and a handful of seconds. I don't particularly love the Greens either but there is no old school continuity liberal to vote for here.0 -
Rubbish, May's Tory poll score is higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election for over 40 years, she is not aiming for libertarian millionaire thriller writers living in Primrose Hill but white working class and lower middle class voters North of WatfordSeanT said:
Ed Miliband would win this election with a swagger. That's how shit the Tories are.bobajobPB said:
Even I am warming to Corbyn. Good campaigner. And some (not all, far from it) decent policies that have the advantage of being easy to communicate. Railways back in public control. Everyone thinks they understand that even if they don't really understand it. That said, still think May will win big, in the end.kle4 said:
Hardly - plenty of people said there would be a poll hit, they just argue that panicking is not the answer and questioned how big a hit it would be.bobajobPB said:
I'm surprised. But kudos to you. Red faces all round.SeanT said:OK DOUBTERS.
Give me some respect. I said these policies were a dreadful example of big fucking hairy bollocks from the beginning. Right from the start. Right from the get-go.
I was right. Sadly, sadly. I was right.
HOW TO HALVE YOUR LEAD IN 48 HOURS, A SEMINAR BY THERESA MAY0 -
Because we're fighting on his turf. It's a disaster for any centre right person, Theresa May has shifted the centre of politics to the left in order to increase her majority from 12 to ~50. The 2022 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.SeanT said:
Ed Miliband would win this election with a swagger. That's how shit the Tories are.bobajobPB said:
Even I am warming to Corbyn. Good campaigner. And some (not all, far from it) decent policies that have the advantage of being easy to communicate. Railways back in public control. Everyone thinks they understand that even if they don't really understand it. That said, still think May will win big, in the end.kle4 said:
Hardly - plenty of people said there would be a poll hit, they just argue that panicking is not the answer and questioned how big a hit it would be.bobajobPB said:
I'm surprised. But kudos to you. Red faces all round.SeanT said:OK DOUBTERS.
Give me some respect. I said these policies were a dreadful example of big fucking hairy bollocks from the beginning. Right from the start. Right from the get-go.
I was right. Sadly, sadly. I was right.
HOW TO HALVE YOUR LEAD IN 48 HOURS, A SEMINAR BY THERESA MAY0 -
Sure, it's bonkers however you look at it. But you'd have thought that there'd be at least a reasonable number of soft-left internationalist/Europhile types who'd be prepared to overlook that.MaxPB said:
Brexit. The second referendum pledge has been extremely poorly received.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?0 -
Just backed Labour to win >162.5 seats at 5/6 with Hills, Laddies' corresponding strike price is 167.5 seats. Meanwhile Spreadex mid-spread for Labour seats is 169 (i.e. 166 - 172).
Hills price can't last but DYOR.0 -
The Lib Dems have wilfully vacated the field by focusing on a single issue which was decided the other way a year ago. They're simply irrelevant.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?0 -
The centre in British politics is a waste land. It has been trashed.ab195 said:Do you know until yesterday I was a conservative voter; or rather I thought I was. I'm certainly a "Leaver".
But I've changed my mind. Not because of the social care stuff (though I do disagree with it and feel the costs should be shared) but because it's flushed out some of the views of the free marketeers, and in particular how they talk about tbe rest of us, and how little they care.
Sadly I will probably still have to vote conservative this time - but please, come back New Labour, we need you.0 -
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
I wrote those exact words on PB a few weeks agoTheScreamingEagles said:Did any Tory MPs in the last few weeks write an article in which they said
'Shortly there will be an election, in which the Tories will increase its majority'
Feels like déjà vu
0 -
Labour are 12-1 to win Ynys Mon. That looks quite good to me.0
-
No, the friendly insurance company will have a lien on your home, so you won't be completely alone!RobD said:
Apart from social care, then you are on your ownMaxPB said:
She thinks that government regulation or intervention is the answer to every problem (or not, in this case).SeanT said:
Oh good god. I think I actively hate her.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/AndrewSparrow/status/864083737167974401SeanT said:
What, in God's good name, is the "religious pay audit"?? Is this another Tory manifesto lunacy that I missed??Sean_F said:
That is bonkers, certainly.TheScreamingEagles said:
It's the religious pay audit that got me.MaxPB said:
Fwiw, one of the two donors who refused is a Brexit backer, the other was a Remainer. Both take the same (dim) view of her meddling in business regulation and the, frankly stupid, energy cap. I've known both for a while now and not seen them agree on much.TheScreamingEagles said:
If it is any consolation, I did urge him to stand again.MaxPB said:
He should have bloody stood. I can see the party getting rid as soon as Brexit is done. She will lose badly to a sane Labour party.TheScreamingEagles said:
I take no pleasure in being right on Mrs May.SeanT said:
Just one more major error from the Tories divides us from a Hung Parliament. That's how shit she is.TheScreamingEagles said:
I was right about these social care policies, but I fear you were right about TMay, and I was deluding myself. She's just Not Corbyn. That's her only appeal.
I despise her nannying policies and she isn't even any good at low, cunning politics, on the basis of this campaign, so far.
Sigh.
There's one person who is really depressed tonight.
George Osborne, if he had decided to stand again as an MP....
It'll be amusing for the likes of you and me, and the consultants in the NHS.0 -
Peter_the_Punter said:
If it's any consolation, Richard, this sane Labour voter moved that way today. Ballot paper in the post.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?
We do agree I'm sane, no? 0 -
WFA, Pensions Triple Lock and Social Care - the Tories actively decided to upset some of their core elderly vote. Now, people are not irrational, and there will be plenty of non-stupid people around May and co, so you have to assume they knew each of those policies will be unpopular with that group.glw said:
If you were to give a member of the Labour campaign a wish for the Tory manifesto that would be granted it would be something like "a policy that will piss off all the old bastards who always vote Tory". Amazingly May has given Labour that, and thrown in the WFA for free.SeanT said:Bang on. This is a policy cunningly and brilliantly designed to alienate EXACTLY the voters TMay needs. They won't read the details, they will grasp the implications (and they won't be entirely wrong).
So they must assume the rest of the offer, including leadership, will be popular enough to overcome that, and that it is a good idea for governance to announce these things now rather than hide them, or they think it will be popular enough with others to make up for it. It simply makes no sense otherwise, as they'd not assume these would be popular with that core vote.
Now, do people dislike Corbyn enough to ensure May still wins comfortably? It would appear so, but perhaps they miscalculated how much people dislike Corbyn, and so it has caused more of an issue that they thought. Nevertheless, they knew it was going to be unpopular and included it anyway, and if we think it a good policy, that honesty should be applauded even if the presentation is bad. If it is a bad policy, obviously it was a foolish move.0 -
Yep, and she needs to get every Tory doing TV and radio tomorrow to be properly briefed and defend it to the hilt.AndyJS said:
Totally disagree. She needs to stick to the policies and dare all those rich, selfish homeowners in the south of England to vote for Jeremy Corbyn.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.0 -
This is an entirely fair point and I was actually going to mention the leverage thing except that I was running out of space and didn't want to delete any more of the inner-nested quotes!Ishmael_Z said:
If you were building up your share portfolio with the same leverage as someone buying a house on a mortgage - well point one you just wouldn't, and point 2 you would be in prison because you would have had to lie through your teeth to get anyone to lend you that much money for that purpose. And without leverage you're nowhere near the house buyer.MyBurningEars said:
As a percentage rate of return, though, over say 30 years, has it been so terribly different to equities? (NB not just stock price index, including reinvestment of dividends.) Of course for most people their main investment is in bricks and mortar rather than a share portfolio, but someone who worked hard and poured their savings into building up a portfolio and did well out of it over a couple of decades wouldn't cop the same flak as someone who benefitted from an "unearned (and by implication, undeserved) rise in house prices."
Another problem with the comparison is that your main residence isn't something you should be buying primarily in the hopes of generating financial returns (and there are countries e.g. Germany where house prices have remained essentially static over decades), whereas with equities chasing a return is the whole point.
I am, however, wary of the way that homeowners who have gained from house price inflation get discussed - that they have benefitted from a windfall they did nothing to earn so it doesn't matter if it is taken back off them, for example. Obviously there are inter-generational issues in play here. However, once someone has experienced a rise in the values of their assets, they do change their financial planning around it - I am sure it has been a factor in many an early retirement decision. In this respect all forms of government asset grabbing (mansion taxes, wealth taxes, fiddling with pensions etc) end up having a kind of retroactive effect, penalising decisions taken many years ago under a different set of rules. Income taxes have many disadvantages, but at least they are up-front, unstealthy and you know exactly what the (dis)incentives are.
I feel uneasy when I see homeowner gains presented simply as however many hundred thousand pounds over multiple decades. Supplementing this with a rate of return, and some kind of comparable, puts things into a better context.0 -
I think it's likely because it's a policy outcome that will take a while to sink in for a lot of people. And when it does they will hate it.SeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
It'd fuck up "strong and stable" big time though.SeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
I'm completely baffled - everyone's inheritance is already at risk to residential care home fees - down to just £23k. Now £100k will be protected.Clown_Car_HQ said:How do PBers who expect to receive a substantial inheritance and don't want to lose any of it to care home expenses think the costs of care should be funded?
By the way, I object to the view of some on this site that anyone who doesn't own a home outright by the time they retire is by definition feckless, useless and lazy. The people who provide frontline care to other people's parents in care homes are unlikely to earn the type of money that would allow them to ever own £500k+ homes.
I agree that the presentation of this policy has been mishandled but there seems to be a lot of wilful misunderstanding and/or ignorance about care funding on this site.
I looked after my father in my own home in the early stages of his vascular dementia but it got to the point where I could no longer look after him safely at home and had to look at the options for residential care.
As for in-home care costs - how much are they likely to be - the Council popping in for 15 mins twice a day - the cost will be absolute peanuts compared to the value of the home.
And anyone remotely wealthy will surely be using a private care agency anyway.
Is it really the case that there are lots of people sitting in homes worth £300k / £400k / £500k and they are relying on Council care for 15 mins twice a day?
Surely they'll end up paying anyway by going to a private care agency for a decent service to suit their needs. If they don't have the income to pay for it then they'll do an equity release. The care cost will be peanuts in comparison to the value of their home.0 -
As far as I can tell, the view is that people like your mother should bear the brunt, and any changes should somehow be slipped through on the sly, post-election.YBarddCwsc said:
I am saying this proposal is better than what exists at the moment for dementia sufferers who live in residential homes.nunu said:
Yes! Thank you! Some of the posters who are saying this policy is just fine would be vitriolic if orbyn dared to propose such a policy.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.
I say this from the experience of watching my mother decline & die from Parkison's dementia over 5 years in homes for which her family paid all the bills.
All I am asking you or kyf to do is explain what your policy is, and what it costs.0 -
Football tax? WTF?bobajobPB said:Prediction: Corbyn's football tax will go down well with people who actually go to football matches. Only a tiny fraction of football fans watch the big four, so this Tranmere Rovers stuff will help him. (Whether it is in any way practical I doubt but popular? - quite possibly)
0 -
Tim Farron is the issue there. He's bloody terrible. I think we have three of the lowest quality leaders I can remember. The combined rating of all three is about 7/30 IMO (4 for Theresa, 2 for Corbyn and 1 for Farron). Last election Dave got that by himself IMO.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sure, it's bonkers however you look at it. But you'd have thought that there'd be at least a reasonable number of soft-left internationalist/Europhile types who'd be prepared to overlook that.MaxPB said:
Brexit. The second referendum pledge has been extremely poorly received.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?0 -
The truth is the Tories will be secretly pleased about these recent polls showing a smaller lead because it means there won't be any complacency from their supporters on polling day, and it will help to keep turnout up as well.0
-
Re iht 1m = Only if you have kids and leave the house to them. it's 850k in total this year rising by 50k pa over next few yearsHYUFD said:
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
Why should the state pay when you clearly have the resources to pay for yourself?Yorkcity said:
Excellent post .I live in York a small three bed semi detached is ,220 to ,250 k.Any threat to that in any way is scary in some cases more than Corbyn.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.0 -
WorseMaxPB said:
Timothy is a pound shop Letwin AIUI.RepublicanTory said:
It isn't her it is Timothy-everything i hear from those close to the campaign is that he has way too much influence, doesn't listen to anybody else and whilst very clever doesn't relate to the average person.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
If Lynton runs the campaign from now on then things will be fine-if he doesn't then we will win but it will feel like a defeat.
At least Letwin was an MP and actually listened to a few other MP's0 -
The surveys above preceed the social care furore.Sandpit said:
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who said say nothing? It would be easy to just put one or two lines in "we will seek to reform social care and fully fund it by the end of 2022".Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
That's literally all they needed and they could have just kept the plans secret until after the election.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.
Jezza has been running a much slicker campaign than tyhe Tories. Jezza is Trump, full of ridiculous unsustainable policies, campaigning at rallies rather than conventionally. May is Hillary, sneering at tbe deplorables and with a whiff of entitlement. Voters dont like being taken for granted.
0 -
If they are running around like headless chickens they may not make it to the polling placeAndyJS said:The truth is the Tories will be secretly pleased about these recent polls showing a smaller lead because it means there won't be any complacency from their supporters on polling day, and it will help to keep turnout up as well.
0 -
Never mind 2022.MaxPB said:The 2022 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
The 2017 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
Labour are going to talk about Dementia Tax and WFA nonstop until polling day. If the Tories gets dragged into this they will likely start losing vote share.0 -
I thought the name dyedwoolie...was a claim to be a true blue....so sorry to have maligned you...my mistake....dyedwoolie said:
The Thai was sublime. There's no true blue here, I am ambivalent to the result as I despise the three big parties at this time. I really hate Corbyn though so I admit a part of me wants to enjoy him getting his comeuppance for being useless.tyson said:
I hope the Thai tonight was OK....dyedwoolie said:Electoral maths suggests if May gets 46, and the polling says she ought to, she will have a big majority. The Tories just need to hammer on Corbyn, GOTV and strong and stable Brexit and convert intention to votes and she will romp home.
I wonder how the Golden Triangle would react knowing there was a True Blue buried deep underneath the wire....
I'd love Corbyn to win...he won't......but the Tories are so hypocritical....they have plunged the UK into chaos, risked the Union, Nato, the EU.... to manage their petty rightwing battles...and they have the cheek to claim Corbyn is a risk after such reckless damage they have wilfully created.....
Tories are wankers with a capital W followed by the ANKER.....and the S because they are a plurality.....
I shall be a shade of Green on June 8 and looking for 2 seats and a handful of seconds. I don't particularly love the Greens either but there is no old school continuity liberal to vote for here.
0 -
Are you asking Richard specifically or is it an open question?Peter_the_Punter said:
If it's any consolation, Richard, this sane Labour voter moved that way today. Ballot paper in the post.Richard_Nabavi said:
Third party squeeze is right, and was of course happening before the latest hysteria. It's an oddity, certainly. You can see why nutty Green extreme lefties might head Corbynwards, but why aren't the LibDems benefiting from sane Labour supporters moving their way? It's mysterious.Pulpstar said:
I'm going weak and wibbly with Corbyn going within 9 points. The third party squeeze is well and truly on in the East Midlands nowRichard_Nabavi said:Evening all, and what an amusing evening.
Executive summary: everyone now agrees that Cameron and Osborne weren't so bad at this politics malarkey after all, right?
We do agree I'm sane, no?0 -
Survation was after and they had the Tories on 46%.foxinsoxuk said:
The surveys above preceed the social care furore.
Jezza has been running a much slicker campaign than tyhe Tories. Jezza is Trump, full of ridiculous unsustainable policies, campaigning at rallies rather than conventionally. May is Hillary, sneering at tbe deplorables and with a whiff of entitlement. Voters dont like being taken for granted.0 -
Possibly-but where the Cabinet in all of this???SeanT said:
She's the fucking leader. She should tell him to shut the F up with his daft ideas. It's her failure. Sorry.RepublicanTory said:
It isn't her it is Timothy-everything i hear from those close to the campaign is that he has way too much influence, doesn't listen to anybody else and whilst very clever doesn't relate to the average person.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
If Lynton runs the campaign from now on then things will be fine-if he doesn't then we will win but it will feel like a defeat.0 -
But Corbyn thinks that property is basically theft, and that we should all just accept what the council gives us. Let's all remember what the alternative looks like for a minute, my parents' generation can certainly remember it.Yorkcity said:
Excellent post .I live in York a small three bed semi detached is ,220 to ,250 k.Any threat to that in any way is scary in some cases more than Corbyn.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
You may argue "oh, but you were potentially going to lose everyting down to your last 23k before" but the fact is most people don't read the fine print, they just hear DEMENTIA TAX which is like winning the reverse-lottery on top of an already terrifying and dehumanising condition.
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.0 -
Some proportion of Premier League TV income will be confiscated and given to the FA to be wasted on some scheme or other.chestnut said:
Football tax? WTF?bobajobPB said:Prediction: Corbyn's football tax will go down well with people who actually go to football matches. Only a tiny fraction of football fans watch the big four, so this Tranmere Rovers stuff will help him. (Whether it is in any way practical I doubt but popular? - quite possibly)
0 -
The Tories are still on 44% and 46% even post manifesto Labour, higher than they have got at a general election for decades, let Corbyn do anything for a vote but it is May the voters want taking the tough decisionsglw said:
Never mind 2022.MaxPB said:The 2022 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
The 2017 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
Labour are going to talk about Dementia Tax and WFA nonstop until polling day. If the Tories gets dragged into this they will likely start losing vote share.0 -
What would your proposed tweak be? Increasing the exemption?chestnut said:
Tweak sensibly, win by 20.AndyJS said:The truth is the Tories will be secretly pleased about these recent polls showing a smaller lead because it means there won't be any complacency from their supporters on polling day, and it will help to keep turnout up as well.
0 -
A lot of people won't know the current situation (I didn't until today). There is a possibility that 'they will take your house' catches on, but if that is so, and the opposition push it, it will be cynical bullshit while they still haven't' explained how their own plan would work, while the Tories are trying to grasp the nettle. There may well be more complicated issues with their plans which are not part of why most people are objecting, so in fact the hysteria is doing a disservice even to scrutiny of this policy, as people react to what they think it is doing, not its true problems.MikeL said:
I'm completely baffled - everyone's inheritance is already at risk to residential care home fees - down to just £23k. Now £100k will be protected.Clown_Car_HQ said:How do PBers who expect to receive a substantial inheritance and don't want to lose any of it to care home expenses think the costs of care should be funded?
By the way, I object to the view of some on this site that anyone who doesn't own a home outright by the time they retire is by definition feckless, useless and lazy. The people who provide frontline care to other people's parents in care homes are unlikely to earn the type of money that would allow them to ever own £500k+ homes.
I agree that the presentation of this policy has been mishandled but there seems to be a lot of wilful misunderstanding and/or ignorance about care funding on this site.
I looked after my father in my own home in the early stages of his vascular dementia but it got to the point where I could no longer look after him safely at home and had to look at the options for residential care.
As for in-home care costs - how much are they likely to be - the Council popping in for 15 mins twice a day - the cost will be absolute peanuts compared to the value of the home.
And anyone remotely wealthy will surely be using a private care agency anyway.
Is it really the case that there are lots of people sitting in homes worth £300k / £400k / £500k and they are relying on Council care for 15 mins twice a day?
Surely they'll end up paying anyway by going to a private care agency for a decent service to suit their needs. If they don't have the income to pay for it then they'll do an equity release. The care cost will be peanuts in comparison to the value of their home.
These overreacting Tories are pushing me closer every minute to a Tory vote for the first time ever.0 -
80% of people receiving Social Care do not receive residential care. They get care at home. There home was 100% safe till Thursday.HYUFD said:
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
The Tories will probably be wishing that UKIP was standing in 600 constituencies again because Labour are probably going to pick up some votes in certain areas due to the lack of a UKIP candidate in constituencies where people still tribally hate the Tories so much that they can't contemplate voting for them, like Merseyside. For example UKIP came second in Bootle in 2015 with 11% but aren't standing this time. Most of those votes will probably go back to Labour.RobD said:
If they are running around like headless chickens they may not make it to the polling placeAndyJS said:The truth is the Tories will be secretly pleased about these recent polls showing a smaller lead because it means there won't be any complacency from their supporters on polling day, and it will help to keep turnout up as well.
0 -
Former Tory who abandoned them after it became obvious trickle down economics was just wealth transfer from public to private pockets. Cannot see me voting blue ever again.tyson said:
I thought the name dyedwoolie...was a claim to be a true blue....so sorry to have maligned you...my mistake....dyedwoolie said:
The Thai was sublime. There's no true blue here, I am ambivalent to the result as I despise the three big parties at this time. I really hate Corbyn though so I admit a part of me wants to enjoy him getting his comeuppance for being useless.tyson said:
I hope the Thai tonight was OK....dyedwoolie said:Electoral maths suggests if May gets 46, and the polling says she ought to, she will have a big majority. The Tories just need to hammer on Corbyn, GOTV and strong and stable Brexit and convert intention to votes and she will romp home.
I wonder how the Golden Triangle would react knowing there was a True Blue buried deep underneath the wire....
I'd love Corbyn to win...he won't......but the Tories are so hypocritical....they have plunged the UK into chaos, risked the Union, Nato, the EU.... to manage their petty rightwing battles...and they have the cheek to claim Corbyn is a risk after such reckless damage they have wilfully created.....
Tories are wankers with a capital W followed by the ANKER.....and the S because they are a plurality.....
I shall be a shade of Green on June 8 and looking for 2 seats and a handful of seconds. I don't particularly love the Greens either but there is no old school continuity liberal to vote for here.0 -
When has May sneered at deplorables?foxinsoxuk said:
The surveys above preceed the social care furore.Sandpit said:
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who sn.Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.
Jezza has been running a much slicker campaign than tyhe Tories. Jezza is Trump, full of ridiculous unsustainable policies, campaigning at rallies rather than conventionally. May is Hillary, sneering at tbe deplorables and with a whiff of entitlement. Voters dont like being taken for granted.0 -
Through married couples allowance of £175 000 each added to the £325 000 threshold you get to a millionScrapheap_as_was said:
Re iht 1m = Only if you have kids and leave the house to them. it's 850k in total this year rising by 50k pa over next few yearsHYUFD said:
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
Look at the locals, Labour went backwards. They’re down to 2 councillors, and even that group has split.tlg86 said:Labour are 12-1 to win Ynys Mon. That looks quite good to me.
Plaid Cymru or the Tories will take Ynys Mon.
For the Tories to take it, they need Labour voters to vote Tory tactically to prevent Plaid.
The better Labour are doing nationally, the more unlikely this is.
If the polls remain as they are, I’d expect Plaid Cymru to take it.0 -
No, I think we'll still get a 50-60 seat majotity, but 2022 will be really tough as Labour won't be too far behind and a sane leader will destroy Theresa.glw said:
Never mind 2022.MaxPB said:The 2022 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
The 2017 election is going to be very tough unless we somehow bring the discussion back to Brexit and turn Theresa back into "Mrs Brexit - the patriotic choice" or whatever it was.
Labour are going to talk about Dementia Tax and WFA nonstop until polling day. If the Tories gets dragged into this they will likely start losing vote share.0 -
The idiocy of those Scottish Tories who tactically voted Labour in 2015 coming home to roost.calum said:East Ren hotting up !
https://twitter.com/LauraEastRen/status/866024978470371332
0 -
I very much doubt that anybody would be left homeless because of this policy. How many children of elderly parents in need of years of home care still live at home with said parents? And how many of those would be reduced to sleeping on a park bench with a substantial inheritance guaranteed at the end of that period? Zero.MaxPB said:Or say that "lunch won't be free, but we're not sure how much it will cost in the future". Don't say "lunch is going to leave your kids without an inheritance or possibly homeless if you live in the south east".
The kids would get their bag of cash and they wouldn't be reduced to penury, or anywhere close. And in the average household outside of Southern England, even for those who need a lot of expensive home care the *majority* of the value of their homes would be preserved.
This is a problem particularly for wealthy people and their heirs in the South, and will probably cause quite a lot of grumbling and whingeing and stick-banging and "but I paid my taxes!" and tut-tut-tutting. But swathes of Buckinghamshire and Surrey are not about to turn red. The one thing that's guaranteed to do their personal finances more harm than entering the home care lottery is opting for socialism - and even if some do throw a total wobblystrop and rebel, the Tories' majorities in these areas are so huge that they'll hold comfortably, even if (and it's a big if) the revolt of the wealthy homeowners is sufficient to cancel out the mass of ex-Ukippers stampeding in the other direction.
In less well-off regions of the country, the policy will be much less controversial. Indeed, getting the wealthy to cough up for their own care, rather than the general taxpayer, might actually be received favourably by some voters.0 -
Corbyn gets more votes than Ed ?
Nah not having it - but lolz either way.0 -
And she has the Brillo interview on Monday.Sandpit said:
Yep, and she needs to get every Tory doing TV and radio tomorrow to be properly briefed and defend it to the hilt.AndyJS said:
Totally disagree. She needs to stick to the policies and dare all those rich, selfish homeowners in the south of England to vote for Jeremy Corbyn.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.0 -
Lets all vote Corbyn
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/20/jeremy-corbyns-10-year-association-group-denies-holocaust/
What a guy.0 -
You can take both the 4/1 on Labour and the 8/1 on the Tories and still win.TheScreamingEagles said:
I say the Blue Meanies.Pulpstar said:
Who knows. My calculations say Labouranother_richard said:
Against who though ?Pulpstar said:200 deliveries or canvassing for Clegg next weekend still. He's still in desperate trouble
2015 results:
Liberal Democrat 22,215
Labour 19,862
Conservative 7,544
UKIP 3,575
If the Lib Dems really are polling at 7-8% and mostly from Labour switchers, that 4/1 looks fantastic, especially if you can stick a few quid on the Conservatives as well as an insurance bet.0 -
If you get dementia, you'll be in a care home sooner or later, unless you die first.bigjohnowls said:
80% of people receiving Social Care do not receive residential care. They get care at home. There home was 100% safe till Thursday.HYUFD said:
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0 -
I think you are discounting the possibility that it really is a combination of both bad policies and politics. I do wonder if the manifesto has been rushed, and I'm all but certain the actual campaigning strategy is only half-cooked.kle4 said:WFA, Pensions Triple Lock and Social Care - the Tories actively decided to upset some of their core elderly vote. Now, people are not irrational, and there will be plenty of non-stupid people around May and co, so you have to assume they knew each of those policies will be unpopular with that group.
So they must assume the rest of the offer, including leadership, will be popular enough to overcome that, and that it is a good idea for governance to announce these things now rather than hide them, or they think it will be popular enough with others to make up for it. It simply makes no sense otherwise, as they'd not assume these would be popular with that core vote.
Now, do people dislike Corbyn enough to ensure May still wins comfortably? It would appear so, but perhaps they miscalculated how much people dislike Corbyn, and so it has caused more of an issue that they thought. Nevertheless, they knew it was going to be unpopular and included it anyway, and if we think it a good policy, that honesty should be applauded even if the presentation is bad. If it is a bad policy, obviously it was a foolish move.
The Tories could have easily gone for something like a commission to look for bold solutions to social care, not announce a policy that obviously has some problems, and is easily caricatured for attack by opponents.0 -
Jezza is Kinnock 1987 except more opportunist, this is wobbly Tuesday and Thatcher still won with a majority of 102foxinsoxuk said:
The surveys above preceed the social care furore.Sandpit said:
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who said say nothing? It would be easy to just put one or two lines in "we will seek to reform social care and fully fund it by the end of 2022".Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax riseteur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
That's literally all they needed and they could have just kept the plans secret until after the election.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.
Jezza has been running a much slicker campaign than tyhe Tories. Jezza is Trump, full of ridiculous unsustainable policies, campaigning at rallies rather than conventionally. May is Hillary, sneering at tbe deplorables and with a whiff of entitlement. Voters dont like being taken for granted.0 -
Kaboom!!!!
As predicted by me for the last two days constantly - Dementia Tax has cut through and is an utter clusterf****
https://twitter.com/fractallogic1/status/866051323053191170/photo/10 -
'These overreacting Tories are pushing me closer every minute to a Tory vote for the first time ever.'kle4 said:
A lot of people won't know the current situation (I didn't until today). There is a possibility that 'they will take your house' catches on, but if that is so, and the opposition push it, it will be cynical bullshit while they still haven't' explained how their own plan would work, while the Tories are trying to grasp the nettle. There may well be more complicated issues with their plans which are not part of why most people are objecting, so in fact the hysteria is doing a disservice even to scrutiny of this policy, as people react to what they think it is doing, not its true problems.MikeL said:
I'm completely baffled - everyone's inheritance is already at risk to residential care home fees - down to just £23k. Now £100k will be protected.Clown_Car_HQ said:How do PBers who expect to receive a substantial inheritance and don't want to lose any of it to care home expenses think the costs of care should be funded?
By the way, I object to the view of some on this site that anyone who doesn't own a home outright by the time they retire is by definition feckless, useless and lazy. The people who provide frontline care to other people's parents in care homes are unlikely to earn the type of money that would allow them to ever own £500k+ homes.
I agree that the presentation of this policy has been mishandled but there seems to be a lot of wilful misunderstanding and/or ignorance about care funding on this site.
I looked after my father in my own home in the early stages of his vascular dementia but it got to the point where I could no longer look after him safely at home and had to look at the options for residential care.
As for in-home care costs - how much are they likely to be - the Council popping in for 15 mins twice a day - the cost will be absolute peanuts compared to the value of the home.
And anyone remotely wealthy will surely be using a private care agency anyway.
Is it really the case that there are lots of people sitting in homes worth £300k / £400k / £500k and they are relying on Council care for 15 mins twice a day?
Surely they'll end up paying anyway by going to a private care agency for a decent service to suit their needs. If they don't have the income to pay for it then they'll do an equity release. The care cost will be peanuts in comparison to the value of their home.
These overreacting Tories are pushing me closer every minute to a Tory vote for the first time ever.
I thought your advice was 'laugh and move on'?0 -
Probably seemed worth it at the time, hard to foresee just how huge the SNP tsunami would be (hard to believe a 30 point rise in Edinburgh SW was in the middle of the pack as far as rises went).another_richard said:
The idiocy of those Scottish Tories who tactically voted Labour in 2015 coming home to roost.calum said:East Ren hotting up !
https://twitter.com/LauraEastRen/status/8660249784703713320 -
She has avoided them. Did you see my pm to you earlier?kle4 said:
When has May sneered at deplorables?foxinsoxuk said:
The surveys above preceed the social care furore.Sandpit said:
Which is why people hate politicians, much better to be honest and deal with something that's been kicked down the road for far too long.MaxPB said:
Who sn.Richard_Tyndall said:
Its called honesty and it is rather refreshing. The bottom line is that it is the right thing to do and she has (quite rightly) calculated that she will win a good majority even if this one policy is initially unpopular.MaxPB said:
Who, other than a rubbish politician, launches a massive tax rise on old people with dementia in the middle of an election campaign. She didn't even prepare the ground by leaking something really horrible in advance. It's real amateur hour stuff.Charles said:
She's not. She's going to win a 50-60 seat majority (as I've been predicting from the start) and have a mandate to do some important stuff.MaxPB said:
Indeed, but we're not heading for a 100+ majority any more. 50+ is what we're looking at, this and the other moves have been Con -> Lab which means getting those direct swings required to make the Labour -> UKIP -> Con strategy work is going to be very tough.ThreeQuidder said:
Sean, grow a pair. This Tory panic is getting fucking tedious. It happens every election at about three weeks out because the media are desperate for a story so they want the favourite to stumble.SeanT said:TMay needs to come out TOMORROW and say OK this policy is utter shit, we've changed our minds.
Heaven help us. This ridiculous, stupid, clueless, myopic little woman is leading the Brexit negotiations.
I've come to the conclusion that Theresa May is a rubbish politician. Which isn't exactly great news for the country heading into what is the most important 2-3 year post-war period.
The alternative would have been to say nothing and then introduce it afterwards with all the outrage about it not having been in the manifesto and how you can't trust the Tories.
Personally I think it is a masterstroke.
After all this furore we're still on 46%, maybe the people can cope with the occasional dose of honesty.
Jezza has been running a much slicker campaign than tyhe Tories. Jezza is Trump, full of ridiculous unsustainable policies, campaigning at rallies rather than conventionally. May is Hillary, sneering at tbe deplorables and with a whiff of entitlement. Voters dont like being taken for granted.0 -
YBarddCwsc said:nunu said:
I am saying this proposal is better than what exists at the moment for dementia sufferers who live in residential homes.kyf_100 said:
Let's reduce that to 300k, then. Or even 200k. There are a heck of a lot of lower middle class types with 250k-ish houses in what are now marginal constituencies.Sean_F said:
Your scenario is far-fetched. There are very few lower middle class voters with £450 k houses in Northern seats.kyf_100 said:
I must confess I had to look orthagonal up!viewcode said:
Fair point. My point, which was orthogonal to yours instead of rebuttal, is that house prices have changed a lot over the past years.
I guess the received wisdom on here is that the people who hate the "dementia tax" are the well off in the south - the scenario I've painted above shows why I think it's absolutely devastating for the Tories in marginal northern constituencies with older small c conservative voters.
Don't try telling them that 250k isn't a lot of money, or that being left with 100k to spread amongst kids and grandkids is just fine and dandy, when you were planning to give them 250k. They are people who worked hard all their lives - AND PAID TAXES - and expected to give their 250k or therabouts to their kids.
This is a generation of working class kids done good, who were sold on the lie of 'cradle to grave' in exchange for a life of taxation and to find that they are suddenly expected to give up 50-90% of their assets to pay for their medical bills, leaving their kids in a not much better position than they started out in themselves.
They are the savers and the small c conservative penny pinchers, and they will have friends and acquaintances who have lived more recklessly and will have 100k or less who will still be covered and they will look at this policy and go "that's the Tories for you, you can't win with them, they just aren't for people like you or me".
This is an utter turkey, a vote loser of the highest order. And it's a vote loser where the Tories need it most - with older, lower middle class voters whose main asset is their house.
I say this from the experience of watching my mother decline & die from Parkison's dementia over 5 years in homes for which her family paid all the bills.
All I am asking you or kyf to do is explain what your policy is, and what it costs.
</blockquot
I think for a start there should be a cap Cameron proposed £72,000, maybe the cap could be bigger or smaller depending on your totoal assests but not having a cap except the last £100,00....no I don't agree with. We had a commission which is being ignored.0 -
If TM backtracks on this, I'll be selling the tories on the spreads.Bromptonaut said:
It'd f*ck up "strong and stable" big time though.SeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.
Changing her mind on this would completely screw up her messaging.
No. It has to be;
Brexit means brexit.
No questions.
Your house is at risk.
Trust Mother Theresa.
(Shut up and vote conservative).0 -
Sadly, many of those people who receive Social Care will deteriorate and will have to move to residential care towards the end of their life. Then their home is not 100 per cent safe.bigjohnowls said:
80% of people receiving Social Care do not receive residential care. They get care at home. There home was 100% safe till Thursday.HYUFD said:
Your house was already taken if you had residential care and you were left with just £23k now you get £100k and Osborne took your house out of Inheritance tax for everyone with a property worth less than £1 millionSeanT said:I actually wonder if the Tories could fall further if this meme takes hold. THE TORIES WILL TAKE YOUR HOUSE.
It threatens everyone, the old, the young, the middle class, the respectable working class. Blindingly, rhapsodically stupid.
They surely have no choice but to reverse and rethink. Whatever the intricate merits of the policy in itself (and they are arguable) it stinks from the start. It REEKS. It is the durian of manifesto commitments. Sure, it might taste good in the end, but it smells of overflowing toilets.0
