On topic, sadly HY is right on one respect in that if the Labour vote drops away, the Tories don’t have to gain a single vote extra in order to take a fair few of their seats. The analysts that keep talking in terms of Labour leavers never voting Tory are missing the point.
What will matter is Labour voters (remainers, as they mostly are) moving to the LibDems in Tory seats whilst remaining loyal in Labour seats.
Yup, agree. 4% off the Lab score to each of LD, BXP and DNV and Con gain Bolsover, which is Conservative Target #70. This is entirely plausible, IMHO.
However, this is the kind of performance they'll have to pull off, if they're going to make up for what they lose to LD and SNP, and the failure to take the (fairly small number of) Remainish seats higher up the list.
IanB2 - yes, its Labour leavers staying at home, rather than voting Conservative, that could scupper Labour. There are many more ultra marginals in this election.
Edmund - I probably am entirely wrong but I struggle to see why in Scotland, given that the dividing line is really on pro/anti-independence than pro/anti-Brexit why the Tories are going to lose so many seats to the SNP. Anyone who is pro-Union will realise a clean sweep for the SNP will mean a further push for indyref2. Far better to hold your nose and vote Conservative this time round.
Same dynamic to a lesser degree in the wealthier, Remain-leaning tory seats in the SE. Corbyn is coming for your houses and screwing up your kids' private education in which you have invested a ton of money. Hold your noses and vote Tory.
I suspect the Tory pitch of “we hate you and despise you, you quisling traitors, now vote for us” is going to have limited purchase with Remain voters.
I think it depends on how strongly they are motivated by Remain (and Leave). Personally, the ones who are strongly pro-Remain will never vote Tory. However, the ones who voted Remain and whom I would categorise as less motivated by it are happy to vote Conservative to keep Corbyn out.
I don’t think you realise just how mad the Conservatives look right now.
I dont think you realise how many will vote for them no matter how mad they look. I do think they'll suffer and labour will receive more votes than many think no matter how mad they also look, but I think the public will surprise us with how willing they are to vote for parties that have a hostile message toward them.
On topic, sadly HY is right on one respect in that if the Labour vote drops away, the Tories don’t have to gain a single vote extra in order to take a fair few of their seats. The analysts that keep talking in terms of Labour leavers never voting Tory are missing the point.
What will matter is Labour voters (remainers, as they mostly are) moving to the LibDems in Tory seats whilst remaining loyal in Labour seats.
Yup, agree. 4% off the Lab score to each of LD, BXP and DNV and Con gain Bolsover, which is Conservative Target #70. This is entirely plausible, IMHO.
However, this is the kind of performance they'll have to pull off, if they're going to make up for what they lose to LD and SNP, and the failure to take the (fairly small number of) Remainish seats higher up the list.
IanB2 - yes, its Labour leavers staying at home, rather than voting Conservative, that could scupper Labour. There are many more ultra marginals in this election.
Edmund - I probably am entirely wrong but I struggle to see why in Scotland, given that the dividing line is really on pro/anti-independence than pro/anti-Brexit why the Tories are going to lose so many seats to the SNP. Anyone who is pro-Union will realise a clean sweep for the SNP will mean a further push for indyref2. Far better to hold your nose and vote Conservative this time round.
Same dynamic to a lesser degree in the wealthier, Remain-leaning tory seats in the SE. Corbyn is coming for your houses and screwing up your kids' private education in which you have invested a ton of money. Hold your noses and vote Tory.
I suspect the Tory pitch of “we hate you and despise you, you quisling traitors, now vote for us” is going to have limited purchase with Remain voters.
I think it depends on how strongly they are motivated by Remain (and Leave). Personally, the ones who are strongly pro-Remain will never vote Tory. However, the ones who voted Remain and whom I would categorise as less motivated by it are happy to vote Conservative to keep Corbyn out.
I don’t think you realise just how mad the Conservatives look right now.
of course, but the others are not much better, who stands out as reasonable and balanced ?
Well that's nice, but it's a cliche to describe talks in a manner such as constructive and the like. We've just gotten used to more blunt and impolitic assessments
I’d expect people to be able to see through the EU’s spin operation by now.
If they’re spinning, it’s interesting they’re spinning Johnson is totally clueless about how the single market and customs union operate. Is there any evidence that he isn’t?
Am sure he isn’t an expert on every detail - that’s what his team is for.
But the EU targeted May and now they try and undermine Johnson.
On the latest Yougov the Tories have a lead of 9% over Labour suggesting a swing of 3.5% from 2017 to the Tories and 31 Tory gains from Labour.
Based on say 10 losses to the SNP the Tories only need to keep losses to the LDs to 13 or lower to gain the 8 seats net they need to get to 326 seats and an overall majority
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
I think Osborne at least understood economics pretty well. This policy was designed to offset, to some extent, the effects of the mortgage famine that existed for several years after the GFC whilst banks repaired their balance sheets. It was designed to moderate a fall in demand that otherwise would have occurred and to encourage builders to keep building. It was also designed to protect prices which were key to the value of securities that banks had for a significant part of their lending. A substantial fall of property prices would have been a disaster for banks with weakened balance sheets. To sell it as help for buyers was a bit of a stretch but I think it was a success overall. It was only ever going to work at the margins.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
so weve gone from Johnson is doing nothing on the negotiation front to Johnson is haggling on negotiation points
As ever Europhiles are consistently inconsistent
I don't agree. Barnier is complaining that we are moving from saying "We don't want to talk" to "We don't like what you say". That's not haggling. Haggling is making a counter-offer.
The problem seems to be that the UK thinks it sees a pssible very small landing zone, as discussed on the last thread, but it doesn't want to put it forward yet as it wants to get the Tory conference out of the way first. That in turn leaves very little time to get a proper deal. There is some progress in principle, but party interest is trumping national interest.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
I think Osborne at least understood economics pretty well. This policy was designed to offset, to some extent, the effects of the mortgage famine that existed for several years after the GFC whilst banks repaired their balance sheets. It was designed to moderate a fall in demand that otherwise would have occurred and to encourage builders to keep building. It was also designed to protect prices which were key to the value of securities that banks had for a significant part of their lending. A substantial fall of property prices would have been a disaster for banks with weakened balance sheets. To sell it as help for buyers was a bit of a stretch but I think it was a success overall. It was only ever going to work at the margins.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
I think Osborne at least understood economics pretty well. This policy was designed to offset, to some extent, the effects of the mortgage famine that existed for several years after the GFC whilst banks repaired their balance sheets. It was designed to moderate a fall in demand that otherwise would have occurred and to encourage builders to keep building. It was also designed to protect prices which were key to the value of securities that banks had for a significant part of their lending. A substantial fall of property prices would have been a disaster for banks with weakened balance sheets. To sell it as help for buyers was a bit of a stretch but I think it was a success overall. It was only ever going to work at the margins.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Not everyone can draw on the bank of mum and dad.
That seems the inequity here.
The Government could help provide that role, or it could do something creative: like allowing you to leverage extra student loan debt up until the age of 35, or something similar, but at a very low interest rate.
Please no props, just let the prospective buyers pay what they can afford, without additional subsidy that they have to pay back in later life! The market will drop to what the buyers can afford naturally.
OT the Financial Times has dropped its paywall so any 7-year-olds wanting to explore their inner Jacob Rees-Mogg can browse the pink'un at ft.com -- not sure if it is a marketing gimmick for a day, or forever.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
And my father. I've had an argument with him that it just pushed up prices, but he's convinced it helps poor people to buy homes (one of our relatives used it to buy a flat) and is a big fan. If a policy is economically illiterate but electorally popular, politicians will wilfully ignore the economics. There's none so blind...
OT the Financial Times has dropped its paywall so any 7-year-olds wanting to explore their inner Jacob Rees-Mogg can browse the pink'un at ft.com -- not sure if it is a marketing gimmick for a day, or forever.
On topic, sadly HY is right on one respect in that if the Labour vote drops away, the Tories don’t have to gain a single vote extra in order to take a fair few of their seats. The analysts that keep talking in terms of Labour leavers never voting Tory are missing the point.
What will matter is Labour voters (remainers, as they mostly are) moving to the LibDems in Tory seats whilst remaining loyal in Labour seats.
Yup, agree. 4% off the Lab score to each of LD, BXP and DNV and Con gain Bolsover, which is Conservative Target #70. This is entirely plausible, IMHO.
However, this is the kind of performance they'll have to pull off, if they're going to make up for what they lose to LD and SNP, and the failure to take the (fairly small number of) Remainish seats higher up the list.
IanB2 - yes, its Labour leavers staying at home, rather than voting Conservative, that could scupper Labour. There are many more ultra marginals in this election.
Edmund - I probably am entirely wrong but I struggle to see why in Scotland, given that the dividing line is really on pro/anti-independence than pro/anti-Brexit why the Tories are going to lose so many seats to the SNP. Anyone who is pro-Union will realise a clean sweep for the SNP will mean a further push for indyref2. Far better to hold your nose and vote Conservative this time round.
Same dynamic to a lesser degree in the wealthier, Remain-leaning tory seats in the SE. Corbyn is coming for your houses and screwing up your kids' private education in which you have invested a ton of money. Hold your noses and vote Tory.
Yes, I think at least 5-6 seats in Scotland should be rather sticky for the Tories.
3 seats are sticky, no more than that.
WA&K, Banff & Buchan, Moray, D,C&T and B,R&S are the ones I’d be banking on.
DCT and BRS are almost guaranteed holds, however WAK is, assuming current conditions, a gonner. Massive borrowed Lib Dem vote to unwind.
The Conservatives were polling at 30-35% in WAK even during their leanest years from 1997-2005. They’re currently at almost 50% of the vote and, even unwinding all of the LD swing from the last election, it still wouldn’t be enough to let the SNP through the middle to take the seat. It’s also an area where Brexit isn’t wholly unpopular unlike, say, Aberdeen South or East Renfrewshire.
so weve gone from Johnson is doing nothing on the negotiation front to Johnson is haggling on negotiation points
As ever Europhiles are consistently inconsistent
I don't agree. Barnier is complaining that we are moving from saying "We don't want to talk" to "We don't like what you say". That's not haggling. Haggling is making a counter-offer.
The problem seems to be that the UK thinks it sees a pssible very small landing zone, as discussed on the last thread, but it doesn't want to put it forward yet as it wants to get the Tory conference out of the way first. That in turn leaves very little time to get a proper deal. There is some progress in principle, but party interest is trumping national interest.
Disagree Nick, sometimes saying no is part of the haggle and aimed at getting the other side to make the counter offer. As ever with negotiation its about seeing where the other side is.
So Swinson is now the most popular leader with middle class ABC1 voters with Corbyn least popular and Boris is the most popular leader with working class C2DE voters with Corbyn again least popular.
Amongst Remain voters Swinson is most popular with Boris least popular, with Leave voters though Boris is most popular with Corbyn least popular.
Corbyn now has a net negative rating from 2017 Labour voters while Boris and Swinson have a net positive rating with their 2017 voters.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
There are 24 million dwellings in the UK, whether we build an addional 0.5 million or 1 million over the next 5 years doesnt actually make that much difference to the level of supply, although its obviously helpful to do more. The bigger short term drivers are interest rates, govt subsidies and the widely assumed perception that the govt will always bail out homeowners, and therefore prices cannot fall.
given you havent seen anything that has been put forward and arent taking part in the conversations Ill leave you to reflect on state of your insider knowledge
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
There are 24 million dwellings in the UK, whether we build an addional 0.5 million or 1 million over the next 5 years doesnt actually make that much difference to the level of supply, although its obviously helpful to do more. The bigger short term drivers are interest rates, govt subsidies and the widely assumed perception that the govt will always bail out homeowners, and therefore prices cannot fall.
We probably need to build 2 million more houses given the population growth and trends within it. Interest rates are the lowest of my lifetime so can only go up. Getting a sensible banking system to fund growth and freeing up land for construction look like the two priorities.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
Driving through mid-Essex one would be forgiven for doubting whether we aren't building enough houses. However, when one looks at the prices....... other than one bed retirement units there seems almost nothing under £200,000
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
There are 24 million dwellings in the UK, whether we build an addional 0.5 million or 1 million over the next 5 years doesnt actually make that much difference to the level of supply, although its obviously helpful to do more. The bigger short term drivers are interest rates, govt subsidies and the widely assumed perception that the govt will always bail out homeowners, and therefore prices cannot fall.
Yes, current building is 1% of housing stock, so not an obvious short term answer to supply issues.
Demographic changes are also making a difference, with single occuparion, and under occupation of family homes, as well as the rise of multiple home ownership all soaking up increased supply.
Kill Brexit Without a Referendum is a masterstroke.
There were those on here who chided the LibDems over Bollox to Brexit, but it turned out to be a brilliant PR coup.
A lot of people would like clarity on Brexit. Referendums aren't particularly democratic because a) they present untested choices which in this case was simplistic, binary and pre-emptive and b) there's little or no recourse so if people change their minds with changing circumstances, they're stuffed.
I hope it's the last time a referendum is ever held in England and Wales.
General Elections are the proper form of expressing democracy, however imperfect. It's really very simple. If you don't want to cancel Brexit don't vote LibDem. If they win, you know very clearly what will happen on Day 1.
Kudos.
It's a niche vote strategy and it may well help push up their share from middle-class Tory voters like Nigel - it's certainly attracted attention, which is half the battle. But she's also deterring some Labour tactical voters - anecdotally I know three dfferent Labour voters who were considering voting LibDem as they did in the locals and Euros who now don't intend to, because they feel Swinson is too anti-Labour as well as too undemocratic on Brexit - and this is Surrey, the sort of area where the LibDems really need tactical support.
Some people could think that recommending against the deal you negotiated is ironic, but as PJ O'Rourke said life is full of ironies for the stupid.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
Driving through mid-Essex one would be forgiven for doubting whether we aren't building enough houses. However, when one looks at the prices....... other than one bed retirement units there seems almost nothing under £200,000
as you rightly point out the building isnt the only problem its the affordabiliity and what you get for your money.1950s housing looks luxurious compared to some of the new builds
This is where appointing Cummings as Johnson's carer isn't working.
They're both "big picture" guys who want 48pt headline answers to stuff which Olly Robbins and Michel Barnier needed 600 pages. It worked a treat for the Leave campaign*.. but up against the reality of stuff like, erm, the law, the wheels are coming off.
There's another example on Tortoise this morning, of DC's modus operandi at the DfE with Gove (who I'd have expected to have a better handle on the detail, frankly). This explains to me some of the overly-black and white thinking that went on in Gove's time at Education..
Kitchen Cabinet "The polls suggest that most voters prefer a hard brexit over Corbyn as PM in a binary choice. Chances are the gap is wider in wealthier, Tory shire areas. Unlike 2017, no one is going into this election thinking Corbyn has no chance of being elected and, while Swinson may claim she won't deal with Corbyn, I wonder how many people trust the LDs on that pledge, especially as it would be easy to point to tuition fees as a prime example of how the LDs went back on their word to gave a share of power. For many people, if they are wealthy, not voting Tory is not worth the risk. "
Many people like me will probably be voting LD precisely because they can't stomach Johnson or Corbyn. It was a clever move to commit to not put either in power because it still leaves the door open to back another leader
Says more about Dan Hodges than Jeremy Corbyn, frankly. It's perfectly rational to prioritise agreement for an outcome over the particular outcome itself. Especially on an issue as divisive as Brexit. Labour need to explain their policy better and it may not work. Hodges is supposed to be a commentator and should understand this stuff.
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
It also shows the genius of Swinson's move... those ABC Remainer Tories will defect to the Lib Dems in decent numbers. So those northern Labour Remainer voters need to defect in ever larger numbers to allow the Tories to catch up. In one or two cases, the Tory and Labour remainers will pile onto the Lib Dems to such an extent as to let the Lib Dems in through the middle. Not many, but the same order of magnitude as Lab->Con seat switches, I think.
Nice to see Corbyn proving he is unelectable..Given all problems Geeece has had to deal with it seens remarkably quiet bar a lot more graffiti than i recall from past visits.
Nice to see Corbyn proving he is unelectable..Given all problems Geeece has had to deal with it seens remarkably quiet bar a lot more graffiti than i recall from past visits.
Just a technical point re: discussions on Help to buy.
It is ONLY available on new build properties. So is a sort of subsidy to Housebuilders but not to sellers of existing properties.
Arguably this should increase development/supply and therefore contribute to lower prices overall?
Currently it is true that it only applies to new builds, from 2013-16 there was also a help to buy mortgage guarantee that applied to all properties below £600k whether new or old.
Prior to 2013 house price inflation had been close to flat since the gfc, with the introduction of the scheme it moved to 5-10% per year. Since the mortgage guarantee part was stopped house price inflation has been dropping back towards flat but the gap to earnings has still been widened by the 2013-6 period.
With a capital IF, If Boris gets a deal that the DUP can support and that gives a smooth transition, with a political declaration that can be amended by whoever wins the next election, isn’t it going to be a bit tricky for the Labour holdouts to continue voting against Brexit?
Might the markets have got this completely wrong and we’re actually only weeks away from an MV4 sailing through the commons?
A good chance for the less extreme of the Tory 21 to vote in favour and get the whip back too.
With a capital IF, If Boris gets a deal that the DUP can support and that gives a smooth transition, with a political declaration that can be amended by whoever wins the next election, isn’t it going to be a bit tricky for the Labour holdouts to continue voting against Brexit?
Might the markets have got this completely wrong and we’re actually only weeks away from an MV4 sailing through the commons?
A good chance for the less extreme of the Tory 21 to vote in favour and get the whip back too.
The extremists are the cabinet, not the continuing Conservatives.
Some people could think that recommending against the deal you negotiated is ironic, but as PJ O'Rourke said life is full of ironies for the stupid.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
Deal (CU/SM) vs Remain. PM neutral. Party mainly Remain.
It's not flawless because that Ref2 formulation is open to the charge of being fixed for Remain. given it has no Hard Leave option. But there is no flawless route from here. I'm pleased to see it confirmed because it is the exact policy I have long predicted will be the Labour offering if there is a GE, and it flies.
It is certainly not confusing. Neither is it impractical. And it is not even a tiny bit 'funny'. Except to those whose anti-Corbyn sentiment has overwhelmed basic faculties. Dan Hodges being a prime example of such.
Kill Brexit Without a Referendum is a masterstroke.
There were those on here who chided the LibDems over Bollox to Brexit, but it turned out to be a brilliant PR coup.
A lot of people would like clarity on Brexit. Referendums aren't particularly democratic because a) they present untested choices which in this case was simplistic, binary and pre-emptive and b) there's little or no recourse so if people change their minds with changing circumstances, they're stuffed.
I hope it's the last time a referendum is ever held in England and Wales.
General Elections are the proper form of expressing democracy, however imperfect. It's really very simple. If you don't want to cancel Brexit don't vote LibDem. If they win, you know very clearly what will happen on Day 1.
Kudos.
It's a niche vote strategy and it may well help push up their share from middle-class Tory voters like Nigel - it's certainly attracted attention, which is half the battle. But she's also deterring some Labour tactical voters - anecdotally I know three dfferent Labour voters who were considering voting LibDem as they did in the locals and Euros who now don't intend to, because they feel Swinson is too anti-Labour as well as too undemocratic on Brexit - and this is Surrey, the sort of area where the LibDems really need tactical support.
That's a really good point Nick and anecdotally I know a few people where the revoke pledge hasn't played too well and they are all classic targets for LD tactical voting..
Interestingly my brother is the one person I know it has won round.. He is now committed to voting LD when he has traditionally been a Labour supporter... Key thing here is he lives in Kensington so his vote shift is likely to elect a Tory.. This may be a pattern where the revoke pledge plays well with inner city ultra remain voters and badly with swing shire voters which leads to LDs doing better against Labour than tories and actually leading to more Con seats in the process..
so weve gone from Johnson is doing nothing on the negotiation front to Johnson is haggling on negotiation points
Try reading it again.
we have gone from "We don't like the backstop" to "We don't like the backstop and have no credible alternatives"
NOTHING HAS CHANGED !!
LOL earlier this week you were ridiculing BoJo for having plans but not letting anyone keep a copy.
as I said consistently inconsistent,
A fan of Boris at last. More rare than the Yeti around here. Been taken in by the blarney.
Oh Roger, you really need to keep up, I'm really not up for yet another Oxford prat running the place they just fk it up. It's the pointless Tory wars I object to, they arent half boring.
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
It also shows the genius of Swinson's move... those ABC Remainer Tories will defect to the Lib Dems in decent numbers. So those northern Labour Remainer voters need to defect in ever larger numbers to allow the Tories to catch up. In one or two cases, the Tory and Labour remainers will pile onto the Lib Dems to such an extent as to let the Lib Dems in through the middle. Not many, but the same order of magnitude as Lab->Con seat switches, I think.
Yeah.. nobody including Swinson expects her to be next PM.. but if they get back up to something like coalition seat levels, this strategy will look to have been successful.
You can spout "anti-democratic" all you want, but if TMay's (and Corbyn's) experience is anything to go by, "bringing the country together" isn't playing all that well. And Farage and Swinson will benefit from being the "screw everyone else.. this is what you *really* want" candidates.
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
It also shows the genius of Swinson's move... those ABC Remainer Tories will defect to the Lib Dems in decent numbers. So those northern Labour Remainer voters need to defect in ever larger numbers to allow the Tories to catch up. In one or two cases, the Tory and Labour remainers will pile onto the Lib Dems to such an extent as to let the Lib Dems in through the middle. Not many, but the same order of magnitude as Lab->Con seat switches, I think.
Yeah.. nobody including Swinson expects her to be next PM.. but if they get back up to something like coalition seat levels, this strategy will look to have been successful.
You can spout "anti-democratic" all you want, but if TMay's (and Corbyn's) experience is anything to go by, "bringing the country together" isn't playing all that well. And Farage and Swinson will benefit from being the "screw everyone else.. this is what you *really* want" candidates.
If she doesnt say she can become PM their whole campaign will be blocked by interviewers asking her which of Corbyn or Johnson will you prop up and not accepting her answer of neither will get support. It doesnt matter if she is likely to or not, by answering she wants to be PM she gets more time on other to discuss their own policies rather than party politics.
This is where appointing Cummings as Johnson's carer isn't working.
... There's another example on Tortoise this morning, of DC's modus operandi at the DfE with Gove (who I'd have expected to have a better handle on the detail, frankly). This explains to me some of the overly-black and white thinking that went on in Gove's time at Education..
An interesting link, which confirms the point some of us were arguing over the WhatsApp messages - government discussion over private networks are still public information, subject to FOI requests, the Public Records Act, etc.
Also demonstrates Cummings willingness to ignore the law.
Some people could think that recommending against the deal you negotiated is ironic, but as PJ O'Rourke said life is full of ironies for the stupid.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
Deal (CU/SM) vs Remain. PM neutral. Party mainly Remain.
It's not flawless because that Ref2 formulation is open to the charge of being fixed for Remain. given it has no Hard Leave option. But there is no flawless route from here. I'm pleased to see it confirmed because it is the exact policy I have long predicted will be the Labour offering if there is a GE, and it flies.
It is certainly not confusing. Neither is it impractical. And it is not even a tiny bit 'funny'. Except to those whose anti-Corbyn sentiment has overwhelmed basic faculties. Dan Hodges being a prime example of such.
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
The Lib Dems are starting to look like the real deal. They remind Labour voters what Labour used to look like in the good old days of Blair and they remind Tory voters what they looked like when they were civilised. Could be a real break through if they can buy some time and get the celebs on board.
You say "by the look of it"... do you have a subscription? Have you actually read the article?
This is an interesting quote from it.
"A return to the UK for affected families is unlikely be an option because it has “the harshest regime of family separation in Europe”, according to Chai Patel of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants."
These numbers look optimistic to me, particularly since I think it overplays how many Spartans, Labour rebels and independents will party, but if a Deal does ‘just pass’ it’ll be on numbers something like this:
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
It also shows the genius of Swinson's move... those ABC Remainer Tories will defect to the Lib Dems in decent numbers. So those northern Labour Remainer voters need to defect in ever larger numbers to allow the Tories to catch up. In one or two cases, the Tory and Labour remainers will pile onto the Lib Dems to such an extent as to let the Lib Dems in through the middle. Not many, but the same order of magnitude as Lab->Con seat switches, I think.
Yeah.. nobody including Swinson expects her to be next PM.. but if they get back up to something like coalition seat levels, this strategy will look to have been successful.
You can spout "anti-democratic" all you want, but if TMay's (and Corbyn's) experience is anything to go by, "bringing the country together" isn't playing all that well. And Farage and Swinson will benefit from being the "screw everyone else.. this is what you *really* want" candidates.
If she doesnt say she can become PM their whole campaign will be blocked by interviewers asking her which of Corbyn or Johnson will you prop up and not accepting her answer of neither will get support. It doesnt matter if she is likely to or not, by answering she wants to be PM she gets more time on other to discuss their own policies rather than party politics.
I absolutely agree.
I also agree with whoever noted below her specifying Corbyn and Johnson rather than Labour or Tories. One of them will return to sanity at some point, or splinter such that the LDs become a main party by default.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
The question is whether it is worth persisting with as market conditions find a new normal. I would say probably not.
I don’t think it is.
Prices have stabilised and are no longer subject to ever accelerating growth.
Meanwhile, real wages are catching up and there are more mortgage products on the market again for 90% and 95% mortgages.
The biggest challenge buyers face now is getting a deposit together, so I think Government support should be focussed on that.
I think we are in agreement but in fact one of the consequences of the GFC was that banks required much higher deposits which discouraged people from buying their first homes and turning into Conservative voters like their parents did before them. Help to buy was designed to address these higher deposits. It certainly helped my daughter buy her first flat. As you say as the level of deposit required falls so does the need for the scheme.
Imagine a world without help to buy. Who would be living in her flat now? Probably her or someone very similar, who would have paid 20-40% less! How on earth is that helping her, and not the person selling the flat?
Osbornes wheezes are total crap it changes nothing much on the supply side. Building more houses would, its basic demand and supply.
Driving through mid-Essex one would be forgiven for doubting whether we aren't building enough houses. However, when one looks at the prices....... other than one bed retirement units there seems almost nothing under £200,000
as you rightly point out the building isnt the only problem its the affordabiliity and what you get for your money.1950s housing looks luxurious compared to some of the new builds
40% of new housing in Epping Forest will be affordable under the local plan with new social housing too.
However this is mainly a London commuter belt problem, go to the North, Wales and the Midlands and most properties will be under £200 000
Some people could think that recommending against the deal you negotiated is ironic, but as PJ O'Rourke said life is full of ironies for the stupid.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
Deal (CU/SM) vs Remain. PM neutral. Party mainly Remain.
It's not flawless because that Ref2 formulation is open to the charge of being fixed for Remain. given it has no Hard Leave option. But there is no flawless route from here. I'm pleased to see it confirmed because it is the exact policy I have long predicted will be the Labour offering if there is a GE, and it flies.
It is certainly not confusing. Neither is it impractical. And it is not even a tiny bit 'funny'. Except to those whose anti-Corbyn sentiment has overwhelmed basic faculties. Dan Hodges being a prime example of such.
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
There are three options. You say "We'll take the deal no matter what", "We'll take the deal if we like it, otherwise we'll remain" or "We'll take the deal if we like it, otherwise we'll no deal". Which of those are you in favour of? The last one doesn't seem to be working out so well...
These numbers look optimistic to me, particularly since I think it overplays how many Spartans, Labour rebels and independents will party, but if a Deal does ‘just pass’ it’ll be on numbers something like this:
Kill Brexit Without a Referendum is a masterstroke.
There were those on here who chided the LibDems over Bollox to Brexit, but it turned out to be a brilliant PR coup.
A lot of people would like clarity on Brexit. Referendums aren't particularly democratic because a) they present untested choices which in this case was simplistic, binary and pre-emptive and b) there's little or no recourse so if people change their minds with changing circumstances, they're stuffed.
I hope it's the last time a referendum is ever held in England and Wales.
General Elections are the proper form of expressing democracy, however imperfect. It's really very simple. If you don't want to cancel Brexit don't vote LibDem. If they win, you know very clearly what will happen on Day 1.
Kudos.
It's a niche vote strategy and it may well help push up their share from middle-class Tory voters like Nigel - it's certainly attracted attention, which is half the battle. But she's also deterring some Labour tactical voters - anecdotally I know three dfferent Labour voters who were considering voting LibDem as they did in the locals and Euros who now don't intend to, because they feel Swinson is too anti-Labour as well as too undemocratic on Brexit - and this is Surrey, the sort of area where the LibDems really need tactical support.
That's a really good point Nick and anecdotally I know a few people where the revoke pledge hasn't played too well and they are all classic targets for LD tactical voting..
Interestingly my brother is the one person I know it has won round.. He is now committed to voting LD when he has traditionally been a Labour supporter... Key thing here is he lives in Kensington so his vote shift is likely to elect a Tory.. This may be a pattern where the revoke pledge plays well with inner city ultra remain voters and badly with swing shire voters which leads to LDs doing better against Labour than tories and actually leading to more Con seats in the process..
Just my thoughts though
Yeah. The downside of the LibDem position is that it risks limiting even further the ground on which the "Rebel Alliance" will co-operate - before, during and after the next election.
But I'm not sure the effect Cotswoldtory notes is necessarily as skewed against Lab as he suggests. I think there's a significant but currently cowed quiet Remain Tory wing who backed TMay for doing her best, but will be seething at the treatment of Clarke and Grieve etc. In the privacy of a ballot box, I wouldn't bet against a chunk of those going yellow.
Some people could think that recommending against the deal you negotiated is ironic, but as PJ O'Rourke said life is full of ironies for the stupid.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
Deal (CU/SM) vs Remain. PM neutral. Party mainly Remain.
It's not flawless because that Ref2 formulation is open to the charge of being fixed for Remain. given it has no Hard Leave option. But there is no flawless route from here. I'm pleased to see it confirmed because it is the exact policy I have long predicted will be the Labour offering if there is a GE, and it flies.
It is certainly not confusing. Neither is it impractical. And it is not even a tiny bit 'funny'. Except to those whose anti-Corbyn sentiment has overwhelmed basic faculties. Dan Hodges being a prime example of such.
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
There are three options. You say "We'll take the deal no matter what", "We'll take the deal if we like it, otherwise we'll remain" or "We'll take the deal if we like it, otherwise we'll no deal". Which of those are you in favour of? The last one doesn't seem to be working out so well...
The second they have taken off the table. As tbf has the HoC.
These numbers look optimistic to me, particularly since I think it overplays how many Spartans, Labour rebels and independents will party, but if a Deal does ‘just pass’ it’ll be on numbers something like this:
Incidentally, the responses to that tweet show how the ultras still won’t be happy even with that.
Never read anything into the responses on twitter. Twitter is full of bots, masqueraders and outright liars. It's utterly worthless in terms of gauging public opinion.
These numbers look optimistic to me, particularly since I think it overplays how many Spartans, Labour rebels and independents will party, but if a Deal does ‘just pass’ it’ll be on numbers something like this:
Yup, agree. 4% off the Lab score to each of LD, BXP and DNV and Con gain Bolsover, which is Conservative Target #70. This is entirely plausible, IMHO.
.
IanB2 - yes, its Labour leavers staying at home, rather than voting Conservative, that could scupper Labour. There are many more ultra marginals in this election.
Edmund - I probably am entirely wrong but I struggle to see why in Scotland, given that the dividing line is really on pro/anti-independence than pro/anti-Brexit why the Tories are going to lose so many seats to the SNP. Anyone who is pro-Union will realise a clean sweep for the SNP will mean a further push for indyref2. Far better to hold your nose and vote Conservative this time round.
.
Yes, I think at least 5-6 seats in Scotland should be rather sticky for the Tories.
3 seats are sticky, no more than that.
WA&K, Banff & Buchan, Moray, D,C&T and B,R&S are the ones I’d be banking on.
DCT and BRS are almost guaranteed holds, however WAK is, assuming current conditions, a gonner. Massive borrowed Lib Dem vote to unwind.
The Conservatives were polling at 30-35% in WAK even during their leanest years from 1997-2005. They’re currently at almost 50% of the vote and, even unwinding all of the LD swing from the last election, it still wouldn’t be enough to let the SNP through the middle to take the seat. It’s also an area where Brexit isn’t wholly unpopular unlike, say, Aberdeen South or East Renfrewshire.
I think it’ll be held.
I would watch Gordon more than WAK. Longer Lib/Lib Dem history and the fall in Lib Dem support strongly impacted by determination to get rid of Salmond- unwind will be brutal for the Tories.
The local by election for Bridge of Don on October 3rd is for a ward 7/8 in Gordon. Lib Dems making a big impact.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
Just as a point of order. Help to Buy helps companies not people. It can only be used on new builds from certain house builders.
My girlfriend and I could only afford our house in the North East because unfortunately my mother died and left me some money. Otherwise we’d be struggling. Even in “cheaper” North East England.
Regarding house building - it’s happening. Tens of thousands in Newcastle and North Tyneside alone. Help to Buy has worked in this regard. A government subsidy none the less.
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
1. The Deal will be the WA plus the PD amended for permanent CU and SM membership. Norway plus. The EU will be happy with that. We already know this. And they will be happy with the Ref formulation too. Either outcome, Remain or a very soft Brexit, works for them.
2. If I were a Leaver of any stripe, Labour or otherwise, I would not like the policy. But it is not possible to please everyone. The party leans strongly Remain and it is therefore not feasible to adopt a pro-Leave stance on Brexit.
3. I am a Labour Remain voter so I can answer this directly. My personal preference would be to keep the soft Brexit but drop the Ref2. However given that the clear majority of the party's MPs, members and supporters are for Remain I view the policy adopted as the best that is politically realistic.
Nice to see Corbyn proving he is unelectable..Given all problems Geeece... where i am on holiday... has had to deal with it seens remarkably quiet bar a lot more graffiti than i recall from past visits.
It means that Greece has settled down after its nightmare or seems to have done so.. meanwhile reading Dan Hodges tweet and looking at leader ratings. Corbyn is just unelectable....
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
1. The Deal will be the WA plus the PD amended for permanent CU and SM membership. Norway plus. The EU will be happy with that. We already know this. And they will be happy with the Ref formulation too. Either outcome, Remain or a very soft Brexit, works for them.
2. If I were a Leaver of any stripe, Labour or otherwise, I would not like the policy. But it is not possible to please everyone. The party leans strongly Remain and it is therefore not feasible to adopt a pro-Leave stance on Brexit.
3. I am a Labour Remain voter so I can answer this directly. My personal preference would be to keep the soft Brexit but drop the Ref2. However given that the clear majority of the party's MPs, members and supporters are for Remain I view the policy adopted as the best that is politically realistic.
Lab would have to make clear their position on freedom of movement at an early stage in all this "permanent SM membership" and I'm not sure that would be an election-winning approach.
Why are some people saying that the DUP (and by extension the ERG) would vote for an all-Ireland backstop? Last I heard it was still a big no-no. Did I miss a seismic change?
These numbers look optimistic to me, particularly since I think it overplays how many Spartans, Labour rebels and independents will party, but if a Deal does ‘just pass’ it’ll be on numbers something like this:
They look a long way off to me. Just 8 Tories voting against!? Also unclear why the DUP are going to vote for a deal which keeps N. Ireland aligned with EU rules and regulations.
Another issue with new builds is the ‘management company’ problem that most seem to ignore. Councils are essentially privatising council services by making it a planning condition that a private management company must be formed to look after green areas, flood protection, play areas, and in some cases even the roads. This is still happening despite leasehold falling out of favour.
Freehold residents have NO rights to throw out the management company (unless otherwise stated, which is not usual), NO rights to see invoices, NO rights to challenge the charges. If you take legal action against them, the fees can be back-charged back through the maintenance fee.
Future governments will have to fix this. It is unsustainable.
The Lib Dems are starting to look like the real deal. They remind Labour voters what Labour used to look like in the good old days of Blair and they remind Tory voters what they looked like when they were civilised. Could be a real break through if they can buy some time and get the celebs on board.
"the good old days of Blair"
err didnt you used to go on demos saying the man was a Tory bastard ?
Nice to see Corbyn proving he is unelectable..Given all problems Geeece has had to deal with it seens remarkably quiet bar a lot more graffiti than i recall from past visits.
It means that Greece has settled down after its nightmare or seems to have done so.. meanwhile reading Dan Hodges tweet and looking at leader ratings. Corbyn is just unelectsble.
Where are you in Greece? The islands? Most of the islands (those unaffected by refugees) are doing OK, because tourism.
This is not the case everywhere. I recently did an epic, 3 week road trip around the mainland. From Thessaloniki to Zagoriou, down to Preveza, Missolonghi and Corinth. Then far into the Peloponnese. It was Deep Greece. Profound Greece.
The economic suffering is intense. These are the parts of Greece that still have 25% unemployment. I’ve traveled all over the world and I’ve never seen such obvious hardship and trauma outside of war zones. Which makes sense, as Greece’s economy has contracted by 40%. The kind of crash you only see in a war.
The pretty little lakeside city of Yanina, in Epirus, was especially striking. Entire neighbourhoods where every single business has been shuttered. And now they are left to rot.
Lab would have to make clear their position on freedom of movement at an early stage in all this "permanent SM membership" and I'm not sure that would be an election-winning approach.
That is the big one.
Soft Brexit means FoM stays but I think that harsh (to many) truth will be finessed in a GE campaign.
Why are some people saying that the DUP (and by extension the ERG) would vote for an all-Ireland backstop? Last I heard it was still a big no-no. Did I miss a seismic change?
It is probably tied to the earlier reports that Boris and/or his team did not understand either the DUP position or that there has to be a new border somewhere (unless the whole country stays in the single market and customs union). I had been wondering if this and the apparent rush for an American deal were cynically designed to lock us out of the EU permanently but perhaps in light of this morning's reports and the earlier Tortoise link on Dominic Cummings, it is just another illustration of British politicians' (in all parties) preference for slogans over policy.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
Just as a point of order. Help to Buy helps companies not people. It can only be used on new builds from certain house builders.
My girlfriend and I could only afford our house in the North East because unfortunately my mother died and left me some money. Otherwise we’d be struggling. Even in “cheaper” North East England.
Regarding house building - it’s happening. Tens of thousands in Newcastle and North Tyneside alone. Help to Buy has worked in this regard. A government subsidy none the less.
That’s only the equity loan. The HtB: ISA (and the LISA that mostly replaces it) can be used on any house. Equally terrible policies, as they amount to a bung of cash dished out in an economically illiterate way, but open to all.
Politically clever, of course. As an individual, seeming to get a Gvt bung looks great.
I’d expect people to be able to see through the EU’s spin operation by now.
If they’re spinning, it’s interesting they’re spinning Johnson is totally clueless about how the single market and customs union operate. Is there any evidence that he isn’t?
Am sure he isn’t an expert on every detail - that’s what his team is for.
But the EU targeted May and now they try and undermine Johnson.
It’s a clear tactic.
More Leaver xenophobic paranoia
Did you miss the BBC documentary ?
Prediction - if there is a deal the levels of fury on the remainer side will be 10x that of any Faragists.
The levels of projection in this comment are off the charts.
OT already but: Help to Buy has exposed both the government and homebuyers to “significant financial risks”, according to a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
A lack of understanding of basic economics is a major problem with all our politicians.
Just as a point of order. Help to Buy helps companies not people. It can only be used on new builds from certain house builders.
My girlfriend and I could only afford our house in the North East because unfortunately my mother died and left me some money. Otherwise we’d be struggling. Even in “cheaper” North East England.
Regarding house building - it’s happening. Tens of thousands in Newcastle and North Tyneside alone. Help to Buy has worked in this regard. A government subsidy none the less.
That’s only the equity loan. The HtB: ISA (and the LISA that mostly replaces it) can be used on any house. Equally terrible policies, as they amount to a bung of cash dished out in an economically illiterate way, but open to all.
Politically clever, of course. As an individual, seeming to get a Gvt bung looks great.
Of course. I myself used the HTB ISA and even got a nice letter from the chancellor congratulating me on buying the house. It’s just that normally when people talk about HTB they mean the equity loan.
Looks good for Swinson. When I did my one and only PPB for Paddy Ashdown Jeremy Bullmore who wrote the script told me that though the tite was 'Maggie's Broken Britain' that was very secondary to getting Paddy's name known to the public. So don't be surprised if this upcoming campaign plays heavily on the leader and her name. Looking at the numbers of 'don't knows' it would make sense.
It means that Greece has settled down after its nightmare or seems to have done so.. meanwhile reading Dan Hodges tweet and looking at leader ratings. Corbyn is just unelectable....
I would counsel against basing a view on Corbyn's electability on tweets from Dan Hodges. It is likely to lead one astray.
Nice to see Corbyn proving he is unelectable..Given all problems Geeece has had to deal with it seens remarkably quiet bar a lot more graffiti than i recall from past visits.
It means that Greece has settled down after its nightmare or seems to have done so.. meanwhile reading Dan Hodges tweet and looking at leader ratings. Corbyn is just unelectsble.
Where are you in Greece? The islands? Most of the islands (those unaffected by refugees) are doing OK, because tourism.
This is not the case everywhere. I recently did an epic, 3 week road trip around the mainland. From Thessaloniki to Zagoriou, down to Preveza, Missolonghi and Corinth. Then far into the Peloponnese. It was Deep Greece. Profound Greece.
The economic suffering is intense. These are the parts of Greece that still have 25% unemployment. I’ve traveled all over the world and I’ve never seen such obvious hardship and trauma outside of war zones. Which makes sense, as Greece’s economy has contracted by 40%. The kind of crash you only see in a war.
The pretty little lakeside city of Yanina, in Epirus, was especially striking. Entire neighbourhoods where every single business has been shuttered. And now they are left to rot.
You're right. It certainly is not confusing. It is idiotic.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
1. The Deal will be the WA plus the PD amended for permanent CU and SM membership. Norway plus. The EU will be happy with that. We already know this. And they will be happy with the Ref formulation too. Either outcome, Remain or a very soft Brexit, works for them.
2. If I were a Leaver of any stripe, Labour or otherwise, I would not like the policy. But it is not possible to please everyone. The party leans strongly Remain and it is therefore not feasible to adopt a pro-Leave stance on Brexit.
3. I am a Labour Remain voter so I can answer this directly. My personal preference would be to keep the soft Brexit but drop the Ref2. However given that the clear majority of the party's MPs, members and supporters are for Remain I view the policy adopted as the best that is politically realistic.
I think you’re right, but the interesting bit for the next few years will be that it is never quite settled. The Tories would likely run on a platform of leaving “properly” even if that were implemented (and especially if it were beaten in a referendum Leave boycotted). The only way this all goes away is someone winning a 100 seat majority and taking ten years to really bed in the new arrangements either way, and make them feel permanent.
Has there been any polling on how much a voter's referendum preference is likely to cause them to vote for a party that they have not voted for in the past? In other words, how important is Brexit to them in the way they will vote in future? There may be some, like me, who are very heavily influenced, others ( I suspect Labour leave voters) who will not change their traditional pattern). I think there will be some demographics that will be more and some less affected.
There was an interesting comment last week from a Labour MP in a northern leave seat.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
It also shows the genius of Swinson's move... those ABC Remainer Tories will defect to the Lib Dems in decent numbers. So those northern Labour Remainer voters need to defect in ever larger numbers to allow the Tories to catch up. In one or two cases, the Tory and Labour remainers will pile onto the Lib Dems to such an extent as to let the Lib Dems in through the middle. Not many, but the same order of magnitude as Lab->Con seat switches, I think.
I work in the City and, certainly from those here that are pro-Remain Tories, their greatest concern is keeping out Corbyn, not voting based on Brexit.
Yup, agree. 4% off the Lab score to each of LD, BXP and DNV and Con gain Bolsover, which is Conservative Target #70. This is entirely plausible, IMHO.
.
IanB2 - yes, its Labour leavers staying at home, rather than voting Conservative, that could scupper Labour. There are many more ultra marginals in this election.
Edmund - I probably am entirely wrong but I struggle to see why in Scotland, given that the dividing line is really on pro/anti-independence than pro/anti-Brexit why the Tories are going to lose so many seats to the SNP. Anyone who is pro-Union will realise a clean sweep for the SNP will mean a further push for indyref2. Far better to hold your nose and vote Conservative this time round.
.
Yes, I think at least 5-6 seats in Scotland should be rather sticky for the Tories.
3 seats are sticky, no more than that.
WA&K, Banff & Buchan, Moray, D,C&T and B,R&S are the ones I’d be banking on.
DCT and BRS are almost guaranteed holds, however WAK is, assuming current conditions, a gonner. Massive borrowed Lib Dem vote to unwind.
The Conservatives were polling at 30-35% in WAK even during their leanest years from 1997-2005. They’re currently at almost 50% of the vote and, even unwinding all of the LD swing from the last election, it still wouldn’t be enough to let the SNP through the middle to take the seat. It’s also an area where Brexit isn’t wholly unpopular unlike, say, Aberdeen South or East Renfrewshire.
I think it’ll be held.
I would watch Gordon more than WAK. Longer Lib/Lib Dem history and the fall in Lib Dem support strongly impacted by determination to get rid of Salmond- unwind will be brutal for the Tories.
The local by election for Bridge of Don on October 3rd is for a ward 7/8 in Gordon. Lib Dems making a big impact.
Probably the most pro-SNP ward in Gordon. They got a 38% vote share, 29% to Tories, 12% to Labour and 10% to LibDems with the balance to Independents. It's a double by-election so two replacement Cllrs to be elected in a 4-member ward. The transfers will be interesting to see.
Looks good for Swinson. When I did my one and only PPB for Paddy Ashdown Jeremy Bullmore who wrote the script told me that though the tite was 'Maggie's Broken Britain' that was very secondary to getting Paddy's name known to the public. So don't be surprised if this upcoming campaign plays heavily on the leader and her name. Looking at the numbers of 'don't knows' it would make sense.
I went to a reception in Whitehall last night, launching a festival of Korean music. You’d expect it to be Remainer central... and it was.
I got into a vigorous but agreeable debate with a nice Lib Dem. A music mogul. We talked about Swinson’s Revoke policy and he gamely tried to defend it, at first, but eventually he admitted it was pretty shocking, however he said it was still tolerable ‘because we will never get a majority’. A line I have seen used on here.
If a party’s flagship policy is being sold this way - ‘yes it’s terrible but don’t worry we will never win, so it will never be enacted’ - then I suggest the policy is a problem. Not an asset.
Problem for Labour . If some of their MPs vote a deal through then Johnson will get a huge boost in an election .
The BP can scream it’s not a proper Brexit but I suspect the palpable relief amongst many people will outweigh that .
On the face of it if you take Brexit out of the equation Johnson’s policies in terms of spending are hardly going to do him harm .
I think it’s pretty clear if Labour are to have any chance of at least getting a minority government they need Brexit to be delayed .
A pact between the Tories and BP will mean it will be a no deal offer to the public, which I think will hurt the Tories .
If the Tories run on a deal or no deal then the BP will cause them trouble .
Faisal Islam is making the point this morning that BJ's move away from May's "level playing field" commitments is likely to alienate many of the potential Labour backers of a WA - the ones who were being brought onside in the Lidington-McDonnell talks around workers' rights and green stuff. ie it'll make it easier for Corbyn to restore the "evil baby-eating Tory Brexit" narrative which gives his side cover for rejecting a WA.
Comments
so weve gone from Johnson is doing nothing on the negotiation front to Johnson is haggling on negotiation points
As ever Europhiles are consistently inconsistent
Lovely Leo kicking out the Untermensch by the looks of it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/brexit-non-eu-family-of-uk-citizens-in-ireland-get-worrying-letters-1.4021343?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/brexit-non-eu-family-of-uk-citizens-in-ireland-get-worrying-letters-1.4021343
we have gone from "We don't like the backstop" to "We don't like the backstop and have no credible alternatives"
NOTHING HAS CHANGED !!
Based on say 10 losses to the SNP the Tories only need to keep losses to the LDs to 13 or lower to gain the 8 seats net they need to get to 326 seats and an overall majority
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
as I said consistently inconsistent,
The problem seems to be that the UK thinks it sees a pssible very small landing zone, as discussed on the last thread, but it doesn't want to put it forward yet as it wants to get the Tory conference out of the way first. That in turn leaves very little time to get a proper deal. There is some progress in principle, but party interest is trumping national interest.
Why do you think they won't show anyone the secret plans?
Because they contain no credible alternative...
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1174225759076048896
I think it’ll be held.
So Swinson is now the most popular leader with middle class ABC1 voters with Corbyn least popular and Boris is the most popular leader with working class C2DE voters with Corbyn again least popular.
Amongst Remain voters Swinson is most popular with Boris least popular, with Leave voters though Boris is most popular with Corbyn least popular.
Corbyn now has a net negative rating from 2017 Labour voters while Boris and Swinson have a net positive rating with their 2017 voters.
https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1174228066270404609
Demographic changes are also making a difference, with single occuparion, and under occupation of family homes, as well as the rise of multiple home ownership all soaking up increased supply.
Several Prime Ministers ago some pillock decided to have a referendum on a vaguely-specified bad idea. This passed, so the job a responsible PM has to do is to turn it into a harm-minimizing, fully-specified, immediately actionable bad idea, than explain to the voters that it's still a bad idea, and make sure they still want to do it.
He observed that the Labour leavers he talked to were more Labour than leave whereas the Labour remainers he talked to were more remain than Labour.
If that turns out to be the case then it does not bode well for the Cummings strategy of hoping to pick up more non-Tory leave voters than he loses Tory remainers to the LDs. 2017 bore this out to some extent - leavers did not vote Tory en masse in response to May's robust Brexit clarion call.
They're both "big picture" guys who want 48pt headline answers to stuff which Olly Robbins and Michel Barnier needed 600 pages. It worked a treat for the Leave campaign*.. but up against the reality of stuff like, erm, the law, the wheels are coming off.
There's another example on Tortoise this morning, of DC's modus operandi at the DfE with Gove (who I'd have expected to have a better handle on the detail, frankly). This explains to me some of the overly-black and white thinking that went on in Gove's time at Education..
https://members.tortoisemedia.com/2019/09/18/190918-cummings-and-i/content.html?sig=V3ep8Di90VEsADMEg8fZ7UUHeKwBE-FtKNLriRS7hGY
(* albeit arguably not to the benefit of democracy)
"The polls suggest that most voters prefer a hard brexit over Corbyn as PM in a binary choice. Chances are the gap is wider in wealthier, Tory shire areas. Unlike 2017, no one is going into this election thinking Corbyn has no chance of being elected and, while Swinson may claim she won't deal with Corbyn, I wonder how many people trust the LDs on that pledge, especially as it would be easy to point to tuition fees as a prime example of how the LDs went back on their word to gave a share of power. For many people, if they are wealthy, not voting Tory is not worth the risk. "
Many people like me will probably be voting LD precisely because they can't stomach Johnson or Corbyn. It was a clever move to commit to not put either in power because it still leaves the door open to back another leader
It is ONLY available on new build properties. So is a sort of subsidy to Housebuilders but not to sellers of existing properties.
Arguably this should increase development/supply and therefore contribute to lower prices overall?
Unpopularer view: she will lose her seat if she stays put in ED.
Prior to 2013 house price inflation had been close to flat since the gfc, with the introduction of the scheme it moved to 5-10% per year. Since the mortgage guarantee part was stopped house price inflation has been dropping back towards flat but the gap to earnings has still been widened by the 2013-6 period.
If Boris gets a deal that the DUP can support and that gives a smooth transition, with a political declaration that can be amended by whoever wins the next election, isn’t it going to be a bit tricky for the Labour holdouts to continue voting against Brexit?
Might the markets have got this completely wrong and we’re actually only weeks away from an MV4 sailing through the commons?
A good chance for the less extreme of the Tory 21 to vote in favour and get the whip back too.
It's not flawless because that Ref2 formulation is open to the charge of being fixed for Remain. given it has no Hard Leave option. But there is no flawless route from here. I'm pleased to see it confirmed because it is the exact policy I have long predicted will be the Labour offering if there is a GE, and it flies.
It is certainly not confusing. Neither is it impractical. And it is not even a tiny bit 'funny'. Except to those whose anti-Corbyn sentiment has overwhelmed basic faculties. Dan Hodges being a prime example of such.
Interestingly my brother is the one person I know it has won round.. He is now committed to voting LD when he has traditionally been a Labour supporter... Key thing here is he lives in Kensington so his vote shift is likely to elect a Tory.. This may be a pattern where the revoke pledge plays well with inner city ultra remain voters and badly with swing shire voters which leads to LDs doing better against Labour than tories and actually leading to more Con seats in the process..
Just my thoughts though
You can spout "anti-democratic" all you want, but if TMay's (and Corbyn's) experience is anything to go by, "bringing the country together" isn't playing all that well. And Farage and Swinson will benefit from being the "screw everyone else.. this is what you *really* want" candidates.
Also demonstrates Cummings willingness to ignore the law.
1) The EU won't need to give diddly squat to the Labour negotiators. Why would they as the latter would ask for something particularly unpalatable to the EU and the EU guys would wink at them and say, for the record, "reluctantly no".
2) How happy would you be as a Labour Leave voter to know that your team is going in to bat but wants to obliterate their stumps as soon as they take up position at the crease?
3) How happy would you be as a Labour Remain voter to know that your party is cocking around with the whole thing? If they want to remain then just say they want to remain.
"A return to the UK for affected families is unlikely be an option because it has “the harshest regime of family separation in Europe”, according to Chai Patel of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants."
https://mobile.twitter.com/iain_w_anderson/status/1174222427712380929
I also agree with whoever noted below her specifying Corbyn and Johnson rather than Labour or Tories. One of them will return to sanity at some point, or splinter such that the LDs become a main party by default.
However this is mainly a London commuter belt problem, go to the North, Wales and the Midlands and most properties will be under £200 000
But I'm not sure the effect Cotswoldtory notes is necessarily as skewed against Lab as he suggests. I think there's a significant but currently cowed quiet Remain Tory wing who backed TMay for doing her best, but will be seething at the treatment of Clarke and Grieve etc. In the privacy of a ballot box, I wouldn't bet against a chunk of those going yellow.
The local by election for Bridge of Don on October 3rd is for a ward 7/8 in Gordon. Lib Dems making a big impact.
My girlfriend and I could only afford our house in the North East because unfortunately my mother died and left me some money. Otherwise we’d be struggling. Even in “cheaper” North East England.
Regarding house building - it’s happening. Tens of thousands in Newcastle and North Tyneside alone. Help to Buy has worked in this regard. A government subsidy none the less.
2. If I were a Leaver of any stripe, Labour or otherwise, I would not like the policy. But it is not possible to please everyone. The party leans strongly Remain and it is therefore not feasible to adopt a pro-Leave stance on Brexit.
3. I am a Labour Remain voter so I can answer this directly. My personal preference would be to keep the soft Brexit but drop the Ref2. However given that the clear majority of the party's MPs, members and supporters are for Remain I view the policy adopted as the best that is politically realistic.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1174239775810818054?s=20
Also unclear why the DUP are going to vote for a deal which keeps N. Ireland aligned with EU rules and regulations.
Freehold residents have NO rights to throw out the management company (unless otherwise stated, which is not usual), NO rights to see invoices, NO rights to challenge the charges. If you take legal action against them, the fees can be back-charged back through the maintenance fee.
Future governments will have to fix this. It is unsustainable.
err didnt you used to go on demos saying the man was a Tory bastard ?
This is not the case everywhere. I recently did an epic, 3 week road trip around the mainland. From Thessaloniki to Zagoriou, down to Preveza, Missolonghi and Corinth. Then far into the Peloponnese. It was Deep Greece. Profound Greece.
The economic suffering is intense. These are the parts of Greece that still have 25% unemployment. I’ve traveled all over the world and I’ve never seen such obvious hardship and trauma outside of war zones. Which makes sense, as Greece’s economy has contracted by 40%. The kind of crash you only see in a war.
The pretty little lakeside city of Yanina, in Epirus, was especially striking. Entire neighbourhoods where every single business has been shuttered. And now they are left to rot.
Soft Brexit means FoM stays but I think that harsh (to many) truth will be finessed in a GE campaign.
Politically clever, of course. As an individual, seeming to get a Gvt bung looks great.
The BP can scream it’s not a proper Brexit but I suspect the palpable relief amongst many people will outweigh that .
On the face of it if you take Brexit out of the equation Johnson’s policies in terms of spending are hardly going to do him harm .
I think it’s pretty clear if Labour are to have any chance of at least getting a minority government they need Brexit to be delayed .
A pact between the Tories and BP will mean it will be a no deal offer to the public, which I think will hurt the Tories .
If the Tories run on a deal or no deal then the BP will cause them trouble .
I got into a vigorous but agreeable debate with a nice Lib Dem. A music mogul. We talked about Swinson’s Revoke policy and he gamely tried to defend it, at first, but eventually he admitted it was pretty shocking, however he said it was still tolerable ‘because we will never get a majority’. A line I have seen used on here.
If a party’s flagship policy is being sold this way - ‘yes it’s terrible but don’t worry we will never win, so it will never be enacted’ - then I suggest the policy is a problem. Not an asset.
Thread here:
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1174238157887418368