politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Following the overnight allegations about WH2016 Dem favourite

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

felix said:

Scott_P said:

HYUFD said:

Given 52% of the voters voted Leave and Leavers now dominate the Tory Party and 40% of the voters voted for Corbyn Labour and Corbynites now dominate the Labour Party what may seem a sect is actually increasingly the majority of the country

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1111613110652145664

Quite. HYUFD repeatedly confuses some Tory members with Tory voters. There lies ruin for the party.

https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-half-of-tories-prefer-no-deal-brexit-poll-11598348
Some 51% of Tory voters want a no-deal compared with 26% of Labour supporters.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-voting-brits-would-quit-12925014

I can usually comprehend why people vote the way they do. However, I really cannot understand why people are prepared to prefer, or even contemplate, a No-Deal Brexit. For a while at any rate it'll be horrendous.

If you are a pensioner Tory member and you think your fixed income is safe, and you aren't exposed to any of the potentially damaging effects on the economy, travel, etc., maybe it isn't so difficult to understand?

We are suffering the effects of having so many of the active electorate above the age when they participate in the labour market.

It's the baby boomers, selfish and irresponsible to the last. Can't we organise a free cruise for them all and then run the referendum again while they're all in the Med somewhere, reading the Daily Mail and talking about the war they weren't even alive to see.

Not that you're generalising or being prejudiced, of course.

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

I’m not one of them but perhaps some respect for the people who actually voted last time and would know what was promised in the 70s and if it was delivered. Saying old people have no part in the future ignores the human condition. Maybe if they have no children’s or family , and are not part of or contributing to their local community. This is not the case for most of the ‘pensioner block vote’ that I know.

brendan16 said:

isam said:

Interesting thread that is maybe a bit on topic... one of the reasons given for the lack of sex in America is #metoo

https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1111607604348805120?s=21

Nearly 30% of men aged 18-30 not having sex is quite a shocking figure - particularly as its nearly double the figure for women. Who are the women having relations with?

Back in 1989 the percentage was half that and the levels for both sexes pretty similar.

There may be other factors than metoo of course e.g. the cost of housing meaning fewer people can afford their own place. If you are still living with mum and dad or in small shared rental flats - its a bit harder to arrange?

I suspect that the normalisation of casual sex and the establishment of things like tinder mean that the “lookers” among men get easier access to a wider pool of partners while the average joe loses out

viewcode said:

brendan16 said:

isam said:

Interesting thread that is maybe a bit on topic... one of the reasons given for the lack of sex in America is #metoo

https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1111607604348805120?s=21

Nearly 30% of men aged 18-30 not having sex is quite a shocking figure - particularly as its nearly double the figure for women. Who are the women having relations with?

Ahem.

Explanation 1: The tyranny of percentages. If the number of women is greater than the number of men, then 40% of men is not necessarily a bigger number thatn 35% of women

Explanation 2: Age bands. The 18-30 women may be having sex with men over 30 or under 18

Explanation 3: Homosexuality. The 18-30 women may be having sex with each other.

Percentages have their problems - but perhaps less so when you are talking about tens of millions of people (people in the US aged 18-30) rather than a small number!

Due to the lack of major wars recently killing off young men in the west the sex ratio isn't that different in that age group - 49% to 51% in the UK. In the US there are actually more men than women in that age group - its only in the over 45 age group where there are more women.

Now perhaps there are twice as many lesbians/bi womwn in the US than 30 years ago relatively or they prefer older men (Joe Biden?) - or something perhaps odd is happening with young men. In the US men are 3.5 times more likely to commit suicide - and perhaps lacking female contact and relationships might contribute to that.

So it does throw up some issues worthy of debate - because 28% of the population of that age group not having had any sex for a year is surprising. Perhaps they are waiting for the right guy or right woman - but its hardly healthy for society and men's health?

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

felix said:

Scott_P said:

HYUFD said:

Given 52% of the voters voted Leave and Leavers now dominate the Tory Party and 40% of the voters voted for Corbyn Labour and Corbynites now dominate the Labour Party what may seem a sect is actually increasingly the majority of the country

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1111613110652145664

Quite. HYUFD repeatedly confuses some Tory members with Tory voters. There lies ruin for the party.

https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-half-of-tories-prefer-no-deal-brexit-poll-11598348
Some 51% of Tory voters want a no-deal Brexit, compared with 26% of Labour supporters.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-voting-brits-would-quit-12925014

I can usually comprehend why people vote the way they do. However, I really cannot understand why people are prepared to prefer, or even contemplate, a No-Deal Brexit. For a while at any rate it'll be horrendous.

We are suffering the effects of having so many of the active electorate above the age when they participate in the labour market.

It's the baby boomers, selfish and irresponsible to the last. Can't we organise a free cruise for them all and then run the referendum again while they're all in the Med somewhere, reading the Daily Mail and talking about the war they weren't even alive to see.

Not that you're generalising or being prejudiced, of course.

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

While some of my pensioner friends are indeed Leavers, the majority I think were, and still are, for Remain. The half-dozen members of the U3a Current Affairs discussion group I belong to are unanimously Remain.
Interestingly in this context I clearly recall that Referendum Day was our house-cleaning day. We had a Remain poster up and my wife asked the two (about) 30 year old cleaning ladies had they voted. Yes they said, but not the same as you.

another_richard said:

viewcode said:

brendan16 said:

isam said:

Interesting thread that is maybe a bit on topic... one of the reasons given for the lack of sex in America is #metoo

https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1111607604348805120?s=21

Nearly 30% of men aged 18-30 not having sex is quite a shocking figure - particularly as its nearly double the figure for women. Who are the women having relations with?

Ahem.

Explanation 1: The tyranny of percentages. If the number of women is greater than the number of men, then 40% of men is not necessarily a bigger number thatn 35% of women

Explanation 2: Age bands. The 18-30 women may be having sex with men over 30 or under 18

Explanation 3: Homosexuality. The 18-30 women may be having sex with each other.

Explanation 4: Some of the 18-30 men might be having sex with multiple 18-30 women.

Chad souls, Virgin hearts

OblitusSumMe said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

WhisperingOracle said:

HYUFD said:

WhisperingOracle said:

The talk of national unity governments from people like Kirkup on the one hand, and no-deal campaigns by more than half of Tory members on the other, are so far apart that this is the kind of disconnected talk at the extreme ends of the spectrum that usually presages and predicts a split. The Tories will be incredibly lucky to get through the week without one.

Given 8 Labour MPs and 3 Tory MPs have already defected to CUK/TIG, both main parties are already split anyway, it is just the extent of the split that may get bigger but Blairites in Labour and Remainers in the Tory Party are now clearly a minority

If you look at those MPs and journalists who've already publicly aligned themselves with Grieve, you already have the first outlines of the next split. A big question in the Tory parliamentary party is how many "quiet remainers" are left, behind the familiar figures of Grieve and Clarke. There's certainly more than three or four, and those opposed to no-deal may be much greater. In the government alone you have Rudd, Liddington, Hammond, Clark, Gauke, Mundell, etc.

It is possible we could see CUK/TIG become a UK En Marche if say Raab or Boris succeeds May as Tory Leader and Corbyn stays Labour Leader

That is what *ought* to be happening.

And I would be early to the barricades.

But the evidence I would be followed by many isn't appearing. Yet, at least.

Yes, it would seem that UK politics is continuing to polarise to the extremes and moderates like Grieve are being left behind.

I would mind less about this were the representatives of those extremes not so monumentally stupid.

"moderates like Grieve".

lol.....

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Except this is not true on any level.

The split between Remain and Leave in the 25-49 age group was 54-46 which is hardly overwhelming. The split in the 50-65 age group which is still of course of working age was a more emphatic 60% in favour of Leave.

There have been loads of studies since 2016 on who voted Leave and why and most of them have killed the myth that it was a lack of education or employment that drove the vote. This is a good example.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

Thanks for that article. Interesting.

Sean_F said:

Most Brexit voters were aged under 65.

Yes, but Leave won because 60% of over 65s supported it. If 50% had supported it, Remain would have won comfortably. In any case, most Leave voters were older than me, and most Remain voters were younger than me (I am in my 40s). So the age dimension to the vote is clear in my mind, and the fact that the people who voted for it will generally not bear the cost is galling.

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Except this is not true on any level.

The split between Remain and Leave in the 25-49 age group was 54-46 which is hardly overwhelming. The split in the 50-65 age group which is still of course of working age was a more emphatic 60% in favour of Leave.

There have been loads of studies since 2016 on who voted Leave and why and most of them have killed the myth that it was a lack of education or employment that drove the vote. This is a good example.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

plus for all the wailing about the young having their future stolen from them, 64% of 18-24 year olds abstained by not voting.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Sean_F said:

Most Brexit voters were aged under 65.

Yes, but Leave won because 60% of over 65s supported it. If 50% had supported it, Remain would have won comfortably. In any case, most Leave voters were older than me, and most Remain voters were younger than me (I am in my 40s). So the age dimension to the vote is clear in my mind, and the fact that the people who voted for it will generally not bear the cost is galling.

60% of the over 50s supported it.

brendan16 said:

"While some of my pensioner friends are indeed Leavers, the majority I think were, and still are, for Remain. The half-dozen members of the U3a Current Affairs discussion group I belong to are unanimously Remain.
Interestingly in this context I clearly recall that Referendum Day was our house-cleaning day. We had a Remain poster up and my wife asked the two (about) 30 year old cleaning ladies had they voted. Yes they said, but not the same as you.""

Has there been any survey results into the proportion of remain vs leave voters who clean their own houses vs those who get hired help in to do it?! Do remain voters prefer someone else to clean up after them?

Freedom of movement has possibly made employing cash in hand hired help cheaper in recent years in the UK - and there is now more choice - but that isn't necessarily to the benefit of cleaners who have to drop their prices to compete!

Perhaps when EU migrants start taking more middle class jobs - including positions in the media and as political commentators rather than being the hired help for them....

These two weren't migrants, and when you/your wife get into your late 70's you too might find that a bit of help around the house once or twice a month comes in handy!

When I come to think about it I've never seen the firm we use, a local one, use migrants.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Sean_F said:

Most Brexit voters were aged under 65.

Yes, but Leave won because 60% of over 65s supported it. If 50% had supported it, Remain would have won comfortably. In any case, most Leave voters were older than me, and most Remain voters were younger than me (I am in my 40s). So the age dimension to the vote is clear in my mind, and the fact that the people who voted for it will generally not bear the cost is galling.

There is no special virtue or wisdom in being aged 20 or 75.

42 was the age at which a majority turned from Remain to Leave. They'll be alive and working for years to come.

OldKingCole said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

felix said:

Scott_P said:

HYUFD said:

Given 52% of the voters voted Leave and Leavers now dominate the Tory Party and 40% of the voters voted for Corbyn Labour and Corbynites now dominate the Labour Party what may seem a sect is actually increasingly the majority of the country

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1111613110652145664

Quite. HYUFD repeatedly confuses some Tory members with Tory voters. There lies ruin for the party.

https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-half-of-tories-prefer-no-deal-brexit-poll-11598348
Some 51% of Tory voters want a no-deal Brexit, compared with 26% of Labour supporters.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-voting-brits-would-quit-12925014

We are suffering the effects of having so many of the active electorate above the age when they participate in the labour market.

It's the baby boomers, selfish and irresponsible to the last. Can't we organise a free cruise for them all and then run the referendum again while they're all in the Med somewhere, reading the Daily Mail and talking about the war they weren't even alive to see.

Not that you're generalising or being prejudiced, of course.

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

While some of my pensioner friends are indeed Leavers, the majority I think were, and still are, for Remain. The half-dozen members of the U3a Current Affairs discussion group I belong to are unanimously Remain.
Interestingly in this context I clearly recall that Referendum Day was our house-cleaning day. We had a Remain poster up and my wife asked the two (about) 30 year old cleaning ladies had they voted. Yes they said, but not the same as you.

Pleanty of examples like that OKC but I thought most of the pollsters' analysis showed very clearly the heavy bias for Remain among that under 30s and for Leave amongst the over 55s.

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Except this is not true on any level.

The split between Remain and Leave in the 25-49 age group was 54-46 which is hardly overwhelming. The split in the 50-65 age group which is still of course of working age was a more emphatic 60% in favour of Leave.

There have been loads of studies since 2016 on who voted Leave and why and most of them have killed the myth that it was a lack of education or employment that drove the vote. This is a good example.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

This strikes me as a selective use of statistics. Around a quarter of under 25s voted Leave and the % increases monotonically with age up until 60% of over 65s. Also FWIW the study you quote demonstrates clearly that education is a significant correlate with Brexit voting behaviour (although I wasn't talking about that). Also maybe worth pointing out that the UK Labour Market is integrated with the EU at all levels. So we are all potentially being outbid by EU immigrants, not just cleaning ladies and the like. Perhaps not newspaper columnists or a few other well protected professions reserved for posh people. But the sector I work in is wide open. Also worth pointing out that the evidence of a negative effect on wages is at best limited, whatever anecdotes people choose to deploy.

OldKingCole said:

Benpointer said:

OldKingCole said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

felix said:

Scott_P said:

HYUFD said:

Given 52% of the voters voted Leave and Leavers now dominate the Tory Party and 40% of the voters voted for Corbyn Labour and Corbynites now dominate the Labour Party what may seem a sect is actually increasingly the majority of the country

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1111613110652145664

Quite. HYUFD repeatedly confuses some Tory members with Tory voters. There lies ruin for the party.

https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-half-of-tories-prefer-no-deal-brexit-poll-11598348
Some 51% of Tory voters want a no-deal Brexit, compared with 26% of Labour supporters.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-voting-brits-would-quit-12925014

.

It's the baby boomers, selfish and irresponsible to the last. Can't we organise a free cruise for them all and then run the referendum again while they're all in the Med somewhere, reading the Daily Mail and talking about the war they weren't even alive to see.

Not that you're generalising or being prejudiced, of course.

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Interestingly in this context I clearly recall that Referendum Day was our house-cleaning day. We had a Remain poster up and my wife asked the two (about) 30 year old cleaning ladies had they voted. Yes they said, but not the same as you.

Pleanty of examples like that OKC but I thought most of the pollsters' analysis showed very clearly the heavy bias for Remain among that under 30s and for Leave amongst the over 55s.

Indeed; all I'm really saying is that jumping to conclusions and stereotyping are rarely good ideas.
To be fair I realise that I may be atypical. I spent a long time in the 1975 referendum knocking on doors, putting out leaflets etc in favour of the Common Market as it was then, and some time handing out leaflets in our local market in 2106.

2106? Had we left by then?

OnlyLivingBoy said:

OldKingCole said:

Benpointer said:

OldKingCole said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

felix said:

Scott_P said:

HYUFD said:

Given 52% of the voters voted Leave and Leavers now dominate the Tory Party and 40% of the voters voted for Corbyn Labour and Corbynites now dominate the Labour Party what may seem a sect is actually increasingly the majority of the country

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1111613110652145664

Quite. HYUFD repeatedly confuses some Tory members with Tory voters. There lies ruin for the party.

https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-half-of-tories-prefer-no-deal-brexit-poll-11598348
Some 51% of Tory voters want a no-deal Brexit, compared with 26% of Labour supporters.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-voting-brits-would-quit-12925014

.

somewhere, reading the Daily Mail and talking about the war they weren't even alive to see.

.

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Interestingly in this context I clearly recall that Referendum Day was our house-cleaning day. We had a Remain poster up and my wife asked the two (about) 30 year old cleaning ladies had they voted. Yes they said, but not the same as you.

Pleanty of examples like that OKC but I thought most of the pollsters' analysis showed very clearly the heavy bias for Remain among that under 30s and for Leave amongst the over 55s.

Indeed; all I'm really saying is that jumping to conclusions and stereotyping are rarely good ideas.
To be fair I realise that I may be atypical. I spent a long time in the 1975 referendum knocking on doors, putting out leaflets etc in favour of the Common Market as it was then, and some time handing out leaflets in our local market in 2106.

2106? Had we left by then?

LOL!!! Poor old chap. Nodding at the keyboard! If I'm still here for that I shall be in the Guinness Website (won't be a book) of records.

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

WhisperingOracle said:

HYUFD said:

WhisperingOracle said:

The talk of national unity governments from people like Kirkup on the one hand, and no-deal campaigns by more than half of Tory members on the other, are so far apart that this is the kind of disconnected talk at the extreme ends of the spectrum that usually presages and predicts a split. The Tories will be incredibly lucky to get through the week without one.

Given 8 Labour MPs and 3 Tory MPs have already defected to CUK/TIG, both main parties are already split anyway, it is just the extent of the split that may get bigger but Blairites in Labour and Remainers in the Tory Party are now clearly a minority

If you look at those MPs and journalists who've already publicly aligned themselves with Grieve, you already have the first outlines of the next split. A big question in the Tory parliamentary party is how many "quiet remainers" are left, behind the familiar figures of Grieve and Clarke. There's certainly more than three or four, and those opposed to no-deal may be much greater. In the government alone you have Rudd, Liddington, Hammond, Clark, Gauke, Mundell, etc.

It is possible we could see CUK/TIG become a UK En Marche if say Raab or Boris succeeds May as Tory Leader and Corbyn stays Labour Leader

Decidedly unlikely under our FPTP system - indeed beyond the defectors themselves few TIG candidates are likely to save their deposits.

Most En Marche candidates even won the first round in France and of course the 50% or so the SDP polled in 1981 when it was Thatcher v Foot would have translated into an SDP majority

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

anothernick said:

isam said:

brendan16 said:

isam said:

Interesting thread that is maybe a bit on topic... one of the reasons given for the lack of sex in America is #metoo

https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1111607604348805120?s=21

Nearly 30% of men aged 18-30 not having sex is quite a shocking figure - particularly as its nearly double the figure for women. Who are the women having relations with?

Back in 1989 the percentage was half that and the levels for both sexes pretty similar.

There may be other factors than metoo of course e.g. the cost of housing meaning fewer people can afford their own place. If you are still living with mum and dad or in small shared rental flats - its a bit harder to arrange?

Yes I only mentioned that as one of the possible factors because it is the topic of the header. Others were less men of that age in work, more live w parents etc

Greater use of online porn perhaps?

Sad if true.

That and more time spent online generally, more sex education and the MeToo movement and emphasis on consent, fear of intimacy and concerns over body image and people living at home longer and the need to build a future first all factors

https://www.tcsnetwork.co.uk/why-are-millennials-having-less-sex/

Also the red MAGA baseball caps & the chino & white polo shirt look probably not helping to get the ladeez horny. Works for billionaire Don but absolutely no one else.

There are plenty of female Trump voters

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Except this is not true on any level.

The split between Remain and Leave in the 25-49 age group was 54-46 which is hardly overwhelming. The split in the 50-65 age group which is still of course of working age was a more emphatic 60% in favour of Leave.

There have been loads of studies since 2016 on who voted Leave and why and most of them have killed the myth that it was a lack of education or employment that drove the vote. This is a good example.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

This strikes me as a selective use of statistics. Around a quarter of under 25s voted Leave and the % increases monotonically with age up until 60% of over 65s. Also FWIW the study you quote demonstrates clearly that education is a significant correlate with Brexit voting behaviour (although I wasn't talking about that). Also maybe worth pointing out that the UK Labour Market is integrated with the EU at all levels. So we are all potentially being outbid by EU immigrants, not just cleaning ladies and the like. Perhaps not newspaper columnists or a few other well protected professions reserved for posh people. But the sector I work in is wide open. Also worth pointing out that the evidence of a negative effect on wages is at best limited, whatever anecdotes people choose to deploy.

The effect on wages is real but complicated. My staff benefit from being in the EU. Indeed without Brexit I'd have had another one by now. But the temps I hire from time to time are definitely cheaper as a result of competition from immigrants. It might well be that people have a pretty good idea of how it hits them personally, which might be why there are so many exceptions to the general rule that the better off voted remain and worse off voted leave. Very hard to explain why working class Brighton is so remainey and genteel Worthing is so leavy by looking at income levels. But when you know the kinds of jobs on offer it makes a bit more sense.

IanB2 said:

TheAncientMariner said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Sean_F said:

Most Brexit voters were aged under 65.

Yes, but Leave won because 60% of over 65s supported it. If 50% had supported it, Remain would have won comfortably. In any case, most Leave voters were older than me, and most Remain voters were younger than me (I am in my 40s). So the age dimension to the vote is clear in my mind, and the fact that the people who voted for it will generally not bear the cost is galling.

60% of the over 50s supported it.

And it appears there is a direct correlation between the length of time a person has lived in the EU/ Common market and the amount that they hate it.

The stronger correlation is with the time a person has spent living outside the EU

But that is only because we weren't members of the Common market pre 1972. You can't extrapolate from that: 47 years + 18 years = 65 years, so everyone 65 and older should be flagged at the same point for correlation purposes.

The following is from Business Insider and is about the TIG and LibDems having an electoral pact. This obviously makes sense in FPTP elections. However the first test may be Euro elections.
In order to get the best result should they stand as a sort of 'Alliance' (to coin a phrase) or separately. It's a sort of proportional system, so maybe it doesn't matter as much. Also there could be a lot of issues around the order of candidates on the list if there are joint lists and there is no guarantee that all votes for one eliminated candidate would transfer to the allied party.

Business Insider reports:

"The Independent Group is mulling an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats in which they would both run under the same “umbrella” and field joint candidates in certain seats at future elections…
Business Insider has been told that the group has discussed forming an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats which is similar to the Labour party’s relationship with the Cooperative Party.
Under the proposed arrangement, both parties would remain independent but agree on joint candidates to stand in certain seats.
These discussions were confirmed by sources in both TIG and the Lib Dems."

brendan16 said:

I see Mrs May is planning to bring her deal back again next week for another vote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122

230 to 149 to 58 - she is getting closer every time....

Beyond delusion. When will someone gently tell her that is is time to go? Come on Mr May.

logical_song said:

The following is from Business Insider and is about the TIG and LibDems having an electoral pact. This obviously makes sense in FPTP elections. However the first test may be Euro elections.
In order to get the best result should they stand as a sort of 'Alliance' (to coin a phrase) or separately. It's a sort of proportional system, so maybe it doesn't matter as much. Also there could be a lot of issues around the order of candidates on the list if there are joint lists and there is no guarantee that all votes for one eliminated candidate would transfer to the allied party.

Business Insider reports:

"The Independent Group is mulling an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats in which they would both run under the same “umbrella” and field joint candidates in certain seats at future elections…
Business Insider has been told that the group has discussed forming an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats which is similar to the Labour party’s relationship with the Cooperative Party.
Under the proposed arrangement, both parties would remain independent but agree on joint candidates to stand in certain seats.
These discussions were confirmed by sources in both TIG and the Lib Dems."

With 3 - 9 MEP's per region, it's certainly possible to fall below the threshold needed to win a seat, so joint candidates make sense.

brendan16 said:

I see Mrs May is planning to bring her deal back again next week for another vote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122

230 to 149 to 58 - she is getting closer every time....

It will be put up by May against whichever option wins the second round of the indicative votes next week though, so it will not just be a straight vote on the Deal alone

Sean_F said:

logical_song said:

The following is from Business Insider and is about the TIG and LibDems having an electoral pact. This obviously makes sense in FPTP elections. However the first test may be Euro elections.
In order to get the best result should they stand as a sort of 'Alliance' (to coin a phrase) or separately. It's a sort of proportional system, so maybe it doesn't matter as much. Also there could be a lot of issues around the order of candidates on the list if there are joint lists and there is no guarantee that all votes for one eliminated candidate would transfer to the allied party.

Business Insider reports:

"The Independent Group is mulling an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats in which they would both run under the same “umbrella” and field joint candidates in certain seats at future elections…
Business Insider has been told that the group has discussed forming an electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrats which is similar to the Labour party’s relationship with the Cooperative Party.
Under the proposed arrangement, both parties would remain independent but agree on joint candidates to stand in certain seats.
These discussions were confirmed by sources in both TIG and the Lib Dems."

With 3 - 9 MEP's per region, it's certainly possible to fall below the threshold needed to win a seat, so joint candidates make sense.

I think so too, although it depends on how redistributed votes fall. In theory if all the first eliminated candidate (LD or TIG) votes went to the other it wouldn't matter. However that sounds very risky.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I am generalising but I don't think I am being prejudiced. Brexit was delivered by the pensioner block vote, people who are insulated from the economic costs by their fixed incomes, and won't even be around to bear the costs of it, putting my generation's prosperity at risk and restricting the horizons of our children. And for what? A nostalgic vision of a 1950s Britain even they can barely remember. Of course they have as much right to vote as the rest of us, but don't expect us to thank them for the mess they've created.

Except this is not true on any level.

The split between Remain and Leave in the 25-49 age group was 54-46 which is hardly overwhelming. The split in the 50-65 age group which is still of course of working age was a more emphatic 60% in favour of Leave.

There have been loads of studies since 2016 on who voted Leave and why and most of them have killed the myth that it was a lack of education or employment that drove the vote. This is a good example.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

This strikes me as a selective use of statistics. Around a quarter of under 25s voted Leave and the % increases monotonically with age up until 60% of over 65s. Also FWIW the study you quote demonstrates clearly that education is a significant correlate with Brexit voting behaviour (although I wasn't talking about that). Also maybe worth pointing out that the UK Labour Market is integrated with the EU at all levels. So we are all potentially being outbid by EU immigrants, not just cleaning ladies and the like. Perhaps not newspaper columnists or a few other well protected professions reserved for posh people. But the sector I work in is wide open. Also worth pointing out that the evidence of a negative effect on wages is at best limited, whatever anecdotes people choose to deploy.

But of course people generally vote on their 'anecdotal' experiences in the real world - not on some academic or ONS statistics based on recorded data (not all reality is recorded!).

If you are immune from the effects of something you are far less likely to see something as being an issue or a problem.

A bit like 'right on' people who choose to live in the most white middle class British parts of London - Twickenham or Barnes say - and then lecture others on 'celebrating diversity'. If they truly did - why don't they buy a bigger house in more diverse parts of London such as Newham or Croydon where their money would go much further?

brendan16 said:

I see Mrs May is planning to bring her deal back again next week for another vote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122

230 to 149 to 58 - she is getting closer every time....

Should get there by 9th April - as this incontrovertibly proves:

AmpfieldAndy said:

kinabalu said:

Just finished the Times. There's a lacerating critique of Brexit and the Brexiteers from Matthew Parris. Thoroughly recommended. It's like Meaks on steroids!

It’s all invective and no substance. He writes like a petulant child, rather like Grieve is behaving. Actions have consequences as Grieve is now discovering.

How does it compoare to BoJo's measured pronouncements on the topic?

Stark_Dawning said:

brendan16 said:

I see Mrs May is planning to bring her deal back again next week for another vote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122

230 to 149 to 58 - she is getting closer every time....

Get them to vote again and again until she gets the result she wants. I thought that was only a dastardly EU trick.

She lost and should admit it and move on to an alternative, which if she is determined to pass the withdrawal agreement would be either a general election or a referendum.

This is exactly the sort of coercive situation that the convention that a defeated measure is not brought back to the House in the same session is intended to protect Parliament from. One hopes that the Speaker will stand firm.

kinabalu said:

Just finished the Times. There's a lacerating critique of Brexit and the Brexiteers from Matthew Parris. Thoroughly recommended. It's like Meaks on steroids!

He's been pretty one-note since the time of the Clacton by-election.

Beto's atwitterin'.

https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1112047354109218817

Perhaps not the best medium for white bread aspirational stuff, particularly if you're intending going head to head with Trump at the end of it.

another_richard said:

I see the forelock tuggers are out in force today.

If Grieve is so highly rated then he should have no problem in finding another Conservative association to stand for.

If he can't then he's not the right man to be a Conservative MP.

Its just the same job application process the proles have to go through.

He was elected on a commitment to support not only Brexit but our leaving the Customs Union and the Single Market. He is now pouring the whole of his considerable political intellect and energy into preventing any sort of Brexit at all. It's a great cause IMO but the case for him to be ditched as a Conservative candidate at the next election is pretty much unanswerable.

Benpointer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Ishmael_Z said:

5,992,000 ish signatures on the revoke petition. Will be comfortably over 6m on Monday when it's debated.

Just 10m short of those who actually voted to Remain........

Perhaps they've all died?

Still beats the 600k who signed the Leave with No Deal petition by a long chalk.

Like we care......

kinabalu said:

another_richard said:

I see the forelock tuggers are out in force today.

If Grieve is so highly rated then he should have no problem in finding another Conservative association to stand for.

If he can't then he's not the right man to be a Conservative MP.

Its just the same job application process the proles have to go through.

He was elected on a commitment to support not only Brexit but our leaving the Customs Union and the Single Market. He is now pouring the whole of his considerable political intellect and energy into preventing any sort of Brexit at all. It's a great cause IMO but the case for him to be ditched as a Conservative candidate at the next election is pretty much unanswerable.

What was the Conservative manifesto on rearmament in 1930s?

Winston now seen as sage, who was right, but under this purist view of manifesto, he should have been deselected I reckon.

Politicians always seem to wear bad sports clobber

https://twitter.com/bendinnery/status/1112037924978208773?s=21

rottenborough said:

Beyond delusion. When will someone gently tell her that is is time to go? Come on Mr May.

Not so. Unless and until the House of Commons can agree a realistic alternative she has every right to keep her Deal on the table. It would be a dereliction of duty not to.

Theuniondivvie said:

Beto's atwitterin'.

https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1112047354109218817

Perhaps not the best medium for white bread aspirational stuff, particularly if you're intending going head to head with Trump at the end of it.

Bonkers Beto, Trump will no doubt be tweeting if O'Rourke is selected, or something along those lines.

kinabalu said:

another_richard said:

I see the forelock tuggers are out in force today.

If Grieve is so highly rated then he should have no problem in finding another Conservative association to stand for.

If he can't then he's not the right man to be a Conservative MP.

Its just the same job application process the proles have to go through.

He was elected on a commitment to support not only Brexit but our leaving the Customs Union and the Single Market. He is now pouring the whole of his considerable political intellect and energy into preventing any sort of Brexit at all. It's a great cause IMO but the case for him to be ditched as a Conservative candidate at the next election is pretty much unanswerable.

I can't recall that point ('he was elected on a manifesto commitment to etc. etc.) ever being made when Major scrapped Maggie's flagship policy of the Poll Tax. In fact, I recall all the Tories being overjoyed that their bacon had been saved.

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/alexhern/status/1111989925497528322

Love the hypocrisy.

When entryists in Labour try and oust Labour MPs that's worrying for democracy, when it happens to a Tory MP it is great for democracy.

According to Figure 2 in that piece linked to by Richard Tyndall, there are people who earn over £60k who consider themselves to be working class:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

I hope no one here falls into that category.

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

another_richard said:

I see the forelock tuggers are out in force today.

If Grieve is so highly rated then he should have no problem in finding another Conservative association to stand for.

If he can't then he's not the right man to be a Conservative MP.

Its just the same job application process the proles have to go through.

He was elected on a commitment to support not only Brexit but our leaving the Customs Union and the Single Market. He is now pouring the whole of his considerable political intellect and energy into preventing any sort of Brexit at all. It's a great cause IMO but the case for him to be ditched as a Conservative candidate at the next election is pretty much unanswerable.

What was the Conservative manifesto on rearmament in 1930s?

Winston now seen as sage, who was right, but under this purist view of manifesto, he should have been deselected I reckon.

Actually the Conservative policy in the 1930s was re-armament:

' In British history, re-armament covers the period between 1934 and 1939, when a substantial programme of re-arming the nation was undertaken. Re-armament was necessary, because defense spending had gone down from £766 million in 1919–20, to £189 million in 1921–22, to £102 million in 1932.

After World War I, dubbed "The War To End All Wars” and “The Great War”, Britain (along with many other nations) had wound down its military capability. The Ten Year Rule said that a "great war" was not expected in the next ten years with the belief in its impossibility and the folly of preparing for it so that Britain made almost no investment at all in the development of new armament. The British Admiralty, however, requested the suspension of this rule when Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931. The policy was officially abandoned on March 23, 1932, by the Cabinet, four months before Adolf Hitler's Nazis became the largest party in the German Reichstag. '

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_re-armament

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Mariner, point of order: wanting to stay or remain doesn't necessarily indicate such strong emotions as love or hate.

True. The passion though of the likes of Steve Baker. Where does it come from? There must have been some incident in the past. Something very personal.

tlg86 said:

According to Figure 2 in that piece linked to by Richard Tyndall, there are people who earn over £60k who consider themselves to be working class:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/

I hope no one here falls into that category.

A person earning £60k would struggle to buy one bed flat in much of London - they couldn't even afford to buy a house in Dagenham. Earn £60k and live in Northumberland and perhaps its a different ballgame.

Wealth matters now - not income - given the insane price of housing in much of the UK.

As Rachel Reeves observed "The hardest way to make money in this country is to go to work."

Someone on £60k a year aged 30 who rents a flat is not as well off as someone on £30k aged 45 who owns a £2 million house - its all about timing, age, location and luck.

So yes a person on £60k in London who can't afford to buy a one bed flat in their area - probably is working class!

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/alexhern/status/1111989925497528322

If the Tories' rules say the leadership can overturn such a decision then that's a matter for the Tories. No organization is obliged to have to stay powerless if a pocket of their membership goes rogue. In fact, what sensible organization would allow that?

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/alexhern/status/1111989925497528322

Love the hypocrisy.

When entryists in Labour try and oust Labour MPs that's worrying for democracy, when it happens to a Tory MP it is great for democracy.

Not that I have a dog in either of those fights, but I wouldn't call either worrying for democracy.

For me it the big issue is that like with a lot of Labour agitators, Mr Grieve's ouster is someone who quite recently was in another party with the express mission of trying to destroy the Tory party.

That does not sit well with me.

Charles said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Stark_Dawning said:

brendan16 said:

I see Mrs May is planning to bring her deal back again next week for another vote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122

230 to 149 to 58 - she is getting closer every time....

Get them to vote again and again until she gets the result she wants. I thought that was only a dastardly EU trick.

She lost and should admit it and move on to an alternative, which if she is determined to pass the withdrawal agreement would be either a general election or a referendum.

This is exactly the sort of coercive situation that the convention that a defeated measure is not brought back to the House in the same session is intended to protect Parliament from. One hopes that the Speaker will stand firm.

Except that the two viable alternatives - no deal and revoke - are both sub optimal

She does not have the consent of the Commons for the Agreement. If she still wants the Agreement she can appeal directly to the people with an election or a referendum. Those are viable alternatives to Revoke or No Deal.

Either Everton have suddenly become Brazil in 1970, or West Ham are very, very dire.

This is exactly the sort of reaction I've sniffed from some of the reactions of less prominent Tories to Grieve today. Brexiters should beware of dismissing these future predictions just because they seem to come mainly from Remainers ; Remainers can still make a split happen.

http://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1111901168354119681