Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling boost for TMay as she takes a “best PM” lead amongst y

24

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited May 2018

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited May 2018
    CD13 said:

    Mr HYUFD,

    "it is now clear that for most as well as starting their working life their 20s are a time to travel, date, and have fun before their responsibilities kick in in their 30s."

    I think you're reflecting the difference between what is now called the 'Metropolitan elite' and normal people. Normal people don't finish their 'A' levels and fret about where to go for their 'gap year'. What do you live on while you're gallivanting around the world?

    I assumed they only appeared in middleclass sit-coms set in the South. They may be spreading slowly, I suppose, but they've not really reached the NW of England yet.

    That includes normal people actually given the average age for first child is 29 and for first time buyers is 31 in the UK, even without a gap year in Peru or Kenya most young people go on Easy Jet flights to Spain and Greece etc.

    Not to mention most want to progress their careers to a level they can afford to buy a property and have a child
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    HYUFD said:

    This polling detail and particularly May's new personal lead with young voters shows why it would be absurd for some Tory MPs to try and topple her given she clearly polls above her party

    May's new personal lead with young voters? Fiddlesticks - it's just a blip in a poll sub sample.

    May needs to go post 29/3/19, but she can hang on until then, providing there is a proper Brexit post the end of the transition period on 31/12/20.

  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    HYUFD said:

    Just on ancient practices etc: the extension of the human life-span from 30 odd to 70 plus has altered the way we view things. In Anglo-Saxon England, 12 was the age of majority. Half a millennium later, Henry IV sent his sons (individually, when 14) to put down the Welsh rebellion and run Ireland.

    Given the daft decision to make education (or training etc) compulsory until 18, it seems a little harsh to expect women to have three years of adulthood before thinking about kids.

    Of course, that can have consequences for fertility. As can high house prices. In a world where a man can earn enough by himself to buy a house, it's easier to have kids at a younger age.

    Given the average age of first child is now 29 (and 35 for graduates) and the average age of first time buyers is 31 it is now clear that for most as well as starting their working life their 20s are a time to travel, date, and have fun before their responsibilities kick in in their 30s
    And rightly so.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    daodao said:

    HYUFD said:

    This polling detail and particularly May's new personal lead with young voters shows why it would be absurd for some Tory MPs to try and topple her given she clearly polls above her party

    May's new personal lead with young voters? Fiddlesticks - it's just a blip in a poll sub sample.

    May needs to go post 29/3/19, but she can hang on until then, providing there is a proper Brexit post the end of the transition period on 31/12/20.

    We will see with other polling but the 5% lead the Tories have in the latest Opinium if reflected at the next general election would give them a small majority
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    CD13 said:

    Mr HYUFD,

    "it is now clear that for most as well as starting their working life their 20s are a time to travel, date, and have fun before their responsibilities kick in in their 30s."

    I think you're reflecting the difference between what is now called the 'Metropolitan elite' and normal people. Normal people don't finish their 'A' levels and fret about where to go for their 'gap year'. What do you live on while you're gallivanting around the world?

    I assumed they only appeared in middleclass sit-coms set in the South. They may be spreading slowly, I suppose, but they've not really reached the NW of England yet.

    Are you saying only the “metropolitan elite” travel and go on dates? HYUFD accurately describes what most people in their 20s do these days, rich or poor
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited May 2018
    Who most loved the Royal engagement and who found it gruesome....Malc?


    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/5-charts-british-reaction-prince-harrys-engagement/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    HYUFD said:

    Just on ancient practices etc: the extension of the human life-span from 30 odd to 70 plus has altered the way we view things. In Anglo-Saxon England, 12 was the age of majority. Half a millennium later, Henry IV sent his sons (individually, when 14) to put down the Welsh rebellion and run Ireland.

    Given the daft decision to make education (or training etc) compulsory until 18, it seems a little harsh to expect women to have three years of adulthood before thinking about kids.

    Of course, that can have consequences for fertility. As can high house prices. In a world where a man can earn enough by himself to buy a house, it's easier to have kids at a younger age.

    Given the average age of first child is now 29 (and 35 for graduates) and the average age of first time buyers is 31 it is now clear that for most as well as starting their working life their 20s are a time to travel, date, and have fun before their responsibilities kick in in their 30s
    And rightly so.
    Agreed
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Mr HYUFD,

    "That includes normal people actually given the average age for first child is 29 and for first time buyers is 31"

    Many certainly settle down later, I agree.

    Although round here (Knowsley), many of the girls settle down very early with a baby (often without a partner). Averages conceal a lot of information.

    And surely, a time for travel and enjoyment doesn't stack up with this new generation being financially disadvantaged compared to the baby boomers who had it all?

    The fifties and sixties … a time of exorbitant spending on luxury goods. I must have missed that one.



  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    These figures say as much about the problems facing Corbyn and Labour than May, who remains tied to the BREXIT agenda, the young vote is more volatile than the others and as the locals showed a few weeks ago, the young (ish) urban vote is not always there to be relied upon for Labour...

    Whoever comes after May will need a mercurial mix that has to please so many elements of the Conservative vote that the battle for succession will be bloody and satisfies nobody (I sense a John Major in the offing), it comes back to the the successor, a young-ish little known quantity is in the offing - Tom Tugenhadt perhaps , he's not afraid to ruffle feathers in the FCO or MOD
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    CD13 said:

    Mr HYUFD,

    "it is now clear that for most as well as starting their working life their 20s are a time to travel, date, and have fun before their responsibilities kick in in their 30s."

    I think you're reflecting the difference between what is now called the 'Metropolitan elite' and normal people. Normal people don't finish their 'A' levels and fret about where to go for their 'gap year'. What do you live on while you're gallivanting around the world?

    I assumed they only appeared in middleclass sit-coms set in the South. They may be spreading slowly, I suppose, but they've not really reached the NW of England yet.

    The (few) NW youth that I know are not ‘gap-year takers”. Getting on with careers seems important.
    There's a difference between travelling in general and gap-years specifically.

    The NW youth that I know are not 'gap year takers' but are more worried about travel (their holidays) etc than they are thinking about children or mortgages.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    Morning all,

    Labour even more at war with itself this morning. This time over Lewisham.

    e.g. from the chair of the CLP

    https://twitter.com/iMcKenzied/status/998153902682931200
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Roger said:

    Sean_F said:

    Roger said:

    OT. I found the first episode of 'A Very British Scandal' disappointing. Too camp and the on screen homosexuality was overshown. It veered towards a rather explicit 'Carry-On' and lost the politics almost completely. Nonetheless two episodes to go so it might improve and Hugh Grant's loucheness if a little too close to 'Leslie Phillips' was at least interesting.

    Agree. It also didn’t make the point that, while Bessell was always regarded as a bit odd ....... an example perhaps of voting for the party, not the candidate ....... Thorpe was popular in the Party and did a great deal to pull it forward, building on Grimond’s legacy. I recall going to a Conference some years afterwards and, when the Leadership was being discussed someone got up and said, to at least some cheers “Can’t we have Jeremy back?'

    What I could not understand is why Bessell, for example, did not write to the chap who sacked Josiffe and ask for his NI card ‘for a constituent’. Furthermore, there was, IIRC a fairly simple mechanism for replacing a lost card. Apart from buying one in a pub!
    I liked Matthew Parris' conclusion.

    "I don't know how Thorpe refrained from murdering Scott. I would have done."

    The book is excellent - and Scott does come across as deeply troubled.
    If the story as told in the TV version is correct Scott was walking into police stations with explicit love letters from Thorpe sending copies to his mother his wife and his colleagues yet we were to believe that he was able to carry on as though nothing was happening
    Much more deferential times - sounds like a fair reflection of the book - who would you believe, a respected political leader, or some snivelling little queer? (sic).
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    HYUFD said:

    daodao said:

    HYUFD said:

    This polling detail and particularly May's new personal lead with young voters shows why it would be absurd for some Tory MPs to try and topple her given she clearly polls above her party

    May's new personal lead with young voters? Fiddlesticks - it's just a blip in a poll sub sample.

    May needs to go post 29/3/19, but she can hang on until then, providing there is a proper Brexit post the end of the transition period on 31/12/20.

    We will see with other polling but the 5% lead the Tories have in the latest Opinium if reflected at the next general election would give them a small majority
    A 5% lead is an insufficient buffer against the turnaround in last year's campaign. CCHQ needs to read David Herdson's weekend piece. The Conservatives need to make a positive case for Tory Brexit and Tory, well, anything at all really, rather than double down on the reds-under-the-bed damp squibs from 2017.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    CD13 said:

    Mr HYUFD,

    "That includes normal people actually given the average age for first child is 29 and for first time buyers is 31"

    Many certainly settle down later, I agree.

    Although round here (Knowsley), many of the girls settle down very early with a baby (often without a partner). Averages conceal a lot of information.

    And surely, a time for travel and enjoyment doesn't stack up with this new generation being financially disadvantaged compared to the baby boomers who had it all?

    The fifties and sixties … a time of exorbitant spending on luxury goods. I must have missed that one.



    Some young working class girls still have a baby early to get a council flat but even that is declining.

    The fact young people take longer to afford to buy a home and have a family just means they spend more spare cash on travel and eating out
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Mr Thompson

    "The NW youth that I know are not 'gap year takers' but are more worried about travel (their holidays) etc than they are thinking about children or mortgages."

    OK, but you should know better than to interrupt a grumpy old git in his musings. Shame on you.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,774
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pulpstar said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    It’s striking how this simple truth is completely absent from the official workplace dialogue about having children and how it interacts with careers.

    I suppose it goes against the spirit of the age.

    Well, fathers can always, you know, share the parenting. In fact, some man go even further and chuck in their job so their wife can work. ;)

    The more men who do this, the less the need for women who want to have a career to have kids late.
    My colleague has carried on working right through her kids as has her partner. Me and my other half will do so likewise if we have one
    Good on them, if that's what they (or you) want to do. In which case, unless their is family nearby, they'll need to pay for nannies or nurseries, or split their working.

    And that might be a large factor in this: the fact many of us no longer live near a familial support structure.

    One word of warning: friends of ours were a very career-orientated couple. She wanted to continue working, but the moment she had her first child she wanted to care for it - and a fair few years later she's not gone back to work. Intentions can change when you first hold that mewling bag of puke and sh*t. ;)
    Well my other half works from home, and the mortgage is currently 3.7 our joint earnings so it's a choice we made when we bought the house (Which we both love).
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    HYUFD said:

    daodao said:

    HYUFD said:

    This polling detail and particularly May's new personal lead with young voters shows why it would be absurd for some Tory MPs to try and topple her given she clearly polls above her party

    May's new personal lead with young voters? Fiddlesticks - it's just a blip in a poll sub sample.

    May needs to go post 29/3/19, but she can hang on until then, providing there is a proper Brexit post the end of the transition period on 31/12/20.

    We will see with other polling but the 5% lead the Tories have in the latest Opinium if reflected at the next general election would give them a small majority
    A 5% lead is an insufficient buffer against the turnaround in last year's campaign. CCHQ needs to read David Herdson's weekend piece. The Conservatives need to make a positive case for Tory Brexit and Tory, well, anything at all really, rather than double down on the reds-under-the-bed damp squibs from 2017.
    You can't look at the next election through the prism of the last. Just because LAB did better than the polls last year doesn't mean it will happen again. Look at how the party totally under performed the London polls earlier in the month. In February YouGov had LAB on 55% in London - they ended with 47%
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,523
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    It’s striking how this simple truth is completely absent from the official workplace dialogue about having children and how it interacts with careers.

    I suppose it goes against the spirit of the age.

    Well, fathers can always, you know, share the parenting. In fact, some man go even further and chuck in their job so their wife can work. ;)

    The more men who do this, the less the need for women who want to have a career to have kids late.
    My colleague has carried on working right through her kids as has her partner. Me and my other half will do so likewise if we have one
    Good on them, if that's what they (or you) want to do. In which case, unless their is family nearby, they'll need to pay for nannies or nurseries, or split their working.

    And that might be a large factor in this: the fact many of us no longer live near a familial support structure.

    One word of warning: friends of ours were a very career-orientated couple. She wanted to continue working, but the moment she had her first child she wanted to care for it - and a fair few years later she's not gone back to work. Intentions can change when you first hold that mewling bag of puke and sh*t. ;)
    Well my other half works from home, and the mortgage is currently 3.7 our joint earnings so it's a choice we made when we bought the house (Which we both love).
    Fair enough.

    Another word of warning: I found it quite easy to 'work' and look after our child between birth and about nine months, when he'd sleep a great deal and I could fit in around him. After nine months, however, it became increasingly difficult as he became ever more demanding of time.

    Having said that, a good friend of ours (another stay at home dad) does manage to work part-time from home with two children, although that often involves very late nights.

    A lot may depend on the type of work.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited May 2018

    Morning all,

    Labour even more at war with itself this morning. This time over Lewisham.

    e.g. from the chair of the CLP

    https://twitter.com/iMcKenzied/status/998153902682931200

    Owen Jones has set the Twitterbots on McKenzie via a tweet taken out of context.

    Meanwhile here's Jones apologia analysis of why the left lost in Remainer Lewisham East:

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/998192895415943168

    Nothing to do with Jeremy, obvs....

    I think Glen O'Hara summed it up best:

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/997817905512361984
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    rkrkrk said:

    Also can’t believe that there’s October election talk. I hope May is not getting excited by polls again....

    Seems ridiculous to me. What would May's rallying call be this time?

    "crush the saboteurs in my own party!"

    "Help me get a soft/hard brexit and face down JRM/Soubry [please delete as appropriate for your constituency]"
    I think it’s likely to centre on anti-Corbynism again, as opposed to anything Brexit related.
    I think that's right. People vote against parties not for them. There is the anti-Tory part(ies) and the anti-Labour party. The anti-Tory party is split between Labour and LibDem with LibDem increasing its share by about 1% point.

    The better the LibDems do, the more seats the Tories will get from Labour. The joys of FPTP.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    daodao said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Still not sure I take polls terribly seriously given recent performances.

    Correct, but Corbyn is toxic, so this poll is likely to be correct that May is seen as "best PM".
    Unlike the Bliarites, he is sound on Brexit and has sensible views on foreign policy, where he would not be beholden to criminal middle-eastern regimes.
    Todays Political Betting geography lesson.

    Iran, Syria and the Genocide enthusiasts of Gaza are all located in South America.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,751
    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,774

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    One big difference between the UK and Germany is the latter has a naturally decreasing population, and thus, plenty of surplus housing.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    edited May 2018

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    I think the success of the German example is perhaps more related to non-politicised trades unions which do not own a political party, and the ability of Government to own industry without politicians interfering on a day-by-day basis. That could not develop here, easily, which is why we are better off with Govt owning fewer things.

    The successful long-term investment holders here seem to be rich individuals or financial funds.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited May 2018

    HYUFD said:

    daodao said:

    HYUFD said:

    This polling detail and particularly May's new personal lead with young voters shows why it would be absurd for some Tory MPs to try and topple her given she clearly polls above her party

    May's new personal lead with young voters? Fiddlesticks - it's just a blip in a poll sub sample.

    May needs to go post 29/3/19, but she can hang on until then, providing there is a proper Brexit post the end of the transition period on 31/12/20.

    We will see with other polling but the 5% lead the Tories have in the latest Opinium if reflected at the next general election would give them a small majority
    A 5% lead is an insufficient buffer against the turnaround in last year's campaign. CCHQ needs to read David Herdson's weekend piece. The Conservatives need to make a positive case for Tory Brexit and Tory, well, anything at all really, rather than double down on the reds-under-the-bed damp squibs from 2017.
    The last general election was a different case as Corbyn had more minor party votes from UKIP, the LDs, the Greens and SNP to squeeze which will not be the case next time.

    Despite the disastrous Tory manifesto Corbyn also made almost no net gains from 2015 Tory voters and he will have to to become PM next time. Though I agree an early general election is not advisable
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    One big difference between the UK and Germany is the latter has a naturally decreasing population, and thus, plenty of surplus housing.
    Does it still? I'd have thought the population decline would have stopped with the migration wave.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    Go Theresa! Her widening appeal to British yoof is no mystery: every day she piles on yet another humiliation to the old farts of Brexit. The whole project will be one colossal waste of effort by the time she's finished with it, but the the Tory Leavers are too cowered to protest. Theresa is the new punk!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,774

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    One big difference between the UK and Germany is the latter has a naturally decreasing population, and thus, plenty of surplus housing.
    Does it still? I'd have thought the population decline would have stopped with the migration wave.
    I think deaths still exceed births.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    One big difference between the UK and Germany is the latter has a naturally decreasing population, and thus, plenty of surplus housing.
    Even with all those foreigners they let in? Surely not.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    IMO it'd be nice to have a rousing national anthem. The French one is superb.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited May 2018
    Two separate polls have found no evidence that Brexit has yet caused a radical shift in public opinion which would make a referendum on a united Ireland remotely winnable. In findings which have added significance because of the Prime Minister’s reported suggestion to Tory MPs last week that she was not confident a border poll would definitely be won by unionism, an Ipsos MORI poll for academics found that just 21.1% of people in Northern Ireland would vote for Irish unity after the UK leaves the EU.

    The poll, commissioned by academics at Queen’s University Belfast for a major piece of research examining how Brexit is shaping political opinion in Northern Ireland, found that not even half of Catholics would vote for a united Ireland, with just 42.6% of Catholics favouring that option – although a large percentage, 26%, were undecided.


    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/new-poll-finds-just-21-support-for-a-united-ireland-despite-fears-about-post-brexit-irish-border/
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The important question is why is UK childcare so expensive?

    I think I saw a graph suggesting we the highest childcare costs in the OECD.

    As someone upthread suggested, the young can afford to go to restaurants, they just can’t afford to have kids or live anywhere.

    It’s not very “conservative”.

    The UK child per woman average of 1.8 is actually above the western average and we still have more home owners than say Germany or Switzerland even if we are lower down the home ownership table
    In Germany people rent.
    When I lived there I rented from a couple who rented a much nicer flat from someone else.
    More Germans rent than here but even in Germany by 2015 a small majority of 52% owned their own home

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
    I thought 52% was enough to determine 'the will of the people'... Germany is committed to Hard-Homeownership! :wink:
    One big difference between the UK and Germany is the latter has a naturally decreasing population, and thus, plenty of surplus housing.
    Does it still? I'd have thought the population decline would have stopped with the migration wave.
    Last time I checked I think Germany had about 1.8 million empty homes. Here in the UK it is about 600-700k.

    That was pre-most of Merkel's Migration.

    http://www.dw.com/en/empty-property-in-eu-could-house-all-of-europes-homeless-and-more/a-17463912
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,867

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    It’s striking how this simple truth is completely absent from the official workplace dialogue about having children and how it interacts with careers.

    I suppose it goes against the spirit of the age.

    Well, fathers can always, you know, share the parenting. In fact, some man go even further and chuck in their job so their wife can work. ;)

    The more men who do this, the less the need for women who want to have a career to have kids late.
    My colleague has carried on working right through her kids as has her partner. Me and my other half will do so likewise if we have one
    Good on them, if that's what they (or you) want to do. In which case, unless their is family nearby, they'll need to pay for nannies or nurseries, or split their working.

    And that might be a large factor in this: the fact many of us no longer live near a familial support structure.

    One word of warning: friends of ours were a very career-orientated couple. She wanted to continue working, but the moment she had her first child she wanted to care for it - and a fair few years later she's not gone back to work. Intentions can change when you first hold that mewling bag of puke and sh*t. ;)
    Well my other half works from home, and the mortgage is currently 3.7 our joint earnings so it's a choice we made when we bought the house (Which we both love).
    Fair enough.

    Another word of warning: I found it quite easy to 'work' and look after our child between birth and about nine months, when he'd sleep a great deal and I could fit in around him. After nine months, however, it became increasingly difficult as he became ever more demanding of time.

    Having said that, a good friend of ours (another stay at home dad) does manage to work part-time from home with two children, although that often involves very late nights.

    A lot may depend on the type of work.
    Yes, been there, done that, having cared alone for my lad since he was 2 years old. It is indeed extremely difficult to get much work done at all while caring for a toddler. Of course, work gets easier once they start school and much easier when they become teenagers, though that does bring different issues!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,579
    .
    The irony is that there might be actually be a deal to be done (but that likely would require a more strategically calculating President, and the complete absence of John Bolton...)

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/05/north-korea-denuclearization/560774/

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    God Save the Queen is the Theresa May of national anthems. Unimaginative and uninspiring, it remains only because no-one can agree on the best replacement.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,882
    rkrkrk said:

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    IMO it'd be nice to have a rousing national anthem. The French one is superb.
    It should be "That's Entertainment" by The Jam.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    I've been looking at the movement between the YouGov surveys of 30 April and 14 May.

    The headline figures show very little movement: Con 43% (-) Lab 38% (-) LD 9% (+1)

    Brexit is the most important issue facing the UK for both Remainers and Leavers, and for supporters of all parties in both surveys. Presumably this is what would cause an early election and what an election would be fought on.

    The interesting movement is in which party would handle Brexit best:

    For Remainers at EURef:

    Con 19% (+3)
    Lab 24% (-1)
    LD 17% (+2)
    UKIP 0 (-)
    None 11% (-3)

    For Leavers at EURef:

    Con 43% (-8)
    Lab 8% (-1)
    LD 1% (+1)
    UKIP 19% (+13)
    None 9% (-)

    Remainers are fairly equally spread between all three main parties with Con and LD gaining a bit.

    Leavers are concentrated on Con and UKIP and give Lab little credit.

    My conclusion: Labour's Brexit strategy is now damaging it. It is losing Remainers and not attracting Leavers. The Tory Brexit strategy (sic) is working in that its softness is attracting Lab voters and the hard Brexiteers have no-where to go to but UKIP - and so in practice will continue to vote Tory.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Given only 21% would vote for a united Ireland that's not a particularly brave prediction...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    True the British national anthem is dire.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Dura_Ace said:

    In this discussion: men explaining what women are "supposed" to do.

    Don't worry for balance all the ladies in my office are busy judging what everyone wore at the royal wedding.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,722

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    God Save the Queen is the Theresa May of national anthems. Unimaginative and uninspiring, it remains only because no-one can agree on the best replacement.
    We’ve knocked out the bit about crushing rebellious Scots, though.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    God Save the Queen is the Theresa May of national anthems. Unimaginative and uninspiring, it remains only because no-one can agree on the best replacement.
    At least England should have an anthem.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,722

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agree on both counts, Mr D.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    God Save the Queen is the Theresa May of national anthems. Unimaginative and uninspiring, it remains only because no-one can agree on the best replacement.
    We’ve knocked out the bit about crushing rebellious Scots, though.
    Something we could definitely add back in after the Unionist victory.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Interesting that Trump seems to have won some concessions from China over their respective trade positions. It will be interesting to see if he is able to get US companies out of China's duplicitous IP sharing laws and where it would leave the UK and EU if he does manage to do it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Max, yes... however, I do wonder if such strong-arm tactics, if repeated, would encourage other countries to band together against the US.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited May 2018
    Greetings mortals. I actually think she might go for it in the Autumn. An I need a mandate, you screwed it up last time election with Brexit as the sole focus this time. No fannying about with social care and foxes, a hard line back me or sack me, Brexit with me or take the socialism on offer and let Jezza take the fallout. They'll gain Kensington at least ;)
    Appeal to the voters that a majority is required and dare them to give it to Labour. Bold but probably the only realistic option to avoid a knee jerk meltdown in 2022 I'd surmise.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Yorkcity said:

    HYUFD said:
    She'd probably get more support if she'd said scrap it because it's a bit shit.
    God Save the Queen is the Theresa May of national anthems. Unimaginative and uninspiring, it remains only because no-one can agree on the best replacement.
    At least England should have an anthem.

    Vindaloo by Fat Les. Epic
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Welcome back, Mr. Woolie.

    Miss Cyclefree, well, the Vikings often received Danegeld during an agreement, then came back a few weeks later asking for more. But one would've thought the propaganda value of looking reasonable with their 'good ally' the UK would be beneficial right about now.

    The explanation could simply be that internal Iranian factionalism is ongoing.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    Mr. Max, yes... however, I do wonder if such strong-arm tactics, if repeated, would encourage other countries to band together against the US.

    I'm not sure how the EU would fare against the US, especially with the US providing a security guarantee for all of Eastern Europe and much of Northern Europe (including Germany). Merkel may want to try and get the EU to band together against Trump but most of the Eastern European countries won't wear it. They depend far too much on US generosity wrt to NATO and the defence of their borders. Additionally, they have the same complaints against Germany that the US has against China, if anything Eastern European leaders are looking at Trump's tactics and taking notes for the next round of internal markets wrangling.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    Roger said:
    They both manage to piss off a vast swathe of folk who wish they could be edited out of existence.....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,579
    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    That is an eccentric, rather than simple explanation.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    You don't think perhaps Trump might have had more to do with Iran taking a hard line with the West?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Pulpstar said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    In this discussion: men explaining what women are "supposed" to do.

    Don't worry for balance all the ladies in my office are busy judging what everyone wore at the royal wedding.
    Ooh lovely! My twopence worth: the heels were much much too high. Walking on tiptoes is excruciatingly painful. The shoes don’t fit properly - look closely and you will see what I mean - and too many women therefore walk like young foals just after birth. Or storks. The odd movement detracts from the overall elegance. Even the sainted Meghan gets this wrong. Though she was properly beautiful on the day! Very envious of her evening gown and, even more so, of the fantastic Jaguar Harry was driving.

    Doria Ragland was very elegant and sweet looking: I thought one of the sweetest moments was Charles walking down the steps after the service with Camilla on one arm and Doria on the other.

    And the couple did curtsey/bow to HMQ but the broadcasters cut away to show us a ceiling or something. Morons!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    That is an eccentric, rather than simple explanation.
    Either way, it's something that we shouldn't discount so easily. We may not agree with whatever law she has purportedly broken, however, it is a law of their land and they may want to prosecute to ensure other foreign visitors don't try and do the same.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    My opinion is that Labour support is relatively high as the voters don't believe JC is capable of winning a GE to become PM.

  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    MaxPB said:

    Mr. Max, yes... however, I do wonder if such strong-arm tactics, if repeated, would encourage other countries to band together against the US.

    I'm not sure how the EU would fare against the US, especially with the US providing a security guarantee for all of Eastern Europe and much of Northern Europe (including Germany). Merkel may want to try and get the EU to band together against Trump but most of the Eastern European countries won't wear it. They depend far too much on US generosity wrt to NATO and the defence of their borders. Additionally, they have the same complaints against Germany that the US has against China, if anything Eastern European leaders are looking at Trump's tactics and taking notes for the next round of internal markets wrangling.
    Really ? East Europeans are net recipients and Germany provides most of the dough!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,579
    Sanders' Presidential prospects looking in trouble:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/bernie-sanders-democrats-2018-599331

    'Nina Turner' - great name, but apparently not someone to have running your organisation...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited May 2018
    surby said:

    MaxPB said:

    Mr. Max, yes... however, I do wonder if such strong-arm tactics, if repeated, would encourage other countries to band together against the US.

    I'm not sure how the EU would fare against the US, especially with the US providing a security guarantee for all of Eastern Europe and much of Northern Europe (including Germany). Merkel may want to try and get the EU to band together against Trump but most of the Eastern European countries won't wear it. They depend far too much on US generosity wrt to NATO and the defence of their borders. Additionally, they have the same complaints against Germany that the US has against China, if anything Eastern European leaders are looking at Trump's tactics and taking notes for the next round of internal markets wrangling.
    Really ? East Europeans are net recipients and Germany provides most of the dough!
    Not of EU funds, but in terms of trade with Germany where most are in deficit. Even that may change with the EU trying to punish Eastern states by shifting the direction of "cohesion" funds to look at unemployment and social strife rather than pure money terms.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,579
    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    That is an eccentric, rather than simple explanation.
    Either way, it's something that we shouldn't discount so easily. We may not agree with whatever law she has purportedly broken, however, it is a law of their land and they may want to prosecute to ensure other foreign visitors don't try and do the same.
    I think the clue is in the story -
    "taken to court on Saturday facing new charges and has been told by the Judge that she can expect to be convicted..."

    That might well be how their legal system operates, but it is clearly not a system of justice.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited May 2018

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Oppositions aside from the Tories 97 to 05 tend to do pretty well in polls as 'not the gov't
    Swingback as choice looms generally
    It depends how he is replaced and how Momentum react
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited May 2018
    Scott_P said:
    So the detail is here: https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/brexitni/BrexitandtheBorder/Report/Filetoupload,820734,en.pdf

    The yes/no Brexit question comes right at the end of the survey, which seems a bit suspect, because it allows the people writing the survey to push their option with the lead-in questions, à-la-yes-minister.

    Even if they weren't trying to fix the result there's pretty much no way you can think about the logistics and practicalities of the whole thing without getting biased against it. Presumably an actual re-referendum wouldn't have the lead-in questions, although hopefully they'd get a little bit more attention than the original one.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    That Northern Irish polling is two months old! Fortunate that it shows such clear answers on the questions asked.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Oppositions aside from the Tories 97 to 05 tend to do pretty well in polls as 'not the gov't
    Swingback as choice looms generally
    It depends how he is replaced and how Momentum react
    Labour did awfully in opposition from Jeremy Corbyn's election of leader right up to the 2017 general election campaign. Jeremy Corbyn's personal ratings have subsided back towards previous levels but Labour's polling has not. Something interesting is happening.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited May 2018

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Oppositions aside from the Tories 97 to 05 tend to do pretty well in polls as 'not the gov't
    Swingback as choice looms generally
    It depends how he is replaced and how Momentum react
    The swing that Hague got from 97 to 01 would very likely be enough to see Corbyn into the office of PM.

    No opposition has been as close to the governing party in terms of UNS required at the next GE as Corbyn has for decades.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Labour make some good criticisms of the failures of our current way of doing things, many of which I share. The Tories either ignore those problems or can’t come up with answers or are seen as responsible for them.

    Second, Labour are not seen as a pro-Brexit party. The fact that Corbyn has made explicit that he does not want the bits of the EU which many Remain voters like seems to have passed them by. For the moment anyway.

    When Corbyn is having to respond to events - rather than when he is setting the narrative (eg when campaigning) - as in the Skripal affair or over anti-semitism - his failings as a leader come more to the fore.

    Labour might do better if they had a leader with Corbyn’s advantages but without any of his failings. As it is I think voters have to decide whether they want to take a punt on the basis of his advantages and have a change or whether they think that his disadvantages and weaknesses will overwhelm him when faced with the reality of what it means to be PM and/ or be bad for the country.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    CD13 said:

    Mr HYUFD,

    "That includes normal people actually given the average age for first child is 29 and for first time buyers is 31"

    Many certainly settle down later, I agree.

    Although round here (Knowsley), many of the girls settle down very early with a baby (often without a partner). Averages conceal a lot of information.

    And surely, a time for travel and enjoyment doesn't stack up with this new generation being financially disadvantaged compared to the baby boomers who had it all?

    The fifties and sixties … a time of exorbitant spending on luxury goods. I must have missed that one.



    Luxury goods have got vastly cheaper but the basics: education; housing etc have got hugely more expensive.
  • On topic, would be surprised if May really was seen as the best choice by 18-34 but I can see why JC support may have come off. It is one thing to shout "Oh JC" when everyone assumes you are a nice - if misguided - person, another when you have in the back of your mind people might think you are a bigot that hates Jews. I have certainly seen far fewer of the Corbyn T-shirts and signs round our North London neck of woods in the past few months.

    On the next election, I think Niemhakhyt (???) had a very good point in the previous post. The key theme in the 2017 GE was whether you wanted T May with a big majority, people said no, hence the result we got. Next time round, the key overriding theme will be "Do you want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?" That is not good for Labour and, bizarrely, on a 43-35 Con / Lab split, I could easily see that as a big C majority if Lab support remains very concentrated in the big cities and London but flees Labour everywhere else. Probably not good for the Lib Dems either - most of their seats are wealthy but wet conservative areas that would vote for their wealth ahead of EU issues.

    O/T, have been topping up on Ladbrokes at 8/13 on the Republicans winning > 50 seats in November. The generic gap is narrowing and the Republicans have gone for sensible candidates in key states. The latest I've seen has them ahead in WV, ID and FL, with Rick Scott. If you want to be a bit more adventurous, the 6/4 on a Republican House majority looks good. The Dems have been picking left-wing over moderate candidates in several swing seats, which could tip the balance.

    Finally, thanks to Alistair and TSE for the Esther McVey and Matt Hancock bets as next PM. Personal view is Hancock may suffer from being seen too much as a Cameron / Osborne styl;e figure but, at 100/1, it is worth a flutter. I think McVey could be very interesting. If TM goes and an election is called, having McVey as the Con leader should not only help the Cons "up North" but also would have Labour continuously on the backfoot over McDonnell's quotation about her, which then reignites the whole issue around Labour and what they tolerate.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    That is an eccentric, rather than simple explanation.
    Either way, it's something that we shouldn't discount so easily. We may not agree with whatever law she has purportedly broken, however, it is a law of their land and they may want to prosecute to ensure other foreign visitors don't try and do the same.
    I think the clue is in the story -
    "taken to court on Saturday facing new charges and has been told by the Judge that she can expect to be convicted..."

    That might well be how their legal system operates, but it is clearly not a system of justice.
    Agreed. However, she went to Iran for reasons unknown, she got arrested for breaking Iranian law unlike the thousands of Iranian British citizens who visit Iran every year, the Iranians are being extremely inflexible over her release, something that hasn't been an issue in the past with phoney arrests of "western spies" and now it looks like shes about to end up in an Iranian prison for the next 5-7 years despite it being in Iran's interests to send her home.

    To me it looks like she went there, knowingly broke some Iranian law on inciting protests against the regime, Iran wants to use her to set an example for other foreign actors who want to help the dissident movement.

    At least that's the way it looks to me.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,882
    Cyclefree said:

    Though she was properly beautiful on the day! Very envious of her evening gown and, even more so, of the fantastic Jaguar Harry was driving.

    It was an all electric E-Type Zero. JLR are very good at product placement, I'll give them that.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Oppositions aside from the Tories 97 to 05 tend to do pretty well in polls as 'not the gov't
    Swingback as choice looms generally
    It depends how he is replaced and how Momentum react
    Labour did awfully in opposition from Jeremy Corbyn's election of leader right up to the 2017 general election campaign. Jeremy Corbyn's personal ratings have subsided back towards previous levels but Labour's polling has not. Something interesting is happening.
    Perhaps yeah. Polarisation along Brexit lines and straight right vs left with the decline of other parties. The Tory % is equally astonishing really given the clear hamstringing of government
    There's a certain amount of cult of Jeremy which might peel off if he were toppled, a problem the Tories don't have with May
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    More likely that Iran is playing silly buggers in the hope we will ask the Americans to ease off a bit. We can see this new development immediately follows Trump ripping up the nuclear deal last week.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    Is Owen Jones becoming the new Eddie Izzard....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    Scott_P said:
    So the detail is here: https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/brexitni/BrexitandtheBorder/Report/Filetoupload,820734,en.pdf

    The yes/no Brexit question comes right at the end of the survey, which seems a bit suspect, because it allows the people writing the survey to push their option with the lead-in questions, à-la-yes-minister.

    Even if they weren't trying to fix the result there's pretty much no way you can think about the logistics and practicalities of the whole thing without getting biased against it. Presumably an actual re-referendum wouldn't have the lead-in questions, although hopefully they'd get a little bit more attention than the original one.
    While I’m loath to criticise the academics I thought the write up a bit biased “as many as 20% of Catholics wouldn’t wear CCTV on the border” (I paraphrase) - not 80% would....<
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    Dura_Ace said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Though she was properly beautiful on the day! Very envious of her evening gown and, even more so, of the fantastic Jaguar Harry was driving.

    It was an all electric E-Type Zero. JLR are very good at product placement, I'll give them that.
    Left Hand Drive, so expect to see it in the USA?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. B, the Cardassians would be proud.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    More likely that Iran is playing silly buggers in the hope we will ask the Americans to ease off a bit. We can see this new development immediately follows Trump ripping up the nuclear deal last week.
    I would be very surprised if the Iranians were daft enough to believe we had that kind of pull. I tend to Max's view that this woman seems to have done something that particularly pisses them off. One begins to wonder if Boris misspoke after all.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,882

    Dura_Ace said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Though she was properly beautiful on the day! Very envious of her evening gown and, even more so, of the fantastic Jaguar Harry was driving.

    It was an all electric E-Type Zero. JLR are very good at product placement, I'll give them that.
    Left Hand Drive, so expect to see it in the USA?
    I assume it's LHD because that was the cheapest donor vehicle they could get their hands on. Series 1.5 Roadsters that aren't rusted to fuck and back aren't exactly cheap.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881

    Two questions from this:

    1) Why are Labour doing pretty well in the polls at a time when the general public collectively think Jeremy Corbyn is so underwhelming?

    And following on from that:

    2) Would Labour do appreciably better with a different leader or are their perceived virtues drawn from elsewhere?

    Other things being equal, I think Labour would do better with a different leader with less baggage.

    But I think strategically Corbyn has made some wise decisions
    (ambiguity on Brexit for now, bold domestic policy offering etc.) - and the danger is that a new leader might unwind some of that.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    More likely that Iran is playing silly buggers in the hope we will ask the Americans to ease off a bit. We can see this new development immediately follows Trump ripping up the nuclear deal last week.
    I would be very surprised if the Iranians were daft enough to believe we had that kind of pull. I tend to Max's view that this woman seems to have done something that particularly pisses them off. One begins to wonder if Boris misspoke after all.
    Leaving Boris to one side, the timing points to this being a reaction to Trump last week. She's been in captivity for two years now so it is unlikely the Iranian Inspector Morse has turned up a new lead. Perhaps it is indirect sabre-rattling aimed at the US government without the associated risks of arresting an American tourist.

    Returning to Boris, we might remember that William Hague made some spectacularly wrong announcements over Libya so if we assume there was no ulterior motive, perhaps there is something wrong with our Middle East intelligence.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    edited May 2018

    On topic, would be surprised if May really was seen as the best choice by 18-34 but I can see why JC support may have come off. It is one thing to shout "Oh JC" when everyone assumes you are a nice - if misguided - person, another when you have in the back of your mind people might think you are a bigot that hates Jews. I have certainly seen far fewer of the Corbyn T-shirts and signs round our North London neck of woods in the past few months.

    On the next election, I think Niemhakhyt (???) had a very good point in the previous post. The key theme in the 2017 GE was whether you wanted T May with a big majority, people said no, hence the result we got. Next time round, the key overriding theme will be "Do you want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?" That is not good for Labour and, bizarrely, on a 43-35 Con / Lab split, I could easily see that as a big C majority if Lab support remains very concentrated in the big cities and London but flees Labour everywhere else. Probably not good for the Lib Dems either - most of their seats are wealthy but wet conservative areas that would vote for their wealth ahead of EU issues.

    O/T, have been topping up on Ladbrokes at 8/13 on the Republicans winning > 50 seats in November. The generic gap is narrowing and the Republicans have gone for sensible candidates in key states. The latest I've seen has them ahead in WV, ID and FL, with Rick Scott. If you want to be a bit more adventurous, the 6/4 on a Republican House majority looks good. The Dems have been picking left-wing over moderate candidates in several swing seats, which could tip the balance.

    Finally, thanks to Alistair and TSE for the Esther McVey and Matt Hancock bets as next PM. Personal view is Hancock may suffer from being seen too much as a Cameron / Osborne styl;e figure but, at 100/1, it is worth a flutter. I think McVey could be very interesting. If TM goes and an election is called, having McVey as the Con leader should not only help the Cons "up North" but also would have Labour continuously on the backfoot over McDonnell's quotation about her, which then reignites the whole issue around Labour and what they tolerate.

    If Esther McVey is your big hope ,you need help.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-43784071
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    More likely that Iran is playing silly buggers in the hope we will ask the Americans to ease off a bit. We can see this new development immediately follows Trump ripping up the nuclear deal last week.
    I don't think anyone in Iran is stupid enough to think that Trump would go back into the deal he loathes because it might help free one non-US citizen.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    King Cole, mildly surprised, as the US/West split over the Iran deal would make this an excellent time for Iran to show how reasonable it can be.

    I do sympathise greatly with the lady and her family, though it remains puzzling she thought returning to Iran would be a good idea.

    Agreed. But given the PR advantages to Iran of a release I do wonder if there is something we haven’t been told.

    A few months back the rumours were of an imminent release and, purely coincidentally, of payment of some monies owed to Iran. So are they holding out for more? Or has something else been happening?
    Or, the simplest explanation, she is guilty of whatever crimes that Iran have accused her of and their are applying the law just as we would if an Iranian visitor committed a crime in the UK.
    More likely that Iran is playing silly buggers in the hope we will ask the Americans to ease off a bit. We can see this new development immediately follows Trump ripping up the nuclear deal last week.
    I don't think anyone in Iran is stupid enough to think that Trump would go back into the deal he loathes because it might help free one non-US citizen.
    Would anyone in Iran think it might concentrate minds in the State Department, after Trump has moved onto his next twitter storm?
This discussion has been closed.