politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s one local by-election

Second. Like NATO after The Donald's given them a kick up the ass...

I was first. My comment was sat there, glorious in its primacy and isolation.

Then it got canned by some.....

MarqueeMark said:

I was first. My comment was sat there, glorious in its primacy and isolation.

Then it got canned by some.....

Suck it up!

First, like Trump after I manhandle the others out of the way

First - after redistribution of second preferences.

Surely this 10pm attack can't be Lab or Con as both have said they aren't restarting their national campaigns until tomorrow.

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Primus inter pares, once I've played with vanilla

Was it ever established whether Smithson junior manipulated the system?

It was. He deleted two comments, including mine, so he could be first.

Re. Harry's forecast, why would the LDs go from 2% to 12% in this heavily Leave area, given current poll ratings?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Primus inter pares, once I've played with vanilla

Was it ever established whether Smithson junior manipulated the system?

It was. He deleted two comments, including mine, so he could be first.

Shocking! Was he told off sufficiently or should we continue to wag our fingers?

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarqueeMark said:

I was first. My comment was sat there, glorious in its primacy and isolation.

Then it got canned by some.....

The vanilla bug that creates multiple threads strikes again.

Your comment is here

http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1583124/#Comment_1583124

Can a moderator not restore it to its rightful place ?

Nope.

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Primus inter pares, once I've played with vanilla

Was it ever established whether Smithson junior manipulated the system?

It was. He deleted two comments, including mine, so he could be first.

Shocking! Was he told off sufficiently or should we continue to wag our fingers?

Best not to talk about it. Robert is the master of the PB server, it is one of the perks of his job.

Pong said:

fpt;

The kids have decided this is the Manchester song;

[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPgEgaPk62M ]

To be fair, it's one of her better songs.

Omnium said:

Shocking! Was he told off sufficiently or should we continue to wag our fingers?

Not angry. Disappointed.

#BritishThreatLevel

https://twitter.com/jamilsmith/status/867814586803601408

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

FPT:

leomckinstry said:

I think some of this hype about the supposed brilliance of the Labour campaign is wildly exaggerated. Let's just remember some of the highlights: Diane Abbott's maths, Angela Rayner's maths, shambles over Trident renewal, McDonnell's rant in front of Stalinist flags at May Day, Corbyn's confusion over the benefits freeze, Burnham refusing to be present for Corbyn's post-poll victory rally to Manchester, Labour candidates refusing to feature their own leader on their campaign material because of his toxicity, the appointment of ultra-leftist Andrew Murray as camaign co-ordinator, Corbyn's refusal to condemn the IRA. If any of these things had happened to previous Labour leaders, they would have been crucified. But we have become so desensitized to Corbyn's extremism and incompetence that none of this seems to matter. Expectations are so low that he is being given an easy ride. Moreover, the very fact that he is not thought likely to win frees his party to be utterly irresponsible about the costs of its policies, breezily announcing £9 billion here (abolition of tuition fees) or £8 billion there (annual increase for the NHS). No previous Labour campaign could have away with such fiscal recklessness. But Corbyn is able to spout profligate, spendthrift nonsense precisely because he is not seen as a likely Prime Minister.

Well said, and summed up neatly by the final sentence.

I suspect that the media focus is disproportionately on the Tories' failings (real or perceived) because, as with the 2015 campaign, it's being warped by the opinion polls.

Nobody takes seriously the notion of anything other than a Conservative majority, so Labour is largely ignored (except when it does something unintentionally hilarious, such as when its shadow cabinet members foul up primary school level arithmetic on national television.) What pronouncements it does manage to get noticed are long lists of goodies that the public likes the sound of, which then fail to be subjected to proper scrutiny as to their gargantuan cost because the hacks are devoting most of their attention to the only party that they believe is capable of winning.

Under those circumstances, the closer the opinion polls get, the better for the Tories - to encourage people to think more seriously about the prospect of a Corbyn-led Government, as well as to help make sure that the Conservative vote is well-motivated.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Primus inter pares, once I've played with vanilla

Was it ever established whether Smithson junior manipulated the system?

It was. He deleted two comments, including mine, so he could be first.

Shocking! Was he told off sufficiently or should we continue to wag our fingers?

Best not to talk about it. Robert is the master of the PB server, it is one of the perks of his job.

A tale to be told with a big smile. I wish my catalogue of sins was so limited.

You'd be hard pressed to do anything other than congratulate Mike and Robert on the site.

Scott_P said:

First, like Trump after I manhandle the others out of the way

The Donald didn't want to be at the back of the queue.

surbiton said:

GIN1138 said:

Second. Like NATO after The Donald's given them a kick up the ass...

What is so special about 2% ? Why not 1.9% or 1.4% ?

I thought that was an excellent speech by Donald Trump and long overdue. The juvenile tittering from some of the other Leaders was beyond childish and not a good look.

Who was the fella Donald pushed out the way anyway?

ThreeQuidder said:

surbiton said:

GIN1138 said:

Second. Like NATO after The Donald's given them a kick up the ass...

What is so special about 2% ? Why not 1.9% or 1.4% ?

It's what was agreed.

In 2006. By every member of NATO. Many have been trying to ignore it ever since...

GIN1138 said:

Who was the fella Donald pushed out the way anyway?

Duško Markovic - PM of Montenegro.

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

For every person mentioning fox hunting negatively in safe Labour seats, there's ten people from the shires volunteering to help the Tories - or even better, getting their chequebooks out for them.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/867698914014765056

Blair's Labour decided to make hunting into a totemic issue, they shouldn't be surprised that those they sneered at now want to fight back.

MikeL said:

Surely this 10pm attack can't be Lab or Con as both have said they aren't restarting their national campaigns until tomorrow.

It could be a YouGov poll, I was polled yesterday and again today by them, yesterday it was just the election and again today with other questions including a question about what I thought about the suspension of political activity in the wake of the latest terrorist attack.
Maybe The Sun commissioned yesterdays poll.

MarqueeMark said:

YBarddCwsc said:

Marquee Mark's comment is "A13 by Billy Bragg - are there any other songs in the history of ever that mention Shoeburyness?"

How about:

I know a lovely old toe-rag obliging and noblesse
Kindly, charming shag from Shoeburyness
My given name is Dickie
I come from Billericay
I thought you'd never guess

Ian Dury has much the better rhyme for Shoeburyness.

Yep, good catch. Should have thought of Ian Dury. One of the greats I never got to see live.

But hey, if an 80s music reference isn't enough to get your first acknowledged, I refuse to play anymore. I'm taking my ball home....

It is SUBTLE pop music references that get you noticed.

Wait until the weekend, I've got an awesome pop music reference lined up.

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

RobD said:

DeClare said:

MikeL said:

Surely this 10pm attack can't be Lab or Con as both have said they aren't restarting their national campaigns until tomorrow.

It could be a YouGov poll, I was polled yesterday and again today by them, yesterday it was just the election and again today with other questions including a question about what I thought about the suspension of political activity in the wake of the latest terrorist attack.
Maybe The Sun commissioned yesterdays poll.

I can't see how a poll is consistent with Cole's tweets.

If it is something embargoed until 10 pm, surely it will be a poll or the launch of an attack ad by one of the main parties? As has been commented on, we surely could use a poll...

RobD said:

DeClare said:

MikeL said:

Surely this 10pm attack can't be Lab or Con as both have said they aren't restarting their national campaigns until tomorrow.

It could be a YouGov poll, I was polled yesterday and again today by them, yesterday it was just the election and again today with other questions including a question about what I thought about the suspension of political activity in the wake of the latest terrorist attack.
Maybe The Sun commissioned yesterdays poll.

I can't see how a poll is consistent with Cole's tweets.

I'd have loved to see the most famous Cole tweet. John Cole would have loved it.

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

She promised a free vote on foxhunting weeks ago, it is not a new development and will not change many votes though it will get the Countryside Alliance out delivering

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

My wife probably isn't going to vote Tory, purely because of fox hunting. It may or may not be the right thing to do, but I don't think it's helped electorally. There aren't many people going to shift into the blue column because the Tories have announced a free vote on fox hunting.

Cookie said:

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

My wife probably isn't going to vote Tory, purely because of fox hunting. It may or may not be the right thing to do, but I don't think it's helped electorally. There aren't many people going to shift into the blue column because the Tories have announced a free vote on fox hunting.

Did she vote Tory in 2015 though? Cameron actually went foxhunting unlike May so I can't see the Tories losing many votes over it either, it is more something for the rural base

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

Foxhunting is what we've had the most e-mails about, same people as 2015 and 2010. Most people couldn't care less. I personally don't like it at all however very few people vote on a single issue.

When they have the ballot paper in front if them, May or Corbyn is the only question. The stark reality will hit home.

I wonder how Fergie will be voting?

https://twitter.com/AamerAnwar/status/867828024267374592

HYUFD said:

Cookie said:

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

My wife probably isn't going to vote Tory, purely because of fox hunting. It may or may not be the right thing to do, but I don't think it's helped electorally. There aren't many people going to shift into the blue column because the Tories have announced a free vote on fox hunting.

Did she vote Tory in 2015 though? Cameron actually went foxhunting unlike May so I can't see the Tories losing many votes over it either, it is more something for the rural base

Yes, because she ABSOLUTELY LOATHED Ed MIliband after the way he stitched his brother up. And in 2010, because Gordon Brown. But she voted Labour 97-05, because Tony Blair. She's not going to vote for Corbyn, though, obviously, and we live in a safe Labour seat even at this election, so it's not going to have any effect, but it might be the first time she ever hasn't voted for the winner.
She's a fascinating political bellwether, actually. She's very well-educated and has worked for the civil service - but she basically almost always votes for the party with the leader she most likes. She's a salutary reminder that most of my over-analysis is about things which most voters pay almost no heed of.
But she does notice a vote on fox hunting. She's not even particularly animal-rightsy, it's just something which instinctively feels very wrong to her.

SeanT said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

I confess I am worried. I thought a solid Tory lead was nailed on.

But the mood music is still bad on Dementia: those YouGov supplementals were horrible for the Tories.

Would they, could they are, can they, will they.... really vote for Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister??

If things got a bit dodgy the Tories only need to revive the 2015 tactic which worked so well ie a Lab/SNP arrangement is the likely alternative, The appealing mix of separatism and neo Marxism should work.

Cookie said:

HYUFD said:

Cookie said:

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

My wife probably isn't going to vote Tory, purely because of fox hunting. It may or may not be the right thing to do, but I don't think it's helped electorally. There aren't many people going to shift into the blue column because the Tories have announced a free vote on fox hunting.

Did she vote Tory in 2015 though? Cameron actually went foxhunting unlike May so I can't see the Tories losing many votes over it either, it is more something for the rural base

Yes, because she ABSOLUTELY LOATHED Ed MIliband after the way he stitched his brother up. And in 2010, because Gordon Brown. But she voted Labour 97-05, because Tony Blair. She's not going to vote for Corbyn, though, obviously, and we live in a safe Labour seat even at this election, so it's not going to have any effect, but it might be the first time she ever hasn't voted for the winner.
She's a fascinating political bellwether, actually. She's very well-educated and has worked for the civil service - but she basically almost always votes for the party with the leader she most likes. She's a salutary reminder that most of my over-analysis is about things which most voters pay almost no heed of.
But she does notice a vote on fox hunting. She's not even particularly animal-rightsy, it's just something which instinctively feels very wrong to her.

So why did she vote for Cameron? Foxhunting toff that he was?

MarqueeMark said:

YBarddCwsc said:

Ian Dury has much the better rhyme for Shoeburyness.

Yep, good catch. Should have thought of Ian Dury. One of the greats I never got to see live.

I once read an institutional history of Chailey Heritage Craft School, the horrible care home where Ian Dury was kept as a child. The eulogising robot of an author wrote that while Dury was critical of some aspects of his experience, he was always happy to tell people that it had contributed to who he was. Or some such dishonest attempt to make a positive out of a negative.

The lyrics to his song "Hey, Hey, Take Me Away" tell it how it actually was.

Meanwhile his song "Spasticus Autisticus" got banned by the BBC during the UN's International Year of Disabled Persons, for describing what it is really like having some kinds of disability, as perceived by someone who had been disabled since childhood. So much for "empowerment" and "inclusion".

So yes, let's hear it for Ian Dury.

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder how Fergie will be voting?

https://twitter.com/AamerAnwar/status/867828024267374592

He likes to keep up with current events doesn't he?

SeanT said:

Cookie said:

Danny565 said:

woody662 said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

Fox hunting is hardly new, probably never Tories.

Fox hunting isn't new for the Tories, but it's new for May -- she had cast herself, with some success, as being a new type of Tory who cared about the NHS, the working class, taking on rich people's privileges, etc. My sense now is that, since the fox-hunting statement, the public's image of her has morphed more into a "typical Tory toff", with all the negative associations people have with that type of image on other issues. Women especially are mentioning it a lot, as an example of how their opinion on May has changed.

It's a bit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem -- the reason that's such a big deal is not just because of the national anthem issue itself, it's about what it says to the public about Corbyn as a person generally, and the prism through which they view his stances on other issues.

(I will add that I'm still expecting the Tories to win the election with an increased majority, just in case anyone is planning to quote this post back at me in a few weeks!)

My wife probably isn't going to vote Tory, purely because of fox hunting. It may or may not be the right thing to do, but I don't think it's helped electorally. There aren't many people going to shift into the blue column because the Tories have announced a free vote on fox hunting.

The polls barely budged after the fox hunting announcement. It was Dementia and Winter Fuel, as we all know.

The polls actually backed means testing winter fuel

I'm no ed miliband fan but I've never understood this stitching his brother up idea. He beat him in an election when he thought he had the better ideas. Should he have deferred to his brother just because david is older?

*drum roll* The UKIP Manifesto
UKIP Manifesto 2017

FOREWORD
Hit and miss. Arguing they are ahead of the curve, politically, but ‘guard dog’s of Brexit’ is just a stupid phrase, mentioning they have been seen as racist seems like unnecessary calling attention to it. Amusing referencing that TMay campaigned for Remain.

INTRODUCTION
Seems to go against the foreword, saying the policies not developed to capture imagination (though they hope it will) even though foreword was about being bold and radical, things that capture imagination.

11bn a year more for NHS – after 4 manifestos, I forget how much each promises, is this more than the others?

Why is a hospital ship one of top ten priorities? Good or bad policy, is that a top ten policy?

I do like that the main priorities are listed unambiguously at the front.

BREXIT BRITAIN THE KEY TESTS
Not sure how they can be sure that unless their personal tests are met the public won’t get what they voted for, but whatever, the tests are clear and easy to understand.

Repealing a ‘little known convention’ eh? One for the core vote then, since no one else will have heard of it.
Loads on fishery policy.

SOUND NATIONAL FINANCES
Upfront promise on savings for each household per year.

No VAT on women’s sanitary products- someone’s been keeping up with tax complaints in the news
“When economic conditions allow, we will restore the personal allowance to those earning over £100,000” - when conditions allow, eh?

Women can retire at 60 but not men I see – misogynists!

“We will support deficit reduction schedules put forward by the next government and vigorously oppose unnecessary spending plans” - another one of those instances where one person wrote lines presuming, however unlikely, that the party writing would be in government, and someone else wrote a line recognizing they won’t be.

BACKING BUSINESS
Referring to other party leaders, which Tories did not. Even references Gordon Brown!

All pretty standard stuff, support small business etc. ‘tighten up’ rules on zero hours contracts and limit their use.

CREATING COASTAL ENTERPRISE ZONES
What first attracted UKIP to a whole section on coastal seaside towns that are often big leave voting areas?

SOLVING BRITAIN’S HOUSING SHORTAGE
Well, they’re right about housing situation being longstanding, and despite promise to be bold and radical, are pitching as the realistic ones with housing building plans.

DEFENDING OUR NHS
LDs almost get a mention via ‘Coalition’.

‘International rather than a NATIONAL health service’ – the capital letters make the point extra strong
Big spending, more GPs and nurses, could be pretty much any party’s policies. Not saying here how it would be funded.

Social care to be assimilated into the NHS

Royal commission on way forward.

BRITAIN’S CHALLENGING MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
Waiting times cut from 18 weeks to 28 days?!

Elsewhere in this manifesto we condemn alien practices that oppress women, but we are not blind to our own failings. The ‘lad culture,’ which treats young women as sex objects and the ‘red circle of shame’ in celebrity magazines that hold women to unattainable levels of physical perfection are just two examples. Boys too are increasingly developing eating disorders and body image issues

Focus on veterans

A BRIGHTER FUTURE FOR OUR NEXT GENERATION
‘Political interference in education has failed children’ – so here’s how we will interfere.

Grammar schools, KS1 testing, sex education. Not abolishing all tuition fees, but some.

CARING FOR YOUNG CHILDREN
This is a typical outcome of policy-making done via a ‘bidding war,’ instead of being thought through. In this case, Labour and the Conservatives have jockeyed for position to see who can offer the highest number of free childcare hours for the youngest children, without considering the unintended consequences, or what else in the system might need to change. - I…actually agree.

MEETING OUR RESPONSIBIBILITIES TO THE ELDERLY AND THE DISABLED
Everyone but Tories are going after the grey vote. This one actually explains the triple lock, where I don’t recall if the others did.

Uh oh, formatting error, different text sizes in the same bullet point section.

Zero hours again. Bedroom tax.

Tough but not too tough on benefits, which is a tough line to sell.

FAIR, BALANCED MIGRATION
Timeline of statements from other parties and their policy failures on immigration. Very namedroppy ‘Senior Labour parliamentarian Frank Field’ happy to be mentioned.

Is net migration to 0 really a good idea?!

Oddly vague at times for their most critical section, in terms of differentiation.

BRITAIN UNITED UNDER ONE LAW FOR ALL
Heavily against multiculturalism, as expected. FGM, burqa ban (niqab ban too). Oddly pre-empting complaints in the text ‘suggestions ukip is undermining liberty with this policy are absurd’.

POLICING, PRISON, PUNISHMENT
Some fun scene setting - The wealthy might feel safe, secreted away in large houses in lovely areas, living behind electronic gates and protected by top-of-the range burglar alarms…The thin blue line is no longer just thin, it is malnourished and emaciated

20000 more police.

NOT legalising the ganja

BRITAIN’S NEW ROLE IN THE WORLD
Do Gibraltarians want a referendum on ‘becoming fully British’?

Dares to mention Trump by name.

‘Give[sic] the continued existence of rogue states’

Going for the pacifist vote with Labour.

DEFENDING OUR NATION
‘Genuine 2% on defence’

Lots of setting out the state of the military before it gets to any policy

Gordon Brown reference number 2.

Veteran support focus.

TRADE NOT AID
Foreign aid reduced (to 0.2%)? I am stunned!

Free trade, low regulation

TRANSPORT
Scrapping HS2 – another good one.

Regional airport expansion, defending diesel.

PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT
Ancient woodland protection – ignores that not all parts of such sites are in fact ancient woodland, they can include cash crop trees regularly felled and bits with no trees, the overall area is designated, and may not all need the same level of protection.

Prioritise brownfield land for housing? What an innovative idea, I’ve never seen that everywhere else before.

FOOD PRODUCTION AND ANIMAL WELFARE
Pretty brief on farming really. Forbidding halal and kosha slaughter obviously the standout policy.

OUR FUTURE ENERGY SECURITY
Differentiation on Climate Change.

Suggests tories want to frack AONBs.

REAL DEMOCRACY
As noted earlier PR system, English parliament by additional member system, halve UK parliament, scrap postal voting on demand, abolish HoL, binding referendums every 2 years – genuinely bold and radical section, cannot say I agree with all of it though.

KEEPING IT LOCAL
Binding local referenda on things like out of town supermakers and major housing developments – expensive and makes strategic planning impossible, with planning policies pointless. Terrible terrible policy.

Oppose cabinet system of government at local level, but do not say they will remove it as an option, so meaningless.

FIVE YEAR FISCAL PLAN
Including tables makes me feel better.

CONCLUSION
Not as well put together as their 2015 manifesto, although I liked the same approach with quotes from different UKIP spokespeople . The democracy stuff was interesting, it was shorter than the others, ,but packed for of details, some pretty decent, although it made it a bit hard to follow and consider the overall theme, as it was all over the place with some far out stuff. Not terribly written, not as dry as the Tory one or as aggressive as the Labour one, but very name droppy.

spire2 said:

I'm no ed miliband fan but I've never understood this stitching his brother up idea. He beat him in an election when he thought he had the better ideas. Should he have deferred to his brother just because david is older?

I like that he challenged him. If David was better he would have won, and as a younger brother I approve of not waiting his turn.

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

Danny565 said:

Hmm. Canvassing session today was the most negative for the Tories yet. Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, Dementia Tax, fox-hunting, the entire time.

(Now I'll wait to be embarrassed by a mega Tory lead in a poll this evening....)

I confess I am worried. I thought a solid Tory lead was nailed on.

But the mood music is still bad on Dementia: those YouGov supplementals were horrible for the Tories.

Would they, could they are, can they, will they.... really vote for Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister??

From phoning I have done up to Monday there is movement from Labour and especially UKIP to the Tories in the Midlands and North and virtually none from Tory to Labour, the LD vote is holding up in posh Remainier and even winning a few Tories there, Labour also doing better in Remain urban areas so I expect little swing if any to the Tories in Remain parts of London and the South but a big swing to the Tories in industrial Leave areas north of Watford

Have you done any phone polling post dementia tax tho ?