Having the PM as your MP is a matter of local pride and PMs have polled decently even as they lost an election, Major remained popular in Huntingdon and, despite the SNP wave already being underway, Brown got a gravity defying result across the whole of Scotland.
I'm not sure whether Richmond will come to see Sunak as an embarrassment or will be bloody minded in defence of their man. It's Yorkshire, so the latter is quite likely, though Sunak's affinity to Yorkshire is limited such that it probably doesn't extend beyond his constituency. I'd also be wondering if Southampton will swing less than other places.
In 2010 there was no SNP wave. SNP's vote rose very modestly, 2.2pp up. Labour's rose across Scotland by more, 2.5pp.
They had taken control at Holyrood by then, so fair to say in 2010 Labour in Scotland bucked (a) their own UK wide trend at that GE and (b) the longer term trend of Scotland towards the SNP, which was already underway.
Good grief. Those seat projections means that someone like Sir Desmond Swayne will become a front bench spokes for Culture Media and Sport. The satire.
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
You might well be right, but I haven't got a fucking clue what you're on about.
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Come on dude: the everyone's GDP increased massively in 2021 as Covid receded and economies came back to life.
Arthur Balfour, who was Conservative leader when losing his seat in the 1906 GE, suffered a 22.5% swing to the Liberals. A 22.5% swing to Labour would probably mean Sunak survives but not by much.
Deltapoll and We Think have UNS of 19% from Conservative to Labour so that would stretch to 25% in some seats which would put Sunak at risk but like most others, I can't see it.
Laura Kuennsberg, who seems happy to die in the Tory ditch, keeps reminding me there are four weeks still to go - well, three and a half effectively. The next debate isn't until June 20th and while Claire Coutinho may want "weekly debates" we know this is a campaign ploy hoping Starmer will make some horrendous gaffe which they can exploit, not that the Prime Minister has done one of those recently...
Tomorrow, I imagine, we'll see any pulchritude of polls headed by Redfield & Wilton.
Finally, apologies for my error in the previous - the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
One of the candidates in Richmond Park represents "The Mitre". This is a pub. The lost deposit will cost £500 but good value for the publicity including, I think, a freepost to every resident in the constituency.
I don't want to pile negativity on to Sunak - the man is human and I do not take any pleasure in his current troubles.
But I do wonder how much news of this fiasco will spread California-wards, and whether it might actually affect Sunak's long-touted tech-bro career post-10 Downing Street.
I don't want to pile negativity on to Sunak - the man is human and I do not take any pleasure in his current troubles.
But I do wonder how much news of this fiasco will spread California-wards, and whether it might actually affect Sunak's long-touted tech-bro career post-10 Downing Street.
Does there come a point where Sunak’s performance is so absurdly poor that Silicon Valley firms lose interest in his CV?
They don’t care about performance
They only care if people don’t return his calls (that’s why Cameron took up the FCDO job - to refresh his contacts and clean off the Greenswill).
Difficult to judge from the outside
Politics is a specialist subject, Silicon Valley is a specialist subject
Sunak is rubbish at politics but excels in Silicon Valley
So the answer is no
Does he actually excel in Silicon Valley? He's an ex Goldman, ex hedge fund analyst, who presumably is pretty smart. But Silicon Valley is full of very smart people.
CDU - 28.9% Greens - 20.5% SPD - 15.8% AfD - 11.0%
Ooh @Alanbrooke and @williamglenn getting all excited about a big tilt to the right in the Euros. Who'd have thought it?
Come on lads, suck it up we left!
Well Im watching German TV and reporting what they say, if you dont want to know skip the posts
On a counter point, just noted the earlier Dutch result where Timmerman's Left-Greens edged out Wilders.
Gives modest nod of approval.
That's an odd one. Wilders gained seats but didnt win the most. Timmermanns won most and stood on a joint ticket with the greens but post election they will divide up the spoils and sit seperately.
I don't want to pile negativity on to Sunak - the man is human and I do not take any pleasure in his current troubles.
But I do wonder how much news of this fiasco will spread California-wards, and whether it might actually affect Sunak's long-touted tech-bro career post-10 Downing Street.
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
Having the PM as your MP is a matter of local pride and PMs have polled decently even as they lost an election, Major remained popular in Huntingdon and, despite the SNP wave already being underway, Brown got a gravity defying result across the whole of Scotland.
I'm not sure whether Richmond will come to see Sunak as an embarrassment or will be bloody minded in defence of their man. It's Yorkshire, so the latter is quite likely, though Sunak's affinity to Yorkshire is limited such that it probably doesn't extend beyond his constituency. I'd also be wondering if Southampton will swing less than other places.
In 2010 there was no SNP wave. SNP's vote rose very modestly, 2.2pp up. Labour's rose across Scotland by more, 2.5pp.
They had taken control at Holyrood by then, so fair to say in 2010 Labour in Scotland bucked (a) their own UK wide trend at that GE and (b) the longer term trend of Scotland towards the SNP, which was already underway.
I think you need to be careful not to project backwards from the IndyRef. That was a critical fracture in Scottish political polling. Even in January 2014 Labour posted a 9pp polling lead over the SNP. By autumn, after the indyref, the SNP were miles ahead.
It's true the SNP won big in Holyrood in 2011, but it wasn't til 2014 that there was an appreciable effect in the Westminster opinion polling. Even the Holyrood polling was largely flat for the SNP til 2011.
- the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
Didn't Screaming Lord Sutch, late of the MRLP, use by-elections to put on a gig locally and promote it through the freepost provided for election addresses?
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Come on dude: the everyone's GDP increased massively in 2021 as Covid receded and economies came back to life.
I'm more positive on Brexit that I've ever been, but that's not a good argument.
I excluded the covid years for the reason you said, for example in 2020 are gdp was -10.4% in 2021 it was +8.7%. The covid effect and I suspect most european countries would reflect the same. My point is though we rarely got an increase of 4% gdp while we were in the eu the last time being 2000. To say brexit cost us 4% gdp is a lie because since brexit our gdp would be negative ever since then. It is a remainer lie.....now if we had stayed in might our gdp be higher well thats a counter factual, maybe yes, maybe no but it irritates me this claimed 4% from remainers when there is no evidence for it
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
Or just an interview in a local paper whose readership is presumably skewed to higher incomes
Having the PM as your MP is a matter of local pride and PMs have polled decently even as they lost an election, Major remained popular in Huntingdon and, despite the SNP wave already being underway, Brown got a gravity defying result across the whole of Scotland.
I'm not sure whether Richmond will come to see Sunak as an embarrassment or will be bloody minded in defence of their man. It's Yorkshire, so the latter is quite likely, though Sunak's affinity to Yorkshire is limited such that it probably doesn't extend beyond his constituency. I'd also be wondering if Southampton will swing less than other places.
In 2010 there was no SNP wave. SNP's vote rose very modestly, 2.2pp up. Labour's rose across Scotland by more, 2.5pp.
They had taken control at Holyrood by then, so fair to say in 2010 Labour in Scotland bucked (a) their own UK wide trend at that GE and (b) the longer term trend of Scotland towards the SNP, which was already underway.
I think you need to be careful not to project backwards from the IndyRef. That was a critical fracture in Scottish political polling. Even in January 2014 Labour posted a 9pp polling lead over the SNP. By autumn, after the indyref, the SNP were miles ahead.
It's true the SNP won big in Holyrood in 2011, but it wasn't til 2014 that there was an appreciable effect in the Westminster opinion polling. Even the Holyrood polling was largely flat for the SNP til 2011.
Fair, but Labour not losing ANY ground in Scotland in GE 2010 was an over performance nonetheless.
Arthur Balfour, who was Conservative leader when losing his seat in the 1906 GE, suffered a 22.5% swing to the Liberals. A 22.5% swing to Labour would probably mean Sunak survives but not by much.
Deltapoll and We Think have UNS of 19% from Conservative to Labour so that would stretch to 25% in some seats which would put Sunak at risk but like most others, I can't see it.
Laura Kuennsberg, who seems happy to die in the Tory ditch, keeps reminding me there are four weeks still to go - well, three and a half effectively. The next debate isn't until June 20th and while Claire Coutinho may want "weekly debates" we know this is a campaign ploy hoping Starmer will make some horrendous gaffe which they can exploit, not that the Prime Minister has done one of those recently...
Tomorrow, I imagine, we'll see any pulchritude of polls headed by Redfield & Wilton.
Finally, apologies for my error in the previous - the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
One of the candidates in Richmond Park represents "The Mitre". This is a pub. The lost deposit will cost £500 but good value for the publicity including, I think, a freepost to every resident in the constituency.
I may be doing the two Independent candidates a grave disservice but the fact their registered addresses also happen to be their business addresses does make me wonder if the £500 is more about the publicity than the politics.
One is a property developer who is involved in a planning application with Newham Council - I know nothing about the other. Neither seems to have set up a Party or got one registered.
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
As much as Laura K annoys me I feel like it’s a fair point to make in a GE campaign - no-one’s voted yet and there is still time for opinions to change, notwithstanding that some voting will start earlier than polling day. It’s the sort of phrase I’d expect a political journalist to use.
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
As much as Laura K annoys me I feel like it’s a fair point to make in a GE campaign - no-one’s voted yet and there is still time for opinions to change, notwithstanding that some voting will start earlier than polling day. It’s the sort of phrase I’d expect a political journalist to use.
Well okay but even if we agree to disagree about that point, there are not 4 weeks to go. You expect a senior political commentator to be accurate.
Campaigning ceases 3 weeks and 3 days. Polling stations open at 7am 3 weeks this Thursday.
There’s a little over 3 weeks until the General Election
Arthur Balfour, who was Conservative leader when losing his seat in the 1906 GE, suffered a 22.5% swing to the Liberals.
No one remembers the Balfour declaration these days.
No, it's all about a very distant place of which we know nothing. Occasionally I wonder how they are getting on these days. Perhaps we we should peer over the brink and find out. I'm sure it's all going fine by now.
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
We are 25 days from polling day. The latest three polls have Labour leads of 25, 25 and 18.
25 days before the 2017 GE, the latest three polls had Tory leads of 18, 18 and 18.
25 days before the 1997 GE, the latest three polls had Labour leads of 20, 25 and 23.
So there might not be 4 weeks to go, but there's still plenty of time for things to change dramatically, particularly if one side or the other fouls up the manifesto. But things might not change much at all.
- the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
Didn't Screaming Lord Sutch, late of the MRLP, use by-elections to put on a gig locally and promote it through the freepost provided for election addresses?
I miss His Lordship; none of his successors seem to have had quite the charisma.
There is no mechanism in which Sunak can resign and somebody else take over.
Just think about it, the new leader would be in charge for five minutes and would inevitably lose. Nobody will take up that chalice.
There must be such a mechanism for the eventuality that a leader dies during the campaign.
If the PM dies during a campaign… I guess ask the Privy Council to find someone?
Cabinet are still in post and I suspect HMK would accept their agreed caretaker
The obvious choice is Cameron: he’s in the current Cabinet, he’s experienced at the job, and he isn’t directly involved in the election.
Oh indeed if such an event occured, Pudding face of Chipping Norton is your guy
I'm coming round to the thought that Cameron is possible even though impossible, insofar as he might be acceptable to the ambitious as he would not be a contender for post-election leader of the party because he will not be an MP. So maybe our ever-flexible constitution can be fudged for a couple of weeks. However, I expect in practice Rishi will stay and DPM Dowden take over as acting PM should the need arise.
Remember Cameron's 'shredded wheat' announcement? At the time people wondered how he would square the circle of serving a full second term but not seeking a third.
That plan would have worked because it's perfectly coherent to remain as PM while the new party leader fights an election campaign to seek their own mandate, but the other way round makes no sense. To parachute in Cameron without a clear idea of what role he would play in the party in the aftermath of the election would just create even more confusion and there's no point in actually making him Prime Minister for a few weeks.
Even I who predicted a Tory majority of 20 in Ben's competition can see jettisoning Sunak mid campaign bis insane. Better to keep him in the fridge and wheel him out for pre-pared events and stick Penny out against Starmer in the PM head to head.
Swapping PM mid-campaign is insane. But so is the way Sunak, and the wider party, have been behaving.
It's getting to the stage where I do wonder if they're deliberately throwing the election...
Previous elections have seen the Tory Party campaign masterminded by Australian tacticians.
This campaign is being masterminded by Pakistani cricketers it seems.
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
It's quite hard dealing with the whole nation. Where I live £100k pa is loads and loads. In much of London and the SE it isn't (SFAICS).
£100k is more than double the median London wage, which is about £44k.
£97400 before tax puts someone in the top 4% of those having liability for income tax:
Arthur Balfour, who was Conservative leader when losing his seat in the 1906 GE, suffered a 22.5% swing to the Liberals. A 22.5% swing to Labour would probably mean Sunak survives but not by much.
Deltapoll and We Think have UNS of 19% from Conservative to Labour so that would stretch to 25% in some seats which would put Sunak at risk but like most others, I can't see it.
Laura Kuennsberg, who seems happy to die in the Tory ditch, keeps reminding me there are four weeks still to go - well, three and a half effectively. The next debate isn't until June 20th and while Claire Coutinho may want "weekly debates" we know this is a campaign ploy hoping Starmer will make some horrendous gaffe which they can exploit, not that the Prime Minister has done one of those recently...
Tomorrow, I imagine, we'll see any pulchritude of polls headed by Redfield & Wilton.
Finally, apologies for my error in the previous - the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
The election freepost, delivered by the Royal Mail, must contain, "matter relating to the election only" under section 91(1) of the Representation of the People Act 1983.
It would be a bloody good deal for a free commercial delivery were that not the case - basically the cost of the £500 deposit for delivery a leaflet to every household in the constituency (or every individual if addressed). But that provision means the potential scam for a local business doesn't work.
Thank you - it will be interesting to see what the two "Independents" produce for the Election Address. Might be more coherent than some of the offerings produced by the actual political party candidates.
It's quite possible that Sinn Fein will lose their last seat in the EU Parliament now. Their support has fallen away massively, as they got on the wrong side of the Irish immigration argument.
I know its not the same election, and I've not followed Irish politics in a while but that's quite a change then, last I saw it Sinn Fein were nearly at the same as FF and FG combined and looked like favourites to get the Taoiseach next election.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Come on dude: the everyone's GDP increased massively in 2021 as Covid receded and economies came back to life.
I'm more positive on Brexit that I've ever been, but that's not a good argument.
I excluded the covid years for the reason you said, for example in 2020 are gdp was -10.4% in 2021 it was +8.7%. The covid effect and I suspect most european countries would reflect the same. My point is though we rarely got an increase of 4% gdp while we were in the eu the last time being 2000. To say brexit cost us 4% gdp is a lie because since brexit our gdp would be negative ever since then. It is a remainer lie.....now if we had stayed in might our gdp be higher well thats a counter factual, maybe yes, maybe no but it irritates me this claimed 4% from remainers when there is no evidence for it
Look, I don't know who's making these claims or frankly why you've suddenly got a bee in your bonnet, but try this form of argument.
If you're going to get twenty-five quid, and someone says hey, I know, let's throw one of those pounds in the lake because if we do that we'll get a magic wish from the Lake People. So the money comes and you pocket £24 and you throw the other pound coin into the water -- plop! -- and you wait for your magic Lake People wish.
And you wait.
And you wait.
And eventually you realise you aren't getting a magic wish. You tell the person that their stupid policy cost you 4%. That would be a fair statement, even though at no point did any money actually leave your pocket.
Just to be clear, I've no idea where this 4% stuff is coming from, I'm just reflecting the number back at you because you used it. I don't have any kind of position on whether Brexit has cost this amount or not. I can tell you though (in case you need it spelling out, which I'm certain you do) that there are no magic-wish-giving Lake People.
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
We are 25 days from polling day. The latest three polls have Labour leads of 25, 25 and 18.
25 days before the 2017 GE, the latest three polls had Tory leads of 18, 18 and 18.
25 days before the 1997 GE, the latest three polls had Labour leads of 20, 25 and 23.
So there might not be 4 weeks to go, but there's still plenty of time for things to change dramatically, particularly if one side or the other fouls up the manifesto. But things might not change much at all.
Ah, you’re mis-reading me.
I have made a big deal of your very point. I have stated that at this stage in 1997 the polls were similar and didn’t narrow until 2 weeks out. I don’t deny that things might change and I, who perhaps first of all on this forum predicted a Labour landslide, have cautioned everyone to stop getting carried away and exaggerating how this might pan out. I today predicted a Labour majority of 172, well below where many people now see this heading.
But there are not four weeks to go. There are 24 days of campaigning left.
And many people voting by post will be starting to vote in 10-14 days.
It's quite possible that Sinn Fein will lose their last seat in the EU Parliament now. Their support has fallen away massively, as they got on the wrong side of the Irish immigration argument.
I know its not the same election, and I've not followed Irish politics in a while but that's quite a change then, last I saw it Sinn Fein were nearly at the same as FF and FG combined and looked like favourites to get the Taoiseach next election.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
Immigration is one answer. SF nailed their trousers to the mast of There’s No Problem.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
It's quite hard dealing with the whole nation. Where I live £100k pa is loads and loads. In much of London and the SE it isn't (SFAICS).
£100k is more than double the median London wage, which is about £44k.
£97400 before tax puts someone in the top 4% of those having liability for income tax:
Worth remembering that the top 1.5% pay more than 35% of total income tax
Different subject but related is that the middle class (I am a member of the northern branch of the tribe) do OK by a couple of strategies under the radar: get married and stay married, and have two middle class incomes, neither of them spectacular in themselves, but which make six figures (£100k) or nearly so when added together and not frittered away on six former wives and seven estranged children and used boringly, together with the tax advantages of shared income.
It's quite possible that Sinn Fein will lose their last seat in the EU Parliament now. Their support has fallen away massively, as they got on the wrong side of the Irish immigration argument.
I know its not the same election, and I've not followed Irish politics in a while but that's quite a change then, last I saw it Sinn Fein were nearly at the same as FF and FG combined and looked like favourites to get the Taoiseach next election.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
Having the PM as your MP is a matter of local pride and PMs have polled decently even as they lost an election, Major remained popular in Huntingdon and, despite the SNP wave already being underway, Brown got a gravity defying result across the whole of Scotland.
I'm not sure whether Richmond will come to see Sunak as an embarrassment or will be bloody minded in defence of their man. It's Yorkshire, so the latter is quite likely, though Sunak's affinity to Yorkshire is limited such that it probably doesn't extend beyond his constituency. I'd also be wondering if Southampton will swing less than other places.
In 2010 there was no SNP wave. SNP's vote rose very modestly, 2.2pp up. Labour's rose across Scotland by more, 2.5pp.
They had taken control at Holyrood by then, so fair to say in 2010 Labour in Scotland bucked (a) their own UK wide trend at that GE and (b) the longer term trend of Scotland towards the SNP, which was already underway.
I think you need to be careful not to project backwards from the IndyRef. That was a critical fracture in Scottish political polling. Even in January 2014 Labour posted a 9pp polling lead over the SNP. By autumn, after the indyref, the SNP were miles ahead.
It's true the SNP won big in Holyrood in 2011, but it wasn't til 2014 that there was an appreciable effect in the Westminster opinion polling. Even the Holyrood polling was largely flat for the SNP til 2011.
Fair, but Labour not losing ANY ground in Scotland in GE 2010 was an over performance nonetheless.
Yes, it was, that's absolutely right. They increased they vote share faster than the Tories. That may well be due to Brown being Scottish.
- the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
Didn't Screaming Lord Sutch, late of the MRLP, use by-elections to put on a gig locally and promote it through the freepost provided for election addresses?
I miss His Lordship; none of his successors seem to have had quite the charisma.
Yes, it's partly because Lord Sutch was originally in a psychedelic band in 1960's London, and had some of the strangely unique strew of antique and traditionalist-cum-wildly anarchist infuences that were circulating in Britain at that time.
Count Binface is showing some promise in this direction, but he has some work to do yet.
It's quite possible that Sinn Fein will lose their last seat in the EU Parliament now. Their support has fallen away massively, as they got on the wrong side of the Irish immigration argument.
I know its not the same election, and I've not followed Irish politics in a while but that's quite a change then, last I saw it Sinn Fein were nearly at the same as FF and FG combined and looked like favourites to get the Taoiseach next election.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
It MAY be (emphasis on conditional) a bit premature to make judgements based on still partial results. For example, for Dublin City Council. in first preferences SF vote is +2 versus last locals, FG is +1.1% while FF is -3.8% and GRN -5.3%
So need more final counts for to shake things out.
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
Or just an interview in a local paper whose readership is presumably skewed to higher incomes
That would be the Sunday Times, apparently. Regardless, the point stands.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
It's quite hard dealing with the whole nation. Where I live £100k pa is loads and loads. In much of London and the SE it isn't (SFAICS).
£100k is more than double the median London wage, which is about £44k.
£97400 before tax puts someone in the top 4% of those having liability for income tax:
Just had fantastic Georgian food in Kyiv via the Glovo delivery app. Good khinkali, superb kachapuri, plus that amazebombs Georgian spicy sauce and garlicky green been salad and a yum little beefy curry thingy
All done via smartphone. No language hassles. No payment hassles (Apple Pay). 40 minutes from ordering to fork in drooling mouth
This is in a nation at war
The world is so schizophrenic. In one way we are headed for apocalypse. At the same time technology makes like ever easier and sweeter
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
It's quite hard dealing with the whole nation. Where I live £100k pa is loads and loads. In much of London and the SE it isn't (SFAICS).
£100k is more than double the median London wage, which is about £44k.
£97400 before tax puts someone in the top 4% of those having liability for income tax:
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Come on dude: the everyone's GDP increased massively in 2021 as Covid receded and economies came back to life.
I'm more positive on Brexit that I've ever been, but that's not a good argument.
I excluded the covid years for the reason you said, for example in 2020 are gdp was -10.4% in 2021 it was +8.7%. The covid effect and I suspect most european countries would reflect the same. My point is though we rarely got an increase of 4% gdp while we were in the eu the last time being 2000. To say brexit cost us 4% gdp is a lie because since brexit our gdp would be negative ever since then. It is a remainer lie.....now if we had stayed in might our gdp be higher well thats a counter factual, maybe yes, maybe no but it irritates me this claimed 4% from remainers when there is no evidence for it
Look, I don't know who's making these claims or frankly why you've suddenly got a bee in your bonnet, but try this form of argument.
If you're going to get twenty-five quid, and someone says hey, I know, let's throw one of those pounds in the lake because if we do that we'll get a magic wish from the Lake People. So the money comes and you pocket £24 and you throw the other pound coin into the water -- plop! -- and you wait for your magic Lake People wish.
And you wait.
And you wait.
And eventually you realise you aren't getting a magic wish. You tell the person that their stupid policy cost you 4%. That would be a fair statement, even though at no point did any money actually leave your pocket.
Just to be clear, I've no idea where this 4% stuff is coming from, I'm just reflecting the number back at you because you used it. I don't have any kind of position on whether Brexit has cost this amount or not. I can tell you though (in case you need it spelling out, which I'm certain you do) that there are no magic-wish-giving Lake People.
It's the ONS's mean of other people's predictions:
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Pagan's initial post wasn't clear, but his clarification is quite easy to understand unless you're dull-witted or being deliberately obtuse for rip-roaringly comedic effect.
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
Or just an interview in a local paper whose readership is presumably skewed to higher incomes
That would be the Sunday Times, apparently. Regardless, the point stands.
I misunderstood “as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey” to be referring to the location of the paper not the interview…
Thinking 100k is an average salary is no different to the remainer lie that we lost 4% gdp when even where we were in the eu the last time our gdp increased by 4% was in 2000
Is this a riddle?
No its simple statement...our gdp didnt grow by 4% a year while we were in the eu since 2000.....the remainer lie is we lost 4% gdp somehow by leaving even though our gdp has continued rising. If it didnt rise by 4% while we were in the eu claiming it would have done is people like you just talking bollocks or as I would put it being a fucking lying piece of shit
I think you missed your last dose of thorazine
Oh wow ad hominem because you know I am right and you can't argue from facts.....yeah talk to the hand
When was the last year when we were in the eu when our gdp increased by 4% then go on tell me?
Come on dude: the everyone's GDP increased massively in 2021 as Covid receded and economies came back to life.
I'm more positive on Brexit that I've ever been, but that's not a good argument.
I excluded the covid years for the reason you said, for example in 2020 are gdp was -10.4% in 2021 it was +8.7%. The covid effect and I suspect most european countries would reflect the same. My point is though we rarely got an increase of 4% gdp while we were in the eu the last time being 2000. To say brexit cost us 4% gdp is a lie because since brexit our gdp would be negative ever since then. It is a remainer lie.....now if we had stayed in might our gdp be higher well thats a counter factual, maybe yes, maybe no but it irritates me this claimed 4% from remainers when there is no evidence for it
Look, I don't know who's making these claims or frankly why you've suddenly got a bee in your bonnet, but try this form of argument.
If you're going to get twenty-five quid, and someone says hey, I know, let's throw one of those pounds in the lake because if we do that we'll get a magic wish from the Lake People. So the money comes and you pocket £24 and you throw the other pound coin into the water -- plop! -- and you wait for your magic Lake People wish.
And you wait.
And you wait.
And eventually you realise you aren't getting a magic wish. You tell the person that their stupid policy cost you 4%. That would be a fair statement, even though at no point did any money actually leave your pocket.
Just to be clear, I've no idea where this 4% stuff is coming from, I'm just reflecting the number back at you because you used it. I don't have any kind of position on whether Brexit has cost this amount or not. I can tell you though (in case you need it spelling out, which I'm certain you do) that there are no magic-wish-giving Lake People.
It's the ONS's mean of other people's predictions:
Many of those predictions, when you look at the detail, have very dodgy central cases: for example, one of them assumes, as the central case, that we leave with no deal and then make a deal after a couple of years. Almost all assume immigration falls markedly or catastophically.
I used the 4% drop in gdp as it often features in remainer arguments about why brexit isn't working. I am merely pointing out its bollocks because we rarely achieved a 4% increase on gdp while in the eu
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
Let's hope that proves to be as accurate as your assertion that Sunak's D-Day antics would have "zero cut through"!
To be fair to him we don’t yet know if there has been much cut through in the opinion polls? There wasn’t much sign of it in last night’s.
Cut through isn't limited to polls. It's been the hottest election topic for the last few days to the point where there has been serious speculation that it was going to cause him to resign and he appears to have gone into hiding.
It has definitely cut through as an issue and, let's be honest, Sunak was pretty much polling at rock bottom before D-Day so there isn't much scope for further large drops.
If my memory serves me correctly CR also predicted that Sunak would be closing the gap on Starmer once the campaign was underway and Starmer was under the spotlight. It could of course still happen but so far the exact opposite has happened.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
Just because you told me to stop I am going to do moorhen till your shrike's make me crane my neck
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
It looks arguing is your pigeon
He should not budgie on his opinions and just parrot the communal line else he will end up in the nuthatch
Just realised that I am eating Georgian food (khinkali, mmmm) while drinking Moldovan wine (Purcari, yay!) in a weird Ukrainian hotel (in ancient Podol, Kyiv) as I gormlessly watch Belarusian TV (shite). I think this might be the Most Post Soviet Moment in the history of travel writing
Just realised that I am eating Georgian food (khinkali, mmmm) while drinking Moldovan wine (Purcari, yay!) in a weird Ukrainian hotel (in ancient Podol, Kyiv) as I gormlessly watch Belarusian TV (shite). I think this might be the Most Post Soviet Moment in the history of travel writing
Putin would not approve
gormlessly was an unnecesary adjective there its how we assume you do everything
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
Just realised that I am eating Georgian food (khinkali, mmmm) while drinking Moldovan wine (Purcari, yay!) in a weird Ukrainian hotel (in ancient Podol, Kyiv) as I gormlessly watch Belarusian TV (shite). I think this might be the Most Post Soviet Moment in the history of travel writing
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
It looks arguing is your pigeon
He should not budgie on his opinions and just parrot the communal line else he will end up in the nuthatch
Having the PM as your MP is a matter of local pride and PMs have polled decently even as they lost an election, Major remained popular in Huntingdon and, despite the SNP wave already being underway, Brown got a gravity defying result across the whole of Scotland.
I'm not sure whether Richmond will come to see Sunak as an embarrassment or will be bloody minded in defence of their man. It's Yorkshire, so the latter is quite likely, though Sunak's affinity to Yorkshire is limited such that it probably doesn't extend beyond his constituency. I'd also be wondering if Southampton will swing less than other places.
In 2010 there was no SNP wave. SNP's vote rose very modestly, 2.2pp up. Labour's rose across Scotland by more, 2.5pp.
They had taken control at Holyrood by then, so fair to say in 2010 Labour in Scotland bucked (a) their own UK wide trend at that GE and (b) the longer term trend of Scotland towards the SNP, which was already underway.
I think you need to be careful not to project backwards from the IndyRef. That was a critical fracture in Scottish political polling. Even in January 2014 Labour posted a 9pp polling lead over the SNP. By autumn, after the indyref, the SNP were miles ahead.
It's true the SNP won big in Holyrood in 2011, but it wasn't til 2014 that there was an appreciable effect in the Westminster opinion polling. Even the Holyrood polling was largely flat for the SNP til 2011.
Fair, but Labour not losing ANY ground in Scotland in GE 2010 was an over performance nonetheless.
Yes, it was, that's absolutely right. They increased they vote share faster than the Tories. That may well be due to Brown being Scottish.
And Clegg, as opposed to Kennedy, not being Scottish.
To be clear leave lied through its teeth, so did remain. Now we are in a general election and tory, labour , lib dem, greens, snp and reform are all lying to the electorate.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Too many gull people. One hopes for a tern around.
We wont know till is plover
Which twite started this? Stop all this snipeing and don't be a coot.
It looks arguing is your pigeon
too much chaff
No need to crow about it
I can't swallow this anymore..
Enough bird nonsense. Change the conversation. I'm knot planning to go but when is the next Swift concert?
Laura K’s Sunday article on the Beeb makes a big play of there being 4 weeks to go. She mentions it twice, and strongly in the context of things could change:
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
No, you are right. LK is unbearable, we knew that already; she is hopeless, again that is not news; but we can now add innumeracy to her list of dubious talents.
It's quite possible that Sinn Fein will lose their last seat in the EU Parliament now. Their support has fallen away massively, as they got on the wrong side of the Irish immigration argument.
I know its not the same election, and I've not followed Irish politics in a while but that's quite a change then, last I saw it Sinn Fein were nearly at the same as FF and FG combined and looked like favourites to get the Taoiseach next election.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
They’ve followed a relentlessly left wing line on social issues which is out of kilter with a fair chunk of Irish nationalist opinion, and they were caught on the wrong side of public opinion on immigration.
And, paradoxically, they let themselves be outflanked to the left on Israel/Palestine.
It turns out that many Irish voters care about more than unification.
On the general topic of things being reported in the Mail, here's something else of interest:
Jeremy Hunt has vowed to do more to help those on six-figure salaries if the Tories win the general election - and he clings on to his own seat.
The Chancellor suggested, if he remains in charge of the Treasury beyond 4 July, he would be focused on removing 'cliff edges' for high earners in the tax system.
Mr Hunt pointed to how the Government's offer of free childcare for parents is not available if one of them is earning over £100,000.
....
'Around here the childcare reforms have been pretty popular,' the Chancellor said, as he spoke to the newspaper in Bramley, Surrey.
'But people also do raise the fact that one person earning over £100,000 means you don't get access to them and that creates a cliff edge.
'Because it was a big commitment we just couldn't afford to do more when I made the original announcement.
'But those are things I think we definitely want to make progress on, yes.'
He added: 'I've always said that if you want to be economically productive we have to get rid of the cliff edges in the tax system.
'The removal of the personal allowance, the fact that childcare support stops when one person in a household is earning over £100,000.
'If you speak to economists, they will say the most damaging things in the tax system are when you have things with a high marginal rate.
'So it is absolutely on our list as something we would like to do more on.'
Compare this to the incessant foot-dragging over the victimisation of Carer's Allowance claimants who, earning, shall we say, somewhat less than £100,000, have found themselves falling over a cliff edge for earning about 56p too much and being ruthlessly pursued by Government-appointed debt collectors.
A good illustration of where Conservative priorities *appear* to lie - but it'll be fascinating to see which, if either, of these issues is deemed worthy of mention in the forthcoming manifesto.
It's quite hard dealing with the whole nation. Where I live £100k pa is loads and loads. In much of London and the SE it isn't (SFAICS).
£100k is more than double the median London wage, which is about £44k.
£97400 before tax puts someone in the top 4% of those having liability for income tax:
- the next question is, subject to the usual laws around slander and libel and the requirement to have an imprint, are there any restrictions on what you can put in an Election Address? If you wanted to promote your company's business, could you do so?
Didn't Screaming Lord Sutch, late of the MRLP, use by-elections to put on a gig locally and promote it through the freepost provided for election addresses?
I miss His Lordship; none of his successors seem to have had quite the charisma.
Yes, it's partly because Lord Sutch was originally in a psychedelic band in 1960's London, and had some of the strangely unique strew of antique and traditionalist-cum-wildly anarchist infuences that were circulating in Britain at that time.
Count Binface is showing some promise in this direction, but he has some work to do yet.
Ah, pseudo-anarchism from the 60’s. That’s what I miss. Student pseudo-anarchy plus a smattering of socialism; those were the days! Although by the end of the 60’s I was a ‘respectable’ small businessman, with a wife, family and mortgage.
I doubt Sunak will lose his seat, Election Maps UK has the Tories winning 101 seats on the latest polls average with Sunak holding Richmond and Northallerton with 36% for Sunak to 31.5% for Labour. Hague of course also held the same rural Yorkshire seat in 2001 despite landslide defeat for his Tories UK wide.
Election Maps UK does however forecast Hunt, Mordaunt, Shapps, Chalk, Rees Mogg, Clarke and IDS will lose their seats so there will still likely be plenty of Portillo moments on election night.
Portillo of course had he challenged Major in 1995 rather than Redwood might even have beaten the PM, however would likely have still faced the same prospect of leading the Tories to landslide defeat as Sunak, albeit having equally had a short time at No 10 https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
The Greens in the UK are utterly unserious. Embarrassing.
I have a certain amount of time for the Greens. They are idealists, and for the most part (friends of Hamas seeking refuge from 2019-era Labour notwithstanding) their hearts are in the right place. But they're also hopelessly impractical and have all failed their maths GCSE: given that the nation is already hugely burdened by providing a gold-plated UBI for people over 66, quite how we're meant to afford it for everyone is beyond me.
And I, too, am far from convinced that the Evil West disarming itself and leaving all the WMDs in the hands of the imperialist genocidal loony in the Kremlin would end well.
The Greens in the UK are utterly unserious. Embarrassing.
The Greens used to be all "save the whales" and "ban CFCs", the modern Greens are far left lunatics who should be allowed no power over us at all.
Falling support for Green/Ecology parties seems a feature of the Euro elections.
I think on the whole they won the environmental arguments, and what's left is very unpalatable. Which is a shame as I suspect quite a lot of people would be keen on an greener social-democratic party at least within sight of the centre ground, not the loony left stuff the Green Party is offering.
The Greens in the UK are utterly unserious. Embarrassing.
Someone was saying we need a Teal Green movement like Oz. They may be right.
That was me. Every day the Greens prove my point. Nevermind watermelons, they’ve evolved into tomatoes without even the pretence of being a green movement.
Or at least that’s the national party. Then go local and it’s a completely different matter. The conservationist arm of the NIMBY alliance. (Sadly an alliance my Lib Dem colleagues also spend too much timing flirting with).
The Greens in the UK are utterly unserious. Embarrassing.
Someone was saying we need a Teal Green movement like Oz. They may be right.
That was me. Every day the Greens prove my point. Nevermind watermelons, they’ve evolved into tomatoes without even the pretence of being a green movement.
Or at least that’s the national party. Then go local and it’s a completely different matter. The conservationist arm of the NIMBY alliance. (Sadly an alliance my Lib Dem colleagues also spend too much timing flirting with).
You’re right, apologies for not name checking you.
Matt Goodwin on good form re. the centrist Tory commentary on the return of Farage.
He has this aside which is a point I make quite often here:
I mean, on a side note, is this what all that lobbying for Rishi Sunak among the Tory elite class was for? Is this it? Is this what ‘getting the adults back in the room’ and ousting Boris Johnson was all about? An average in the polls of 21% four weeks out from an election? A prime minister who looks utterly lost and out of his depth? A Tory party that’s never looked so out of touch with the country? Fiddling around the edges with smoking bans, reforming A-levels, and high-speed rail? I await the William Hague and Matthew Parris columns warning us once again that Farage is the amateur and only they are the experts who truly understand the modern world.
Opposition CDU/CSU first, AfD second, governing Greens third and SPD fourth and FDP on just 5% in exit polls for the largest EU nation in the German EU Parliament elections https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-69102843
I must say, I was pleasantly surprised by Labour’s promise of 20,000 more prison places.
There's also meant to be support for getting ex-inmates into employment, but we'll see how far the commitment to important work like education and support for prisoners extends, given the pressures on the public purse and how low a priority this is for voters.
In the long run, the solution to crime lies in prevention, not building more and more jails to warehouse more and more prisoners.
That infamous article from 6th September 2014 by Matthew Parris.
"Tories should turn their backs on Clacton The seaside town represents a Britain that’s going nowhere. The future belongs to places with more ambition and drive"
We used to just have a bit of a laugh at the Euro elections. Vote for cranks, cock & balls, stay at home. The remaining EU members seem to treat them like proper elections. Strange.
Off topic. Interesting stuff on old Lowry interviews uncovered.
I’ve reappraised him recently; I’d mentally pigeonholed him as a bit tiresome and amateurish but actually there’s a lot to his work - and I feel the key to it was looking at it from the viewpoint of his having probably quite deep and chronic depression.
Beyond the factory/crowd scenes he is best known for, there is a lot of pretty weird and visionary and even near-abstract (his seascapes). Since experiencing a sustained depressive bout myself I found I could relate to his work so much more.
His studies of girls in chaste but preposterously tight/throttling dress take on a peculiar dimension when considering the absence of romance in his life.
Comments
The satire.
Starmer looks so gorgeous in that photo
Gives modest nod of approval.
See - https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ranking/gdp-growth-rate
I'm more positive on Brexit that I've ever been, but that's not a good argument.
This is a pub. The lost deposit will cost £500 but good value for the publicity including, I think, a freepost to every resident in the constituency.
Sunak is rubbish at politics but excels in Silicon Valley
So the answer is no
"And yet - take a breath, repeat after me - there are still four weeks to run”
She’s right that things might change but there aren’t really 4 weeks to go. Campaigning will cease in 3 weeks and 3 days.
And, more importantly, people will begin voting by post in the next c. 10-14 days.
Hair splitting? Maybe.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz55kvkp0ymo
It's true the SNP won big in Holyrood in 2011, but it wasn't til 2014 that there was an appreciable effect in the Westminster opinion polling. Even the Holyrood polling was largely flat for the SNP til 2011.
One is a property developer who is involved in a planning application with Newham Council - I know nothing about the other. Neither seems to have set up a Party or got one registered.
Campaigning ceases 3 weeks and 3 days. Polling stations open at 7am 3 weeks this Thursday.
There’s a little over 3 weeks until the General Election
25 days before the 2017 GE, the latest three polls had Tory leads of 18, 18 and 18.
25 days before the 1997 GE, the latest three polls had Labour leads of 20, 25 and 23.
So there might not be 4 weeks to go, but there's still plenty of time for things to change dramatically, particularly if one side or the other fouls up the manifesto. But things might not change much at all.
This campaign is being masterminded by Pakistani cricketers it seems.
Curious what changed to make FF and FG popular and Sinn Fein unpopular when it was looking the opposite not long ago.
If you're going to get twenty-five quid, and someone says hey, I know, let's throw one of those pounds in the lake because if we do that we'll get a magic wish from the Lake People.
So the money comes and you pocket £24 and you throw the other pound coin into the water -- plop! -- and you wait for your magic Lake People wish.
And you wait.
And you wait.
And eventually you realise you aren't getting a magic wish. You tell the person that their stupid policy cost you 4%.
That would be a fair statement, even though at no point did any money actually leave your pocket.
Just to be clear, I've no idea where this 4% stuff is coming from, I'm just reflecting the number back at you because you used it. I don't have any kind of position on whether Brexit has cost this amount or not. I can tell you though (in case you need it spelling out, which I'm certain you do) that there are no magic-wish-giving Lake People.
I have made a big deal of your very point. I have stated that at this stage in 1997 the polls were similar and didn’t narrow until 2 weeks out. I don’t deny that things might change and I, who perhaps first of all on this forum predicted a Labour landslide, have cautioned everyone to stop getting carried away and exaggerating how this might pan out. I today predicted a Labour majority of 172, well below where many people now see this heading.
But there are not four weeks to go. There are 24 days of campaigning left.
And many people voting by post will be starting to vote in 10-14 days.
That was my point.
This is our democracy now who can lie best and gull people into believing them
Count Binface is showing some promise in this direction, but he has some work to do yet.
So need more final counts for to shake things out.
All done via smartphone. No language hassles. No payment hassles (Apple Pay). 40 minutes from ordering to fork in drooling mouth
This is in a nation at war
The world is so schizophrenic. In one way we are headed for apocalypse. At the same time technology makes like ever easier and sweeter
Which will win?
Exclusive: Home Office whistleblower writes he heard his colleagues call for violence against Nigel Farage (Two HO staff confirmed this to me)
"Colleagues even suggested he should be arrested and people claimed Reform is an extremist far-right group."
It has definitely cut through as an issue and, let's be honest, Sunak was pretty much polling at rock bottom before D-Day so there isn't much scope for further large drops.
If my memory serves me correctly CR also predicted that Sunak would be closing the gap on Starmer once the campaign was underway and Starmer was under the spotlight. It could of course still happen but so far the exact opposite has happened.
Putin would not approve
“We’re not going to nuke ourselves, are we?"
@Lewis_Goodall isn’t convinced by Green Party leader Carla Denyer’s justification for giving up our nuclear deterrent.
https://x.com/LBC/status/1799818739938127997
The Greens in the UK are utterly unserious. Embarrassing.
And, paradoxically, they let themselves be outflanked to the left on Israel/Palestine.
It turns out that many Irish voters care about more than unification.
Student pseudo-anarchy plus a smattering of socialism; those were the days!
Although by the end of the 60’s I was a ‘respectable’ small businessman, with a wife, family and mortgage.
Election Maps UK does however forecast Hunt, Mordaunt, Shapps, Chalk, Rees Mogg, Clarke and IDS will lose their seats so there will still likely be plenty of Portillo moments on election night.
Portillo of course had he challenged Major in 1995 rather than Redwood might even have beaten the PM, however would likely have still faced the same prospect of leading the Tories to landslide defeat as Sunak, albeit having equally had a short time at No 10
https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
And I, too, am far from convinced that the Evil West disarming itself and leaving all the WMDs in the hands of the imperialist genocidal loony in the Kremlin would end well.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clkkdymdwlvo
Or at least that’s the national party. Then go local and it’s a completely different matter. The conservationist arm of the NIMBY alliance. (Sadly an alliance my Lib Dem colleagues also spend too much timing flirting with).
Matt Goodwin on good form re. the centrist Tory commentary on the return of Farage.
He has this aside which is a point I make quite often here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-69102843
In the long run, the solution to crime lies in prevention, not building more and more jails to warehouse more and more prisoners.
"Tories should turn their backs on Clacton
The seaside town represents a Britain that’s going nowhere. The future belongs to places with more ambition and drive"
https://www.thetimes.com/article/tories-should-turn-their-backs-on-clacton-j0k5h6zld08
Off topic. Interesting stuff on old Lowry interviews uncovered.
I’ve reappraised him recently; I’d mentally pigeonholed him as a bit tiresome and amateurish but actually there’s a lot to his work - and I feel the key to it was looking at it from the viewpoint of his having probably quite deep and chronic depression.
Beyond the factory/crowd scenes he is best known for, there is a lot of pretty weird and visionary and even near-abstract (his seascapes). Since experiencing a sustained depressive bout myself I found I could relate to his work so much more.
His studies of girls in chaste but preposterously tight/throttling dress take on a peculiar dimension when considering the absence of romance in his life.