politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prof John Curtice does not make a prediction – Summing up wher
Comments
-
Because he thinks they would lose. I'm not greatly in favour of referenda, but so much has changed since 2016 it would be the democratic way forward. If it genuinely is the will of the people to leave, it will still be leave as the answer. Brexiteers fear that may not be the case, and their nasty agenda might be found out through another poll.Benpointer said:
Yet you won't countenance another ballot.Philip_Thompson said:
No I do not entertain that notion, at the last ballot which measured this an absolute majority voted Leave. Unless or until a new ballot changes that, there is no difference.Stocky said:Philip_Thompson said: "Or you could both accept democracy and accept that we voted to Leave.
Controversial suggestion I'm sure, what am I thinking?"
You, like others, adhere to the belief that leaving the EU is justified by dint of the majority wanting it. Direct democracy trumps rep democracy. I wonder whether you will entertain the notion that less than 50% now want to leave, thus defeating your argument?
Opinion polls gave Ed Miliband's Labour Party a lead in the polls from late 2010 to early 2015. Should David Cameron have vacated Downing Street and invited Ed Miliband to take his place as Prime Minister on the basis of opinion polls or is it votes that matter?
0 -
If May put her deal with the DUP over the concerns of voters then that says a lot about May - and of course she didn't even keep the DUP on board so what did she even achieve?OblitusSumMe said:
The EU gave a lot in negotiations with May. Your problem is that she wasn't asking for what you wanted because she had different priorities (such as preserving the Union and her deal with the DUP).Philip_Thompson said:
Until Boris replaced May we could have only left without a deal, or with a despicably terrible deal. The EU did not negotiate with May in good faith.kle4 said:
Exactly. I dislike the man, but that criticism really is either knowingly phoney or truly a sign that people are letting their dislike lead them to ridiculousness.Endillion said:
Of all the stupid criticisms of Johnson possible, accusing him of not sufficiently quoting obscure historical figures has to be the dumbest. He literally does all the bloody time, and gets routinely criticised for it.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/PaulbernalUK/status/1194862348198141952Big_G_NorthWales said:Donald Tusk making a fool of himself again.
Either way its very lame.
Nothing wrong with Tusks comments particularly as he is standing down. I imagine the upset is the impression he wasnt working to get a deal but to delay so we changed our minds, but if wed wanted we could have left ages ago, it's on our parliamentarians that we didnt.
Perhaps if Parliament had been able to provide her with a negotiating mandate we would have had those arguments in 2017, rather than not having them at all except between Johnson and the ERG this autumn.0 -
Bozo pretending he does detail. He probably has one of his favourite porn mags hidden insidePhilip_Thompson said:
I don't know but presumably an inanimate object didn't take the photo? Couldn't that be the photographer's own seat and the red box has been placed in the seat while the photographer takes the picture?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
How many people have 4 children nowadays? In your scenario, if Mum has 1, 2 or 3 children which is much more likely then a lot more tax will be paid.kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
Perhaps we should call it the "only child tax" as only children will get disproportionately clobbered.
And at least with IHT you only get clobbered once. With this proposal, if you reach your cap you can then get clobbered for ever more. Someone gave you a pair of slippers for Christmas - have you paid your LGT on that?0 -
Unlike BJ boosters, not many of them on here.TheScreamingEagles said:
I don’t know, those Nats who think Alex Salmond is being framed by the BritNat establishment are in a league of their own.Theuniondivvie said:
Possible?! I think even BJ might feel a little queasy at at such relentless puffery.Nigelb said:
Though he is his own biggest fan.Dura_Ace said:
"Morality is the choices you make so that you can be friends with yourself," as Arendt also said. Boris is transparently somebody who is not friends with himself.Stocky said:Regarding Tusk`s comments (previous thread) . I think his analysis is spot on, and nicely encapsulates the reasons why I (after much agonising) voted Remain.
His Arendt comment echoes my view - expressed many times - that the only way that the Brexit decision can be overturned is if Leavers themselves accept that they got it wrong and want a re-think.
.
(With the possible exception of HYUFD.)0 -
Benpointer said: "Hmmm - slightly creepy comment."
Crikey, we`re allowed a joke now and then.0 -
It will be democratic if a majority of MPs are elected on a mandate of holding a referendum.Nigel_Foremain said:
Because he thinks they would lose. I'm not greatly in favour of referenda, but so much has changed since 2016 it would be the democratic way forward. If it genuinely is the will of the people to leave, it will still be leave as the answer. Brexiteers fear that may not be the case, and their nasty agenda might be found out through another poll.Benpointer said:
Yet you won't countenance another ballot.Philip_Thompson said:
No I do not entertain that notion, at the last ballot which measured this an absolute majority voted Leave. Unless or until a new ballot changes that, there is no difference.Stocky said:Philip_Thompson said: "Or you could both accept democracy and accept that we voted to Leave.
Controversial suggestion I'm sure, what am I thinking?"
You, like others, adhere to the belief that leaving the EU is justified by dint of the majority wanting it. Direct democracy trumps rep democracy. I wonder whether you will entertain the notion that less than 50% now want to leave, thus defeating your argument?
Opinion polls gave Ed Miliband's Labour Party a lead in the polls from late 2010 to early 2015. Should David Cameron have vacated Downing Street and invited Ed Miliband to take his place as Prime Minister on the basis of opinion polls or is it votes that matter?
The last referendum was only held because a majority were elected on that mandate.0 -
Demonstrates there are still 37% of people who can fooled all of the time.Casino_Royale said:
Those numbers may prove to be very decisive.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Corbyn's 'Santa Tax' will be ruthlessly exploited by the conservatives and qute right tookinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
IHT is fine as it is
0 -
Falsches Bewusstsein as Engels said.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.0 -
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
I think that is quite insightful. I fall into that category. If Labour had a more centrist, more economically literate leader, Brexit and the Tories would be toast.Cookie said:
Many Remainers - I would say most, but am prepared to be persuaded otherwise - are Remainers primarily because they view Remain as the low-risk option with regard to the economy. Persuading people keen on low-risk economic decision-making to pur Jeremy Corbyn in 10 Downing Street - with or without the help of the SNP - might be challenging.bigjohnowls said:#FBPE @LibDems
The only way to prevent a No Deal Brexit is to kick the Tories OUT. The only way to do this is to elect a LAB government.
LAB will ensure a People's Vote.
The Lib Dems are actively preventing this from happening.
Pick a side. https://t.co/u99v3QvGdu0 -
Yes, each case would be different. Some would gain, some would lose. But the thrust is that instead of the estate paying, the recipient does - based on amount received and allowance available and personal financial circumstances. Broadly speaking, the bigger the bequest and the more affluent the recipient is before the bequest, the higher will be the tax. Therefore for "ordinary" people it is more likely to lead to less tax not more. It's borderline superb.Philip_Thompson said:Is Mum the only person who bequeaths anything under your logic? Because isn't it a lifetime allowance?
So if Dad, or any of their 4 Grandparents or anyone else bequeaths them anything then it would be different.0 -
Which is good for the tories and SNP but bad for other parties.StuartDickson said:
SNP the only party retaining both their Remain voters and their Leave voters. Surely due to SNP voters being far more motivated by Scottish independence than by attitudes to the EU.CarlottaVance said:0 -
There are many of us who think Alex Salmond is the "victim" of SNP infighting and there have been previous instances like the Free Church of Scotland some years ago backing an almost identical type of allegation which was made against Professor MacLeod. He was acquitted and the Free Church split as a result. Perhaps if Salmond is acquitted the SNP will fracture. There are people already starting to suggest Sturgeon will not be leading the SNP by the time of the next Holyrood election. If Salmond goes to trial early next year, it will be wall to wall bade news for the SNP no matter what they say.TheScreamingEagles said:
I don’t know, those Nats who think Alex Salmond is being framed by the BritNat establishment are in a league of their own.Theuniondivvie said:
Possible?! I think even BJ might feel a little queasy at at such relentless puffery.Nigelb said:
Though he is his own biggest fan.Dura_Ace said:
"Morality is the choices you make so that you can be friends with yourself," as Arendt also said. Boris is transparently somebody who is not friends with himself.Stocky said:Regarding Tusk`s comments (previous thread) . I think his analysis is spot on, and nicely encapsulates the reasons why I (after much agonising) voted Remain.
His Arendt comment echoes my view - expressed many times - that the only way that the Brexit decision can be overturned is if Leavers themselves accept that they got it wrong and want a re-think.
.
(With the possible exception of HYUFD.)0 -
May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.0 -
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.0 -
Not sure of your sums.kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
Current system:
Say dad and mum owned property jointly; So the dad dies passing on the house:The tax limit is increased to £475k
Mum dies with another £475k after leaving the house to children.
So thats £50k @ 40% which is £20k of tax,
Under labour
£1m 4 ways is £250, so £125k less leaves £125 over the threshold.
£125 *40% * 4=200k
So thats a tax grab of £180k for the taxman.,
1 -
Most libdem leaning people said he was a bad candidate when selected in a way I haven't seen for other libdem candidates, I'm not sure why though?NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
0 -
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
And of course if only one child, the tax grab is a whopping £395,000.Slackbladder said:
Not sure of your sums.kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
Current system:
Say dad and mum owned property jointly; So the dad dies passing on the house:The tax limit is increased to £475k
Mum dies with another £475k after leaving the house to children.
So thats £50k @ 40% which is £20k of tax,
Under labour
£1m 4 ways is £250, so £125k less leaves £125 over the threshold.
£125 *40% * 4=200k
So thats a tax grab of £180k for the taxman.,
Only children weep now...0 -
Leaving the E.U will end the infighting in the tory party about Europe. 😜Nigel_Foremain said:
Demonstrates there are still 37% of people who can fooled all of the time.Casino_Royale said:
Those numbers may prove to be very decisive.CarlottaVance said:0 -
But that's from their mum. What if their dad lives separately. Before the mum dies he gives each child a £25k gift for a deposit on a house.kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
When the mum dies the allowance is now £100k for each child. Then the dad dies and ALL the inheritance from that is taxed.
It's not just an IHT. It's a GIFT tax. If you've used it up before you're left any money - ALL of any inheritance is taxed over the £125k aggregate of gifts received.0 -
There would always be an issue when candidates are only motivated by a narrow interest, rather than supporting the party as a whole.nunu2 said:
Most libdem leaning people said he was a bad candidate when selected in a way I haven't seen for other libdem candidates, I'm not sure why though?NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
He's not a liberal first, he's a remoaner first.-1 -
Interesting statistic. My own instinct was always that the electorate collectively resiled from giving the Tories a majority based on those early polls. This was seen as OOOh Jeremy Corbyn, but was in fact nothing of the sort. It is one of the reasons that one can reasonably argue there is no mandate for hard Brexit. If a hung parliament happens again it will be very easy to argue that the electorate has no appetite for hard Brexit, and very little for Brexit at all.Benpointer said:Average Tory lead (last 6 polls) 28 days ahead of GE19 = 10.3%
Average Tory lead 28 days ahead of GE17 = 17%0 -
Answer is simple. Labour have rejected any quid pro quo (which is not an issue with the indies who have none to offer). Labour could stand down in, say, Lewes in return for the LDs standing down in Canterbury - but they refuse any arrangement. It is not a one way street.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.0 -
I knew you were going to say that.Fishing said:It's so much easier to predict the past and the present than the future.
0 -
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.2 -
I'm confident that the PM travels with more than three other people.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't know but presumably an inanimate object didn't take the photo? Couldn't that be the photographer's own seat and the red box has been placed in the seat while the photographer takes the picture?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Was the bloke who has stepped down in High Peak also bad and all the local activists who agree its crackers to put another person forward in Canterbury are wrong?nunu2 said:
Most libdem leaning people said he was a bad candidate when selected in a way I haven't seen for other libdem candidates, I'm not sure why though?NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
0 -
Is that Norwegian or ancient Icelandic?Peter_the_Punter said:
May we be pedantically correct on this please - accept *direct* democracy.Philip_Thompson said:
Or you could both accept democracy and accept that we voted to Leave.MikeSmithson said:
Bollocks. The way to prevent a no deal Brexit is for Johnson not to get a majority.bigjohnowls said:#FBPE @LibDems
The only way to prevent a No Deal Brexit is to kick the Tories OUT. The only way to do this is to elect a LAB government.
LAB will ensure a People's Vote.
The Lib Dems are actively preventing this from happening.
Pick a side. https://t.co/u99v3QvGdu
LAB has lost between a quarter and a third of its GE2017 vote because it has stuck with an unelectable leader,
Controversial suggestion I'm sure, what am I thinking?
Parliamentary democracy is a different gether altothing.
0 -
I am very happy if she is a Tory/Conservative. I don't really believe she is, but it makes me feel happier about voting for her party, thank you!bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.
Joking aside, if you think that argument is going to get traction you may be disappointed!0 -
It's more complicated than thatalb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
Lib Dem vote, East Dumbartonshire
2015: 19,926
2017: 21,023
Overall turnout fell by 3000 votes. Looks to me like a mix of switching and differential turnout. Some SNP 2015 voters stayed home in 2017.0 -
Kin hell Boris Johnson is nearly as dim witted as the PBer that thought Mansfield and Stoke were in the North.
https://twitter.com/gloriadepiero/status/1194912869940420608?s=210 -
You can almost see the penny dropping.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
What's the quid pro quo with ex Tories? LDs do not currently hold 638 seats and have 5% of MPs of Lab if you think QPQ is an equal thing you are mad LDs stand down in 20 Lab in 1 would be QPQ.alb1on said:
Answer is simple. Labour have rejected any quid pro quo (which is not an issue with the indies who have none to offer). Labour could stand down in, say, Lewes in return for the LDs standing down in Canterbury - but they refuse any arrangement. It is not a one way street.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.0 -
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?0 -
Well indeed, but the fault was hers rather than the EUs. The EU was responding to her negotiating demands. You can't fault them for that.Philip_Thompson said:
If May put her deal with the DUP over the concerns of voters then that says a lot about May - and of course she didn't even keep the DUP on board so what did she even achieve?OblitusSumMe said:
The EU gave a lot in negotiations with May. Your problem is that she wasn't asking for what you wanted because she had different priorities (such as preserving the Union and her deal with the DUP).Philip_Thompson said:
Until Boris replaced May we could have only left without a deal, or with a despicably terrible deal. The EU did not negotiate with May in good faith.kle4 said:
Exactly. I dislike the man, but that criticism really is either knowingly phoney or truly a sign that people are letting their dislike lead them to ridiculousness.Endillion said:
Of all the stupid criticisms of Johnson possible, accusing him of not sufficiently quoting obscure historical figures has to be the dumbest. He literally does all the bloody time, and gets routinely criticised for it.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/PaulbernalUK/status/1194862348198141952Big_G_NorthWales said:Donald Tusk making a fool of himself again.
Either way its very lame.
Nothing wrong with Tusks comments particularly as he is standing down. I imagine the upset is the impression he wasnt working to get a deal but to delay so we changed our minds, but if wed wanted we could have left ages ago, it's on our parliamentarians that we didnt.
Perhaps if Parliament had been able to provide her with a negotiating mandate we would have had those arguments in 2017, rather than not having them at all except between Johnson and the ERG this autumn.0 -
With any changes the issues arise both from the change and the way it is implemented. The principles behind the disability changes may be supportable, but the appalling and chaotic way they were implemented resulted in huge numbers of incorrect decisions, massive waits to get them overturned on appeal and real hardship for vulnerable people. It seems to be a hallmark of the recent Conservative government that even when they get changes right in principle, they are utterly incapable of managing the change properly. Probably a result of too many ministers who have never worked in the real world.Pulpstar said:
May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.1 -
..and he is very dim witted indeed if he thinks someone who has just had their home flooded gives a flying fuck about his Brexit delusion.TheScreamingEagles said:Kin hell Boris Johnson is nearly as dim witted as the PBer that thought Mansfield and stoke were in the North.
https://twitter.com/gloriadepiero/status/1194912869940420608?s=210 -
You mean the clueless wonders are in for a shock?StuartDickson said:
You can almost see the penny dropping.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
Oh dear - blind are we? They have nothing to trade so the decision has to be taken on what will most damage the Tories. Labour can (and should) trade.bigjohnowls said:
What's the quid pro quo with ex Tories?alb1on said:
Answer is simple. Labour have rejected any quid pro quo (which is not an issue with the indies who have none to offer). Labour could stand down in, say, Lewes in return for the LDs standing down in Canterbury - but they refuse any arrangement. It is not a one way street.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.0 -
Lib Dems shortening in both Gordon and Inverness NB&S. Now 10/1 in both, from 20/1 and 12/1 yesterday.0
-
If that is not evidence then I am Boris Johnson.Theuniondivvie said:
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?0 -
And that's only in his own head.OblitusSumMe said:
I'm confident that the PM travels with more than three other people.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't know but presumably an inanimate object didn't take the photo? Couldn't that be the photographer's own seat and the red box has been placed in the seat while the photographer takes the picture?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Morning PB
Wonder if we'll see a Mori poll turning up this morning? Haven't had one for two weeks.0 -
Next MORI next Wednesday.GIN1138 said:Morning PB
Wonder if we'll see a Mori poll turning up this morning? Haven't had one for two weeks.1 -
Na, his nom de plume when contributing to PB is either Philip Thompson or HYUFD.alb1on said:
If that is not evidence then I am Boris Johnson.Theuniondivvie said:
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?0 -
An avowedly pro-independence political betting expert?Theuniondivvie said:
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?0 -
Thanks Mike.MikeSmithson said:
Next MORI next Wednesday.GIN1138 said:Morning PB
Wonder if we'll see a Mori poll turning up this morning? Haven't had one for two weeks.
0 -
The A and E waiting times figures will not help the Tories today. Classic Labour territory0
-
I can assure you a majority of voters want neither as PM, yet one of them will be. A sure sign that our democracy is broken...Philip_Thompson said:
The choice is a Labour PM or a Conservative PM. Nobody is gifting anyone anything voting with that knowledge. The reason there was a Tory MP in Guildford previously is not because of somebodies "gift" but because over 30k Guildford voters voted for a Tory MP. Do those voters want Corbyn as Prime Minister or Johnson?alb1on said:
Monumentally stupid to base your vote on a straight Lab/Con choice. Your approach would gift Guildford to the Conservatives.bigjohnowls said:#FBPE @LibDems
The only way to prevent a No Deal Brexit is to kick the Tories OUT. The only way to do this is to elect a LAB government.
LAB will ensure a People's Vote.
The Lib Dems are actively preventing this from happening.
Pick a side. https://t.co/u99v3QvGdu1 -
Not if the LibDems continue to refuse to support a party led by Corbyn, she doesn't.GarethoftheVale2 said:Swinson's problem is that in a hung parliament situation she has to choose between Corbyn and Johnson. If no coalition is formed then Corbyn will put down a VNOC. If the LDs don't back it then Boris would continue with a minority government. If the LDs back it then Johnson would resign and the Queen would send for Corbyn.
Most projections of the scenarii that let Labour have a chance of running the country require LD support, or at least agreement not to oppose.
SWINSON WON'T LET CORBYN IN. So if Corbyn persists in insisting on being PM, the Queen can't invite him to be PM - and if Johnson remains PM, he'll lose every vote too till the Queen invites an anti-Johnsonian not called Corbyn or McDonnell to be PM
There are scenarii in which the LDs' seats become irrelevant. But they're the least likely. The likeliest scenarii all mean Swinson ultimately really will be the Kingmaker. The only way to stop that is for Johnson to become a grownup or Corbyn to become a social democrat.0 -
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.0 -
The results! FFSTheuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
TUD is right, it's not evidence. You can achieve swing without a single voter switching sides, just through differential turnout.alb1on said:
If that is not evidence then I am Boris Johnson.Theuniondivvie said:
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?
Of course there will be a mix. There will be people in that constituency who switched from Ukip to Lib Dem, from SNP to Conservative, and all sorts of exotic transfers. The question is, how many? And you have no evidence either way.0 -
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still0 -
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.0 -
Ok, I'll give you circumstantial evidence, ie depending on inference. How about infering what was going on in the heads of those (still hypothetical) SNP>LD switchers?alb1on said:
If that is not evidence then I am Boris Johnson.Theuniondivvie said:
That's not evidence, and churn is difficult to prove.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
However talk me through the mental process in which thousands of SNP voters in 2015 changed to voting for an explicitly pro Union LD candidate in 2017? Perhaps a mailshot from a well know political betting expert changed their mind?0 -
And the BBC News headline makes grim reading (use of the word “imploding” even though in quotation marks). A cynic would suggest the Beeb knew exactly what they were doing there.dyedwoolie said:The A and E waiting times figures will not help the Tories today. Classic Labour territory
0 -
Bollocks again.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.0 -
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.0 -
Hence Boris right to promise more money for the NHS than under May and Cameron, the Tories usually will not win on the NHS but they can try and neutralise the issuedyedwoolie said:The A and E waiting times figures will not help the Tories today. Classic Labour territory
0 -
Tories party of golden generation pensioners.Alistair said:
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still0 -
Corbyn is not going to leave *more* for people with inherited wealth. If he makes a big tax change he will makes sure he take more for the treasury. This plan takes £9 billion more. Someone has to be worse offSlackbladder said:
Not sure of your sums.kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
Current system:
Say dad and mum owned property jointly; So the dad dies passing on the house:The tax limit is increased to £475k
Mum dies with another £475k after leaving the house to children.
So thats £50k @ 40% which is £20k of tax,
Under labour
£1m 4 ways is £250, so £125k less leaves £125 over the threshold.
£125 *40% * 4=200k
So thats a tax grab of £180k for the taxman.,0 -
No they are now the party of welfare, the Tories lead with workers and pensioners nowAlistair said:
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still0 -
It depends - pls see my reply to @Philip_Thompson. In essence it's a switch of mindset. Recipient pays not the estate. Which is great because it addresses the big perception problem with IHT. "You work hard for it, pay tax all your life, then the taxman nicks a slice when you die." No longer. Now the taxman tales nothing off you when you die. The only ones paying any tax are those who receive the windfall and even then only if it exceeds a large sum. And of course they have NOT worked hard for it. It's unearned income which will still receive a favourable tax treatment compared to other types of such.Slackbladder said:Not sure of your sums.
Current system:
Say dad and mum owned property jointly; So the dad dies passing on the house:The tax limit is increased to £475k
Mum dies with another £475k after leaving the house to children.
So thats £50k @ 40% which is £20k of tax,
Under labour
£1m 4 ways is £250, so £125k less leaves £125 over the threshold.
£125 *40% * 4=200k
So thats a tax grab of £180k for the taxman.0 -
The SANTA TAX? We wait with baited breath.bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.0 -
Libdems have a chance in Inverness. Gordon is safe Tory.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems shortening in both Gordon and Inverness NB&S. Now 10/1 in both, from 20/1 and 12/1 yesterday.
0 -
Well said.alb1on said:
With any changes the issues arise both from the change and the way it is implemented. The principles behind the disability changes may be supportable, but the appalling and chaotic way they were implemented resulted in huge numbers of incorrect decisions, massive waits to get them overturned on appeal and real hardship for vulnerable people. It seems to be a hallmark of the recent Conservative government that even when they get changes right in principle, they are utterly incapable of managing the change properly. Probably a result of too many ministers who have never worked in the real world.Pulpstar said:
May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).kinabalu said:I agree that as, with the "Dementia Tax", Labour's IHT reform, if it appears, will be ruthlessly misrepresented in the campaign and as a consequence perhaps cost votes out there amongst the ignorami. However, let's not do that here. We're better than that.
Mum dies, leaves house worth £1m to 4 children.
The net of tax inheritance will be HIGHER under the new system.
The extra money for each child will not in any way lessen their grief, of course, they will think about Mum every day of their lives until they themselves pass away, but it is certainly not to be sneezed at.
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
People with degenerative illnesses having to go through the cycle of:
"apply, rejection, seek mandatory reconsideration, rejection, appeal, win the appeal*"
...for benefits such as PIP, ESA and UC is bad enough.
But then 12 months later they recieve a 24 page form which they have to complete as they are being 're-assessed' and they are back in the cycle all over again.
The money this process must waste is presumably offset by the fact that many entitled to this support find it too difficult to complete the process and so go without.
Still, such people probably don't vote, so not to worry, eh?
(*70% win the tribunal appeal if they persevere to this stage.)0 -
Ah, results! I'm sure you'll agree that on the 'evidence' of results that the Tory party has been an irrelevance despised by the majority of Scots since 1955.NorthCadboll said:
The results! FFSTheuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
Why do you want Tories leave supporting Candidate to gain Canterbury from ultra Remainer Duffield? Same in High Peak and dozens of other Lab Tory marginals.MikeSmithson said:
Bollocks again.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.
Bollocks wouldn't be an appropriate response!0 -
Brexit Party announcement coming up shortly.
https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1194918146844643330?s=210 -
IF you look at 2010 to 2015 the SNP vote can be explained by capturing the entirety of the incerased turnout plus all the lost Labour voters.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
Swinson's vote went up in 2015 despite losing the seat. She got Con-to-LD switchers then.
She then only added a further 1000 votes from 2015 to 2017.
Differential Turnout. In 2017 SNP turnout plunged and SCon turnout rose.
0 -
Very refreshing to see a Scottish Tory actually interested in results. They’ve spent the last two years telling anybody who would listen that they “won” in 2017, with 22% of the seats. The party which “lost” only got 59% of the seats. And, as everyone knows, 22 is a much bigger number than 59.Theuniondivvie said:
Ah, results! I'm sure you'll agree that on the 'evidence' of results that the Tory party has been an irrelevance despised by the majority of Scots since 1955.NorthCadboll said:
The results! FFSTheuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
Only the latter.HYUFD said:
No they are now the party of welfare, the Tories lead with workers and pensioners nowAlistair said:
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still0 -
Or on the other hand, people will see it as 'I want to help my son/daughter' out with X/Y/Z and they've got to pay a chunk of it across to the tax man up front..kinabalu said:
It depends - pls see my reply to @Philip_Thompson. In essence it's a switch of mindset. Recipient pays not the estate. Which is great because it addresses the big perception problem with IHT. "You work hard for it, pay tax all your life, then the taxman nicks a slice when you die." No longer. Now the taxman tales nothing off you when you die. The only ones paying any tax are those who receive the windfall and even then only if it exceeds a large sum. And of course they have NOT worked hard for it. It's unearned income which will still receive a favourable tax treatment compared to other types of such.Slackbladder said:Not sure of your sums.
Current system:
Say dad and mum owned property jointly; So the dad dies passing on the house:The tax limit is increased to £475k
Mum dies with another £475k after leaving the house to children.
So thats £50k @ 40% which is £20k of tax,
Under labour
£1m 4 ways is £250, so £125k less leaves £125 over the threshold.
£125 *40% * 4=200k
So thats a tax grab of £180k for the taxman.1 -
BREXIT standing down more candidates in full alliance with Jester?0
-
Ugh, if you want to read something that will make your skin itch:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/14/task-politics-today-scare-capitalists-communism
I can see where Chakrabortty is coming from but this all seems backwards to me. It gives too much credit to despotic-regimes-as-examples and too little credit to the political campaigners of the West who had positive visions for how society should be fairer. The latter is a vision that people from all parts of the political spectrum can participate in, from conservatives to socialists. We need to stop thinking of capitalism as oppressive and start to realise that it is a tool of great power that can be used or misused. We don't need communism to tell us about capitalism's deficiencies. We see those by looking at places where capitalism is done well.2 -
The SavantaComRes poll from yesterday had Labour ahead with both Public and Private Sector workers.HYUFD said:
No they are now the party of welfare, the Tories lead with workers and pensioners nowAlistair said:
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still
0 -
"We have come to the view that we should remain part of the European Union. We're very sorry about everything before today."williamglenn said:Brexit Party announcement coming up shortly.
https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1194918146844643330?s=210 -
Lab. always ahead with workersAlistair said:
The SavantaComRes poll from yesterday had Labour ahead with both Public and Private Sector workers.HYUFD said:
No they are now the party of welfare, the Tories lead with workers and pensioners nowAlistair said:
Yet Labour are the party of people who work.HYUFD said:
The Brexit Party and to a lesser extent the Tories now the true party of the working class on those numbers percentage of vote wise.Slackbladder said:https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080
Labour...the party of the 'working classes' no longer.
The LDs now the party of the middle class percentage wise even if the Tories lead with middle class voters still
Tories always ahead with golden generation.0 -
Flying a kite? If it is or if it isn't it will lose Lab votes. Why, if it only affects a small proportion of the population?bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.
Aspiration. It craps all over aspiration. Look at how many people play the lottery. Let's imagine that a party said that in future 90% of all lottery wins over £1m would be taken away for tax purposes. It would be hugely unpopular even though the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small.1 -
Clueless wonders? Is that the best on offer? No wonder the electorate is disillusioned.TheScreamingEagles said:
You mean the clueless wonders are in for a shock?StuartDickson said:
You can almost see the penny dropping.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
Council by-election today in Inverness today (Inverness Central ward). May be a harbinger. Tories will be hoping the by election a few weeks back in Gordon was a harbinger as their vote share went up by 10% and they overtook the SNP in the ward concerned (Bridge of Don).nunu2 said:
Libdems have a chance in Inverness. Gordon is safe Tory.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems shortening in both Gordon and Inverness NB&S. Now 10/1 in both, from 20/1 and 12/1 yesterday.
0 -
Right wing: people should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, the rich are rich because they worked hard and deserve it, don't give handouts to people who don't contribute to society, you should have to work to have money.
Right wing: it is perfectly fine for wealth to accumulate amongst the already richest people in society through inheritance, allowing a class of people who can be unfathomably wealthy just because their parents were wealthy.0 -
Because Remainers don't want Remain for its own sake, they want it because they think it is the best bet for economic stability. Labour aren't currently offering this.bigjohnowls said:
Why do you want Tories leave supporting Candidate to gain Canterbury from ultra Remainer Duffield? Same in High Peak and dozens of other Lab Tory marginals.MikeSmithson said:
Bollocks again.bigjohnowls said:
I agree with Tim.NorthCadboll said:Tim Walker exposing divisions within Liberal party about opposing remoaner candidates in Labour party on SKY News
Why stand down for Tories Grieve and Soubry who haven't an earthly of winning but not for Duffield.
Asking for a friend who thinks it's because Swinson is a Tory.
Bollocks wouldn't be an appropriate response!
0 -
Yes, it would be a net gain for the Treasury, which is needed given the ambitious spending and investment plans. And the extra burden would fall on the truly affluent. There would be many winners at the lower end of the scale. It is also simpler and harder to evade than IHT. It's everything you want from a tax reform. Well perhaps not "you" but you know what I mean.nunu2 said:Corbyn is not going to leave *more* for people with inherited wealth. If he makes a big tax change he will makes sure he take more for the treasury. This plan takes £9 billion more. Someone has to be worse off
0 -
You can't "aspire" to inherit millions of pounds if your whole family is in poverty.TOPPING said:
Flying a kite? If it is or if it isn't it will lose Lab votes. Why, if it only affects a small proportion of the population?bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.
Aspiration. It craps all over aspiration. Look at how many people play the lottery. Let's imagine that a party said that in future 90% of all lottery wins over £1m would be taken away for tax purposes. It would be hugely unpopular even though the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small.0 -
Clueless wonders was what Stuart called people who had the temerity to bet/predict a No victory in September 2014.alb1on said:
Clueless wonders? Is that the best on offer? No wonder the electorate is disillusioned.TheScreamingEagles said:
You mean the clueless wonders are in for a shock?StuartDickson said:
You can almost see the penny dropping.alb1on said:
Since the 2015 and 2017 results are a matter of public record (Swinson up 4.3% in '17, Tories up 6% and SNP down 10%) it seems blindingly obvious unless there were some very circuitous switching.Theuniondivvie said:
What's your evidence for that?NorthCadboll said:Stuart Dickson talking nonsense about East Dunbartonshire. Jo Swinson won the seat back in 2017 on the basis of SNP to Liberal switchers. The Tory vote in 2017 was 6% higher than it was in 2015. So no Tory to Liberal switchers helped her win!
0 -
No. Aspire was the wrong word for the lottery. Day dream perhaps.Noo said:
You can't "aspire" to inherit millions of pounds if your whole family is in poverty.TOPPING said:
Flying a kite? If it is or if it isn't it will lose Lab votes. Why, if it only affects a small proportion of the population?bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.
Aspiration. It craps all over aspiration. Look at how many people play the lottery. Let's imagine that a party said that in future 90% of all lottery wins over £1m would be taken away for tax purposes. It would be hugely unpopular even though the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small.
But you can aspire to make millions of pounds to leave to your family.0 -
People do though. My mother calls it the "Del Boy Delusion".Noo said:
You can't "aspire" to inherit millions of pounds if your whole family is in poverty.TOPPING said:
Flying a kite? If it is or if it isn't it will lose Lab votes. Why, if it only affects a small proportion of the population?bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.
Aspiration. It craps all over aspiration. Look at how many people play the lottery. Let's imagine that a party said that in future 90% of all lottery wins over £1m would be taken away for tax purposes. It would be hugely unpopular even though the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small.0 -
Day one, I bought an apple, spent time polishing it and sold it for a profit.148grss said:Right wing: people should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, the rich are rich because they worked hard and deserve it, don't give handouts to people who don't contribute to society, you should have to work to have money.
Right wing: it is perfectly fine for wealth to accumulate amongst the already richest people in society through inheritance, allowing a class of people who can be unfathomably wealthy just because their parents were wealthy.
With the profits, on day two I bought two apples, polished them, and sold them for profit.
On day three I bought four apples, and sold them for profit.
On day four my childless uncle died and I inherited ten million dollars.1 -
This is the weirdness of this election:
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1194927368709791744
The equilibrium is hard to balance, and I think it is why many are angry at Swinson on the remain / left side. BUT, the more anti-Labour the LDs are, the less likely a Corbyn PMship seems, the more some people might hold their nose and vote Labour even if they dislike Corbyn.
On current polling, depending on tactical voting, geographic efficiency, etc. we could see a Tory majority of 40+, all the way to a hung parliament with 30-40 seats separating Tories and Labour. I don't know whether tactical voting should be baked into polls as they are, but I can imagine a swing of a couple % either way making a big difference.0 -
If you were talking about the 18th Century and taxing estates and land from the aristocracy I would agree with you.148grss said:Right wing: people should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, the rich are rich because they worked hard and deserve it, don't give handouts to people who don't contribute to society, you should have to work to have money.
Right wing: it is perfectly fine for wealth to accumulate amongst the already richest people in society through inheritance, allowing a class of people who can be unfathomably wealthy just because their parents were wealthy.
But we're not. We're talking about things such as ordinary houses, peoples savings, assets earned through hard work which have already been taxed by the government and when you want to pass that on to your loved ones when you pass away the government takes another slice.
We're not talking about "unfathomable wealth". We're talking about normal peoples assets accumulated over a lifetime.
Quite why you think the world is like Downton Abbey is rather strange.1 -
Conservatives have to have the £350m extra for NHS in their manifesto (something Theresa failed to do)dyedwoolie said:The A and E waiting times figures will not help the Tories today. Classic Labour territory
1 -
I "aspire" to live in a country where we prioritise the shelter, nutrition, health and happiness of all people, no matter how vulnerable.TOPPING said:
No. Aspire was the wrong word for the lottery. Day dream perhaps.Noo said:
You can't "aspire" to inherit millions of pounds if your whole family is in poverty.TOPPING said:
Flying a kite? If it is or if it isn't it will lose Lab votes. Why, if it only affects a small proportion of the population?bigjohnowls said:
Is it in the Manifesto?HYUFD said:
And Labour's gift tax would regain that Tory majority on its ownbigjohnowls said:
It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.kinabalu said:
The Dementia Tax was an excellent policy.Pulpstar said:May's "dementia tax" was a net cost to the treasury (And hence an implied saving above the current system to the general public in aggregate).
There have been net beneficiaries from some of the disability changes too I believe.
Noone hears from the winners when a new "tax" is on its way.
Says much about our softhead politics and populace that it bombed.
Aspiration. It craps all over aspiration. Look at how many people play the lottery. Let's imagine that a party said that in future 90% of all lottery wins over £1m would be taken away for tax purposes. It would be hugely unpopular even though the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small.
But you can aspire to make millions of pounds to leave to your family.0 -
Well, yes, and that in and of itself was a great thing, but we are never going to get any good tax reform done in this country with everything being dumbed down the way it is. Burnham's "Death Tax" was another casualty in 2010.bigjohnowls said:It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.
This fabulous IHT reform, I suppose will not be in the manifesto for this reason. So depressing.0 -
Things like this can only happen when both a party has a large majority, and the economy is going very well. Niether is likely anytime soon.kinabalu said:
Well, yes, and that in and of itself was a great thing, but we are never going to get any good tax reform done in this country with everything being dumbed down the way it is. Burnham's "Death Tax" was another casualty in 2010.bigjohnowls said:It was excellent it lost the Tory majority.
This fabulous IHT reform, I suppose will not be in the manifesto for this reason. So depressing.0
