Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prof John Curtice suggests that LAB is not going to have an ea
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prof John Curtice suggests that LAB is not going to have an easy ride in Thursday locals as many of the forecasts
John Curtice
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Alleged antisemitism? ??
A bit dubious given the evidence. Alleged racism but antisemitism is pain to see.
It is this which accounts for the way that leavers, despite having won, still devote so much energy to attacking remainers. Screaming at your opponents to ‘suck it up’ is easy; engaging with, say, Cumulative Rules of Origin not so much. But it also accounts for something which is having a far more damaging effect on Britain and, could leavers but see it, Brexit itself. For it explains the at best sour and at worst aggressive way in which what is now a Brexit government has approached the EU negotiations On the face of it, you’d expect that approach to have been characterised by magnanimity and even joy: we’re leaving for a much better future! In those circumstances things like the ‘divorce bill’ would have been brushed aside: what are a few billion pounds, when so bright a future awaits us?
But of course nothing like that has happened. From the start, the approach of Brexiters both within and outside of government has been confrontational, defensive and angry, often, as I have written before, acting as if Britain were being expelled from the EU rather than choosing to leave. Whenever any consequence of leaving emerges – the possibility of a charge for visas being a recent trivial example; the need for a border in Ireland being an ongoing important one – they cry punishment. Even, as with Gibraltar, they talk of war. None of that would make sense if Brexiters were confident, happy winners of a great prize; all of it makes sense if they are a protest movement, in love with a sense of put-upon victimhood, fearful of – to coin a phrase – taking back control.
http://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.co.uk/2018/04/brexiters-would-have-been-much-happier.html
Votes will be decided on the usual desire to kick a government that is struggling a bit, frustration with an economy which has not provided wage growth for too many for too long, that has not provided affordable homes for a generation, that has in addition loaded half that generation with debt so that they end up paying more tax than people have since Lawson, with the widely held perception that "austerity" is some sort of morally defective choice rather than a desire to head to a situation where we live within our means and no doubt irritation with the local councils about less frequent bin collections etc.
National polling at the moment, especially the last 2 Yougovs, suggest the Tories might do ok but will those who don't see an alternative to a fairly lacklustre government be as motivated to vote as those who want to kick the machine when the government of the country is not at risk? I have my doubts.
Just a matter of time, though.
Ironically of course this would be a very damaging outcome in every way, far worse than the other way around. But I don't think the potential for economic crisis has ever bothered Corbyn.
Yes, demographics drives a lot of it but I still remember being harssed by the ultra-Remain granny and an eloquent advocation of Leave by a 20-year old student during the campaign.
You can’t make assumptions about people.
The Conservatives’ big problem is that it is easy to see how the effect could be transient among Leave voters and permanent among Remain voters.
For all that, they’ll do fine on Thursday for the reason the knightly professor gives.
Edit: The first strike policy, it all makes sense.
I decent result in London will allow Labour to avoid looking at the truth I suspect. That is that out in the marginals outside London, they are not doing anywhere near as well as an Opposition approaching mid-term should be.
I cannot see the point of leaving the EU and the SM but remaining in the CU. If we stay in the latter we may as well remain in the SM, especially if we’re going to offer something much like free movement to those in the EU.
And if we’re going to remain in the SM and the CU we may as well have a say in the rules.......
Anyway, I tend to agree with @DavidL. People may well vote on local issues or to kick the government rather than because of Brexit.
Still, you have got your excuses in early. What sort of swing to Labour (oh the irony of that) will indicate a remainer revolt in our capital?
That's not what they voted for.
Once again Brexiteers completely unable to deal with the consequences of their actions, and seek to blame those who counseled, campaigned and voted against it.
You Brexit, you own it...
A lot of them will be wrong, of course. But assumptions allow you to spend your precious brain energy on more useful things.
https://www.camecon.com/news/economic-impact-brexit-starkly-revealed-new-report/
A month ago I predicted the Conservatives would do fine overall, largely off the back of analysis of swings last year.
Labour will be benefiting from a Remainer revolt if they get any swing to them in London this year (bearing in mind Labour did well in 2014 under a leader who was satirised for being a metropolitan leftie, and were actually polling nationally ahead of where they are now, relative to the Conservatives). In practice, no one is talking about them standing still in London.
The casting around by Conservatives to try to explain why they are going so sharply backwards in London without using the B word is grimly amusing.
Note yesterday’s Ipsos-MORI poll sub samples appear to show that London voters are unusually unimpressed with Jeremy Corbyn. Yet they’re going to troop out to vote Labour on Thursday. Labour don’t deserve that success. The Conservatives richly deserve to be pummelled.
There are some votes that the Lords are absolutely right over - such as overturning the Henry VIII powers. But votes such as that yesterday trying to prevent a no deal situation simply make the UK's position weaker and again are designed to try and keep us in the EU as a last resort.
malcolmg said:
» show previous quotes
Why not just make it a driving licence, you can get one regardless of whether you drive a car.
Because they're quite expensive.
ydoethur, surely £20 is not expensive
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-great-show-glaring-flaw-3-takeaways-from-bibi-s-iran-lied-speech-1.6045586
What the Lib Dems need is to shout out their values and what the party can offer the country - and there is a saleable product there. Instead, they're navel-gazing on an area that won't change votes.
Cable is an absolute disaster.
It seems certain quarters of the political class have dedicated themselves to thwarting what the electorate voted for. That's not healthy for a democracy.
I fear you risk becoming a caricature with some of your assertions.
I don't claim to be an expert but this is how politics works ... The government proposes a referendum on a subject. Parliament agrees and promises to honour the result. Note that it is the government of the day that is responsible for doing that by way of an organisation called the civil service who take orders from that government.
It is not the responsibility of any pressure group to 'own' and implement the result. Giving orders to the civil service is in the gift only of the government.
If parliament reneges on their promise to honour the result, for example by disregarding the result and ordering another referendum, I fear the anger will be bad for democracy and it will come from Remainers too.
I don't expect the extreme Remainers like you to change your mind or like the result, but you have to face facts at some stage.
"But that's a Brexit pothole!!"
Glada vappen !
Hauskaa vappua !
But there are clearly benefits to being in the customs union - as evidenced by the multitude of economists and businesses that want us to stay in that at least.
Off topic, I see Guido is having fun revealing nutty local candidates - good for him for nt restricting to Corbynites
The only Brexit that makes sense is one where we have a slow gradual detachment and divergence from the EU, that allows us to chart our own course without damaging the economy. The trouble is that’s bloody hard to negotiate- and not really in the EU’s interest - so we fall up against a hard choice of a very hard/clean break or a meaningless limbo for the long-term that changes nothing.
One has to hope both the Government and the EU can negotiate a compromise.
As it happens I think the HoL is being silly and counter-productive in this. But I do not think as a whole they're trying to thwart the will of the electorate.
IMO the people hysterically screaming about the HoL are potentially damaging democracy and the country.
Now personally I think they should have that power even though in this case it would result in a decision that would be disastrous for the country. But it should not be for the Lords to be making fundamental changes to the Constitution as it stands for partisan purposes.
The obvious way through is for the government to start taking more cognisance of a Parliament in which it does not command a majority.
To try and claim there was any doubt on this from any side is simply dishonest.
In London polls suggest there has been a swing to Labour since 2014 but even there while Labour May pick up more councillors they are unlikely to win many more boroughs as the Tories are largely only in control of their 'safe' areas anyway. Indeed as John Curtice says Labour's top target of Barnet could even stay Tory thanks to the Jewish vote
But there is a difference between the government trying to take on powers it did not use to have, and parliament via the Lords trying to take on powers it did not use to have, and if the latter s the case there have been many disgenuous remarks which suggest it is perhaps improper for the government to do certain things. Like the war powers debate sone things might or might not be a good idea, but it would not be legally wrong not to do it. Taking on new powers for Parliament would not be 'taking back control', since it didn't have it in the first place.
As it is, the Lords have proposed a change, as they are allowed. We shall see if the Commons agrees. If they don't, we shall see how the Lords react. It is part of the usual proceses for now at least.
results on thursday will be, shall we say, mixed.
It all seems a mess where we end up losing the advantages of the EU without gaining any of the advantages of Brexit.
I hope there will be a sensible compromise. But pro-Brexit politicians seem to be very good at saying what they are against but less good at coming up with practical proposals for the future which will actually work. That worries me.
In practice, a modus vivendi will be worked out. I doubt this clause will be enacted in anything like its current form.
Like I said your position is fundamentally dishonest.