politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » All you need is Gove, Gove, Gove is all you need Mrs May

nunu said:

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

and what about Lib Dem and SNP seats,please?

My latest guesses, probably wrong:

Most likely LD gains: Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, Cambridge, Burnley, B’ham Yardley, Twickenham. Losses: Southport, Norfolk North.

SNP losses: Dumfries, Berwickshire, Stirling (not so likely), Edinburgh SW, Perth, Ochil, Moray, Angus, Aberdeenshire West, Aberdeen South, Banff & Buchan, Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, East Lothian.

Welcome to Drutt with his interesting post and kind personal note - please tell your parents that Greg Marshall is nicer than me!

HYUFD's post is interesting for its identification of CCHQ phone canvass targets. All the seats he mentions look to be in the 2-4% Tory swing needed range (I would guess he was calling Walsall N, not the safer Walsall S), which looks a lot more sensible than the wild stuff about Bolsover etc. That's about where I'd expect them to be hunting if their polling has them 7% ahead with a modest regional Midlands/North edge.

I wouldn't put great weight on his personal calls, with all due respect, as we don't know anything about the sample - at least, if it's like Labour phone canvasses, they select for demography and past voting rather than look for a balanced sample.

AndyJS said:

nunu said:

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

and what about Lib Dem and SNP seats,please?

My latest guesses, probably wrong:

Most likely LD gains: Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, Cambridge, Burnley, B’ham Yardley, Twickenham. Losses: Southport, Norfolk North.

SNP losses: Dumfries, Berwickshire, Stirling (not so likely), Edinburgh SW, Perth, Ochil, Moray, Angus, Aberdeenshire West, Aberdeen South, Banff & Buchan, Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, East Lothian.

From your lips to the voters' ears.....

I fear you may be optimistic on both sets, 16 SNP losses would be about double where I'd be and 6 net Lib Dem gains would be striking!

We'll know soon enough!

AndyJS said:

Dadge said:

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

Not sure about the London seats or Anglesey

I deliberately haven't included any London seats apart from three on the boundary with the home counties.

Living in London, there is a visible labour surge. Tories will make a net loss of seats in London even in outer London.

What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:

Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!

Tories 40% +20%

SNP 38% -11%

Labour 21% -6%

Others down 3%.

I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.

CarlottaVance said:

nunu said:

What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:

Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!

Tories 40% +20%

SNP 38% -11%

Labour 21% -6%

Others down 3%.

I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.

Nigel Marriott has it down as a close SNP hold:

SNP: 36
Con: 34
Lab: 16
Lib: 4

I would dearly love the MP for Gordon to add another pension to the multiple ones he already collects - but Marriott also has this as a comfortable SNP hold:

SNP: 35
Con: 29
Lab: 13
Lib: 23

SCON and SLAB should have given SLD an easy ride in Gordon.

Jordan joins in:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872295533569859586


While Turkey sides with Qatar:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872297248008400897

On seats that might go SCon but probably won't I'd add my old home seat of Angus - though Marriott has it going narrowly SCon:

SNP: 41
SCon: 43
Lab: 12
LibD: 4

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

Edinburgh South won't go Tory. Maybe SNP but more likely to stay Labour.

FF43 said:

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

Edinburgh South won't go Tory. Maybe SNP but more likely to stay Labour.

Marriott has it solidly Labour:

Lab: 44
SNP: 27
Con: 22
Lib: 6

FF43 said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jordan joins in:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872295533569859586


While Turkey sides with Qatar:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872297248008400897

It's about Iran I think

Granted this is as dubious a source as you can imagine but http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-05/shocking-trigger-behind-todays-gulf-scandal-qatar-paid-al-qaeda-iran-1bn-hostage-dea may explain why this is being done now...

But as you say given the side Turkey is taking this is about Iran

eek said:

FF43 said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jordan joins in:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872295533569859586


While Turkey sides with Qatar:

https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872297248008400897

It's about Iran I think

Granted this is as dubious a source as you can imagine but http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-05/shocking-trigger-behind-todays-gulf-scandal-qatar-paid-al-qaeda-iran-1bn-hostage-dea may explain why this is being done now...

But as you say given the side Turkey is taking this is about Iran

The original source was the FT - non paywall report in the Straits Times:

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/middle-east/14b-hostage-deal-the-straw-that-broke-the-camels-back-report

Also Qatar's Al-Jazeera has no fans among the Middle Easts' despots.....

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

Yes, some of the 'youngsters' might find their 'grandfolks' have strong opinions robustly held

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

An earful? Cut out the will more like!

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

nunu said:

What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:

Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!

Tories 40% +20%

SNP 38% -11%

Labour 21% -6%

Others down 3%.

I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.

Hope so. I'm on that at 14/1.

AndyJS said:

nunu said:

AndyJS said:

My guesses for the 35 Labour seats most likely to turn blue, (in no particular order):

Wrexham, Clwyd South, Bridgend, Barrow & Furness, Copeland,
Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke South,
Derbyshire NE, Blackpool South, Lancaster, Enfield North, Halifax,
Dewsbury, Wakefield, Penistone, Wolverhampton SW, B’ham Edgbaston,
B'ham Northfield, Mansfield, Ynys Mon, Gedling, City of Chester.
Oldham East, Scunthorpe, Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Walsall North,
Bristol East, Newport West, Edinburgh South, Harrow West, Dagenham.

and what about Lib Dem and SNP seats,please?

My latest guesses, probably wrong:

Most likely LD gains: Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, Cambridge, Burnley, B’ham Yardley, Twickenham. Losses: Southport, Norfolk North.

SNP losses: Dumfries, Berwickshire, Stirling (not so likely), Edinburgh SW, Perth, Ochil, Moray, Angus, Aberdeenshire West, Aberdeen South, Banff & Buchan, Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, East Lothian.

So you think Tom Brake will hold on for the LDs in Carshalton&Wallington?

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

Scott_P said:

Nicola really screwed herself last night

"Can I be in the Brexit negotiations?"

"Will you leak confidential discussions on live TV?"

"Only if it disadvantages my political opponents"

"Like, the British government?"

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

Bromptonaut said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Surprised to see Ynys Mon Tories told to vote for PC - some models think the Tories could snatch it.

The Mail even recommends Tories should vote Green in Bristol West, they REALLY do not like Corbyn

The Express is on the fence:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/872201849289527298

Quick quiz question, how much does that newspaper cost?

Cheaper than Andrex.

I just pray to god that the public don't think the redtops are crying wolf. Because Corbyn is a danger.

Cyclefree said:

Morning.

Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......

He's not alone in that.

MikeSmithson said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning.

Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......

He's not alone in that.

Back to the 70’s, I don’t remember Thatcher arousing such strong feelings of dislike then, although as Education Minister she was known as the Milk Snatcher.

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?

MikeSmithson said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning.

Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......

He's not alone in that.

Nick Clegg.. yesterdays man. Noone cares what he thinks,

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?

Because Corbyn has said she will?

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/86384/jeremy-corbyn-abbott-mcdonnell-and

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?

Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is prepared to make that plain.

Edited for spelling!

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?

Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.

Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?

Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.

Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...

I suspect now Gove has burnt his fingers (right up to the elbow) over the leadership he could get back to long-term strategy. He wasn’t a wild success at Education, of course!

SquareRoot said:

MikeSmithson said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning.

Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......

He's not alone in that.

Nick Clegg.. yesterdays man. Noone cares what he thinks,

Regardless he made some good points about the EU wide database and what access the UK might have to it post-Brexit.

"Gove will tear us apart" well that's one song I can't listen to any more.

He might have put a Churchill bust in the Oval Office, but the truth about Trump is that he is demonstrably the most anti-British US president in living memory:
https://twitter.com/champagne_lefty/status/872341289228013569

asjohnstone said:

There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Or she.

I agree, and you can extend the lesson.

If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.

If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?

Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.

Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...

It also depends on having a PM who is able to hear views he/she does not like. Thatcher had that intellectual self-confidence, May does not seem to. Look at the cabinet she put together.

Listening to some Brexiter on R4. I had forgotten what morons some Brexiters can be.

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Observer, not a Guardian reader. Are they taking a similar line on Corbyn?

Miss Vance, if Clegg and Miliband lost their seats, they and Cameron should become the new Top Gear hosts. Assuming Top Gear still exists.

On-topic: I agree. Timothy's contribution has been to seriously harm a seemingly unassailable lead and turn potentially the largest victory since WWII into an unknown result, anywhere from losing to a landslide (albeit one half the size it might have been).

F1: Canada soon. May give the markets a look. Also, some very good news. Kubica's been testing an F1 car (2012 model), the first time he's been in one since his rallying accident. If he could return, it'd be great. He's an extremely good driver.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/40179662

"The team are considering whether to replace the Englishman later in the season, with former F1 driver Sebastien Buemi and Sirotkin among the possible candidates."

Buemi's a former Toro Rosso driver (when they operated their brief 'Sebastiens only' driver policy), and Sirotkin was pencilled in for a seat with someone (maybe Sauber?) a couple of years ago but was thought too young.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

asjohnstone said:

There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Or she.

I agree, and you can extend the lesson.

If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.

What about a compromise between the two? Make student loan repayments tax deductible?

The Labour candIdate for a Wimbledon has just been suspended by the Solicitors Regulation Authority on suspicion of dishonesty. http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/15330332.Wimbledon_Labour_general_election_candidate_s_law_firm_closed_due_to_suspicion_of_dishonesty/

Shooting in Tehran: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40184641

SouthamObserver said:

He might have put a Churchill bust in the Oval Office, but the truth about Trump is that he is demonstrably the most anti-British US president in living memory:
https://twitter.com/champagne_lefty/status/872341289228013569

But surely he's changed his hairstyle since then?

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

He might have put a Churchill bust in the Oval Office, but the truth about Trump is that he is demonstrably the most anti-British US president in living memory:
https://twitter.com/champagne_lefty/status/872341289228013569

But surely he's changed his hairstyle since then?

which is more than Gerry has done

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

OldKingCole said:

OldKingCole said:

asjohnstone said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Chortle.......

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
ttps://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656

Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?

I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.

There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.

In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.

Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.

That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.

PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.

Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?

Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?

Because Corbyn has said she will?

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/86384/jeremy-corbyn-abbott-mcdonnell-and

You are always a few days late !

http://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-refuses-to-say-abbott-will-keep-job-if-labour-wins-10906460

Well she is Shadow Home Secretary...

Less than 24 hours until polls open!

I'm still not quite as bullish of the Tories chances as some on here. I do fear, sadly, that Corbyn has cut through with some voters. That said, I still think the Yougov estimates are rubbish.

I suspect Labour will have a good night in London and even pick several seats off the Tories there. However, the Tories will do well in the North West, Midlands and Scotland which will offset this and boost their majority.

I'm going to go for a majority of 54 at this stage. I think TM will win a workeable majority and a clear 5 year term, but I'm not sure I see evidence that she will sweep all before her either.

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

He might have put a Churchill bust in the Oval Office, but the truth about Trump is that he is demonstrably the most anti-British US president in living memory:
https://twitter.com/champagne_lefty/status/872341289228013569

colal not dole, Sinn Fein - Trump's just an old leftie

he could stand for labour

Yep - the US alt-right and the British far left are very close on so many issues: pro-IRA, anti-EU, anti-Semitic, anti-NATO, pro-Putin ...

EU decides it can be a military power and should spend more

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/strategiepier-eu-kommission-europa-kann-militaerische-macht-werden-15050161.html

looks like Trump got his way