Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For the first time since August the YouGov Brexit tracker has

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited January 19 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For the first time since August the YouGov Brexit tracker has referendum “right” in the lead

Ask PB regulars will know I make a point of reporting the YouGov Brexit tracker which is the one that has the most data points and for which we have a detailed records going back right to the referendum.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    Maybe a reaction to the progress made at the end of last year and the realisation that the sky isn't falling.

    The extreme Remainers are their own worst enemy by continuously leaping to the most extreme scenarios meaning that when that doesn't come true it undermines them.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    Second, like Remain.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465
    edited January 19
    It must be Tory Remain women who have driven the change based on the various subsamples. Could it just be a rogue poll, or has Farage's call for a second referendum made people think they'd rather just get it over?

    Jan 16-17 (Female) - Comparison with Jan 7-8

    Right: 44% (-4)
    Wrong: 42% (+5)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    I wonder if the reason that as people get older they're not buying into the Remain Doom and Gloom propanda is that we've seen this before. As someone who doesn't feel like one but is technically a millenial (35, born in 85) I've already lived through the projections that the UK was doomed to misery if we didn't join the Eurozone, when in fact the Eurozone then had its own crises.

    For me I was still a child when we had Black Wednesday, those even older have lived through all the projections of doom and gloom if we left the ERM. Of course those projections were wrong then.

    Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Fool me three times ... ?

    The youngest voters of today were not just children when these earlier projections came a cropper, they weren't even born then. Brexit to them is unimaginable in the same way as when I was 18 (year 2000) I couldn't believe that the UK wasn't going to join the Euro one day.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,083
    edited January 19
    Fifth, like Catherine Howard.

    In the City, people are realising that they won’t lose their jobs/have to move to an undistinguished town in Europe. In tech, nowhere in Europe is remotely near rivalling London.

    It would be rather amusing if this shift has been driven by speculation about a second referendum.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    I initially regretted my vote - mainly due to Trump’s election, but I’m more sanguine now.

    My pre-EUref concerns were twofold: whether the economy was strong enough to withstand the various Brexit related shocks (jury still out on that one, but it’s been fine so far) and whether we had the calibration of political leadership to execute well. That’s clearly still a worry.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,519
    edited January 19

    It must be Tory Remain women who have driven the change based on the various subsamples. Could it just be a rogue poll, or has Farage's call for a second referendum made people think they'd rather just get it over?

    Jan 16-17 (Female) - Comparison with Jan 7-8

    Right: 44% (-4)
    Wrong: 42% (+5)

    It's all your scare stories that are self destructing - Britain was going to be in a mega depression by now, millions of jobs were going to move to the Eurozone blah blah blah.........and to think that was said as a matter of fact by all those experts........epic fail indeed.

    As usual, believe the opposite of what politicians tell you......and you won't be far from the truth.
  • The concerted love in by EU leaders to attract us to remain in the EU follows well publicised meetings with those arch remainers, Clegg, Clarke, Adonis and frankly their pleadings just seems self interested, insincere and patronising.

    Having spent the last 12 months seeking punishment of the UK and it's temerity to have a democratic vote it is attempting a new strategy of pleading to stay which is going to fail as there is no scenario that will produce a change of mind or a second referendum before 29th March 2019
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,215
    Anecdotally - the story of the German girl getting killed by the "child" migrant got a lot of views on my social media among liberal women who were almost certainly remain voters. It may have contributed to some of the change.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604
    The change is surely because Blair has urged us to Remain?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465

    Right: 44% (-4)
    Wrong: 42% (+5)

    My pluses and minuses are the wrong way round... Should be:

    Right: 44% (+4)
    Wrong: 42% (-5)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,506
    I see that this poll is going to get a lot more analysis than most individual polls.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,360
    Just one poll, doesn't really mean anything.

    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    TGOHF said:
    Sounds like UKIP are about to implode.
    They are a joke and in terminal decline
    Unless there’s a massive Brexit betrayal by the government that leads to Farage coming back, I think we’ve probably seen the last of UKIP.
    That possibility of betrayal is surely the only thing keeping many of those left in the party.
    Oh I don't know. If one has spent years in a party and made friends etc etc it is quite hard to walk away.
    Didn't seem to help in the last locals - they could barely find any candidates in many places.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    edited January 19
    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,977
    Whether this particular poll is a blip, or not, it will be taken to mean that public opinion is hard to measure, isn't irrevocably shifting one way or the other, and is more or less static, which means Brexit will continue.

    That doesn't mean the Government shouldn't try harder to broaden its tent.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,977

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465
    Are Boris's allies being activated?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 1,738
    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    I think it is too early to say that this is anything more than polling volatility. What is unfortunately clear is that the country remains deeply divided on this in pretty even measures. Whether people think it is a good idea or a bad idea I had hoped that we would be coming together to make the best of it by now. The way the government has sought to present and negotiate Brexit has not helped.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402
    I'm sure it's been said before but let's have a referendum on having another referendum.

    Obviously I don't mean that.

    I don't really ever want another referendum, and certainly not on an issue that has any nuance to it. If the result can't immediately be enacted in law then it's a bad idea.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 1,738
    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    edited January 19

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
  • Hard not to agree
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402
    Who knows. He'll make a good PM though.

    I think that Gove's disapproval and quite astonishing ineptitude is just about wearing off.

    Boris is a mixed bag, but a very capable one. With all the risks it entails I'd like to see him as PM.
  • NormNorm Posts: 799
    RoyalBlue said:

    Fifth, like Catherine Howard.

    In the City, people are realising that they won’t lose their jobs/have to move to an undistinguished town in Europe. In tech, nowhere in Europe is remotely near rivalling London.

    It would be rather amusing if this shift has been driven by speculation about a second referendum.

    I suspect your second para nails it. Perhaps the ermine clad show be a little more wary of Adonis and his fellow travellers when they commence their game of sabotage in the Upper House.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
    Well as we haven't left yet the only explanation for the fall is that Britain is now a less attractive place to live. Speaking personally I'd say that the upcoming downgrade has certainly made me less happy about living here.
  • Omnium said:



    Boris is a mixed bag, but a very capable one. With all the risks it entails I'd like to see him as PM.

    I'm going to have to check a dictionary to see whether the definition of "capable" has been radically changed from what I've always understood it to be.

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
    Well as we haven't left yet the only explanation for the fall is that Britain is now a less attractive place to live. Speaking personally I'd say that the upcoming downgrade has certainly made me less happy about living here.
    That's far from the only explanation.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
    Well as we haven't left yet the only explanation for the fall is that Britain is now a less attractive place to live. Speaking personally I'd say that the upcoming downgrade has certainly made me less happy about living here.
    Well nothing stopping you leaving for the continent while we still have free movement for the next 2-4 years
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,823

    Omnium said:



    Boris is a mixed bag, but a very capable one. With all the risks it entails I'd like to see him as PM.

    I'm going to have to check a dictionary to see whether the definition of "capable" has been radically changed from what I've always understood it to be.

    +1

    Even as FS he is a liability. Indeed he fully merits an extra F.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    edited January 19

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    Indeed though the primary constraint that has delayed HS2 and LHR expansion etc is not that but NIMBYism and political pandering to NIMBYists. People objecting to the route, the effects it would cause on their homes not to forget those whose homes would be compulsory purchased and demolished in progressing with it. China doesn't care.

    However that's not the issue here. There's nobody living in the Channel whose homes would have cars going above them (LHR objections) or demolished along the route.

    If we can't do progress we won't get anything done. If we can't even consider grand projects without laughing them out then we've really fallen a long way.

    Victorian Britain with today's technology could have got this done.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 10,570

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
    Well as we haven't left yet the only explanation for the fall is that Britain is now a less attractive place to live. Speaking personally I'd say that the upcoming downgrade has certainly made me less happy about living here.
    A reduction in the increase is not the same as a decrease.

    There are probably about 400,000 more immigrants in the UK now than there was before the Referendum.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the long term, even if we eventually rejoin the single market after bringing Eastern European migration to the UK under control, Brexit was probably the right thing to do as the EU splits into a Eurozone inner core (perhaps even heading towards a United States of Europe) and a non Eurozone outer tier perhaps focused on a reformed EFTA

    Economic pressures are hard to resist whatever the political setup. Brexit does give the UK a few levers to pull that it doesn't have in the EU which might enable it to reduce Eastern European migration. But the difference in wages is going to make those workers attractive to UK employers, and make UK jobs attractive to those workers. Unless we propose a total ban and complete repatriation, there are going to be one heck of a lot of people with an incentive to keep migration as high as they can manage. Remember that most immigration as come from outside the EU anyway. We had the power to stop most of that and we didn't.

    I don't think there is any way Brexit is going to reduce migration enough for it to be noticeable. I think there is a very good chance it will actually go up.
    Net migration has already fallen by 100 000 since the Brexit vote.

    https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3YJS2JazCwAxAtB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWZibG83BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1516419977/RO=10/RU=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42178038/RK=2/RS=B1GAU8RHRnyjUmGIpf1JvV3H.Fw-

    However, the key thing is to make up for Blair's failure to follow most EU nations and impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries from 2004 to 2011
    Well as we haven't left yet the only explanation for the fall is that Britain is now a less attractive place to live. Speaking personally I'd say that the upcoming downgrade has certainly made me less happy about living here.
    No the other explanation is reversion to mean.

    Net migration is still higher than it was almost every year before now. Suggesting that net migration now is low because its off its peak is like saying global temperatures are lower now so global warming is a fraud.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Tony Blair is right about one thing. 2018 will be the key year when it comes to Brexit. By this time next year we will be on our way out, and talk of another referendum will fade away. Those who want us to be in the EU will have to start arguing for the UK rejoining after Brexit (and as a new member that would mean accepting the Euro).
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402
    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 10,570
    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    There's plenty of slots at other British airports though if there was demand to fly to these Chinese cities.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    But it wouldnt happen. Governments tend to be less popular in the polls than at general elections. Remember Miliband had a 12 point lead at one point which implied gains of about 100 seats (he lost 30). Which is why an opposition needs to be at least 15 points in the polls between elections.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 19

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    Disagree, for the first time today. You don’t build an airport somewhere foggy, and on the wrong side of the city for all your customers.

    All the talk of Boris Island has done is delayed the LHR expansion. We should have had runways 3 and 4 built by now.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    Hoo hah! But yes I agree.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    There's plenty of slots at other British airports though if there was demand to fly to these Chinese cities.
    The demand is the other way, from the Chinese. They want to fly to London and can’t because LHR is full. So they go to other counties and do their business there instead.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    stevef said:

    Tony Blair is right about one thing. 2018 will be the key year when it comes to Brexit. By this time next year we will be on our way out, and talk of another referendum will fade away. Those who want us to be in the EU will have to start arguing for the UK rejoining after Brexit (and as a new member that would mean accepting the Euro).

    An EU spokesman said last weekend if we rejoined we would not have to join the Euro or Schengen but would have to give up our rebate
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,823
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    There's plenty of slots at other British airports though if there was demand to fly to these Chinese cities.
    The demand is the other way, from the Chinese. They want to fly to London and can’t because LHR is full. So they go to other counties and do their business there instead.
    I understood that some of these new Chinese airports have little demand to speak of at all.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,823

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    It was idiotic from the start. Just another of his grandiose proposed white elephants.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Endemol “reality” TV crew attempt to go through security at Newark airport with fake bomb and several covert cameras to record officals’ reactions - and get caught.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42743829

    Whoever thought that could possibly end well? Morons.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 1,738
    IanB2 said:

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    It was idiotic from the start. Just another of his grandiose proposed white elephants.
    What's idiotic is trying to squeeze another runway into Heathrow which is surrounded by heavily populated areas on all sides.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,549
    fpt

    I think there is something rather symbolic about the inability to build a 3rd Heathrow runway. Blaming NIMBYism is to miss the point. We live in a democracy. The real issue is how can it be that the (understandable) objections of a few hundred thousand people outweigh the interests of 60 million? Ultimately because the locals really care and the rest of Britain doesn't give a stuff. It makes no sense to sacrifice a bunch of SW marginals in the hope of wooing Nuneatons because the Nuneatons don't care about 'global Britain' which is nothing more than a daydream of political and corporate minds. They care about their families their standard of living and being able to get cheap flights to their favourite holiday destinations. It makes me laugh when some Bexiteers think leaving the EU will allow us to unleash global Britain which has apparently been shackled by the EU. Want Global Britain? Start having a conversation with your own population.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,402
    Sandpit said:

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    Disagree, for the first time today. You don’t build an airport somewhere foggy, and on the wrong side of the city for all your customers.

    All the talk of Boris Island has done is delayed the LHR expansion.
    Maybe foggy and unlivable is exactly where you want it - people won't be landing these planes. We're going to have to build something approaching C21 trains soon - partially evacuated tunnels, maglev, all the rest of it. Stick it all together and build it. Connect it to foggy Boris island. Next 200 years - sorted. If not the LHR expansion is paramount.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 1,738
    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    My point was mainly that the figures are within the margin of error of the general election percentages. Tories within 2.5%, Labour within 1.0%, LDs within 0.6%.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    edited January 19
    stevef said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    But it wouldnt happen. Governments tend to be less popular in the polls than at general elections. Remember Miliband had a 12 point lead at one point which implied gains of about 100 seats (he lost 30). Which is why an opposition needs to be at least 15 points in the polls between elections.
    I am afraid that is psephological gibberish. Governments tend to perform better at General Elections than implied by polls - and by-elections- at the peak of midterm unpopularity. We will be nowhere near that point in this Parliament for at least another 12 months or so. Beyond that , it is not the case that election campaign periods favour the incumbent government - on the contrary it is normal for the Opposition party to gain relative to the Government during that month or so leading up to Polling Day. The 2017 election highlighted that tendency to an exceptional degree - but has actually been true of most postwar General Elections.The only obvious exceptions were the elections of 1951 - 1979 - 1992 - and 2015 - though in the last two instances it is now accepted that there were methodological issues with the polls - ie they were wrong all along!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,839
    @SkyNewsBreak: White House spokeswoman says U.S. President Donald Trump will meet Prime Minister Theresa May at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos in Switzerland next week
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    My point was mainly that the figures are within the margin of error of the general election percentages. Tories within 2.5%, Labour within 1.0%, LDs within 0.6%.
    Indeed so!
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    HYUFD said:

    stevef said:

    Tony Blair is right about one thing. 2018 will be the key year when it comes to Brexit. By this time next year we will be on our way out, and talk of another referendum will fade away. Those who want us to be in the EU will have to start arguing for the UK rejoining after Brexit (and as a new member that would mean accepting the Euro).

    An EU spokesman said last weekend if we rejoined we would not have to join the Euro or Schengen but would have to give up our rebate
    So remainers should start campaigning for the 2056 referendum for rejoining the EU -and come up with an argument that giving up our rebate wont matter (if people remember what the rebate was in 38 years time)
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    edited January 19
    justin124 said:

    stevef said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    But it wouldnt happen. Governments tend to be less popular in the polls than at general elections. Remember Miliband had a 12 point lead at one point which implied gains of about 100 seats (he lost 30). Which is why an opposition needs to be at least 15 points in the polls between elections.
    I am afraid that is psephological gibberish. Governments tend to perform better at General Elections than implied by polls - and by-elections- at the peak of midterm unpopularity. We will be nowhere near that point in this Parliament for at least another 12 months or so. Beyond that , it is not the case that election campaign periods favour the incumbent government - on the contrary it is normal for the Opposition party to gain relative to the Government during that month or so leading up to Polling Day. The 2017 election highlighted that tendency to an exceptional degree - but has actually been true of most postwar General Elections.The only obvious exceptions were the elections of 1951 - 1979 - 1992 - and 2015 - though in the last two instances it is now accepted that there were methodological issues with the polls - ie they were wrong all along!
    edit - I would add 1997 to the list too.However, in both 1979 and 1997 the Opposition enjoyed such a big lead over the incumbent that some rallying of support was to be expected.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    justin124 said:

    stevef said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    But it wouldnt happen. Governments tend to be less popular in the polls than at general elections. Remember Miliband had a 12 point lead at one point which implied gains of about 100 seats (he lost 30). Which is why an opposition needs to be at least 15 points in the polls between elections.
    I am afraid that is psephological gibberish. Governments tend to perform better at General Elections than implied by polls - and by-elections- at the peak of midterm unpopularity. We will be nowhere near that point in this Parliament for at least another 12 months or so. Beyond that , it is not the case that election campaign periods favour the incumbent government - on the contrary it is normal for the Opposition party to gain relative to the Government during that month or so leading up to Polling Day. The 2017 election highlighted that tendency to an exceptional degree - but has actually been true of most postwar General Elections.The only obvious exceptions were the elections of 1951 - 1979 - 1992 - and 2015 - though in the last two instances it is now accepted that there were methodological issues with the polls - ie they were wrong all along!
    What about the 2010 election. The Tories were 20 points ahead at one point, The Labour goverment on 22% and facing falling further. Yet the Tories only got 36% and Labour rose to 29%
    Obviously we dont know what the polls will be in 12 months time, but Labour should be doing considerably better right now and the Tories considerably worse. Yet Labour is only 1 point ahead, and occasionally not ahead at all.
    If Labour is not 15 points ahead this time next year, indeed if Labour is only 1 point ahead in January 2015, that suggests not that Labour will win seats, but given the likely recovery of the government up to 2022 with a new leader, and better campaign, it would suggest that Labour will lose seats. It is a big big mistake to assume that an opposition will do at the general election as well as it does in polls. Ask Ed Miliband, Neil Kinnock, David Cameron, Edward Heath, Harold Wilson................
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    Sandpit said:

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    In China an airport that doesn't get flights from London would perhaps be seen as their failure.

    Boris Island was the right idea.
    Boris Island was absolutely right. We're too timid by half.
    Disagree, for the first time today. You don’t build an airport somewhere foggy, and on the wrong side of the city for all your customers.

    All the talk of Boris Island has done is delayed the LHR expansion. We should have had runways 3 and 4 built by now.
    Well yes if we would have 3 and 4 built instead I'd be happy with that.

    My problem with LHR is its taking this long just for 3 with little to no real talk of 4. How long is it going to take to get 4 done if we can't even get 3 done. Boris Island at least would get 4 immediately.

    But yes if you can get LHR 4 then again JFDI.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    HYUFD said:

    stevef said:

    Tony Blair is right about one thing. 2018 will be the key year when it comes to Brexit. By this time next year we will be on our way out, and talk of another referendum will fade away. Those who want us to be in the EU will have to start arguing for the UK rejoining after Brexit (and as a new member that would mean accepting the Euro).

    An EU spokesman said last weekend if we rejoined we would not have to join the Euro or Schengen but would have to give up our rebate
    Did they? I thought they said if we changed our minds and remained that would be the case.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    stevef said:

    justin124 said:

    stevef said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    justin124 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did the YouGov poll include Westminster voting intention?

    Yes. - Lab 42 Con 41 LD 7 Ukip 3 SNP 4
    Thanks. Hardly any change from the general election.
    Not a great deal - it amounts to a swing to Lab from Con of 1.7%.and would imply 25 Labour gains at Tory expense.
    .
    I am afraid that is psephological gibberish. Governments tend to perform better at General Elections than implied by polls - and by-elections- at the peak of midterm unpopularity. We will be nowhere near that point in this Parliament for at least another 12 months or so. Beyond that , it is not the case that election campaign periods favour the incumbent government - on the contrary it is normal for the Opposition party to gain relative to the Government during that month or so leading up to Polling Day. The 2017 election highlighted that tendency to an exceptional degree - but has actually been true of most postwar General Elections.The only obvious exceptions were the elections of 1951 - 1979 - 1992 - and 2015 - though in the last two instances it is now accepted that there were methodological issues with the polls - ie they were wrong all along!
    What about the 2010 election. The Tories were 20 points ahead at one point, The Labour goverment on 22% and facing falling further. Yet the Tories only got 36% and Labour rose to 29%
    Obviously we dont know what the polls will be in 12 months time, but Labour should be doing considerably better right now and the Tories considerably worse. Yet Labour is only 1 point ahead, and occasionally not ahead at all.
    If Labour is not 15 points ahead this time next year, indeed if Labour is only 1 point ahead in January 2015, that suggests not that Labour will win seats, but given the likely recovery of the government up to 2022 with a new leader, and better campaign, it would suggest that Labour will lose seats. It is a big big mistake to assume that an opposition will do at the general election as well as it does in polls. Ask Ed Miliband, Neil Kinnock, David Cameron, Edward Heath, Harold Wilson................
    I don't actually need to ask anybody - I am very familiar with the pattern of opinion polls - and by election results - throughout the postwar period. There is no point in constantly quoting midterm poll leads for one party or the other - simply because we are miles away from that stage of this Parliament! As others on here have said to you on several occasions, you are simply failing to compare like with like. If we reach 2019 with the polls still showing a neck and neck picture overall , your comments will have more credibility.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,830

    As someone who doesn't feel like one but is technically a millenial (35, born in 85).

    Is my brain gradually frying or is there a typo there?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,537
    Omnium said:

    Maybe foggy and unlivable is exactly where you want it - people won't be landing these planes. We're going to have to build something approaching C21 trains soon - partially evacuated tunnels, maglev, all the rest of it. Stick it all together and build it. Connect it to foggy Boris island. Next 200 years - sorted. If not the LHR expansion is paramount.

    Maglev as it currently stands is a technology hovering on extinction. Germany sunk millions into the program, did not build a line of their own, and killed 23 people in a crash ruled by stupid people putting faith into the technology ("it can't crash!"). The only long-distance route built using their Transrapid system was in Shanghai, and the Chinese are being very tardy in extending it. The Germans have not only stopped developing it, but they are planning to dismantle their test track.

    There is more hope for the Japanese system, which is much more complex than the German system and less flexible. Perversely, it may end up being a better system. But it is still basically a test system.

    Your 'partially evacuated tunnels' sounds rather like Hyperloop. People on here already know my feelings on that. ;)
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 615
    edited January 19
    Does anyone else think that much of London's current airport capacity is being wasted and hugely undervalued?

    Fly from Luton these days and you'll quickly find that 90% of the flights are cheapo £10 Ryanair type flights to Latvia, Poland etc. Same with a fair proportion of Stansted and at least some of Gatwick. Why don't we significantly increase landing fees to reduce the low cost carriers' dominance and that would provide some useful space for extra long-haul services to China etc.

    If people want to go on a £10 flight to Riga then they can do it from East Midlands or Doncaster or somewhere else less crowded.

    Heathrow 3rd runway will be a disaster. The M25 is already a car park almost the entire daylight hours.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,335

    fpt

    I think there is something rather symbolic about the inability to build a 3rd Heathrow runway. Blaming NIMBYism is to miss the point. We live in a democracy. The real issue is how can it be that the (understandable) objections of a few hundred thousand people outweigh the interests of 60 million? Ultimately because the locals really care and the rest of Britain doesn't give a stuff. It makes no sense to sacrifice a bunch of SW marginals in the hope of wooing Nuneatons because the Nuneatons don't care about 'global Britain' which is nothing more than a daydream of political and corporate minds. They care about their families their standard of living and being able to get cheap flights to their favourite holiday destinations. It makes me laugh when some Bexiteers think leaving the EU will allow us to unleash global Britain which has apparently been shackled by the EU. Want Global Britain? Start having a conversation with your own population.

    Really good post. Politicians think about salience a lot - a majority vaguely in favour of something doesn't generate votes, while entrenched opposition does.

    I think the circle is best squared by really generous (but compulsory) comensation for people who have to move in what is seen as the national interest. For the cost of a big LHR expansion, I imagine they could compensate every actually displaced resident by 200% of their house values (or 10 years' rent for tenants) without changing the overall cost significantly. Residents further away who don't much like the noise of planes overhead are less likely to feel that strongly and could be partly assuaged with flight path tinkering. The trouble is that the lobbies have fought each other to a standstill so few people even in politics are really sure what the best course of action is.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,950
    ydoethur said:

    As someone who doesn't feel like one but is technically a millenial (35, born in 85).

    Is my brain gradually frying or is there a typo there?
    Yes I was born in 82. Typo on the keypad.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,830
    Dr Palmer

    Forgive me for bringing up your earlier dispute with Cyclefree re. whether Labour is anti-Semitic.

    However, I wondered if you had read this about Momentum, and indeed whether you agreed with it;

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2018/01/17/we-need-to-talk-about-momentum-and-anti-semitism/

    Disclaimer - I have known a great many very left wing members of Labour on a personal basis and I do not know of one who has been antisemitic. However, I also used to be an academic many moons ago and after working professionally with UCU I am shall we say wary of some of the more interesting tropes on Israel and what they hide. Jenna Delich springs to mind.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,830

    ydoethur said:

    As someone who doesn't feel like one but is technically a millenial (35, born in 85).

    Is my brain gradually frying or is there a typo there?
    Yes I was born in 82. Typo on the keypad.
    Much relieved. I was starting to wonder if I had missed several birthdays and was now 37 having let three years slip by without noticing.

    After the last two weeks I would not have been surprised!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    edited January 19
    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,830
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems both Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.

    That might in theory be bad news for Labour if UKIP implode as seems probable tonight.

    However if 2015 and 2017 show anything it's that any suggestion that UKIP=Tory on holiday is to put it mildly rather simplistic.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,788
    He is right. But no, I don't think Boris's allies are being activated. If this was about a leadership challenge, Boris's allies could simply drop the VoNC in - unless Boris doesn't have the numbers (in which case it makes sense to play a longer game). But I don't think it is that second option. I think this is Boles saying it for himself, and probably for many other MPs who don't want to put their heads above the parapet.

    Reality is, it's a good time to call for an improvement because Brexit makes it very difficult to justify a leadership contest before next March, so it has credibility at face value.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 2,041
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


    The LD,s have lost 30% of their 2017 vote? That is truly astonishing from what must admittedly be a small sample size.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    edited January 19
    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems both Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.

    That might in theory be bad news for Labour if UKIP implode as seems probable tonight.

    However if 2015 and 2017 show anything it's that any suggestion that UKIP=Tory on holiday is to put it mildly rather simplistic.
    Not Tories on holiday but majority Tory, especially pro Brexit Tory, certainly
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


    The LD,s have lost 30% of their 2017 vote? That is truly astonishing from what must admittedly be a small sample size.
    They collapsed in 2015, were squeezed in 2017 and are still being squeezed it seems, though they have gained a few diehard Remainers from Labour
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


    The LD,s have lost 30% of their 2017 vote? That is truly astonishing from what must admittedly be a small sample size.
    Vince has given them no policies, no profile, no purpose.

    No point.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,818
    Evening all :)

    Given what must by definition be a very small sub sample the change in the LD vote share from 9 to 7 is as meaningful as the shift from 7 to 9 was in the previous poll. The Party's becalmed but those trying to read huge cosmic significance into a tiny sample have clearly got nothing better to do with their lives.

    Likewise obsessing over the 3% UKIP share isn't worth it.

    At the moment we have two blocs, one made up of 70% LEAVE and 30% REMAIN and the other make up of 70% LEAVE and 30% REMAIN. Each considers the other the worst possible Government possible for the country and will do what they can to prevent it.

    Until that dynamic changes and Labour is no longer seen as a bunch of anti-Semitic malcontents led by a geriatric senile Marxist and the Conservatives are no longer seen as a pack of baby-eating, granny-selling incompetents led by a woman with all the charm and charisma of an iceberg off the northern coast of Greenland I suspect we'll see little change.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,830

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


    The LD,s have lost 30% of their 2017 vote? That is truly astonishing from what must admittedly be a small sample size.
    Vince has given them no policies, no profile, no purpose.

    No point.
    Some possible puns:

    The cable has lost its spark.

    The cable is frayed.

    The cable is no longer current.

    Etc...
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting detail from today's Yougov that only 2% of 2017 Tories have switched to Labour but 4% have switched to UKIP and only 2% of 2017 Labour voters have switched to the Tories while 4% have switched to the LDs. 4% of 2017 LDs have switched to the Tories and 26% to Labour.
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/srb6u4hbl6/TimesResults_180117_VI_Trackers.pdf

    It thus seems almost all Labour and Tory voters consider the other party untouchable but some ardent Remainer Labour voters will consider the LDs and some ardent Leaver Tories will consider UKIP while any voters the two main parties do gain tend to come from the LDs.


    The LD,s have lost 30% of their 2017 vote? That is truly astonishing from what must admittedly be a small sample size.
    Vince has given them no policies, no profile, no purpose.

    No point.
    Some possible puns:

    The cable has lost its spark.

    The cable is frayed.

    The cable is no longer current.

    Etc...
    Cable unplugged?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,469
    edited January 19
    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    I think you may just have indulged in wishful thinking.

    The way politics are it is equally possible Corbyn's hard left could be in the low thirties.

    The truth is none of us have a clue
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    Given the Tories got 37% in 2010 too and in 2005 they were facing Blair and not Corbyn I doubt there will be much movement in that direction
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    That only works if they don't perceive the alternative as toxic.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,467
    edited January 19

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    At the moment it looks like 2022 will be like 2017 in reverse ie a hung Parliament where Corbyn has to scrape together a government rather than a hung Parliament where May has to scrape together a government. Until Labour gets back to the centre and while Brexit remains an issue there will be little change between the two main parties
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Given what must by definition be a very small sub sample the change in the LD vote share from 9 to 7 is as meaningful as the shift from 7 to 9 was in the previous poll. The Party's becalmed but those trying to read huge cosmic significance into a tiny sample have clearly got nothing better to do with their lives.

    Likewise obsessing over the 3% UKIP share isn't worth it.

    At the moment we have two blocs, one made up of 70% LEAVE and 30% REMAIN and the other make up of 70% LEAVE and 30% REMAIN. Each considers the other the worst possible Government possible for the country and will do what they can to prevent it.

    Until that dynamic changes and Labour is no longer seen as a bunch of anti-Semitic malcontents led by a geriatric senile Marxist and the Conservatives are no longer seen as a pack of baby-eating, granny-selling incompetents led by a woman with all the charm and charisma of an iceberg off the northern coast of Greenland I suspect we'll see little change.


    I have seen an iceberg of the coast of Greenland and I can tell you it had loads of charm and charisma
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    That only works if they don't perceive the alternative as toxic.
    Oh they might, but they don't have to vote Tory - just not vote, or vote LibDem. Labour gets stuffed if so.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    I really don't think Brexit is such a big issue for many Labour supporters - and even the minority who have strong views will support Labour as the best anti -Tory option . I am sick to death with Brexit even as a fellow political anorak, and I am in no doubt that the electorate at large finds it a highly technical issue.I believe this was true at the 2017 election which was why so many were receptive to Corbyn and Labour raising other issues such as Austerity to which people can much better relate. I rather suspect that when back in campaigning mode a similar impact will be seen again - and this is probably not presently being picked up by polls.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    Given the Tories got 37% in 2010 too and in 2005 they were facing Blair and not Corbyn I doubt there will be much movement in that direction
    Blair was much weaker in 2005 and probably a liability to Labour by that time. Labour would probably have performed better under Brown in 2005.
  • justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    I really don't think Brexit is such a big issue for many Labour supporters - and even the minority who have strong views will support Labour as the best anti -Tory option . I am sick to death with Brexit even as a fellow political anorak, and I am in no doubt that the electorate at large finds it a highly technical issue.I believe this was true at the 2017 election which was why so many were receptive to Corbyn and Labour raising other issues such as Austerity to which people can much better relate. I rather suspect that when back in campaigning mode a similar impact will be seen again - and this is probably not presently being picked up by polls.
    You do live in such a hypothetical world - time everyone agreed no one has any idea of the next GE
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 10,570
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Meanwhile as people mock Boris for suggesting a 20 mile bridge linking our nation with our nearest continental neighbour ... China has completed a 26 mile bridge linking one of their port cities with a nearby island.

    https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/china-opens-worlds-longest-sea-bridge-toppling-american-record-holder

    That China can do that not in their busiest region but the very notion of us linking with France is a joke to people shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

    JFDI - Just F***ing Do It.

    They have lots of money, lots of workers, no democratic process, few procurement rules, and very little health and safety standards or worker protection.

    If you've got a lot of resources and don't give a toss about due process, you can get a lot done - quickly.
    For how many more decades should we keep talking about new runways and railways, before we actually get on with building them?

    China have built a load of new cities with airports, but you can’t fly to London from them because there’s no slots at our end. So they fly to Germany and Holland instead.
    There's plenty of slots at other British airports though if there was demand to fly to these Chinese cities.
    The demand is the other way, from the Chinese. They want to fly to London and can’t because LHR is full. So they go to other counties and do their business there instead.
    But there are other London airports and if the potential Chinese business is so profitable why doesn't it displace some of the present destinations at Heathrow ?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    I really don't think Brexit is such a big issue for many Labour supporters - and even the minority who have strong views will support Labour as the best anti -Tory option . I am sick to death with Brexit even as a fellow political anorak, and I am in no doubt that the electorate at large finds it a highly technical issue.I believe this was true at the 2017 election which was why so many were receptive to Corbyn and Labour raising other issues such as Austerity to which people can much better relate. I rather suspect that when back in campaigning mode a similar impact will be seen again - and this is probably not presently being picked up by polls.
    You do live in such a hypothetical world - time everyone agreed no one has any idea of the next GE
    Of course the future is hypothetical - but we can still reasonably speculate.I have already declared openly ,by the way , that I will not be voting Labour in my key marginal Norwich North seat next time - albeit for gender vetting reasons.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,864
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    It's tempting to think of Tory voters in 2017 as all "Tories" with the image that conjures up. But of course they aren't. They are a mixed bag. Many are loyal core Tories but many are not. It is those that are not dedicated Tories that are the swing voters available to Labour and Libdems. I would guess that a quarter of the current 40% Tory share is up for grabs.

    The Labour share is also a mixed bag but I'm guessing not much of it is available to the Tories. There is a lump of about 50% which is permanently anti-Tory shared between Labour, LibDem and Green - mainly Labour at the moment.
  • justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    On the whole, I believe Labour can be fairly content with poll ratings of 41%/42%. I am rather more interested in the Tory vote share and am far from convinced that will remain at circa 40% as time moves on. At some point I can well see quite a few of their softer voters drifting off to the LibDems - particularly if austerity and public services become more salient issues.In due course I will not be surprised to see Tory support fall back to the 36% /37% levels seen in 2010 and 2015.

    No, over half the 12% who voted UKIP in 2015 are now voting Tory so the 40%+ the Tories are on is pretty solid now, especially while Corbyn leads Labour
    But there were quite a few Tory voters in 2017 - and 2015 - who voted Libdem in 2010 and to a lesser extent 2005. I can forsee circumstances when such voters drift back to the LibDems.
    The greater likelihood is the mass of soft-left Labour Remainers who see Corbyn doing nothing to stop Brexit will think "what's the point in Labour?".
    I really don't think Brexit is such a big issue for many Labour supporters - and even the minority who have strong views will support Labour as the best anti -Tory option . I am sick to death with Brexit even as a fellow political anorak, and I am in no doubt that the electorate at large finds it a highly technical issue.I believe this was true at the 2017 election which was why so many were receptive to Corbyn and Labour raising other issues such as Austerity to which people can much better relate. I rather suspect that when back in campaigning mode a similar impact will be seen again - and this is probably not presently being picked up by polls.
    You do live in such a hypothetical world - time everyone agreed no one has any idea of the next GE
    Of course the future is hypothetical - but we can still reasonably speculate.I have already declared openly ,by the way , that I will not be voting Labour in my key marginal Norwich North seat next time - albeit for gender vetting reasons.
    To be fair Justin you do have an enormous amount of knowledge and you are very good at speculating and I do read your comments with interest
  • A very sensible comment section. Who knows how the EU will look in 10 - 20 years. It may even have got rid of Brussels and failed to federalise
This discussion has been closed.