Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
The funniest graph in history is the one showing leaders poll ratings, with Truss being a near vertical line.
I saw a video of her a little while back, puffy face and a bit unkempt, like a female version of Johnson. Life is tough on political failures. Sunak next to join them, but not on the bottle probably.
Yes, I remember reading your rather ungentlemanlike comments about her appearance at the time. How kind of you to give us a repeat performance.
I am not, nor have ever been, a gentleman, but my description is an expression of sympathy. There is a brutality in watching the public self destruction of our political figures. Few go out with dignity.
Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
The funniest graph in history is the one showing leaders poll ratings, with Truss being a near vertical line.
I saw a video of her a little while back, puffy face and a bit unkempt, like a female version of Johnson. Life is tough on political failures. Sunak next to join them, but not on the bottle probably.
Truss has gone (or was) proper mental. It was all the deep state and the bank of England doing secret things that brought her down. Everybody everywhere was against her, the whole swamp.
Whereas, I don't think Rishi will be ODing on too many Mexican Cokes in the California sun.
You weren't really watching the interviews if that was your takeaway. Truss blames the Bank for the continuing instability because their 'support' (buying back bonds they shouldn't have been selling off in the first place) had a time limit that caused a cliff edge. She also blames them for not informing her and Kwasi about the UK's unique LDI exposure. Those aren't 'deep state' theories, they're simple facts. As for her wider point that the financial institutions of the UK actively resist changes to the status quo - look at the bizarre BOE response to Le Pen.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
Indeed. It’s unclear what the Conservative Party’s plan is to improve the state of public services, public finance, and public governance. If they’ve told us I can’t remember it over the “LABOUR SUPERMAJORITY” and “LABOUR IS GOING TO TAX YOU 2K”.
They had 14 years and they have done almost nothing with it other than the Brexit vanity project. Meanwhile everything has got worse.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
How will we tell the difference?
Taxes have been going up already. Spending has been going up already.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
The funniest graph in history is the one showing leaders poll ratings, with Truss being a near vertical line.
I saw a video of her a little while back, puffy face and a bit unkempt, like a female version of Johnson. Life is tough on political failures. Sunak next to join them, but not on the bottle probably.
Truss has gone (or was) proper mental. It was all the deep state and the bank of England doing secret things that brought her down. Everybody everywhere was against her, the whole swamp.
Whereas, I don't think Rishi will be ODing on too many Mexican Cokes in the California sun.
They were indeed. But she did lob a series of skyers at them to catch.
Morning all! Poll eve is upon us. I see Verian put out their final poll last night and, as i did with the others yesterday the campaign polling from them has shown a swing of 1.5% Lab to Con from first to last campaign poll (41 23 to 36 21) but a bigger Reform surge (9 to 16). Its also a very low Labour total on a probibalistic panel.
Given that we seem to have broad periods of 'similarity' on the overall tax burden as a percentage of GDP - with both parties responsible for precipitous falls and rises in their times regardless of rhetoric - it seems to me that it is the "spend" part that is the differentiator.
Even if you take COVID out of the equation, I would contend that the spending priorities since 2010 are what drive any not-Tory voting tomorrow.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
If Labour tax me more but the country’s finances and public services improve, then great.
Tax levels and public debt are already at a level where that outcome is incompatible with tax rises.
Is that true?
I'd rather live somewhere low tax, but Denmark (for example) has higher tax than us, with better public finances and better public services.
And, it's very boring.
Apart from the lego.
It was a place I was shouted at across the street in 3 different languages by an elderly gentleman, who then charged across the road to make sure I heard what he had to say....all because I was sitting on a seat in an empty bus shelter that was reserved for the elderly.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is why they Tories have been so bad. This is supposed to be Tory 101 stuff, its supposed to be in their DNA that they understand why you have to resist the calls to just whack up taxes on businesses. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
You’re right but worth rolling the dice. Got nowt to lose.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
TBF the recent YouGov suggests that a shade under 30% actually want it, with another 10% prepared to plump for it to avoid getting the alternative on offer.
Talking of YouGov, I've just done my survey for this evening's MRP, which followed on from lots of questions about video games.
Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
The funniest graph in history is the one showing leaders poll ratings, with Truss being a near vertical line.
I saw a video of her a little while back, puffy face and a bit unkempt, like a female version of Johnson. Life is tough on political failures. Sunak next to join them, but not on the bottle probably.
Truss has gone (or was) proper mental. It was all the deep state and the bank of England doing secret things that brought her down. Everybody everywhere was against her, the whole swamp.
Whereas, I don't think Rishi will be ODing on too many Mexican Cokes in the California sun.
You weren't really watching the interviews if that was your takeaway. Truss blames the Bank for the continuing instability because their 'support' (buying back bonds they shouldn't have been selling off in the first place) had a time limit that caused a cliff edge. She also blames them for not informing her and Kwasi about the UK's unique LDI exposure. Those aren't 'deep state' theories, they're simple facts. As for her wider point that the financial institutions of the UK actively resist changes to the status quo - look at the bizarre BOE response to Le Pen.
It's always easy to blame others, and hope that gullible or malign fools will believe you.
It is much harder to accept you have done wrong.
Truss falls into the first camp. It's someone else's fault...
Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
The funniest graph in history is the one showing leaders poll ratings, with Truss being a near vertical line.
I saw a video of her a little while back, puffy face and a bit unkempt, like a female version of Johnson. Life is tough on political failures. Sunak next to join them, but not on the bottle probably.
Yes, I remember reading your rather ungentlemanlike comments about her appearance at the time. How kind of you to give us a repeat performance.
I am not, nor have ever been, a gentleman, but my description is an expression of sympathy. There is a brutality in watching the public self destruction of our political figures. Few go out with dignity.
I think we're all big and grown up enough to know when a middle aged man is expressing sympathy and when he's pleasuring himself over what he perceives to the unkempt appearance of a hated female political figure. Strangely I think you might have a comment to make if we all sharpened our claws every time Angela Rayner looked less than on point.
Not a team player. I think we can expect her to defect in the hope others follow and a forced merger happens with Reform. I suspect that will fail. Either way she is finished in front line politics
If a few more people hadn't been 'team players' the Tories might have ditched Sunak and avoided electoral wipeout.
The seeds of this defeat though were sown before Sunak, and that’s something you on the Right really need to come to terms with.
Whether you go as far back as 2016 is up to you, but there’s little doubt that if Boris Johnson was unsuitable material to be PM, then Liz Truss was utterly disastrous.
The Conservative Party won't lose this election because of Rishi Sunak.
Sorry but that's exactly what is happening. People aren't voting for another 5 years of Truss, Boris and their respective Governments. Sunak has had ample time (and six months more if he wanted it) to show what he's about. People have decided they like it somewhat less than a dose of clap.
The Tory brand was damaged by Boris's shenanigans. If he had been replaced by a sane moderate - say, another Cameron-style leader - then he might have been able to reverse some of the rot. I doubt enough to win a GE, but not get a shellacking.
Instead, we got Truss, who was both blind and inept, and managed to upset enough people that she was soon gone. That further damaged the party. We got Truss because the Tories decided they were not extreme enough, and wanted to go more extreme. And damn the electorate.
We then got Sunak, who inherited an almighty mess. I have some sympathy for the situation he found himself in, but he played a bad hand badly.
So yeah, much of this Tory defeat is down to Johnson and Truss. Sunak didn't help, though.
The polling figures on both Johnson and Truss are very clear. Boris was about 4 points behind. Truss was polling at the (then) disastrous level of 19 at the nadir of her Government. Polling on an administration does not get worse in retrospect when that administration leaves office. These are simply risible excuses with zero basis in any sort of psephology to excuse the fact that the centrist, managerialist EU-friendly 'grown ups' that PB shrewdies had longed for came back into the room - even Cameron came back into the room ffs, and the outcome looks to be the worst Tory election result in our lifetimes.
You make the dramatic assumption that Truss's ratings would have remained static. Polling on an administration does not remain the same during that administration. And I see little reason to think her polling would have improved, given the disastrous start she had.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
You’re right but worth rolling the dice. Got nowt to lose.
I think Rachael Reeves is a decent candidate for chancellor. But I haven't seen anything that screams how to get this magical growth and the concern is the party will want to drag Starmer leftward. I can't see him for instance ever getting rid of the £100k a year cliff edge, you can do that without giving the rich a free pass, but it would boost productivity.
Blair had headroom for tax rises and actually a lot of his cabinet weren't that left anyway.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
How will we tell the difference?
Taxes have been going up already. Spending has been going up already.
It is very busy here but local facebook groups not registering. Just the usual moans about lost mobile phones, cracks on the pavement, late buses and a flasher on the loose.
You wouldn't know there was a big, possibly seismic erection tomorrow.
No one talks about politics in local FB groups. Many (most?) have rules explicitly against it. Ours do.
I am more astonished that people are still using FB.....
The vast majority of people I know use it. In spite of it's reputation it is still by far the most useful of the social media formats.
All of the final polls published to date have leads below 20.
That's quite a safe margin of error for Starmer. A 17 point swing at a GE is truly remarkable, and barely any swingback detectable during the campaign.
Final non BPC Ashcroft poll gives lab 38 (-2) con 19(+1 ) ref 18 (+1) ld 11 (+1) green 8 (-1) SNP 3 (=) Changes over the campaign +5 LD +6 Ref, 2% swing Lab to Con (47 24 to 38 19) Likely to be the only sub 40 lab sub 20 con final call (YG?)
Here's a much more interesting question than @kinabalu's low IQ drivel
If you were American, and if the Democrats persist in forcing you to choose between the wanker Trump or the demented Biden, then which would you choose?
I have said many times I do NOT want Trump to win. But if given that stark choice, between D J Trump or an actually mad president, I would go for Trump, I reckon he is the lesser threat to American security and wider western interests. Trump is predictably vain, and will do his weird shit as he did in 2016-2020, but he won't go to war. An actually mad president like Biden might do - or allow - anything, and will also be seized upon by Xi and Putin
That's how bad a demented Biden is, Trump is actually better
Trump isn't sleepwalking us into WW3 like Biden so unless you actually live in the USA then the main impact of Trump47 is that he is considerably less warry than Biden and his handlers.
Yes, Exactly. If you're American and the choice is Demented Joe versus Fuckface Donald, then it's Donald all the way. Trump will do and say embarrassing things. and maybe persecute a few Democrats (just as they have jailed republicans like Steve Bannnon). Trump won't take shit from Vlad or Xi if it actually threatens America, whereas Crazy Joe might launch nukes against Greenland when he's wearing a nappy and then try and blow up Washington to distract everyone from Hunter's crack habit
If you're a Yank, you choose Trump
Wasn't Bannon convicted of setting up a charity to "Build the Wall", raising millions of dollars, and then spending it all on himself, and exactly none on the wall?
I mean, you can call that persecution if you like. But I suspect the more accurate phrase is "fraud".
Sure, but - nonetheless- combine it with some of the "reachier" law cases against Trump and you can see why the GOP might feel the law is being weaponised against them
Trouble is, the Dems can say the same, SCOTUS is now acting as a cudgel brandished by the GOP
You live in America. If you were given the choice between Demented Joe and Fuckface Biden, which would you pick? (I do not envy your choice)
The only case that should have been brought against Trump was the Fake Electors one. The problem is that it appears that attempting to rig an election is covered by Presidential Immunity.
The other problem is that prosecutors in the US are elected. How do you stop it being in the interests of the New York Attorney General's political career to prosecute Donald Trump?
Well, my first choice would be a Democratic candidate without dementia, say that nice Mr Buttigieg or Ossoff or Whitmer. How they are currently polling is irrelevant, as they would get a good bump from being alive and able to speak without slurring.
If I can't get that, I'll take Harris.
And failing that Joe.
And last of all Donald Trump. Because I believe he is a clear and present danger to US democracy.
You don’t think the secret documents case should also have been brought?
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
If there are no consequences for failure then there is zero prospect of anything ever improving. The Tory record of government, 2019-2024, has been so monumentally shambolic that voting the Tories out of office is non-negotiable. With the FPTP system of voting that almost requires voting Labour.
If you're upset about the lack of scrutiny of Labour then you should advocate a change to a voting system that allows voters to make a positive vote for what they want, rather than one that coerces them into making a negative vote against what they most fear.
And, also, I am sorry that you fear Labour enough that you think voting for the continuation of this Tory government is your best option. You deserve to have a better choice than that.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
You’re right but worth rolling the dice. Got nowt to lose.
I think Rachael Reeves is a decent candidate for chancellor. But I haven't seen anything that screams how to get this magical growth and the concern is the party will want to drag Starmer leftward. I can't see him for instance ever getting rid of the £100k a year cliff edge, you can do that without giving the rich a free pass, but it would boost productivity.
Blair had headroom for tax rises and actually a lot of his cabinet weren't that left anyway.
If he was clever he could get rid of the 45p tax and all the cliff edges and make the inheritance tax limit £500k (incorpodating residence allowance) and throw a bit of red meat to the backbenches in return (like five new council tax bands for mansions and 50p inheritance tax on value of estates over £2 million, knowing that getting rid of the 45p tax band and all the cliff edges cost more than they bring in.
The mail and telegraph comments from both their columnists and by the line comments would be epic, or even Eadric. Better than Leon stuck on a ferry and accidentally locked in the bar store.
Mel Stride said the Labour Party appears to be heading for an “extraordinary landslide” victory tomorrow “on a scale that has probably never, ever been seen in this country before”.
“Not just 1997, not even 1931, but something probably the like of which we have never ever seen before.
The Work and Pensions Secretary stressed the need for there to be an “effective opposition” in the House of Commons during the next Parliament as he urged wavering voters to back the Tories.
All of the final polls published to date have leads below 20.
Sometimes late swing is very late and I’m not sure these polls with weekend fieldwork will be picking them up fully. But even these are almost universally showing Labour drops and Conservative rises.
Apropos of the discussion earlier re where the Tories were under Johnson, the final TechneUK before he resigned on 7 July 2022 was on 30 June 2022 and gave -
LAB: 39% CON: 33% REF: - (didn't trouble the scorer - other pollsters around the same time had them between 1% and 4%. I don't think Technewere giving Reform as an option based on other polls around that time) LDEM: 10% GRN: 5%
Based on that entirely unscientific subsample of two polls two years apart the movement post-Johnson has almost all been to Reform from the Tories, save perhaps for a shift to the LD's from somewhere. So you can argue, unscientifically, that Johnson would have ameliorated the defeat. IMHO he would have done something else utterly discrediting (people forget Pincher was the proximate cause of his resignation) leaving them roughly where they are now anyway. Than again...no Truss.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
You’re right but worth rolling the dice. Got nowt to lose.
I think Rachael Reeves is a decent candidate for chancellor. But I haven't seen anything that screams how to get this magical growth and the concern is the party will want to drag Starmer leftward. I can't see him for instance ever getting rid of the £100k a year cliff edge, you can do that without giving the rich a free pass, but it would boost productivity.
Blair had headroom for tax rises and actually a lot of his cabinet weren't that left anyway.
If he was clever he could get rid of the 45p tax and all the cliff edges and make the inheritance tax limit £500k (incorpodating residence allowance) and throw a bit of red meat to the backbenches in return (like five new council tax bands for mansions and 50p inheritance tax on value of estates over £2 million, knowing that getting rid of the 45p tax band and all the cliff edges cost more than they bring in.
The mail and telegraph comments from both their columnists would be epic. Better than Leon stuck on a ferry and accidentally locked in the bar store.
There is a whole load of crap that has been built up in the system that is primed for reform. And of course you could do the thing that should have been done ages ago, combine NI+IC. You could even get more tax out of it.
The problem is there will be winner and losers from changes and we seem to be stuck in this mode you really can't have that these days (unless its the very rich losing). It why the Tories didn't take any decisive steps to sort out cliff edges.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
It doesn't take some nerve at all.
Let's consider an example, where tax starts out at a level of 100 and Party A is a low tax party and Party B is a high tax party:
1) Party A pledges to lower tax from 100 to 90 2) Party A experiences two big black swan events and interest rates spike so actually raises tax to 115 to cover the debt and at the same time people are hit in the wallet by inflation 3) Party B stays quiet on specifics but makes clear it is still interested in higher tax on the right things and people 4) Party A pledges that it would like to lower tax back down to 105 in the medium-long term
That lots of supporters of Party A are angry doesn't mean that it isn't an issue when Party B comes along and further raises tax to 140.
If you want lower tax you should still rationally vote Party A over Party B, even if you're pissed off, and anything else is an emotional decision you'll later pay for with cold hard cash.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
You're rallying round the most worst option. How's that logic working out?
All of the final polls published to date have leads below 20.
Sometimes late swing is very late and I’m not sure these polls with weekend fieldwork will be picking them up fully. But even these are almost universally showing Labour drops and Conservative rises.
Which is about as unexpected as rain during Wimbledon fortnight to be fair, whatever the campaigns are like and whovever did or didn't make gaffes.
Mel Stride said the Labour Party appears to be heading for an “extraordinary landslide” victory tomorrow “on a scale that has probably never, ever been seen in this country before”.
“Not just 1997, not even 1931, but something probably the like of which we have never ever seen before.
The Work and Pensions Secretary stressed the need for there to be an “effective opposition” in the House of Commons during the next Parliament as he urged wavering voters to back the Tories.
Stride is usually a bit poor in interviews but on Today now he’s getting the points across effectively. I think they’re having a good couple of days, right on time.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is why they Tories have been so bad. This is supposed to be Tory 101 stuff, its supposed to be in their DNA that they understand why you have to resist the calls to just whack up taxes on businesses. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
I see, then yes we're on the same page.
Its also why I'm content for the Tories to go to the Opposition benches.
We need a party that opposes whacking up taxes on private enterprise and understands the market economy. Unfortunately we don't have one. If the Tories won't do that in Government, then they need to go to the Opposition until they're led by someone who can understand that and they can be fit to return to office then.
Hostage to fortune here, but I think if Labour win, we will see a return to strong economic growth.
For one thing, after a decade of ubderperformance, you'd expect a reversion to the mean. For another, I do expect Labour to act on our planning system, which I think is widely agreed to be holding back our economy. That will probably be unpopular though, we will see if Starmer can ride out the nimby storm.
I do worry their fiscal rules have boxed them in and will prevent them from making needed capital investment.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
For the 1000% time untrue.....unless you are on extremely rich. Lowest for 50 years if on average earnings.
Certainly not if you are NOT rich but on above average earnings, tax is eye watering.
They aren't at record highs for above average earnings. They are higher. For the very wealthy and big business is where a bulk of the direct tax hit has been and are up there at historic levels.
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
You say these things like they are unrelated.
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
No I am not. It is also why I am not that convinced Starmer has a great plan to get growth.
You’re right but worth rolling the dice. Got nowt to lose.
I think Rachael Reeves is a decent candidate for chancellor. But I haven't seen anything that screams how to get this magical growth and the concern is the party will want to drag Starmer leftward. I can't see him for instance ever getting rid of the £100k a year cliff edge, you can do that without giving the rich a free pass, but it would boost productivity.
Blair had headroom for tax rises and actually a lot of his cabinet weren't that left anyway.
If he was clever he could get rid of the 45p tax and all the cliff edges and make the inheritance tax limit £500k (incorpodating residence allowance) and throw a bit of red meat to the backbenches in return (like five new council tax bands for mansions and 50p inheritance tax on value of estates over £2 million, knowing that getting rid of the 45p tax band and all the cliff edges cost more than they bring in.
The mail and telegraph comments from both their columnists would be epic. Better than Leon stuck on a ferry and accidentally locked in the bar store.
There is a whole load of crap that has been built up in the system that is primed for reform. And of course you could do the thing that should have been done ages ago, combine NI+IC. You could even get more tax out of it.
The problem is there will be winner and losers from changes and we seem to be stuck in this mode you really can't have that these days (unless its the very rich losing). It why the Tories didn't take any decisive steps to sort out cliff edges.
Indeed. I make a fair bit of money out of Tax + NI being different, because part of my pay is a one off bonus.
Most of it only gets taxed at a marginal rate of 22% (instead of 28% now or 32% previously).
20% income tax. Plus 2% National Insurance, because that is done monthly (or weekly if weekly paid) not yearly, so virtually all the bonus is above the higher rate threshold for that month so gets taxed at 2%.
Additional pension voluntary contributions ensure I'm not in the 40% tax band, which in your 50s amount to a savings plan that is tax exempt going in and out.
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
If there are no consequences for failure then there is zero prospect of anything ever improving. The Tory record of government, 2019-2024, has been so monumentally shambolic that voting the Tories out of office is non-negotiable. With the FPTP system of voting that almost requires voting Labour.
If you're upset about the lack of scrutiny of Labour then you should advocate a change to a voting system that allows voters to make a positive vote for what they want, rather than one that coerces them into making a negative vote against what they most fear.
And, also, I am sorry that you fear Labour enough that you think voting for the continuation of this Tory government is your best option. You deserve to have a better choice than that.
Labour are going to win, by possibly the biggest majority ever. That isn't in question.
This is about stopping a supermajority and not giving them a blank cheque.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
It doesn't take some nerve at all.
Let's consider an example, where tax starts out at a level of 100 and Party A is a low tax party and Party B is a high tax party:
1) Party A pledges to lower tax from 100 to 90 2) Party A experiences two big black swan events and interest rates spike so actually raises tax to 115 to cover the debt and at the same time people are hit in the wallet by inflation 3) Party B stays quiet on specifics but makes clear it is still interested in higher tax on the right things and people 4) Party A pledges that it would like to lower tax back down to 105 in the medium-long term
That lots of supporters of Party A are angry doesn't mean that it isn't an issue when Party B comes along and further raises tax to 140.
If you want lower tax you should still rationally vote Party A over Party B, even if you're pissed off, and anything else is an emotional decision you'll later pay for with cold hard cash.
I bet you don't just buy the cheapest of everything without looking at what you get for it in the rest of your life!
Higher taxes are baked in with the freeze in allowances, which government really likes because it is bringing in a shedload of extra money with relatively little adverse publicity and without many voters understanding what's going on. That won't be temporary - indeed, does anyone believe the allowances and thresholds will suddenly start keeping pace with inflation again when the declared freeze ends, whoever wins?
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
If there are no consequences for failure then there is zero prospect of anything ever improving. The Tory record of government, 2019-2024, has been so monumentally shambolic that voting the Tories out of office is non-negotiable. With the FPTP system of voting that almost requires voting Labour.
If you're upset about the lack of scrutiny of Labour then you should advocate a change to a voting system that allows voters to make a positive vote for what they want, rather than one that coerces them into making a negative vote against what they most fear.
And, also, I am sorry that you fear Labour enough that you think voting for the continuation of this Tory government is your best option. You deserve to have a better choice than that.
Labour are going to win, by possibly the biggest majority ever. That isn't in question.
This is about stopping a supermajority and not giving them a blank cheque.
I believe you should vote in the hope that other voters will agree with you and vote similarly.
To rely on other voters to do the dirty work of electing a Labour government, and absolve yourself of the responsibility to choose the next government is an abdication of your democratic duty.
Mel Stride said the Labour Party appears to be heading for an “extraordinary landslide” victory tomorrow “on a scale that has probably never, ever been seen in this country before”.
“Not just 1997, not even 1931, but something probably the like of which we have never ever seen before.
The Work and Pensions Secretary stressed the need for there to be an “effective opposition” in the House of Commons during the next Parliament as he urged wavering voters to back the Tories.
Is Mel Stride the only government minister allowed on telly? Is it his fault they will lose?
Im uncertain how he gets a majority of 80/90 from the headline voting intentions. Unless they are referring to a different poll?
The argument is that there are a lot of narrow Con losses, so even a slight swingback from shy Tories will cut the majority severely.
Of course there are a lot of narrow Con holds too but he didn't seem interested in that bit of the bell curve.
Thanks for clarifying. So in effect a majority of 80 if all the Moe seats stay Tory
He seems to be assuming a Lab lead at the very bottom of the current polling range, and hardly any extra Lab seats from tactical voting. And that MRP is woo.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
It doesn't take some nerve at all.
Let's consider an example, where tax starts out at a level of 100 and Party A is a low tax party and Party B is a high tax party:
1) Party A pledges to lower tax from 100 to 90 2) Party A experiences two big black swan events and interest rates spike so actually raises tax to 115 to cover the debt and at the same time people are hit in the wallet by inflation 3) Party B stays quiet on specifics but makes clear it is still interested in higher tax on the right things and people 4) Party A pledges that it would like to lower tax back down to 105 in the medium-long term
That lots of supporters of Party A are angry doesn't mean that it isn't an issue when Party B comes along and further raises tax to 140.
If you want lower tax you should still rationally vote Party A over Party B, even if you're pissed off, and anything else is an emotional decision you'll later pay for with cold hard cash.
I bet you don't just buy the cheapest of everything without looking at what you get for it in the rest of your life!
Higher taxes are baked in with the freeze in allowances, which government really likes because it is bringing in a shedload of extra money with relatively little adverse publicity and without many voters understanding what's going on. That won't be temporary - indeed, does anyone believe the allowances and thresholds will suddenly start keeping pace with inflation again when the declared freeze ends, whoever wins?
When does the declared threshold freeze end? 2028?
Mel Stride said the Labour Party appears to be heading for an “extraordinary landslide” victory tomorrow “on a scale that has probably never, ever been seen in this country before”.
“Not just 1997, not even 1931, but something probably the like of which we have never ever seen before.
The Work and Pensions Secretary stressed the need for there to be an “effective opposition” in the House of Commons during the next Parliament as he urged wavering voters to back the Tories.
Is Mel Stride the only government minister allowed on telly? Is it his fault they will lose?
Once you rule out the ones that the public actively dislikes, the ones who are rubbish at telly, the ones who are desperately trying to save their own seats, and Lord Cameron who isn't a candidate, who else do they have left?
I expect a Labour government. I always want one. I've been hoping for and confidently counting down the hours for 2 and a bit years. And now? I don't know how to feel. A little nervous. I'll be crushed if it doesn't happen. But I don't really know how I'll mark it. I have no great expectations of change. At least not soon. But not having to listen to Boris, Braverman, Truss, JRM, Sunak, the Telegraph and the Mail, and take them seriously, because they have the power to affect my life will be a relief and a weight lifted. Maybe I'd sleep for a week if I didn't have to work to pay my outrageous rent? I think perhaps that's how the 40% of the country voting Labour are feeling. Just fucking exhausted by your constant Tory drama about all kinds of shit that simply doesn't matter to folk who work hard and just want to have a bit left over to spend.
Shame they're going to tax you even more and raise your bills still further then.
No they’re not. The Conservatives are the tax and spend party now. The problem is that no-one knows how they’re spending any of the money they appropriate. You need to cast your eye over your team with a critical eye, CR. They need the sort of scrutiny you refuse to give them. Even I’m going to lend Labour my vote this time.
No, Labour are the tax and spend party.
Always have been, always will be. And it's them you've failed to scrutinise in this election. Entirely.
A shock is coming for you.
I don’t really see how the Conservatives can have the gall to lecture others about tax and spend.
I have never in my entire life seen such high levels of taxation and unaccountable Government debt.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on.
Well, shortly, you will see levels of taxation and debt even higher still. Beyond your wildest dreams.
If you vote for the beast, expect the beasting.
Blair under the bed 👹
SKS is a socialist. He said it himself.
Expect aspects of socialism.
We know. You are so patronising. You have this idea that people are stupid and haven’t read the small print.. You keep saying this as if it is a turn off. The Labour Party constitution makes it clear that it is a socialist party. The British public like aspects of socialism - most notably the NHS which is the most socialist way of organising health provision in the capitalist world. They also quite like socialist things like state funded schools, state pensions, and nationalised utilities.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
Ah, the irony of being called patronising by someone who presumes my financial status.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
If there are no consequences for failure then there is zero prospect of anything ever improving. The Tory record of government, 2019-2024, has been so monumentally shambolic that voting the Tories out of office is non-negotiable. With the FPTP system of voting that almost requires voting Labour.
If you're upset about the lack of scrutiny of Labour then you should advocate a change to a voting system that allows voters to make a positive vote for what they want, rather than one that coerces them into making a negative vote against what they most fear.
And, also, I am sorry that you fear Labour enough that you think voting for the continuation of this Tory government is your best option. You deserve to have a better choice than that.
Labour are going to win, by possibly the biggest majority ever. That isn't in question.
This is about stopping a supermajority and not giving them a blank cheque.
Under our constitutional arrangement we usually talk about a "working majority", which is usually deemed to be a majority sufficient to expedite Parliamentary business for the government in the most efficient manner. Once a working majority is achieved, it makes no difference if the government wins Parliamentary votes by 30-40 or 300.
In any event a majority of 1 is sufficient to pass government bills. A "supermajority" isn´t a thing in our constitution, its just a Tory propaganda point.
It takes some nerve to suggest tax rises will be an issue under Labour when income taxes under the blue team are now at a record high.
Personally, I would happily take the hit on my bank balance for good governance and less corruption.
It doesn't take some nerve at all.
Let's consider an example, where tax starts out at a level of 100 and Party A is a low tax party and Party B is a high tax party:
1) Party A pledges to lower tax from 100 to 90 2) Party A experiences two big black swan events and interest rates spike so actually raises tax to 115 to cover the debt and at the same time people are hit in the wallet by inflation 3) Party B stays quiet on specifics but makes clear it is still interested in higher tax on the right things and people 4) Party A pledges that it would like to lower tax back down to 105 in the medium-long term
That lots of supporters of Party A are angry doesn't mean that it isn't an issue when Party B comes along and further raises tax to 140.
If you want lower tax you should still rationally vote Party A over Party B, even if you're pissed off, and anything else is an emotional decision you'll later pay for with cold hard cash.
For everyone earning over £50k and possibly less tax is going to increase. Party A in your scenario were lying about their intentions and it’s hard to enthuse over a party that starts off lying. Party B has made certain specific promises which I think they will break but one thing is certain: everything not covered is going to be taxed till the pips squeak.
Our state needs another £100bn a year to pay for current spending, no increases. Our tax base has been out of line with our spending since the GFC. When something is unsustainable it will eventually stop.
Well said Mel Stride, a bit of honesty recognising what everyone else knows and what the real situation is. We need honest politicians not the likes of that Johnson who almost single handed is responsible for the rot that has beset the party.
Comments
Fisher then says that based on all polls he is expecting a majority of 80 or 90.
https://x.com/GMB/status/1808376282444444079?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
They had 14 years and they have done almost nothing with it other than the Brexit vanity project. Meanwhile everything has got worse.
Taxes have been going up already. Spending has been going up already.
"It will be more of the same" isn't a threat.
So yes, me and some 35%-42% of the electorate are wanting and expecting aspects of socialism. Primarily, but not exclusively, a working public healthcare system.
(At this juncture I should point out that I think the French model of healthcare has a lot to recommend it, which puts me to the right of most of the country on the issue and gives me a point of agreement with Farage, which in turn makes me feel dirty. Nevertheless I’m still voting Labour because it’s the least worst option in this regard.)
The problem is poor wage growth, high inflation, high interest rates, indirect taxation, means everybody is feeling much poor(er).
I see Verian put out their final poll last night and, as i did with the others yesterday the campaign polling from them has shown a swing of 1.5% Lab to Con from first to last campaign poll (41 23 to 36 21) but a bigger Reform surge (9 to 16). Its also a very low Labour total on a probibalistic panel.
Was it happy hour at the local off licence or something?
Even if you take COVID out of the equation, I would contend that the spending priorities since 2010 are what drive any not-Tory voting tomorrow.
(OBR Chart)
Putting taxes to record levels on businesses etc suppresses both wages and growth.
Or just aggression.
Talking of YouGov, I've just done my survey for this evening's MRP, which followed on from lots of questions about video games.
Man who babbles about sharks, is facing jail time, tried to murder his Vice President and randomly threatens nuclear war is NOT.
It is much harder to accept you have done wrong.
Truss falls into the first camp. It's someone else's fault...
📊 Labour lead at 19pts
Westminster voting intention
LAB: 40% (-1)
CON: 21% (+2)
REF: 16% (-1)
LDEM: 11% (-1)
GRN: 6% (+1)
via @techneUK, 28 Jun - 02 Jul
https://x.com/BritainElects/status/1808377633240936922?t=qn4zH_UhqMWsRNkPlri8_Q&s=19
Blair had headroom for tax rises and actually a lot of his cabinet weren't that left anyway.
Thank you for the impassioned TED Talk. I had no idea that appreciating the NHS and state schools made one an expert on socialism. It’s truly inspiring to see such fervor for selective reading and logical leaps. And it's charming to see you rallying around 'the least worst option.'
How wonderfully optimistic.
Will voters punish the DUP because of Donaldson’s alleged actions?
Don't you worry about that.
That Ming vase is very nearly over the line.
Changes over the campaign +5 LD +6 Ref, 2% swing Lab to Con (47 24 to 38 19)
Likely to be the only sub 40 lab sub 20 con final call (YG?)
Of course there are a lot of narrow Con holds too but he didn't seem interested in that bit of the bell curve.
If you're upset about the lack of scrutiny of Labour then you should advocate a change to a voting system that allows voters to make a positive vote for what they want, rather than one that coerces them into making a negative vote against what they most fear.
And, also, I am sorry that you fear Labour enough that you think voting for the continuation of this Tory government is your best option. You deserve to have a better choice than that.
The mail and telegraph comments from both their columnists and by the line comments would be epic, or even Eadric. Better than Leon stuck on a ferry and accidentally locked in the bar store.
“Not just 1997, not even 1931, but something probably the like of which we have never ever seen before.
The Work and Pensions Secretary stressed the need for there to be an “effective opposition” in the House of Commons during the next Parliament as he urged wavering voters to back the Tories.
LAB: 39%
CON: 33%
REF: - (didn't trouble the scorer - other pollsters around the same time had them between 1% and 4%. I don't think Technewere giving Reform as an option based on other polls around that time)
LDEM: 10%
GRN: 5%
Based on that entirely unscientific subsample of two polls two years apart the movement post-Johnson has almost all been to Reform from the Tories, save perhaps for a shift to the LD's from somewhere. So you can argue, unscientifically, that Johnson would have ameliorated the defeat. IMHO he would have done something else utterly discrediting (people forget Pincher was the proximate cause of his resignation) leaving them roughly where they are now anyway. Than again...no Truss.
The problem is there will be winner and losers from changes and we seem to be stuck in this mode you really can't have that these days (unless its the very rich losing). It why the Tories didn't take any decisive steps to sort out cliff edges.
Let's consider an example, where tax starts out at a level of 100 and Party A is a low tax party and Party B is a high tax party:
1) Party A pledges to lower tax from 100 to 90
2) Party A experiences two big black swan events and interest rates spike so actually raises tax to 115 to cover the debt and at the same time people are hit in the wallet by inflation
3) Party B stays quiet on specifics but makes clear it is still interested in higher tax on the right things and people
4) Party A pledges that it would like to lower tax back down to 105 in the medium-long term
That lots of supporters of Party A are angry doesn't mean that it isn't an issue when Party B comes along and further raises tax to 140.
If you want lower tax you should still rationally vote Party A over Party B, even if you're pissed off, and anything else is an emotional decision you'll later pay for with cold hard cash.
Its also why I'm content for the Tories to go to the Opposition benches.
We need a party that opposes whacking up taxes on private enterprise and understands the market economy. Unfortunately we don't have one. If the Tories won't do that in Government, then they need to go to the Opposition until they're led by someone who can understand that and they can be fit to return to office then.
"The offences are alleged to have occurred between 1985 and 2008 and involve two alleged victims."
One of the fun things about this election is that some people are going to be very wrong.
But who?
NEW THREAD
For one thing, after a decade of ubderperformance, you'd expect a reversion to the mean. For another, I do expect Labour to act on our planning system, which I think is widely agreed to be holding back our economy. That will probably be unpopular though, we will see if Starmer can ride out the nimby storm.
I do worry their fiscal rules have boxed them in and will prevent them from making needed capital investment.
Most of it only gets taxed at a marginal rate of 22% (instead of 28% now or 32% previously).
20% income tax. Plus 2% National Insurance, because that is done monthly (or weekly if weekly paid) not yearly, so virtually all the bonus is above the higher rate threshold for that month so gets taxed at 2%.
Additional pension voluntary contributions ensure I'm not in the 40% tax band, which in your 50s amount to a savings plan that is tax exempt going in and out.
This is about stopping a supermajority and not giving them a blank cheque.
Higher taxes are baked in with the freeze in allowances, which government really likes because it is bringing in a shedload of extra money with relatively little adverse publicity and without many voters understanding what's going on. That won't be temporary - indeed, does anyone believe the allowances and thresholds will suddenly start keeping pace with inflation again when the declared freeze ends, whoever wins?
To rely on other voters to do the dirty work of electing a Labour government, and absolve yourself of the responsibility to choose the next government is an abdication of your democratic duty.
With a few polls added so far this morning, we are at: Con 20.6, Lab 39.9, LD 11.2, Ref 16.3, Grn 6.1
Maybe 39-21 by close of business tonight? I don't expect much more than that.
In any event a majority of 1 is sufficient to pass government bills. A "supermajority" isn´t a thing in our constitution, its just a Tory propaganda point.
Our state needs another £100bn a year to pay for current spending, no increases. Our tax base has been out of line with our spending since the GFC. When something is unsustainable it will eventually stop.