Good morrow travellers in an antique land. Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this? We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
Yes I take that on board but I was referring to the only snippet we have from the Manchester pause and poll blackout which was that yougov chart showing leader ratings at crossover, it suggests the Tories dipped to level pegging post cluster fuck then picked up a little. This yougov one week survey would retain part of the lowest ebb. Or, ya know, we could just shrug and say bank holiday Polling!
Does anyone know how much money the dementia tax is supposed to raise?
Depends on the cap. That is why where the cap is placed is crucial.
Government doesn't pay for it directly, the cost falls on local councils (and is slowly crippling them). So central government doesn't budget for it by allocating £X, like it does for defence or health. Also why it is easier for them to let councils do the dirty work like coming after people's houses.
My guess is that they just know they need something to stem the pressure on costs, and weren't as concerned with the finer costings as they would have (needed to have) been if it came out of the government's budget directly.
Sorry if this question has been answered, but what's still puzzling me is:
Are the national vote shares in YouGov's regular polls based on the same model as the seat predictions issued last night (and if so, how is it that the Tory percentage lead associated with those seat predictions is smaller than in any of the regular polls)?
Or are YouGov using two different models simultaneously now - one for vote share in the regular polls, and another for the giant model?
Jack, my last post actually said LOL and thank you re JohnO but bloody Vanilla truncated my post YET AGAIN & chopped off the most important part. So - thank you!
We must all condole that you've had your "most important part" chopped off.
Surely the first PB casualty of this general election. On the plus side you'll at least be able to listen to "Woman's Hour" with more empathy.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
A lot of people with their only asset been their house, are not as trusting as you.They are not told what the cap will be so are wary
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
Yes exactly my father a strong conservative told me on the phone yesterday evening he is not voting because of it.He goes to the local pub for quiz night every week and his elderly friends it is their main concern.
Shooting themselves in the foot is hardly an adequate phrase to describe what the tories have done.
Your father and his friends were not aware of the current policy, all the tories have done is publicise something which was (a) unknown and (b) massively unpopular. the fact that the new policy is more generous and does not force people to sell their homes in their lifetimes has been lost in the chaos.
What a complete unmitigated disaster. All they needed to do was announce that they would have a review with serious grown up sounding words, job done. And now we risk a bunch of fiscally incontinent jokers coming in and causing economic carnage
It has to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Here's a solution to Home Care and Brexit problem..
Stay in the EU, and when pensioners get to 75, forcibly pack them all off to Spain, Portugal and Greece. This has the side-effect of bankrupting the Mediterranean EU. You could lower the age if you want to rid yourself of Jezza too.
There'll be the odd squeal of rage from the daily Mail and Express, but the Guardian will like it.
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
Does anyone know how much money the dementia tax is supposed to raise?
IF have a document, but I don't think it comes up with a final figure.
IFS says there are 228,000 in residential care, with average cost of £553 a week.
10% of 65 year olds can expect to spend more than £100K on social care.
"64% of local authority spending on care for the over-65s is for residential care, with the remainder spent on home care. The Conservative plans would tip this balance towards a greater fraction of spending on residential care – increasing public funding for residential care (by raising the asset threshold) but decreasing public funding for home care (by including housing wealth in the asset test).
It is not possible to be confident whether the change would increase or decrease overall spending relative to the current system on care on the basis of publically available data. What is clear is that the proposal is less generous than the version of the Dilnot commission’s recommendations that have already been put into law"
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
As far as I am concerned, no Tory can exceed Cameron, Osborne and Clegg for their wickedness while in office. .
Mr. Pulpstar, a shame. I'm not in agreement with Huppert on various things (he is a Lib Dem, after all), but having more scientists in Parliament would be a good thing.
Mr. NZ, possibly. But what coalition would work? SNP-Con is out of the question. SNP-Lab would be horrendous. A minority Conservative government would be weak.
Maybe the best result would be a stonking Conservative victory, followed by immediate political regicide so that the PM isn't someone seemingly so in thrall to a pair of SPADs, at least one of whom is a tin-eared, short-sighted moron?
Good morrow travellers in an antique land. Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this? We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
So far the PB consensus has been that Labour's poll rating would fall from the 28% it started with, and that Manchester would finish off Labour's chances for sure. Accompanied by some very wild predicted Tory gains. Not a great election for us either in the prediction department, it would seem?
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
As I understand it the model is not based on constituency sampling but on modelling constituencies by social types and sampling those social types. It seems an entirely plausible method to me.
A problem I can see with that approach is that marginals, which by definition are the ones that will decide the result, are likely to be more volatile. I suspect you would be better taking bigger samples in a representative set of marginals and modelling from there. Even better if you can canvas voters- how did they vote last time, how do they expect to vote this time?
IIRC, there was an awful lot of modelling of voting in the marginals in 1987, which indicated a much tighter race than headline polls.
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
I suspect you are totally f@#ked whatever the outcome!
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
If Tw@tter is anything to go by Zeichner will hold Cambridge, looks to have a massive number of activists compared to Huppert.
These anecdotes are now coming from all sorts of places. Rarely, do we hear people cannot stomach Corbyn's name on the doorstep. I am sure it happens, but the incidence has gone down.
When did you last hear SCON making huge inroads in Scotland ?
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
Remember how the Lib Dems got treated for going into coalition with the Conservatives?
Does anyone know how much money the dementia tax is supposed to raise?
I don't think so not even the government and as I read it in the case of residential care nil and cost the state more it's the extension to home care where it may raise money
It isn't a tax. It isn't about levying money to go to the Treasury or to be pooled in local council budgets. It is about paying for individual care so it is meaningless to talk about how much it will raise.
This is the problem about using 'tax' as a sound bite. It sounds clever, it is easy for activists to use but it leads to misunderstandings like this.
Here's a solution to Home Care and Brexit problem..
Stay in the EU, and when pensioners get to 75, forcibly pack them all off to Spain, Portugal and Greece. This has the side-effect of bankrupting the Mediterranean EU. You could lower the age if you want to rid yourself of Jezza too.
There'll be the odd squeal of rage from the daily Mail and Express, but the Guardian will like it.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
As far as I am concerned, no Tory can exceed Cameron, Osborne and Clegg for their wickedness while in office. .
Absurd. Particularly as they were running Ed Balls's spending plans.
A tale of two countries - one of which has incessant whining about 'austerity':
' According to provisional data turnover in retail trade in April 2017 was in real terms 0.9% smaller and in nominal terms 0.6% larger than that in April 2016. '
' In April 2017, the quantity bought in the retail industry increased by 2.3% compared with March 2017 and by 4.0% compared with April 2016. '
If Tw@tter is anything to go by Zeichner will hold Cambridge, looks to have a massive number of activists compared to Huppert.
I must admit even though the £100 I put at 5/6 against the LibDems winning 29 seats is the largest single bet I've made starting from nothing, I still wish I'd made it a bit more
I wrote the previous thread which explained why I think ICM is more likely to be right than YouGov. But YouGov's work is being dismissed way too quickly on this thread.
As I said when it come out yesterday I just can't see Labour winning 28 seats - and that for me is where it falls over.
The fact the typical sample size is 11 people per constituency also really doesn't help its sub-sampling done to extremes...
As I understand it the model is not based on constituency sampling but on modelling constituencies by social types and sampling those social types. It seems an entirely plausible method to me.
A problem I can see with that approach is that marginals, which by definition are the ones that will decide the result, are likely to be more volatile. I suspect you would be better taking bigger samples in a representative set of marginals and modelling from there. Even better if you can canvas voters- how did they vote last time, how do they expect to vote this time?
IIRC, there was an awful lot of modelling of voting in the marginals in 1987, which indicated a much tighter race than headline polls.
IIRC that resulted in the BBC's disastrously inaccurate prediction.
Jeez, the spread on Sporting Index just leapt up to 197/203 Labour Seats. What's going on?
Don't the guys at Sporting listen to Woman's Hour?
Do many women listen to "Women's Hour"?
It has a loyal audience amongst middle class female Radio Four listeners. About 3 million people at peak audience (live and podcast), average age about 55. So probably not too many Corbyn fans to begin with?
Three million (actually 3.3) is across a week, averaged over the past year. The average Tuesday gets 1.4 million (by no means all of whom listen across the hour). The biggest demographic across the week is 65+ women, followed by 65+ men. (Source: RAJAR/IPSOS)
Worth saying that I have a friend who's on this Yougov panel. He only does it because he gets paid and given that he no longer works due to ill health, it's worth his time to do it. Obviously his vote is worth as much as anyone else's but I do wonder about this approach.
Hopefully there is no last minute herding next week.
Yougov panel will be disporpotionally low/non-earners because they will place a lower value on their time, and so be more willing to fill in surveys for a small bonus. Except for the politically obsessed there are going to be very few executives who feel that 50p for half an hour answering questions on their preferred type of washing powered is a good use of their time.
Boris is perhaps the most ridiculous figure ever to have held major office in the UK. He is genuinely detested in Europe and disdained in most other parts of the world. He is absolutely not PM material and would significantly harm UK interests if he were.
Being "detested in Europe" is a plus for the headbangers.
And can he really do any worse than Trump on the Global stage?
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
So Labour and the LD and SNP and PC will accept a Tory Brexit team ? Are you in another world ?
Mr. Rabbit, that's always the way, isn't it? We wish we'd put more on winning bets, whilst forgetting about our losses.
If I'd put a tenner on Verstappen last year, I'd've made thousands of pounds. The tiny sum I put on was still my biggest ever win, but it's hard not to be critical in hindsight.
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
So Labour and the LD and SNP and PC will accept a Tory Brexit team ? Are you in another world ?
310 Tory plus labour centrists, the rest locked out. The Labour contingent would let Tories muff up Brexit and take the electoral hit in 2022.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
From: Tim Farron (tim@lakedistrict.com) To: Theresa May (Theresa@strongbutstable.gov.uk)
Dear Prime Minister,
Welcome to your chaos. Yep, it's your fault and you're no doubt having a good cry as Philip organises the removal vans and I understand that. I know what it's like to be on the end of an ungrateful electorate - well, we both do if you remember '92.
Anyway, before you pack away the Nespresso, all is not lost. I've had a word with the team - we moved from the broom closet into a small ante-room - and we've crunched the numbers and I think we can help out.
The problem is, we all remember 2010 and William's sweet promises and the Rose Garden Bromance and all that but it didn't end well for us - it didn't end well for David either but that's your issue, not mine.
We've decided we're going to give you a chance - anything's better than the beardy-weirdy from Islington and his mob of no-hopers but it can't be like last time because, frankly, you lot treated us worse than the back of the net at Ewood Park and I can't face another relegation.
So, here's a few ideas:
1) We'll have Vince as Chancellor because otherwise he's threatening to team up with Ed Balls and George Osborne and film "Three Men and an audacious fiscal policy".
2) Single Transferrable Vote without a referendum.
3) Make Kirkby Lonsdale the European City of Culture 2018.
4) Oh, I forgot, revoke A50 and you can go crawling on your hands and knees to Merkel and Macron pleading forgiveness and asking them to take us back - we'll have the Euro and Schengen as well.
Mr. Rabbit, that's always the way, isn't it? We wish we'd put more on winning bets, whilst forgetting about our losses.
If I'd put a tenner on Verstappen last year, I'd've made thousands of pounds. The tiny sum I put on was still my biggest ever win, but it's hard not to be critical in hindsight.
Exactly MD.
(What's different here is that LibDems on 28 seats would have been the best result for me - I placed £25 on various LD gains/holds.) But it will still backstop the rest of my betting, which makes me more comfortable.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
As far as I am concerned, no Tory can exceed Cameron, Osborne and Clegg for their wickedness while in office. .
Absurd. Particularly as they were running Ed Balls's spending plans.
Bedroom taxes etc and their shameful behaviour towards the bottom 5% of the population by income and the disabled. It would make Churchill and MacMillan want to throw up.
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
So Labour and the LD and SNP and PC will accept a Tory Brexit team ? Are you in another world ?
Hung parliament means soft Brexit and Corbyn PM unless the DUP plus Tories have a majority
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
Yes but those of us who were aware of the problem assumed the Cameron cap of about £70k was our risk and avast improvement to all but £23.5k. The new policy without committing to a cap is the really stupid part of it and assumes we forgot about Dave's proposal.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
I agree that there are no current proposals available from any party that solve the basic problem of affordability. The people want a solution that someone else pays for and see no reason why thier asserts built up over their lives should pay for something others, who they consider less prudent etc etc, should get it for free. Understandable but what is the solution?
May at least attempts to address the problem but the public do not understand the vast sums involved. If you can find out the number in care, their average time in care, and multiply it by at least £40,000 pa you should arrive at the figure
Re your earlier question 1.278m care in community 290k in residential SC at 2014 according to ONS
Maybe a national government is the only workable option. Kiwi's are looking at doing trade deals across the globe and cannot fathom why you would want to leave the EU .... a market place on your doorstep ..... if only!
"The average Tuesday gets 1.4 million (by no means all of whom listen across the hour)."
This Tuesday's clip went across all channels, but it will have little effect. The Corbyn Kiddies will ignore it, their Messiah can do no wrong, and the Old Gits already knew he was dimmer than a minus-three watt bulb.
Two respectable pollster show a comfortable Tory lead which is realisted at the polls would give them a majority in the high two figures or possible low three figures. A third pollster with a less than stellar record at accurate rolling daily/weekly polls is showing a potential crossover, and thas is the one that everyone is wetting the bed about and choosing to believe ?
10 days out the Yougov daily tracker was showing a result of 34/34 during GE2015 and the week before had Labour in the lead, well that worked out well didn't it.
Tory campaign has been unbelievably piss poor, May has been outed as wooden and inept - they have given voters no good reason to vote for them other than they are not a Corbyn led Labour party.
Still can't believe they will lose to Corbyn and his fellow travellers, but this election presents the least appealing choice in my lifetime.
NOTA would win by a landslide. Next 5 years going to be grim for the tories and labour odds-on next time round surely.
No, not necessarily at all. In 1987 Kinnock closes to within 4 points of Thatcher and in 1992 led Major in most polls, in both elections the Tories won in the end and we are at the equivalent stage in the electoral cycle. Though if Corbyn does not become PM as Yougov suggests is possible he will have increased his voteshare even if you look at ICM so should have secured his position as leader
My thinking was that May appears to be fairly rubbish, much less able than I would have said a couple of months ago. Add in Brexit and 2022 looks like much less favourable territory than today (I also assume a new, slightly less bonkers Labour leader and team)
But you are right of course that she could be ousted and replaced by someone good, plus 5 years is a long time.
Major was no great leader and won in 1992 despite a recession and Corbyn should have secured his leadership now whatever happens, like Kinnock he will lead in 2 elections
Good morrow travellers in an antique land. Well, well, Well! Interesting times. One point of caution. Yougov were showing what looked like crossover around the time of Manchester which moved out to a 5 point by the weekend. This poll is over the last week....... could that supposed nadir be impacting the result today? No poll was ever released with those figures, it was on a graph - perhaps taken from the figures that were being collated to go into this? We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
Yes I take that on board but I was referring to the only snippet we have from the Manchester pause and poll blackout which was that yougov chart showing leader ratings at crossover, it suggests the Tories dipped to level pegging post cluster fuck then picked up a little. This yougov one week survey would retain part of the lowest ebb. Or, ya know, we could just shrug and say bank holiday Polling!
Yougov may well have had Labour ahead at one point.
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
big improvement
Yes but those of us who were aware of the problem assumed the Cameron cap of about £70k was our risk and avast improvement to all but £23.5k. The new policy without committing to a cap is the really stupid part of it and assumes we forgot about Dave's proposal.
The cap is very complicated. £72,000 is less than two years care fees and even my sister who had cancer and was in care for three years cost £105,000. The annual social care cost with the increasing number of pensioners will be many billions and a cross party commission needs to be set up to put foreward a solution. This will take years and in the absence of May's changes the present system will continue well into the 2020's resulting in continuing distress for so many
There will be a cap now too
The cap is reassurance for the small minority of residential care cases (around 10% I believe) that extend for years, and it's an even smaller minority when tenants without savings and the many people with property equity not much above £100k, who won't have to pay anyway, are excluded.
It would appear to be another mistake by the Tory manifesto to have left out any reference to a cap - people reasonably in the know like IDS insist it was always supposed to be there; others suggest the "new" Tory policy was supposed to be a replacement. Who knows? Despite all the conspiracy theories the truth is probably more mundane: Mr T or whoever wrote the manifesto either forgot, and/or isn't an expert on the detail himself.
I have assumed if one structures your wills correctly and the property is held as joint tenants then we can preserve £200 k for our children, am I right?
That depends on who needs care and when. If the first partner needs care, uses up a lot of their equity, then dies and the second partner then needs care and uses up the balance (down to £100k) then obviously not. The first partner leaving everything to the children may well fall foul of deprivation of assets rules. It's all hugely complicated - there is some guidance about couples where one partner has Care costs here:
From: Tim Farron (tim@lakedistrict.com) To: Theresa May (Theresa@strongbutstable.gov.uk)
Dear Prime Minister,
Welcome to your chaos. Yep, it's your fault and you're no doubt having a good cry as Philip organises the removal vans and I understand that. I know what it's like to be on the end of an ungrateful electorate - well, we both do if you remember '92.
Anyway, before you pack away the Nespresso, all is not lost. I've had a word with the team - we moved from the broom closet into a small ante-room - and we've crunched the numbers and I think we can help out.
The problem is, we all remember 2010 and William's sweet promises and the Rose Garden Bromance and all that but it didn't end well for us - it didn't end well for David either but that's your issue, not mine.
We've decided we're going to give you a chance - anything's better than the beardy-weirdy from Islington and his mob of no-hopers but it can't be like last time because, frankly, you lot treated us worse than the back of the net at Ewood Park and I can't face another relegation.
So, here's a few ideas:
1) We'll have Vince as Chancellor because otherwise he's threatening to team up with Ed Balls and George Osborne and film "Three Men and an audacious fiscal policy".
2) Single Transferrable Vote without a referendum.
3) Make Kirkby Lonsdale the European City of Culture 2018.
4) Oh, I forgot, revoke A50 and you can go crawling on your hands and knees to Merkel and Macron pleading forgiveness and asking them to take us back - we'll have the Euro and Schengen as well.
Here's a solution to Home Care and Brexit problem..
Stay in the EU, and when pensioners get to 75, forcibly pack them all off to Spain, Portugal and Greece. This has the side-effect of bankrupting the Mediterranean EU. You could lower the age if you want to rid yourself of Jezza too.
There'll be the odd squeal of rage from the daily Mail and Express, but the Guardian will like it.
But we're all coming back apparently
Sending old folk to Spain is a good idea, just as in the US they send them to Florida. Living's a lot cheaper down there, but it has a major drawback: people tend to live longer in warm sunshine than they do in the frozen north, so pension providers catch the cold instead.
If social care became free at the point of use, by sharing the risk somehow, then the demand for it would rise, perhaps uncomfortably. The present (and proposed) system incentivises families to rally round and help their elders rather than pack them off into a home.
If granny gets to keep her house while she slowly declines in a care home, what will happen to it? Will it waste away unheated through many winters, its value diminishing all the time. What does this do for the housing shortage when every street in every town has a few empty 3-bedroom houses waiting for their owners to expire?
The Dementia Tax is heading to be one of the worst manifesto policies of all time. I mean this in the sense of winning or losing an election. I'm sure there are others from the past, but this must be in contention.
What a class-A clanger.
And yet it is a good policy and when TM explained it in the debate she did get applause. Indeed it is progressive and neither labour or lib dems have any answer on the frightening costs of social care. At present people are losing their homes and their savings down to £23,250. Security of tenure and £100,000 base is a big improvement
A lot of people with their only asset been their house, are not as trusting as you.They are not told what the cap will be so are wary
It is the idea that scares them, the fine detail is too obscure.
An Englishmans home is his castle, and May wants to take it off them. Not a good look.
Yes exactly my father a strong conservative told me on the phone yesterday evening he is not voting because of it.He goes to the local pub for quiz night every week and his elderly friends it is their main concern.
Shooting themselves in the foot is hardly an adequate phrase to describe what the tories have done.
Your father and his friends were not aware of the current policy, all the tories have done is publicise something which was (a) unknown and (b) massively unpopular. the fact that the new policy is more generous and does not force people to sell their homes in their lifetimes has been lost in the chaos.
What a complete unmitigated disaster. All they needed to do was announce that they would have a review with serious grown up sounding words, job done. And now we risk a bunch of fiscally incontinent jokers coming in and causing economic carnage
Very true apart from the fact Labour have no chance this time of getting anywhere near governing the UK in Westminster.
Mr. Rabbit, a similar motive made me back the over at 1.83 on Lib Dems at 11.5 seats. I'm green if they're under 20, and a bit more if they're 12-19. Also got some Lib Dem bets. Biggest hope is they retain/win Richmond Park, which Mr Putney fantastically tipped at 26 (pricing error on Betfair Sportsbook).
Just wish I'd put more on that. But there we are
For that matter, I wish I'd put more on Raikkonen to win (for hedging) the last race, or Ferrari to take the Constructors'. Will be interesting to see how the next two races go. Azerbaijan is very tight but also has an enormo-straight, so it won't be as good as Monaco for Red Bull.
A tale of two countries - one of which has incessant whining about 'austerity':
' According to provisional data turnover in retail trade in April 2017 was in real terms 0.9% smaller and in nominal terms 0.6% larger than that in April 2016. '
' In April 2017, the quantity bought in the retail industry increased by 2.3% compared with March 2017 and by 4.0% compared with April 2016. '
Can anyone guess the two countries ?
Nice one!. Germany and then UK.
Well done.
The "Why can't we be more like Germany" crowd never want to emulate Germany's willingness to live within its means.
Mr. NZ, trade with the EU is very popular. Political integration is not. If trade and no/little politics was on offer, the vast majority would really like that.
But that wasn't the deal on offer. [Well, possibly, with the 'detached/associate' status Cameron was apparently offered, but declined].
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
The Tories would sooner make the SNP's dreams come true than go into coalition with Labour. She'd be left negotiating the break up of the UK, on terms dictated from Brussels and Edinburgh.
But, surely anyone with a training in statistics can see that this methodology is poor.
If you are predicting a referendum result (i.e., one huge nationwide constituency) this method may make some sense. The sample size is ~ 7000.
To take the sample, split it up into constituencies so that the sample size is ~ 100, and to try and predict each individual constituency means that the sampling error per constituency is very large.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
And what if this national coalition goes to Brussels and says, "You know, maybe Brexit isn't such a great idea after all". Would they shrug their gallic shoulders and retort "A50 means A50. You're out on your ears anyway, on our terms or none at all."
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
As far as I am concerned, no Tory can exceed Cameron, Osborne and Clegg for their wickedness while in office. .
Absurd. Particularly as they were running Ed Balls's spending plans.
Bedroom taxes etc and their shameful behaviour towards the bottom 5% of the population by income and the disabled. It would make Churchill and MacMillan want to throw up.
You need to wise up on the Labour plans, particularly its significant unidentified amount earmarked to be raised from benefits cuts. Given that Labour introduced the "bedroom tax" itself originally for private tenants it is very likely that a Labour government post-2010 would have gone down a similar path. And rowed back on the rising costs of DLA too.
A tale of two countries - one of which has incessant whining about 'austerity':
' According to provisional data turnover in retail trade in April 2017 was in real terms 0.9% smaller and in nominal terms 0.6% larger than that in April 2016. '
' In April 2017, the quantity bought in the retail industry increased by 2.3% compared with March 2017 and by 4.0% compared with April 2016. '
Can anyone guess the two countries ?
Nice one!. Germany and then UK.
Well done.
The "Why can't we be more like Germany" crowd never want to emulate Germany's willingness to live within its means.
Or Germany's workers councils in industry. Or that it has an artificially low exchange rate boosting its exports and upsetting that nice Mr Trump, thanks to the Euro. Or that it does not spend billions (or anything at all) on nuclear weapons.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
Corbyn will probably be PM if NOM and it will be soft Brexit then socialism diluted by the LDs and SNP. Most likely this is 1987 when Kinnock got to within 4% of Thatcher but Thatcher still won by 12%, exactly the Tory lead ICM had yesterday
We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
"Nobody" is not quite right. The alarming reports for Labour by some (especially the infamous Labour Uncut piece a month ago) have been highlighted by the media as they make good copy. But most of us who are actually canvassing feel it's going quite well. I've been deliberately cautious after my 2015 debacle, and in truth no one canvasser can really know.
In particular, the anti-Corbyn stuff just isn't working to scare off Labour voters. It resonates big time with many people already planning to vote Tory. Most Labour voters say meh, he doesn't seem that bad. The sheer vehemence of their attacks undermined them - people might buy an argument that he doesn't look like their idea of a PM, but they don't buy that he's simultaneously a mad peacenik and a cunning sympathiser for bombers.
Saying 'it worked well for the referendum' neglects that there are wildly differing systems at work. The referendum was a nationwide binary choice. The election is 650 miniature contests each with multiple (and varying) options available.
Mr. Patrick, better than either option currently on the table...
I think a hung Parliament would lead to one of two outcomes. No Brexit or no deal brexit. That is why you like it - you're taking a gamble on the former. God knows what it would do for civil strife in this country. UKIP might win the next election.
If Brexit collapses in chaos and national humiliation, do you really think any party advocating trying it all over again would get within a sniff of power?
But, surely anyone with a training in statistics can see that this methodology is poor.
If you are predicting a referendum result (i.e., one huge nationwide constituency) this method may make some sense. The sample size is ~ 7000.
To take the sample, split it up into constituencies so that the sample size is ~ 100, and to try and predict each individual constituency means that the sampling error per constituency is very large.
I would expect a noisy and unstable result.
"It worked for EUref" is certainly a hostage to fortune. As is "based on complex model", as if complexity on its own guaranteed anything.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
The Tories would sooner make the SNP's dreams come true than go into coalition with Labour. She'd be left negotiating the break up of the UK, on terms dictated from Brussels and Edinburgh.
The SNP is going to lose seats whoever wins but you are correct they will never do a deal with the Tories
Two respectable pollster show a comfortable Tory lead which is realisted at the polls would give them a majority in the high two figures or possible low three figures. A third pollster with a less than stellar record at accurate rolling daily/weekly polls is showing a potential crossover, and thas is the one that everyone is wetting the bed about and choosing to believe ?
10 days out the Yougov daily tracker was showing a result of 34/34 during GE2015 and the week before had Labour in the lead, well that worked out well didn't it.
It is worth stating that polling is not that difficult compared to ... say predicting climate change or economic forecasting.
Other professions would be laughing stocks if they showed the divergence that UK pollsters do.
It is not that difficult to do polling with reasonable accuracy.
I think there is something in Taxman’s hypothesis, that much of this is a manufactured story.
We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
"Nobody" is not quite right. The alarming reports for Labour by some (especially the infamous Labour Uncut piece a month ago) have been highlighted by the media as they make good copy. But most of us who are actually canvassing feel it's going quite well. I've been deliberately cautious after my 2015 debacle, and in truth no one canvasser can really know.
In particular, the anti-Corbyn stuff just isn't working to scare off Labour voters. It resonates big time with many people already planning to vote Tory. Most Labour voters say meh, he doesn't seem that bad. The sheer vehemence of their attacks undermined them - people might buy an argument that he doesn't look like their idea of a PM, but they don't buy that he's simultaneously a mad peacenik and a cunning sympathiser for bombers.
If Tw@tter is anything to go by Zeichner will hold Cambridge, looks to have a massive number of activists compared to Huppert.
These anecdotes are now coming from all sorts of places. Rarely, do we hear people cannot stomach Corbyn's name on the doorstep. I am sure it happens, but the incidence has gone down.
When did you last hear SCON making huge inroads in Scotland ?
Scottish Ipsos MORI poll out soon so maybe soon? Warm the klaxon.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
Who would take her job, over what timescale and how? Bearing in mind there's a two year countdown clock ticking. If George Osborne had stayed in Parliament, there would be an answer to that question. Without him, there isn't.
I think a hung Parliament would lead to one of two outcomes. No Brexit or no deal brexit. That is why you like it - you're taking a gamble on the former. God knows what it would do for civil strife in this country. UKIP might win the next election.
If Brexit collapses in chaos and national humiliation, do you really think any party advocating trying it all over again would get within a sniff of power?
Corbyn is Sanders, May is Clinton, Farage is Trump?
But, surely anyone with a training in statistics can see that this methodology is poor.
If you are predicting a referendum result (i.e., one huge nationwide constituency) this method may make some sense. The sample size is ~ 7000.
To take the sample, split it up into constituencies so that the sample size is ~ 100, and to try and predict each individual constituency means that the sampling error per constituency is very large.
I would expect a noisy and unstable result.
"It worked for EUref" is certainly a hostage to fortune. As is "based on complex model", as if complexity on its own guaranteed anything.
Arron Banks' complex model that nailed the EU ref had Nuttall clear in Stoke
ICM (the worst pollster for Labour) is showing the marginals to be very, very close between the two main parties, so its not surprising a pollster showing Labour several points closer has them doing very well in marginal seats.
Most politicians dream of leading their party, and never get near any chance of doing so. Even those with the drive and ability can be thwarted by years stuck under a Thatcher or Blair.
Corbyn never wanted the job, only stood as a 'paper candidate', hates the whole leadership thing (except for the rallies). Yet he just can't get rid of the job, however hard he tries. If Labour turns down the rule changes he could be stuck with it for years....!
Hung parliament speculation. If YouGov came to pass, neither leader could get a workable majority. May offers the Labour centrists a national government with a Labour Chancellor and Home secretary, Tory PM and Foreign Secretary and Tory Brexit team? Corbyn gets cut out. How's that?
No chance. Corbyn would be PM. Sturgeon would prop him up in return for enhanced status in Brexit negotiations and a free hand on when to call another referendum. Sinn Fein likewise. Corbyn would appeal to EU for more time to get himself ready for EU negotiations. He would say to his backbenchers that if they backed him on his domestic agenda of a socialist economy he would let Brexit wither on the vine. Outcome-a crashed economy,nationalization and a Brexit negotiation so difficult that it is abandoned.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
Who would take her job, over what timescale and how? Bearing in mind there's a two year countdown clock ticking. If George Osborne had stayed in Parliament, there would be an answer to that question. Without him, there isn't.
If there is a hung parliament it is Corbyn PM, soft Brexit, then diluted socialism
ICM (the worst pollster for Labour) is showing the marginals to be very, very close between the two main parties, so its not surprising a pollster showing Labour several points closer has them doing very well in marginal seats.
Do we have that level of data from ICM? The marginals, London excepted, were supposed to leaning more Tory than average, at the beginning of the campaign at least.
But, surely anyone with a training in statistics can see that this methodology is poor.
If you are predicting a referendum result (i.e., one huge nationwide constituency) this method may make some sense. The sample size is ~ 7000.
To take the sample, split it up into constituencies so that the sample size is ~ 100, and to try and predict each individual constituency means that the sampling error per constituency is very large.
I would expect a noisy and unstable result.
"It worked for EUref" is certainly a hostage to fortune. As is "based on complex model", as if complexity on its own guaranteed anything.
Arron Banks' complex model that nailed the EU ref had Nuttall clear in Stoke
ICM (the worst pollster for Labour) is showing the marginals to be very, very close between the two main parties, so its not surprising a pollster showing Labour several points closer has them doing very well in marginal seats.
ICM has the Tories 5% ahead in Labour marginals and 1% ahead in Tory marginals
We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
"Nobody" is not quite right. The alarming reports for Labour by some (especially the infamous Labour Uncut piece a month ago) have been highlighted by the media as they make good copy. But most of us who are actually canvassing feel it's going quite well. I've been deliberately cautious after my 2015 debacle, and in truth no one canvasser can really know.
In particular, the anti-Corbyn stuff just isn't working to scare off Labour voters. It resonates big time with many people already planning to vote Tory. Most Labour voters say meh, he doesn't seem that bad. The sheer vehemence of their attacks undermined them - people might buy an argument that he doesn't look like their idea of a PM, but they don't buy that he's simultaneously a mad peacenik and a cunning sympathiser for bombers.
You are not listening then to isam ?
Nick would support a donkey wearing a red rosette with 'leader' written on it. He also thought he'd won so easily in Broxtowe last time that Soubry had given up!
Most people don't just think 'meh' when a politician supports terrorists against the British state.
ICM (the worst pollster for Labour) is showing the marginals to be very, very close between the two main parties, so its not surprising a pollster showing Labour several points closer has them doing very well in marginal seats.
ICM has the Tories 5% ahead in Labour marginals and 1% ahead in Tory marginals
If Brexit collapsed, then 52% of the voting public would assume it had been a deliberate ploy by those pointy-heads in Washington (as Clint Eastwood once said).
The fact that you don't understand that is why you didn't see it coming.
Two respectable pollster show a comfortable Tory lead which is realisted at the polls would give them a majority in the high two figures or possible low three figures. A third pollster with a less than stellar record at accurate rolling daily/weekly polls is showing a potential crossover, and thas is the one that everyone is wetting the bed about and choosing to believe ?
10 days out the Yougov daily tracker was showing a result of 34/34 during GE2015 and the week before had Labour in the lead, well that worked out well didn't it.
It is worth stating that polling is not that difficult compared to ... say predicting climate change or economic forecasting.
Other professions would be laughing stocks if they showed the divergence that UK pollsters do.
It is not that difficult to do polling with reasonable accuracy.
I think there is something in Taxman’s hypothesis, that much of this is a manufactured story.
No but its expensive to do it right, so they don't.
I started my career in the social science research doing surveys, the samples are an order of magnitude or more larger, and they are almost always proper stratified random samples, with strict rules about who you can use to subsitute if one of your sample members doesnt want to play. Of course this is expensive and lengthly to do once, and would be prohibitive to do repeatedly, but the alternatives are very poor relations. For my money, the British Social Attitudes Survery is probably the one to take most seriously in politics because it uses this sort of methodology.
We will soon know as if things have improved post Manchester for may the seat tally will grow. I have to ask though, where's the doorstep evidence of this? Nobody is reporting it to this extent. Where are the 'the mood out there has changed dramatically'? It has to have done from Labour sources saying 140 seats!
I am not sure things have improved for May after Manchester. Even with ICM, the Tory lead has come down.
"Nobody" is not quite right. The alarming reports for Labour by some (especially the infamous Labour Uncut piece a month ago) have been highlighted by the media as they make good copy. But most of us who are actually canvassing feel it's going quite well. I've been deliberately cautious after my 2015 debacle, and in truth no one canvasser can really know.
In particular, the anti-Corbyn stuff just isn't working to scare off Labour voters. It resonates big time with many people already planning to vote Tory. Most Labour voters say meh, he doesn't seem that bad. The sheer vehemence of their attacks undermined them - people might buy an argument that he doesn't look like their idea of a PM, but they don't buy that he's simultaneously a mad peacenik and a cunning sympathiser for bombers.
I agree with you on that one, Nick. The Tory attempts to drag up whatever he said about the Falklands or Ireland back when I was a student just makes the Tories look nasty, petty, and leaves me wondering why they have nothing more useful to say about what they will do if re-elected.
I think this National Govt would go for Single Market status with some fig leaf on Free Movement.
Isn't that what May was going for in her pre-negotiations and was told it wasn't possible? If we couldn't get it from a position of strength when the EU was still reeling from the referendum result, we're not going to get it from a position of weakness with a reinvigorated EU.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
As far as I am concerned, no Tory can exceed Cameron, Osborne and Clegg for their wickedness while in office. .
Absurd. Particularly as they were running Ed Balls's spending plans.
Bedroom taxes etc and their shameful behaviour towards the bottom 5% of the population by income and the disabled. It would make Churchill and MacMillan want to throw up.
You need to wise up on the Labour plans, particularly its significant unidentified amount earmarked to be raised from benefits cuts. Given that Labour introduced the "bedroom tax" itself originally for private tenants it is very likely that a Labour government post-2010 would have gone down a similar path. And rowed back on the rising costs of DLA too.
I think I can guess your voting record Churchill Churchill Eden Macmillan Heath Thatcher Major Haque Howard Cameron May.
Most posters here recall can JackW was pro-Labour.
We've had posters on here that called Ted Heath a socialist. I've always thought JackW a Tory grandee, although the one I thought he was popped his clogs with no noticeable diminution in JackW's output.
It's worth noting that on these hypothetical figures the Conservatives and Labour would be in almost exactly the same place that they had each been in after the 2010 election. But with the SNP and the Lib Dems almost exactly reversed, the dynamics of such a hung Parliament would be very different.
The only certainty is that May would have to resign. Shame it's not going to happen.
Not only do I not think that she would have to, I don't think she could. The Brexit clock is ticking. A government would be required in very short order and only the Conservatives could form one. They don't have the luxury of time for another leadership campaign in such circumstances.
Her entire Brexit strategy would have been shot to pieces. She'd go to Brussels and they would just laugh at her.
Well yes. But once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
But what possible Brexit could she negotiate? She's asked for a mandate to take to Brussels. If she's PM with NOM the public have explicitly denied her that mandate. She's weak, diminished, could fall and probably will fall at any moment.
I don't see it. A national coalition of Tory, Lab and LD to negotiate Brexit then have new elections at the end might be the best bet. However mad it sounds. Who would lead? Dunno.
And what if this national coalition goes to Brussels and says, "You know, maybe Brexit isn't such a great idea after all". Would they shrug their gallic shoulders and retort "A50 means A50. Your out on your ears anyway, on our terms or none at all."
I think this National Govt would go for Single Market status with some fig leaf on Free Movement.
Who knows. Not you. Not I.
Chaos looms, whatever. A country evenly divided on Brexit now looks evenly divided at the GE. Perhaps that is only right.
Or Yougov is bollocks and the Tories still get a majority of 80-90, which seems more likely, but is less fun to panic about
Comments
Or, ya know, we could just shrug and say bank holiday Polling!
My guess is that they just know they need something to stem the pressure on costs, and weren't as concerned with the finer costings as they would have (needed to have) been if it came out of the government's budget directly.
Are the national vote shares in YouGov's regular polls based on the same model as the seat predictions issued last night (and if so, how is it that the Tory percentage lead associated with those seat predictions is smaller than in any of the regular polls)?
Or are YouGov using two different models simultaneously now - one for vote share in the regular polls, and another for the giant model?
Surely the first PB casualty of this general election. On the plus side you'll at least be able to listen to "Woman's Hour" with more empathy.
Stay in the EU, and when pensioners get to 75, forcibly pack them all off to Spain, Portugal and Greece. This has the side-effect of bankrupting the Mediterranean EU. You could lower the age if you want to rid yourself of Jezza too.
There'll be the odd squeal of rage from the daily Mail and Express, but the Guardian will like it.
How's that?
(strangely close to Cameron's cap figure?)
Mr. NZ, possibly. But what coalition would work? SNP-Con is out of the question. SNP-Lab would be horrendous. A minority Conservative government would be weak.
Maybe the best result would be a stonking Conservative victory, followed by immediate political regicide so that the PM isn't someone seemingly so in thrall to a pair of SPADs, at least one of whom is a tin-eared, short-sighted moron?
Or we could just make Miss Cyclefree dictatrix.
When did you last hear SCON making huge inroads in Scotland ?
This is the problem about using 'tax' as a sound bite. It sounds clever, it is easy for activists to use but it leads to misunderstandings like this.
And can he really do any worse than Trump on the Global stage?
If I'd put a tenner on Verstappen last year, I'd've made thousands of pounds. The tiny sum I put on was still my biggest ever win, but it's hard not to be critical in hindsight.
https://twitter.com/libsg77/status/869624269772345346
From: Tim Farron (tim@lakedistrict.com)
To: Theresa May (Theresa@strongbutstable.gov.uk)
Dear Prime Minister,
Welcome to your chaos. Yep, it's your fault and you're no doubt having a good cry as Philip organises the removal vans and I understand that. I know what it's like to be on the end of an ungrateful electorate - well, we both do if you remember '92.
Anyway, before you pack away the Nespresso, all is not lost. I've had a word with the team - we moved from the broom closet into a small ante-room - and we've crunched the numbers and I think we can help out.
The problem is, we all remember 2010 and William's sweet promises and the Rose Garden Bromance and all that but it didn't end well for us - it didn't end well for David either but that's your issue, not mine.
We've decided we're going to give you a chance - anything's better than the beardy-weirdy from Islington and his mob of no-hopers but it can't be like last time because, frankly, you lot treated us worse than the back of the net at Ewood Park and I can't face another relegation.
So, here's a few ideas:
1) We'll have Vince as Chancellor because otherwise he's threatening to team up with Ed Balls and George Osborne and film "Three Men and an audacious fiscal policy".
2) Single Transferrable Vote without a referendum.
3) Make Kirkby Lonsdale the European City of Culture 2018.
4) Oh, I forgot, revoke A50 and you can go crawling on your hands and knees to Merkel and Macron pleading forgiveness and asking them to take us back - we'll have the Euro and Schengen as well.
Probably something we can negotiate on.
Best Wishes
Tim
(What's different here is that LibDems on 28 seats would have been the best result for me - I placed £25 on various LD gains/holds.) But it will still backstop the rest of my betting, which makes me more comfortable.
"The average Tuesday gets 1.4 million (by no means all of whom listen across the hour)."
This Tuesday's clip went across all channels, but it will have little effect. The Corbyn Kiddies will ignore it, their Messiah can do no wrong, and the Old Gits already knew he was dimmer than a minus-three watt bulb.
Two respectable pollster show a comfortable Tory lead which is realisted at the polls would give them a majority in the high two figures or possible low three figures. A third pollster with a less than stellar record at accurate rolling daily/weekly polls is showing a potential crossover, and thas is the one that everyone is wetting the bed about and choosing to believe ?
10 days out the Yougov daily tracker was showing a result of 34/34 during GE2015 and the week before had Labour in the lead, well that worked out well didn't it.
http://www.ageuk.org.uk/Documents/EN-GB/Factsheets/FS39_Paying_for_care_in_a_care_home_if_you_have_a_partner_fcs.pdf?dtrk=true
If social care became free at the point of use, by sharing the risk somehow, then the demand for it would rise, perhaps uncomfortably. The present (and proposed) system incentivises families to rally round and help their elders rather than pack them off into a home.
If granny gets to keep her house while she slowly declines in a care home, what will happen to it? Will it waste away unheated through many winters, its value diminishing all the time. What does this do for the housing shortage when every street in every town has a few empty 3-bedroom houses waiting for their owners to expire?
Just wish I'd put more on that. But there we are
For that matter, I wish I'd put more on Raikkonen to win (for hedging) the last race, or Ferrari to take the Constructors'. Will be interesting to see how the next two races go. Azerbaijan is very tight but also has an enormo-straight, so it won't be as good as Monaco for Red Bull.
The "Why can't we be more like Germany" crowd never want to emulate Germany's willingness to live within its means.
But that wasn't the deal on offer. [Well, possibly, with the 'detached/associate' status Cameron was apparently offered, but declined].
If you are predicting a referendum result (i.e., one huge nationwide constituency) this method may make some sense. The sample size is ~ 7000.
To take the sample, split it up into constituencies so that the sample size is ~ 100, and to try and predict each individual constituency means that the sampling error per constituency is very large.
I would expect a noisy and unstable result.
https://twitter.com/vinny_lbc/status/869551393887199233
https://twitter.com/jg_ccpress/status/869552159452516352
In particular, the anti-Corbyn stuff just isn't working to scare off Labour voters. It resonates big time with many people already planning to vote Tory. Most Labour voters say meh, he doesn't seem that bad. The sheer vehemence of their attacks undermined them - people might buy an argument that he doesn't look like their idea of a PM, but they don't buy that he's simultaneously a mad peacenik and a cunning sympathiser for bombers.
Saying 'it worked well for the referendum' neglects that there are wildly differing systems at work. The referendum was a nationwide binary choice. The election is 650 miniature contests each with multiple (and varying) options available.
Mr. Patrick, better than either option currently on the table...
Other professions would be laughing stocks if they showed the divergence that UK pollsters do.
It is not that difficult to do polling with reasonable accuracy.
I think there is something in Taxman’s hypothesis, that much of this is a manufactured story.
How very dare you forget the last Scottish peer to become Prime Minister ....
Corbyn never wanted the job, only stood as a 'paper candidate', hates the whole leadership thing (except for the rallies). Yet he just can't get rid of the job, however hard he tries. If Labour turns down the rule changes he could be stuck with it for years....!
Mr. T, that's a plausible possibility.
Remember when politics used to be boring? It all ended when Brown flunked the election-that-never-was. Seems to get more unpredictable every year.
I just don't want to believe it.
Most people don't just think 'meh' when a politician supports terrorists against the British state.
If Brexit collapsed, then 52% of the voting public would assume it had been a deliberate ploy by those pointy-heads in Washington (as Clint Eastwood once said).
The fact that you don't understand that is why you didn't see it coming.
I started my career in the social science research doing surveys, the samples are an order of magnitude or more larger, and they are almost always proper stratified random samples, with strict rules about who you can use to subsitute if one of your sample members doesnt want to play. Of course this is expensive and lengthly to do once, and would be prohibitive to do repeatedly, but the alternatives are very poor relations. For my money, the British Social Attitudes Survery is probably the one to take most seriously in politics because it uses this sort of methodology.