https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/866684809741037573

I'd like the one without the Dementia Tax please...

https://twitter.com/profchalmers/status/866683704810360833

Gallowgate said:

In the unlikely event that Labour did win, how could they possibly govern? The party does not support the leader...

Support? They'd worship JC in this event. A new JC.

Why are people commemorating Jo Cox now rather than on the anniversary? Is it because that falls after the election?

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/866684809741037573

Lynton must have told them not to put this in the manifesto in the first place and they ignored him... Which I can't imagine went down very well...

Brom said:

The ICM poll having 200 retweets and the Welsh poll 1.5k retweets in less time is an example of how twitter can warp people's perceptions of society. Probably less than 10% of voters actively post on twitter (even less will look at opinion polls) and yet it seems to provide a huge percentage of opinions deemed 'newsworthy'. If we take the ICM and Wales poll together it spells crushing Tory win, but when the latter is shared in isolation, particularly with no mention of 2015 Wales vote share then it can be used to spell a picture that Corbyn is surging and on the cusp of power.

Neatly put, Brom. It's what the twatterati wants, though, to change perceptions and to change the narrative. I don't see much or indeed any correlation between twitter and what the general public thinks, though.

We have all been guilty of massively over indulging these opinion polls, to the point of hysteria I would suggest.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just remember in 2015 that sources close to Sir Lynton NEVER EVER complained about Dave or the campaign.

Dave wasn't as crap at politics as Tezza....

MarkSenior said:

What is the Welsh for Weak and Wobbly ??

wan a sigledig

TheScreamingEagles said:

The day the polls turned!

OOH - I hope there's a paper going to give me a new avatar tomorrow perhaps????

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just remember in 2015 that sources close to Sir Lynton NEVER EVER complained about Dave or the campaign.

So that's a huge intervention.

Would we even be having this election if Dave hadn't bloody well resigned and left Parliament at the earliest opportunity?

DavidL said:

Ok, this is getting embarrassing.

That's the key. She's not strong. She's been rumbled. There may be trouble ahead

https://twitter.com/jonwalker121/status/866688311552856064

YBarddCwsc said:

Clown_Car_HQ said:

YBarddCwsc said:

surbiton said:

IanB2 said:

surbiton said:

IanB2 said:

Dilnot now suggesting a cap might only cost 2 or 3 £bn a year - hugely less than the estimates floating around yesterday.

That surely depends where the cap is put ?

For sure. The way he spoke it sounded like he was referring to his original proposal, which PB'ers yesterday were estimating at up to £20bn. I am surprised he can cost what he proposed as low as that, although of course the 'catch' was that what he defined as care costs was only a proportion of the care costs people actually have to pay, as there was a significant deduction for 'regular' living costs.

The problem will be for TM is that under the proposals before the U-turn, in theory, some rich person could have spent vast sums of money. Now they will be saved as surely TM could not say something like £1m. Even if she says £50k or £100k, the bill for the government will be racking up.

Why on Earth is this something to be pleased about ?

Unless you want the social care system to collapse.

I truly do not understand some of the thinking (and I use the term loosely) by some on this site.

Yesterday they were looking at indulging in a spot of tax avoidance to keep their inheritance intact and complaining about the cap being shelved (which they didn't understand anyway) and now they are moaning that the U- turn is going to protect the rich.

I don't wish to be rude but it is moronic. Grow up!

The alarm bell for social care funding sounded a long time ago and as a society we have to find a solution.

It has been a depressing performance on pb.com. Everything has been viewed through a dark prism -- getting one over on the other political party, or showing how a proposal can be manipulated to pay nothing.

I wish you luck in navigating the system.

From my experience with my mother, the two things that are needed are (i) private money and (ii) younger members of the family who are prepared to spend lots of time and energy arguing with the Local Authority, the NHS, the doctors and the care homes to try and get the best for elderly relatives.

Without both those, an elderly person entering our Social Care system really hasn’t much chance.

To be fair this is a site about politics and betting, which right now are both relentlessly short term, and not a forum for a long-term redesign of the social care system. Nevertheless very many of the posts on the care system, especially over the weekend, have been extremely well informed.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The day the polls turned!

OOH - I hope there's a paper going to give me a new avatar tomorrow perhaps????

Remember I chose the pic for this thread header just for you

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/23/why-a-1997-style-landslide-or-even-a-1983-style-landslide-might-not-happen-but-maybe-a-2005-style-majority-of-66-will/

isam said:

Why are people commemorating Jo Cox now rather than on the anniversary? Is it because that falls after the election?

I think that yesterday's tribute was a bit like a minute's silence to reflect that politics isn't worth people getting killed over. There's a lot more planned for the actual anniversary, including a lot of these: https://www.greatgettogether.org/

YBarddCwsc said:

Clown_Car_HQ said:

YBarddCwsc said:

surbiton said:

IanB2 said:

surbiton said:

IanB2 said:

Dilnot now suggesting a cap might only cost 2 or 3 £bn a year - hugely less than the estimates floating around yesterday.

That surely depends where the cap is put ?

For sure. The way he spoke it sounded like he was referring to his original proposal, which PB'ers yesterday were estimating at up to £20bn. I am surprised he can cost what he proposed as low as that, although of course the 'catch' was that what he defined as care costs was only a proportion of the care costs people actually have to pay, as there was a significant deduction for 'regular' living costs.

The problem will be for TM is that under the proposals before the U-turn, in theory, some rich person could have spent vast sums of money. Now they will be saved as surely TM could not say something like £1m. Even if she says £50k or £100k, the bill for the government will be racking up.

Why on Earth is this something to be pleased about ?

Unless you want the social care system to collapse.

I truly do not understand some of the thinking (and I use the term loosely) by some on this site.

Yesterday they were looking at indulging in a spot of tax avoidance to keep their inheritance intact and complaining about the cap being shelved (which they didn't understand anyway) and now they are moaning that the U- turn is going to protect the rich.

I don't wish to be rude but it is moronic. Grow up!

The alarm bell for social care funding sounded a long time ago and as a society we have to find a solution.

It has been a depressing performance on pb.com. Everything has been viewed through a dark prism -- getting one over on the other political party, or showing how a proposal can be manipulated to pay nothing.

I wish you luck in navigating the system.

From my experience with my mother, the two things that are needed are (i) private money and (ii) younger members of the family who are prepared to spend lots of time and energy arguing with the Local Authority, the NHS, the doctors and the care homes to try and get the best for elderly relatives.

Without both those, an elderly person entering our Social Care system really hasn’t much chance.

Errm my focus is on June 8th, not what is potentially happening ~10-15 years potentially in the future.
Which just emphasises the point as to how daft it was to stick in a manifesto rather than green paper etc etc. This is an election campaign - and there is betting to be done on it.

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

More than anything this social care fiasco has shown May to be poorly prepared and not on top of her brief. This is exactly what Brussels has been saying about her and Brexit.

The only leader Brussels would consider on top of their brief was someone who paid them €100 billion Euros without complaint, kept free movement and the UK in the Single market and did not answer them back but that won't wash with British voters. In any case it at least shows May is prepared to listen and be flexible up to a point if needed

She wobbled because she was not on top of her brief. Jeremy Corbyn - yes, Jeremy Corbyn - forced her into a climbdown. Let that sink in. Jeremy Corbyn. In Brussels they are laughing.

I would not be surprised if Labour moved back into 2nd place in Scotland in the next week or so .

MarkSenior said:

I would not be surprised if Labour moved back into 2nd place in Scotland in the next week or so .

Taking bets?

Evening all.

Sparrow may be right, he usually is - she still looks like a big girls blouse though.

British politics at the moment is so grim.

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Ok, this is getting embarrassing.

What is? There's so much to choose from...

I meant the cap that she "forgot" to mention in the Manifesto but I take your point.

Jason said:

dyedwoolie said:

Ishmael_Z said:

dyedwoolie said:

The u turn was a huge mistake. She should have taken the hit and moved the headlines on

You are confident she won't u-turn on the u-turn?

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others".

Shes awful on any level. So is Jezza. And Tim. It's a paucity of talent.
She'll probably fall over the line with the help of Brexiteers but will look like an idiot for calling the election. On the other hand, maybe the electorate will say you know what? Screw this,. And vote for something odd.

Nah. The British public are too sensible to put an extremist like Corbyn into Downing Street. Amidst all this hysteria and irrationality in the middle of an election campaign, where people like us are in the middle of it all, the cool heads of the British public will prevail.

They will not risk a two trillion pound economy because of May's mid-election campaign wobble.

Because the electorate is renowned for its track record in not doing anything that might destablise the economy?

I think the Welsh & Scottish "New Tories" are getting cold feet as they see what awaits them should the Tories ever take control of either Parliament. The Scottish electorate isn't going to be bought off by a temporary reprieve from the WFA pending a Unionist Regressive Alliance takeover in 2021.

The SNP are going to launch themselves as the Pensioners Protectors - SCON could easily be returning to their rightful place behind SLAB. Expect from Nicola at tomorrow's small gathering a vision of Tory Rule in Scotland - Dementia Tax, no Triple Lock, no WFA, no Bus passes, no Childrens Meals, Tuition Fees, Prescription Charges, Bedroom Tax, Disability Benefit cuts etc etc etc.

IanB2 said:

peter_from_putney said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Sean_F said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

surbiton said:

Andrew said:

ICM 47-33 ............ Baxtering gives 134 majority (392-177)

Spreads aren't moving much: Spreadex 388-171, Spin 387-173

I am not sure where you get 134 from.

If you enter 47/33/9/4/2 and also tick the Scottish box and put in 43/29/19

the majority is 92. Tories 371, Labour 204, SNP 49, LD 5, PC 3, NI 18

Yes, I thought there was something a bit wrong there - not quite Abbotesque but not exactly Carol Vorderman either.

Fisher had Labour on 178 before the recent run of better polls for them so you would have expected some uplift since. Of course I'm aware that now there has been a U-Turn it's as if nothing ever happened and we all need to calibrate our estimates back to the time before the unfortunate manifesto error happened, but to Baxter on current polling numbers rather than those which will appear soon now that normality has been restored must produce something like your figures above, surely?

ICM are probably factoring differential swings in marginal seats.

A lead of 14% probably would generate a majority that was well into three figures.

Sorry Sean F but isn't there an uncharacteristic non sequitur there?

If differential swing is already factored in, shouldn't the crude UNS model work a bit better?

Or am I missing something?

There is certainly a marked difference between the current spreadbetting firms' mid-market prices and those derived by Baxtering the ICM poll figures.
This is especially so as regards Labour seats where the spread firms go 171 & 174, compared with Baxter's 204, a difference of 30 or more seats, whereas the difference is much smaller in terms of Tory seats where the spread bettors go 387 compared with Baxter's projection of 371 seats, i.e. 16 fewer. I presume that Baxter is giving more wins to Labour in Scotland.
Incidentally, Baxter appears to have Lucas losing Brighton Pavilion for the Greens, which I recently backed the Tories to win (against a perfectly split left vote) at odds of 10/1. Slightly tongue in cheek admittedly, but Baxter gives them a good chance.
DYOR.

Baxter's UNS is likely to be unusually worthless this election, and certainly has no value in working out whether or not the Greens will hold their seat.

Yeah but Fisher went 178 Labour last week before all the schmozzle.

PfP is right. Labour are undersold on the spreads.

dyedwoolie said:

SouthamObserver said:

dyedwoolie said:

Ishmael_Z said:

dyedwoolie said:

The u turn was a huge mistake. She should have taken the hit and moved the headlines on

You are confident she won't u-turn on the u-turn?

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others".

Shes awful on any level. So is Jezza. And Tim. It's a paucity of talent.
She'll probably fall over the line with the help of Brexiteers but will look like an idiot for calling the election. On the other hand, maybe the electorate will say you know what? Screw this,. And vote for something odd.

She'll win easily. And that's when her - and our - troubles will really begin.

I don't think she will. I think the games up and it's gonna be a 2001 result - little change, but a collapse in confidence in her and Brussels planning an extra 50 billion bill.

Looks like we have not one, but two characters from Dad's Army now - Corporal Jones (Sean T), and now Private Frazer.

MarkSenior said:

I would not be surprised if Labour moved back into 2nd place in Scotland in the next week or so .

On what basis, weekend polls still had a swing against Labour in Scotland and against the SNP and the Tories on 28%+

https://twitter.com/speccoffeehouse/status/866691123057541120

Jason said:

dyedwoolie said:

SouthamObserver said:

dyedwoolie said:

Ishmael_Z said:

dyedwoolie said:

The u turn was a huge mistake. She should have taken the hit and moved the headlines on

You are confident she won't u-turn on the u-turn?

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others".

Shes awful on any level. So is Jezza. And Tim. It's a paucity of talent.
She'll probably fall over the line with the help of Brexiteers but will look like an idiot for calling the election. On the other hand, maybe the electorate will say you know what? Screw this,. And vote for something odd.

She'll win easily. And that's when her - and our - troubles will really begin.

I don't think she will. I think the games up and it's gonna be a 2001 result - little change, but a collapse in confidence in her and Brussels planning an extra 50 billion bill.

Looks like we have not one, but two characters from Dad's Army now - Corporal Jones (Sean T), and now Private Frazer.

I'm more de valera in that I am neutral

Scott_P said:

@WarGit: Increasingly plausible nightmare scenario:

- Tories win, but May's authority shot
- Labour loses but Corbyn stays, completes party takeover

The next Tory govt is going to be v interesting to watch, although perhaps best viewed on fast forward. It's more or less built on two lies: that T May is akin to W Churchill, and that the Tories are the party of Brexit. The slow unravelling of these myths suggests to me that May won't make it as PM as far as the next election.

I'm sure Corbyn and McDonnell already see this election campaign as a great triumph. Corbyn remains utterly unsuitable to lead the party or the country and yet I'd say the chance of his resigning on 9th June is virtually nil. Nick Cohen has just admitted on FB that he's got writer's block as he tries to pen "What next for Labour?" The Common Sense wing is stuck, and I think they/we should just go on holiday for a year and then come back and take stock. In other words, the campaign-time truce will hold for some time. The two sides have found that they can work together in extremis. I don't foresee a Momentum takeover; I think that, on the contrary, JC will hold out an olive branch and a few rebels will take it. This will allow the removal of the worst of his current front bench, e.g. D Abbott. There'll be no split. Energy will be saved for when JC steps down, which I assume will be in 2-3 years.

dyedwoolie said:

Jason said:

dyedwoolie said:

SouthamObserver said:

dyedwoolie said:

Ishmael_Z said:

dyedwoolie said:

The u turn was a huge mistake. She should have taken the hit and moved the headlines on

You are confident she won't u-turn on the u-turn?

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others".

Shes awful on any level. So is Jezza. And Tim. It's a paucity of talent.
She'll probably fall over the line with the help of Brexiteers but will look like an idiot for calling the election. On the other hand, maybe the electorate will say you know what? Screw this,. And vote for something odd.

She'll win easily. And that's when her - and our - troubles will really begin.

I don't think she will. I think the games up and it's gonna be a 2001 result - little change, but a collapse in confidence in her and Brussels planning an extra 50 billion bill.

Looks like we have not one, but two characters from Dad's Army now - Corporal Jones (Sean T), and now Private Frazer.

I'm more de valera in that I am neutral

My God I'd hate to see you taking sides!

Pong said:

Jeez.

The conservative retired homeowners party haven't got a hope in hell of addressing intergenerational unfairness.

The baby boomers will be protected from the costs of brexit.

The young will pay.

That is a heartrending post, Pong, and one with which I can only agree, with great sadness.

Puts all this GE crap into perspective. Thanks.

Good evening, my fellow imperial stormtroopers.

Mr. Gin, cheers for posting that. I was wonder what the ICM poll had said.

Labour Home secretary?

https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/866693005293572096

Jason said:

dyedwoolie said:

SouthamObserver said:

dyedwoolie said:

Ishmael_Z said:

dyedwoolie said:

The u turn was a huge mistake. She should have taken the hit and moved the headlines on

You are confident she won't u-turn on the u-turn?

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others".

Shes awful on any level. So is Jezza. And Tim. It's a paucity of talent.
She'll probably fall over the line with the help of Brexiteers but will look like an idiot for calling the election. On the other hand, maybe the electorate will say you know what? Screw this,. And vote for something odd.

She'll win easily. And that's when her - and our - troubles will really begin.

I don't think she will. I think the games up and it's gonna be a 2001 result - little change, but a collapse in confidence in her and Brussels planning an extra 50 billion bill.

Looks like we have not one, but two characters from Dad's Army now - Corporal Jones (Sean T), and now Private Frazer.

Wouldn't it be more fun to identify politicians as members of the Dad's Army cast?

Theresa May as Sergeant Wilson, Nigel Farage as Private Walker, Tim Farron as the Verger (obviously) and so on? Still trying to figure out where Jeremy Corbyn fits in.

Can we expect any other polls today?

calum said:

I think the Welsh & Scottish "New Tories" are getting cold feet as they see what awaits them should the Tories ever take control of either Parliament. The Scottish electorate isn't going to be bought off by a temporary reprieve from the WFA pending a Unionist Regressive Alliance takeover in 2021.

The SNP are going to launch themselves as the Pensioners Protectors - SCON could easily be returning to their rightful place behind SLAB. Expect from Nicola at tomorrow's small gathering a vision of Tory Rule in Scotland - Dementia Tax, no Triple Lock, no WFA, no Bus passes, no Childrens Meals, Tuition Fees, Prescription Charges, Bedroom Tax, Disability Benefit cuts etc etc etc.

and attacking nurses?

Chris said:

Razedabode said:

Any chance this is just some elaborate ploy to narrow the polls a tad, send corbynites wild, then roundly thrash them on the 8th June?

Just a thought.

Yes, undoubtedly it's a cunning plan to lull the opposition into a false sense of security.

Once she has them precisely where she wants them, Mrs May will demonstrate some competence.

Not even the Thick of It writers would come up with this:

1. We'll make up a policy on social care which deliberately leaves a ticking bomb in the middle of it, which will be picked up by the press within minutes and will cause a crash in the polls and a near riot on the doorsteps

2. When every potential Tory voter is going Oh My God I can't vote for the Dementia Tax but I don't want Corbyn, but look at the polls, Corbyn is going to win - panic, panic - we do a u-turn on the Monday

3. Fear of God that Corbyn could win spreads and Tories return to the fold.

NEW THREAD

As Theresa May goes into meltdown, there are are two past analogies that are striking. One is the 1970 General Election, when some opinion polls were giving Harold Wilson, who ran a highly controlled, almost complacent campaign, a double digit lead over Heath right up to election day. The other is 1945, when there was a widespread presumption that Churchill would easily triumph. Attlee himself said on the eve of polling that the Tories would have a majority of more than 70. Yet the electorate warmed to Labour's commitment to mass nationalisation, taxpayer-funded healthcare . wealth redistribution and a vast expansion in social housing..

surbiton said:

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

I would not be surprised if Labour moved back into 2nd place in Scotland in the next week or so .

On what basis, weekend polls still had a swing against Labour in Scotland and against the SNP and the Tories on 28%+

Polling was on 15th - 18th just before the yellow stuff hit the fan.

SCON were already wobbling as they've not managed to kill off SLAB or fatally wound the SNP

IanB2 said:

leomckinstry said:

As Theresa May goes into meltdown, there are are two past analogies that are striking. One is the 1970 General Election, when some opinion polls were giving Harold Wilson, who ran a highly controlled, almost complacent campaign, a double digit lead over Heath right up to election day. The other is 1945, when there was a widespread presumption that Churchill would easily triumph. Attlee himself said on the eve of polling that the Tories would have a majority of more than 70. Yet the electorate warmed to Labour's commitment to mass nationalisation, taxpayer-funded healthcare . wealth redistribution and a vast expansion in social housing..

1945 isn't really a good example - with hindsight it was obvious that a 'win the peace' and let's not bring back the 1930s' mood was going to deliver a Labour win; this came as a surprise simply because there wasn't the media and polling paraphernalia we have today, and because of all the immediate post-war disruption. 1970 is an interesting one, however.

Heart's Tories had made big by election gains unlike Corbyn and Heath ultimately was far more centrist than Corbyn and got 46%, Corbyn is nowhere near that score

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

I would not be surprised if Labour moved back into 2nd place in Scotland in the next week or so .

On what basis, weekend polls still had a swing against Labour in Scotland and against the SNP and the Tories on 28%+

The polls are still moving . There has not been a full Scottish poll for a little while . Yes the Yougov sub sample had Con at 28 . ICM's has them back at 23 .

Survation had them at 29 over the same period

New thread

IanB2 said:

leomckinstry said:

As Theresa May goes into meltdown, there are are two past analogies that are striking. One is the 1970 General Election, when some opinion polls were giving Harold Wilson, who ran a highly controlled, almost complacent campaign, a double digit lead over Heath right up to election day. The other is 1945, when there was a widespread presumption that Churchill would easily triumph. Attlee himself said on the eve of polling that the Tories would have a majority of more than 70. Yet the electorate warmed to Labour's commitment to mass nationalisation, taxpayer-funded healthcare . wealth redistribution and a vast expansion in social housing..

1945 isn't really a good example - with hindsight it was obvious that a 'win the peace' and let's not bring back the 1930s' mood was going to deliver a Labour win; this came as a surprise simply because there wasn't the media and polling paraphernalia we have today, and because of all the immediate post-war disruption. 1970 is an interesting one, however.

February 1974 - a premature dissolution, a supposed single issue campaign, the government ahead in the polls throughout. On the day - defeat. I remember well - it was an absolute shocker.