Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Where did it go wrong for the Lib Dems?

12346

Comments

  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    So Bozo gets to look tough on crime for his appearance on Marr and avoids AN .

    Marr is unlikely to go after Johnson given the circumstances .

    It would indeed look terrible for the national broadcaster to do that 48 hours after an attack in the capital. Mabe not all of CCHQ should be fired after all.
    Why would it look terrible.
  • Options
    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
  • Options

    On topic: Where did the LD's go wrong?
    Megalomania.
    They are not "Jo Swinson's Lib Dems". That makes it look like the election is about electing her. The focus is on the wrong place. They should be remembering that it is the voter who matters, not Jo Swinson. Perhaps they should have put "Your Lib Dems" at the top?
    "Vote Jo Swinson" has too many shades of similarity to "Vote Theresa May"

    I think that's right, though I got monstered by nico for saying it yesterday.
    The joys of PB ;)

    That said, every General Election under FPTP is an unfair puzzle for the LibDems. The two possible strategies are complete centrist equidistance and deciding to try to supplant one big party altogether by being the better version of that side. In the end, the latter never quite works by external pressure - one day a big party may collapse by itself, but despite numerous prominent resignations on both sides it's not happening this time.
    The former is more promising but has been undermined by the Revoke stance, which has its followers but doesn't feel very centrist at all. Campaigning as "the reasonable option" would probably have been the best, ironically adopting something like Corbyn's "neutral chairing of a referendum with a sensible choice" before he did - they'd have found it easier to sell than he has, because people do assume they're moderate.

    Yes. Pushing the line that vote was a long time ago, circumstances have changed and we finally what the deal is would at least be coherent arguments for supporting a 2nd ref.
  • Options
    Johnson goes onto Marr

    Wait that's not Marr's music

    **ANDREW NEIL COMES IN WITH A STEEL CHAIR**
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    #ChickenBoris

    I’m planning to eat a chicken later. It’s been frozen. Should I call it Boris?
    Is it an utter cock ?
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,934
    John McDonnell - who will be Chancellor if Labour wins the election - confirms to @moneybox that some people with incomes around £20,000 including pensioners will pay more tax.

    Colour me shocked
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283
    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    The money and effort getting OGH to write to the good electors of Hornchurch and Warrington has clearly been wasted.

    It all hangs, now, on whether the Labour vote recovers in its marginals, whilst the LibDems get a lot of tactical support in the Home Counties. The recent polling and anecdota aren’t incompatible with such an outcome.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    On topic: Where did the LD's go wrong?
    Megalomania.
    They are not "Jo Swinson's Lib Dems". That makes it look like the election is about electing her. The focus is on the wrong place. They should be remembering that it is the voter who matters, not Jo Swinson. Perhaps they should have put "Your Lib Dems" at the top?
    "Vote Jo Swinson" has too many shades of similarity to "Vote Theresa May"

    It might work if she were really popular or even just well known, but the reality is the new leader of the LDs was probably not known by most people.
    Mrs May was well known, but it did not work for her either ;)
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    On infrastructure, does anyone know which railway lines the Tories are planning to reopen?
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Imagine being the type of scumbag that gets terrorists out of jail.

    I am more concerned about potential PMs that work to do that sort of thing....as Jezza did with the ISIS funder raiser, cos he thought he should be let out so he could celebrate Christmas.
  • Options
    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    I live in Warrington South where the lib dems have zero chance , yet I have never had so much lib dem correspondence in any election campaign,they must have money to burn
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226

    Johnson goes onto Marr
    Wait that's not Marr's music
    **ANDREW NEIL COMES IN WITH A STEEL CHAIR**

    Oh cripes!
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283

    kle4 said:

    On topic: Where did the LD's go wrong?
    Megalomania.
    They are not "Jo Swinson's Lib Dems". That makes it look like the election is about electing her. The focus is on the wrong place. They should be remembering that it is the voter who matters, not Jo Swinson. Perhaps they should have put "Your Lib Dems" at the top?
    "Vote Jo Swinson" has too many shades of similarity to "Vote Theresa May"

    It might work if she were really popular or even just well known, but the reality is the new leader of the LDs was probably not known by most people.
    Mrs May was well known, but it did not work for her either ;)
    But in her case, being well known was the problem.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Really don't like this idea of attacking lawyers for doing their job

    Yes, even terrorist scumbags are allowed to have a fair trial.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    kinabalu said:

    Johnson goes onto Marr
    Wait that's not Marr's music
    **ANDREW NEIL COMES IN WITH A STEEL CHAIR**

    Oh cripes!
    I would pay good money to see that...
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    nichomar said:

    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    So Bozo gets to look tough on crime for his appearance on Marr and avoids AN .

    Marr is unlikely to go after Johnson given the circumstances .

    It would indeed look terrible for the national broadcaster to do that 48 hours after an attack in the capital. Mabe not all of CCHQ should be fired after all.
    Why would it look terrible.
    It wouldn’t, and it’s ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,934
    edited November 2019

    Johnson goes onto Marr

    Wait that's not Marr's music

    **ANDREW NEIL COMES IN WITH A STEEL CHAIR**

    Neil has hit him with the Pedigree! 1, 2, ...... Oh My God Johnson kicks out! Johnson Kicks out!
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited November 2019
    Everybody is building up being interviewed by Andrew Neil like you are facing a firing squad. Loads of people have been interviewed by him and done perfectly fine.
    If I was Boris I would be more concerned about Marr. Neil is a straight shooter, he asks tough questions, he is well briefed and won't take any BS. But if you give a reasonably straight answer you are ok.
    Marr on the other hand, has a visceral dislike of Cameron / Boris types, and he has pulled stupid stunts in the past e.g. flashing up the Bullingdon picture off camera just as Cameron was about to speak.
    He also did a similar thing when he ambushed Gordon about what potential medication he was taking. I don't think that is somewhere Neil would go.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Really don't like this idea of attacking lawyers for doing their job

    Yes, even terrorist scumbags are allowed to have a fair trial.
    Indeed. It is what separates us from the totalitarian regimes of places like the Middle East where the religious police just lock you up and flog you until you confess....
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    edited November 2019
    Sandpit said:

    Really don't like this idea of attacking lawyers for doing their job

    Yes, even terrorist scumbags are allowed to have a fair trial.
    Also, given the nature of the cases involved, you can imagine that to ensure they are fair that they have to have pretty specialist lawyers in the room. Some of these cases are fearsomely complicated and juries are of course still usually present* unlike in fraud cases. Therefore it’s not surprising you have a lawyer who has been involved in a very high proportion of them.

    *I know some are tried by a panel of judges.
  • Options
    kjohnw1 said:

    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    I live in Warrington South where the lib dems have zero chance , yet I have never had so much lib dem correspondence in any election campaign,they must have money to burn
    I lived until recently in Warrington South. There isn't the foggiest chance the Lib Dems will win it.

    The only reason I can think of the Lib Dems putting that much effort in it is to try and get the Labour MP to cling on and thus help ensure there is another Hung Parliament. Nothing else makes sense to me.

    Neither Mike who sent the letter nor anyone else can credibly think the Lib Dems will win in Warrington South.
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    On topic: Where did the LD's go wrong?
    Megalomania.
    They are not "Jo Swinson's Lib Dems". That makes it look like the election is about electing her. The focus is on the wrong place. They should be remembering that it is the voter who matters, not Jo Swinson. Perhaps they should have put "Your Lib Dems" at the top?
    "Vote Jo Swinson" has too many shades of similarity to "Vote Theresa May"

    It might work if she were really popular or even just well known, but the reality is the new leader of the LDs was probably not known by most people.
    Mrs May was well known, but it did not work for her either ;)
    But in her case, being well known was the problem.
    :D
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,288
    edited November 2019
    NOM just gone in to 3.45.
    Am I the only one astonished by the current odds?
    The direction of travel seems so clear cut - it looks like an absolute carbon copy of 2017 to me - maybe Lab 2% lower, LD 2% higher to reflect anti-Semitism / defections - which would give 43/39/10 (for GB, not UK).
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    On infrastructure, does anyone know which railway lines the Tories are planning to reopen?
    Trumpton
    Camberwick Green
    It is rumoured that Casey Jones will be at the throttle of the Cannonball Express
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    I don't understand why they wouldn't mention the NHS? The other two I get.

    But the NHS is surely their best issue.
  • Options
    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
  • Options

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    Does anyone believe that the Labour manifesto spending commitments can be paid for by just taxing the rich, raising corporation tax & abolishing IHT allowances.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    edited November 2019

    Everybody is building up being interviewed by Andrew Neil like you are facing a firing squad. Loads of people have been interviewed by him and done perfectly fine.
    If I was Boris I would be more concerned about Marr. Neil is a straight shooter, he asks tough questions, he is well briefed and won't take any BS. But if you give a reasonably straight answer you are ok.
    Marr on the other hand, has a visceral dislike of Cameron / Boris types, and he has pulled stupid stunts in the past e.g. flashing up the Bullingdon picture off camera just as Cameron was about to speak.
    He also did a similar thing when he ambushed Gordon about what potential medication he was taking. I don't think that is somewhere Neil would go.

    Andrew Neil is an excellent person to be interviewed by if you are honest, intelligent, well-informed and prepared to be straight with him. Because he asks shrewd questions that allow those answers to come to the fore. Much though I dislike him, I can imagine Gove being interviewed by him and it being both informative and interesting.
    But we’re talking about Boris Johnson.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283

    kjohnw1 said:

    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    I live in Warrington South where the lib dems have zero chance , yet I have never had so much lib dem correspondence in any election campaign,they must have money to burn
    I lived until recently in Warrington South. There isn't the foggiest chance the Lib Dems will win it.

    The only reason I can think of the Lib Dems putting that much effort in it is to try and get the Labour MP to cling on and thus help ensure there is another Hung Parliament. Nothing else makes sense to me.

    Neither Mike who sent the letter nor anyone else can credibly think the Lib Dems will win in Warrington South.
    You highlight a key question, which is who exactly these letters are being sent to? There must be some sort of strategy behind it.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,288
    And just as I type the above post it goes 3.4.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    MikeL said:

    NOM just gone in to 3.45.
    Am I the only one astonished by the current odds?
    The direction of travel seems so clear cut - it looks like an absolute carbon copy of 2017 to me - maybe Lab 2% lower, LD 2% higher to reflect anti-Semitism / defections - which would give 43/39/10 (for GB, not UK).

    Must be a good poll for Labour incoming
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    Does anyone believe that the Labour manifesto spending commitments can be paid for by just taxing the rich, raising corporation tax & abolishing IHT allowances.
    Does anyone believe they can actually be paid for without Weimar style printing of money?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,449
    ydoethur said:

    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    On infrastructure, does anyone know which railway lines the Tories are planning to reopen?
    Skipton - Colne, Leamside line and Blyth have all been mentioned.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    From what I can see the started out with a 50/50 strategy 50 genuine targets 50 development seats. After TBP pulled out of the Tory held seats it was reigned back to 30/30 which has had an impact on the national polling figures.
  • Options

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    Does anyone believe that the Labour manifesto spending commitments can be paid for by just taxing the rich, raising corporation tax & abolishing IHT allowances.
    That's not what I am asking, I am asking what specific taxes are being referred to.

    I understand the broader point about us all needing to pay - but that was not the implication of this Tweet. It was that McDonnell has specifically said about the £20,000 group paying specific taxes - but these are not cited and I can't see anything on McDonnell saying anything.

    For what it's worth, I am very happy to pay more tax.
  • Options
    camelcamel Posts: 815

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
  • Options
    “This is BBC One. Now it’s time for the Andrew Marr Show. Unfortunately Andrew’s off sick today and we could only find one other political interviewer called Andrew to replace him at short notice. And if you’d like to see the show at a more convenient time, it’ll be shown again tonight in between two mass audience blockbuster dramas. And again every night this week next to Eastenders”
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    It would, for example, clobber me as I have a private pension scheme as well as my TPS.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,934
    "This guy was out on automatic early release and I have long said that this system simply isn't working."

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    Read more: https://t.co/qf2gIP6Pgs https://t.co/T4gMNRvBKA
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    I'd like to see Madeley take a crack at him.
  • Options
    BobBeige said:

    MaxPB said:

    Imagine being the type of scumbag that gets terrorists out of jail.

    Alex Salmond and the SNP ?
    Let it go, Harry, let it go.
  • Options
    camelcamel Posts: 815
    ydoethur said:

    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    On infrastructure, does anyone know which railway lines the Tories are planning to reopen?
    Not sure, but in the area of this targeted mailshot (WY marginals), I do not think there are any potentials.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited November 2019
    ydoethur said:

    Everybody is building up being interviewed by Andrew Neil like you are facing a firing squad. Loads of people have been interviewed by him and done perfectly fine.
    If I was Boris I would be more concerned about Marr. Neil is a straight shooter, he asks tough questions, he is well briefed and won't take any BS. But if you give a reasonably straight answer you are ok.
    Marr on the other hand, has a visceral dislike of Cameron / Boris types, and he has pulled stupid stunts in the past e.g. flashing up the Bullingdon picture off camera just as Cameron was about to speak.
    He also did a similar thing when he ambushed Gordon about what potential medication he was taking. I don't think that is somewhere Neil would go.

    Andrew Neil is an excellent person to be interviewed by if you are honest, intelligent, well-informed and prepared to be straight with him. Because he asks shrewd questions that allow those answers to come to the fore. Much though I dislike him, I can imagine Gove being interviewed by him and it being both informative and interesting.
    But we’re talking about Boris Johnson.
    What I like about Neil is he also doesn't interrupt constantly. He lets people dig their own grave. This trend of just constantly interrupting is both annoying to watch and actually doesn't allow the viewer to really find out how much of a moron (or not) the person is.

    The best take down of Nick Griffin was a similar event when Iain Dale interviewed him. He let him spout his well rehearsed stuff, then he said ok, so if you want to do x, how will that work....well Griffin was totally thrown as for once an interviewer didn't scream RACISSSSSTTTTTTT every time he said anything. It was a total car crash, as Griffin position was exposed as he stuttered and stumbled to try and explain the illogical positions.

    You are right about Boris, in that he just can't help himself when in a corner he comes out with some BS story. I think if I was advising him that perhaps just be honest, even if it doesn't also paint you in the best light.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,775
    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    They made it seem like they were going for bolder predictions though. I think 20 would be good night, 25+ really good, 15 with a recovery to second place in swathes of seats servicable, but anything under that pretty bad.
  • Options
    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    Cookie said:

    ydoethur said:

    camel said:

    "Tories leave the North behind"
    Labour leaflet landed today. No mention of the big three: Brexit, NHS and Corbyn.
    Leaflet focuses on infrastructure investment in the North. The change of strategy begins in earnest. I imagine it is targeted at commuters in the M62 marginals.

    On infrastructure, does anyone know which railway lines the Tories are planning to reopen?
    Skipton - Colne, Leamside line and Blyth have all been mentioned.
    Thanks. Not exactly going overboard then. If they wanted a transpennine route, for example, you would have thought the Woodhead route would be the obvious one (admittedly a new tunnel would need to be bored).
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,775

    kle4 said:

    On topic: Where did the LD's go wrong?
    Megalomania.
    They are not "Jo Swinson's Lib Dems". That makes it look like the election is about electing her. The focus is on the wrong place. They should be remembering that it is the voter who matters, not Jo Swinson. Perhaps they should have put "Your Lib Dems" at the top?
    "Vote Jo Swinson" has too many shades of similarity to "Vote Theresa May"

    It might work if she were really popular or even just well known, but the reality is the new leader of the LDs was probably not known by most people.
    Mrs May was well known, but it did not work for her either ;)
    She got 42%, it was an ok result, it just also helped her opponents.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,775

    "This guy was out on automatic early release and I have long said that this system simply isn't working."

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    Read more: https://t.co/qf2gIP6Pgs https://t.co/T4gMNRvBKA

    About 1 more year in this case?
  • Options
    MikeL said:

    And just as I type the above post it goes 3.4.

    The Tories are f##ked.....Its coming, back to where we were 2 months ago and years more silly buggery in the HoC.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897
    Sandpit said:

    Really don't like this idea of attacking lawyers for doing their job

    Yes, even terrorist scumbags are allowed to have a fair trial.
    If defendants aren't allowed representation in court, the government is free to prosecute any one they don't like , unchallenged, including you.

    A proper democracy needs defence lawyers, for every defendant.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453

    “This is BBC One. Now it’s time for the Andrew Marr Show. Unfortunately Andrew’s off sick today and we could only find one other political interviewer called Andrew to replace him at short notice. And if you’d like to see the show at a more convenient time, it’ll be shown again tonight in between two mass audience blockbuster dramas. And again every night this week next to Eastenders”

    I hope they do this
  • Options
    camelcamel Posts: 815

    Johnson goes onto Marr

    Wait that's not Marr's music

    **ANDREW NEIL COMES IN WITH A STEEL CHAIR**

    I think he'd bluster his way through half an hour/3 questions with Neil. Jeremy survived - in that no-one's voting intention would have been changed. I may be the only anti-corbynista who thinks so though.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
    Tories need to go really hard on economics for the last couple of weeks, making it clear that ordinary families will be paying the bill for a Labour government. They need a 1992 - style “Labour’s Tax Bombshell” campaign for the last few days.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453

    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?

    😥
  • Options
    I highly doubt the incident from yesterday will be the last. There are just too many of these people and from all reports there are a number of prisons were rather than deradicalization, it is the opposite that is going on. Plus, we have all the battle hardened ISIS nutters making their way back and we know hardly any of them get locked up upon their return.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    edited November 2019

    ydoethur said:

    Everybody is building up being interviewed by Andrew Neil like you are facing a firing squad. Loads of people have been interviewed by him and done perfectly fine.
    If I was Boris I would be more concerned about Marr. Neil is a straight shooter, he asks tough questions, he is well briefed and won't take any BS. But if you give a reasonably straight answer you are ok.
    Marr on the other hand, has a visceral dislike of Cameron / Boris types, and he has pulled stupid stunts in the past e.g. flashing up the Bullingdon picture off camera just as Cameron was about to speak.
    He also did a similar thing when he ambushed Gordon about what potential medication he was taking. I don't think that is somewhere Neil would go.

    Andrew Neil is an excellent person to be interviewed by if you are honest, intelligent, well-informed and prepared to be straight with him. Because he asks shrewd questions that allow those answers to come to the fore. Much though I dislike him, I can imagine Gove being interviewed by him and it being both informative and interesting.
    But we’re talking about Boris Johnson.
    What I like about Neil is he also doesn't interrupt constantly. He lets people dig their own grave. This trend of just constantly interrupting is both annoying to watch and actually doesn't allow the viewer to really find out how much of a moron (or not) the person is.

    The best take down of Nick Griffin was a similar event when Iain Dale interviewed him. He let him spout his well rehearsed stuff, then he said ok, so if you want to do x, how will that work....well Griffin was totally thrown as for once an interviewer didn't scream RACISSSSSTTTTTTT every time he said anything. It was a total car crash, as Griffin position was exposed as he stuttered and stumbled to try and explain the illogical positions.

    You are right about Boris, in that he just can't help himself when in a corner he comes out with some BS story. I think if I was advising him that perhaps just be honest, even if it doesn't also paint you in the best light.
    If Corbyn had been honest about antiSemitism in his interview with Neil, he would almost certainly have come out unscathed. It was his twisting that looked bad.

    Edit - before anyone twists that, that isn’t condoning the antisemitism in Labour. It is to note that most people who are considering voting for him would have been less worried about him admitting a problem than trying to pretend there isn’t one. Perhaps it shouldn’t be, but it would be.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,822
    edited November 2019
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249

    “This is BBC One. Now it’s time for the Andrew Marr Show. Unfortunately Andrew’s off sick today and we could only find one other political interviewer called Andrew to replace him at short notice. And if you’d like to see the show at a more convenient time, it’ll be shown again tonight in between two mass audience blockbuster dramas. And again every night this week next to Eastenders”

    Neiling on him very heavily...
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    edited November 2019

    "This guy was out on automatic early release and I have long said that this system simply isn't working."

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    Read more: https://t.co/qf2gIP6Pgs https://t.co/T4gMNRvBKA

    This a million times better than May's response I think.

    But since this is planning out exactly like 2017, we are due unfortunately for a far right attack. Let's hope he doesnt shout "get brexit done"!
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,822

    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?

    Of course. It's the penultimate Mega Polling Saturday of the general election campaign and I think we're hitting Peak Labour tonight. :open_mouth:
  • Options
    DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    Don't worry about it, there aren't that many certainties in life but it is a sure fire certainty that he won't ever present a budget.

  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
    Tories need to go really hard on economics for the last couple of weeks, making it clear that ordinary families will be paying the bill for a Labour government. They need a 1992 - style “Labour’s Tax Bombshell” campaign for the last few days.
    Problem is they have left it far too late. The media will now be dominated by this terrorist attack, then back to Prince Andrew.

    It is like 2017 all over again. They let Labour set the agenda, didn't really contest their manifesto pledges and only went hard with 3 days to go.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205

    Boris has a fine line to tread over yesterdays attack. He needs to point out early release is tied in with european justice without shoving Brexit down our throats and explain how he will tighten sentencing and release procedures without looking like hes knee jerking or over playing the we can only do this if we Brexit angle.
    If he gets that balance right it will be a vote consolidator and gainer for him. If he goes in two footed he could lose vote share.
    I don't like an overtly political angle on terror or how to present policy on it but its inevitable in a GE.
    The young girls being slaughtered in 2017 against the backdrop of May and her police cuts was catastrophic for the Tories imo (alongside nothing has changed). This is somewhat different and unlikely to have the same sort of effect.

    One of the issues which maybe ought to be raised is Labour’s policies with regard to the Prevent programme, aimed at dealing with deradicalisation. Labour seem to be against it - without suggesting anything to replace it. If so, how are they going to deal with people serving sentences for terrorism which are not life sentences and what happens to them when they are released?
  • Options
    alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    IanB2 said:

    From Fraser Nelson no less (not a phrase you see very often):

    "There’s no sign of bold Boris. He looks at times as if he is fighting the last campaign, terrified of messing things up as Theresa May did."
    "Ducking the Andrew Neil interviews braved by all other leaders risks giving a sense of complacency, as if he thinks victory is in the bag and that he doesn’t need to say anything more to earn votes."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/28/fear-tories-may-yet-blow-election/

    Whatever one thinks of whether Johnson is morally bound to go on Andrew Neil or not, the idea that he might not because of “complacency” is an absolutely laughable analysis. There has to be a perception that the interview has a potential upside for that to be the case. As opposed to making an choice between two negatives, and deciding which one is worse.

  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    kjohnw1 said:

    Novo said:

    Can’t say that it has gone wrong. The Lib Dem’s have targeted 50 seats. If they win 15 of those that would be a success - 20+ would be a great success.

    I live in Warrington South where the lib dems have zero chance , yet I have never had so much lib dem correspondence in any election campaign,they must have money to burn
    They are meant to stay within election spending limits which they will not have done I'm sure..postman round here has been delivering and that costs money..not hand delivered by activists. There will be some major repercussions for them over this.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    If Corbyn had been honest about antiSemitism in his interview with Neil, he would almost certainly have come out unscathed. It was his twisting that looked bad.

    Edit - before anyone twists that, that isn’t condoning the antisemitism in Labour. It is to note that most people who are considering voting for him would have been less worried about him admitting a problem than trying to pretend there isn’t one. Perhaps it shouldn’t be, but it would be.

    But in Jezza's mind, he was being honest....
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    GIN1138 said:

    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?

    Of course. It's the penultimate Mega Polling Saturday of the general election campaign and I think we're hitting Peak Labour tonight. :open_mouth:
    It could be CorrectHorseBattery Saturday. LAB new favourites now!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    If people are going to serve the term of their sentence we will have to have either much shorter sentences or a large and very expensive expansion of the prison system.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Floater said:

    nunu2 said:

    The more you look at the MRP YouGov numbers, the more you realise how much of a disaster they are for Labour. Few crumbs of comfort

    And that is why I find it difficult to see a dramatic change in labour's fortunes not matter their recent improvement in the polls
    Dont forget in 2015 certain people who should really have known better on a betting site were providing misleading info from the battlegrounds

    Tick tock.......
    Said poster provides an illuminating insight into the idea that MPs will control the worst excesses of Corbyn et al. A true believer Corbynite who nonetheless voted for the the whole Blair/Brown package. Loyalty trumps morality at every opportunity.
  • Options
    Ave_it said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?

    Of course. It's the penultimate Mega Polling Saturday of the general election campaign and I think we're hitting Peak Labour tonight. :open_mouth:
    It could be CorrectHorseBattery Saturday. LAB new favourites now!
    Labour will never be the largest party, I think the Tories will be. But I think a Hung Parliament will be realised if the polls tonight continue their current trajectory
  • Options
    alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Wasn’t there a leaders debate on the BBC last night?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    kinabalu said:

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    If people are going to serve the term of their sentence we will have to have either much shorter sentences or a large and very expensive expansion of the prison system.
    The most obvious takeaway actually is that we need to expand the role of parole boards.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,934
    kinabalu said:

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    If people are going to serve the term of their sentence we will have to have either much shorter sentences or a large and very expensive expansion of the prison system.
    Practicalities versus what the public (electorate) want to hear right now
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
    Tories need to go really hard on economics for the last couple of weeks, making it clear that ordinary families will be paying the bill for a Labour government. They need a 1992 - style “Labour’s Tax Bombshell” campaign for the last few days.
    Problem is they have left it far too late. The media will now be dominated by this terrorist attack, then back to Prince Andrew.

    It is like 2017 all over again. They let Labour set the agenda, didn't really contest their manifesto pledges and only went hard with 3 days to go.
    And they're in denial about student debt.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    In news that might be being overshadowed by London:
    North Korea threatens Japan with 'real ballistic missile'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-50613051
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    It will take money from relatively poor pensioners and give it to some rather well off WASPIs. If the Tories were proposing such a thing the Labour Party would be up in arms.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    glw said:

    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    It will take money from relatively poor pensioners and give it to some rather well off WASPIs. If the Tories were proposing such a thing the Labour Party would be up in arms.
    All of Labour's popular policies are regressive. Cancelling tuition fees so that the taxes of the poor pay for middle class students to go to university, free broadband when the middle class can easily afford it, and a huge bung for already well-off pensioners.
  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    Ave_it said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Are we expecting another flood of polls tonight? What time would we expect them all, seems to have been about 8pm it has gotten exciting last two Saturdays.
    Any chance the polls won't all be depressing from a Tory perspective?

    Of course. It's the penultimate Mega Polling Saturday of the general election campaign and I think we're hitting Peak Labour tonight. :open_mouth:
    It could be CorrectHorseBattery Saturday. LAB new favourites now!
    I agree...the 1.44 to.lay on Con major on betfair will.look a steal by 8pm tonight.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    kinabalu said:


    If people are going to serve the term of their sentence we will have to have either much shorter sentences or a large and very expensive expansion of the prison system.

    iirc the intent (announced a couple of months ago) is to end automatic early release at halfway through the sentence for violent perps. They weren't proposing some massive overhaul though, just moving that point to the 2/3 stage of the sentence.

  • Options
    Seems to me the most effective thing that can be done re this case is to ensure that all applications for release must go through a parole board first. That would seemingly reduced the likelihood of this attack happening.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    Sandpit said:

    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
    Tories need to go really hard on economics for the last couple of weeks, making it clear that ordinary families will be paying the bill for a Labour government. They need a 1992 - style “Labour’s Tax Bombshell” campaign for the last few days.
    Problem is they have left it far too late. The media will now be dominated by this terrorist attack, then back to Prince Andrew.

    It is like 2017 all over again. They let Labour set the agenda, didn't really contest their manifesto pledges and only went hard with 3 days to go.
    When does the Tory election campaign begin?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283

    PM @BorisJohnson says his "immediate takeaway" from the #LondonBridge attack is that people should 'serve the term of their sentence'.

    Says the man who has cut and run. ;)

  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,449
    DeClare said:

    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    Don't worry about it, there aren't that many certainties in life but it is a sure fire certainty that he won't ever present a budget.

    Ha ha - yes, that appears to be the Labour line: vite for us because don't worry, we won't actually win. Not saying it's not effective but I'd say those following it are playing with fire somewhat.
  • Options
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    BobBeige said:
    Anybody with half a brain knows we are all going to pay a shit load more tax. It is impossible to fund the massive extension of the state, especially as I expect a lot of the super rich are going to bugger off.
    Tories need to go really hard on economics for the last couple of weeks, making it clear that ordinary families will be paying the bill for a Labour government. They need a 1992 - style “Labour’s Tax Bombshell” campaign for the last few days.
    Problem is they have left it far too late. The media will now be dominated by this terrorist attack, then back to Prince Andrew.

    It is like 2017 all over again. They let Labour set the agenda, didn't really contest their manifesto pledges and only went hard with 3 days to go.
    When does the Tory election campaign begin?
    13th December?
  • Options
    camelcamel Posts: 815
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    It will take money from relatively poor pensioners and give it to some rather well off WASPIs. If the Tories were proposing such a thing the Labour Party would be up in arms.
    All of Labour's popular policies are regressive. Cancelling tuition fees so that the taxes of the poor pay for middle class students to go to university, free broadband when the middle class can easily afford it, and a huge bung for already well-off pensioners.
    The last similar blind spot was the removal of the 10p rate in 2009 thereabouts. Brown could not acknowledge that it penalised those on low incomes, insisting tax credits would make up the difference even though many affected weren't eligible for tax credits.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    Andrew said:

    iirc the intent (announced a couple of months ago) is to end automatic early release at halfway through the sentence for violent perps. They weren't proposing some massive overhaul though, just moving that point to the 2/3 stage of the sentence.

    Ah OK. Bit of tinkering. Yes, you could do that. Tag on some tough talk and maybe the public will be happy. But to satisfy the sentiment that "life should be life, 10 years should be 10 years etc" would require root & branch change plus a big investment in prisons. Although we need a big investment in prisons anyway of course. They are a disgrace. I gather.
  • Options
    alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Anyone think Labour will attempt to nationalise the Private healthcare sector? They’ll have to won’t they to meet some of their NHS pledges. All those MRI scanners and other bits of expensive kit that the NHS buy slots for. The referrals to physiotherapists and psychiatrists. Many other things no doubt.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Corbyn’s Facebook page full of liked posts with conspiracy theories about the timing of the terror attack. I despair for his supporters.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Con majority now drifting back in. Very volatile market
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    camel said:

    BobBeige said:
    Is this just re-announcing the removal of the marriage allowance? I'd like to see the taxes cited here please
    The big one is the labour proposed change to dividend taxation. The 2016 budget made holding a few shares, say a portfolio of 30k or 40k worth, very tax efficient. Lots of pensioners are still sitting on their carpetbagger and privatisation shares, and lots of those pensioners of them have quite low incomes. I think the philosophy is that, while they may have lower thanm median incomes, these people are still filthy capitalists and need to pay more so that the middle classes can get free broadband.
    It will take money from relatively poor pensioners and give it to some rather well off WASPIs. If the Tories were proposing such a thing the Labour Party would be up in arms.
    All of Labour's popular policies are regressive. Cancelling tuition fees so that the taxes of the poor pay for middle class students to go to university, free broadband when the middle class can easily afford it, and a huge bung for already well-off pensioners.
    Yes, second election running where only the LibDems are offers fiscally progressive policies. As signed off by the IFS.
  • Options
    alex_ said:

    Anyone think Labour will attempt to nationalise the Private healthcare sector? They’ll have to won’t they to meet some of their NHS pledges. All those MRI scanners and other bits of expensive kit that the NHS buy slots for. The referrals to physiotherapists and psychiatrists. Many other things no doubt.

    Probably, Wilson managed to nationalize Pickford's removal company in the 60's, so anything is open to confiscation particularly if it's successful.
  • Options
    Have laid Con Majority
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,249
    camel said:

    The last similar blind spot was the removal of the 10p rate in 2009 thereabouts. Brown could not acknowledge that it penalised those on low incomes, insisting tax credits would make up the difference even though many affected weren't eligible for tax credits.

    Tax credits were a stupid idea anyway. They were Universal Credit only more expensive and more hassle.
  • Options
    Brom said:

    Con majority now drifting back in. Very volatile market

    Have laid Con Majority

    Bloody hell, how deep are CorrectHorseBattery’s pockets?
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    edited November 2019

    Brom said:

    Con majority now drifting back in. Very volatile market

    Have laid Con Majority

    Bloody hell, how deep are CorrectHorseBattery’s pockets?
    I believe he has every market covered
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    ydoethur said:

    camel said:

    The last similar blind spot was the removal of the 10p rate in 2009 thereabouts. Brown could not acknowledge that it penalised those on low incomes, insisting tax credits would make up the difference even though many affected weren't eligible for tax credits.

    Tax credits were a stupid idea anyway. They were Universal Credit only more expensive and more hassle.
    Tax credits are the single worst government policy of this century.
This discussion has been closed.