Wrong current polls show the Tories leading with 40s to 50s, 40 being the age most people now own a home
But Foxys argument seems to be that becoming older =/= becoming more likely to vote Tory, rather that the current crop of older people are more likely to vote Tory. So is the average 25-30 year old now, in 20 years, going to be likely to vote Tory at the same rate as current 45-50 year olds (as Foxy suggested would have been the case in the past), or has that trend broken? I was thinking about this during the PB Tory panic over some of the polling, but the Tory party have failed to win a lasting governing majority since Major, with the small blip of Cameron's majority not lasting and being overtaken by the Europe question. Did Thatcher break this age drift? Has something else happened that is making it near impossible for Tories to win a majority? I wonder if the Anyone But Conservative alliance is just too strong and that, as we see now, even unpopular parties with the voters will gain enough tactical votes once an election is called to keep Tories out of power. Is the base of each party enough that, if either side decides to vote tactically, we are now in an era of weak governments and the only response would be electoral reform and a more conciliatory approach to politics, with more emphasis on coalitions and common ground. With Labour losing Scotland they can't find a majority anywhere, and enough of the Wets seem happy voting for the LDs. The working class is shifting more Tory than the past, but I bet that will have a racial tinge to it, and therefore the working class that does still vote Labour will be more concentrated and therefore more efficient, whereas the white working class vote that the Tories get will be more spread thin, possibly just bolstering them in safe seats rather than winning Lab / LD seats...
Housing affordability is important.
The young will not become more Conservative as they age if they don't own their own home.
It has risen but by 34 over 50% own their own home, coincidentally 35 is the age voters now stop voting Labour with Tories leading with 35 to 54s
You might like to consider what home ownership levels are in areas which are trending towards the Conservatives and what they are in areas which are trending away from the Conservatives.
Home ownership levels are now rising again which is good news don't you think?
What a shame. I always found his recipes a bit too fussy, but he was a delight to watch.
It took a long time for him to realise that taking his restaurant cooking to domestic environment simply didn’t work. It needed major modification (aka simplification). In that sense, he opened the door for chefs who grasped that significantly faster.
Why is Bojo having his AN interview so close to the election? He should get it over with pronto.
Postal votes? Loads of people will have sent them off and voted Con. @Big_G_NorthWales, for example, just to pick one at random from on here, Boris might bomb horribly with Neil but he will be unable to switch his vote to Labour. He might want to, he might lose sleep over it, but it will be too late.
Finally watched the Corbyn-Neil interview. Of course I think he cane across shiftily, but i suspect both sides will be able to mine for social media clips so probably a score draw.
However what interests me is this:
Neil asked is the phrase “Rothschild Zionists rule Israel and the world” anti Semitic or not?
Corbyn didn’t and wouldn’t give a straight answer.
A simple yes would have closed it down
The only reason why I can think he wouldn’t have done that is he was aware/afraid that Neil had evidence that a friend/ally of Corbyn’s had said that (it turned out to be someone called Liam Moore who I’ve never heard of)
Can anyone else explain why Corbyn wouldn’t answer this question? It looked terrible.
I find the prevarication of this sort of thing puzzling from JC. He really doesn’t like commenting on specifics - on anti-semitism or otherwise (unless of course it’s rich people or Donald Trump).
Some of it is I think a clumsy way of trying to avoid a ‘gotchya’ moment but it doesn’t come across well at all. He should just say no, it’s unacceptable, I don’t want people who say that sort of thing in the Labour Party.”
The fact he doesn’t suggests underlying unease that there is more to come out of the woodwork, whether rightly or wrongly.
Yes, he should have just said it's anti-semitic. I suspect the reason is his hostility to Israeli policy in the occupied territories, and a reluctance to start going down a path where criticism of Israel is banned as being anti-semitic. But in this case the above statement isn't even close to being borderline, and it shouldn't really take even a moment's thought to say "yes of course it's anti-semitic"
It just shows what a rubbish political operator Corbyn is, and actually stupid too. It's a tragedy, because I think a fairly radical Labour leader without the baggage and the stupidity but instead with political smarts would be winning any general election against the current grotesque caricature of a Conservative party.
People say that a lot (your final paragraph) but taking one aspect of a counterfactual without the rest is pretty weak. If Corbyn wasn’t there, would the Euro referendum have gone a different way, would Cameron have chosen the time of his departure, would there have been a 2017 election and would there be an election now? The answer to all of those is, I’d venture, yes, yes, no, no.
Why is Bojo having his AN interview so close to the election? He should get it over with pronto.
Postal votes? Loads of people will have sent them off and voted Con. @Big_G_NorthWales, for example, just to pick one at random from on here, Boris might bomb horribly with Neil but he will be unable to switch his vote to Labour. He might want to, he might lose sleep over it, but it will be too late.
Short of Corbyn, McDonnell and co standing down I'm not sure any changes will make anyone who has voted Tory losing sleep.
But Foxys argument seems to be that becoming older =/= becoming more likely to vote Tory, rather that the current crop of older people are more likely to vote Tory. So is the average 25-30 year old now, in 20 years, going to be likely to vote Tory at the same rate as current 45-50 year olds (as Foxy suggested would have been the case in the past), or has that trend broken? I was thinking about this during the PB Tory panic over some of the polling, but the Tory party have failed to win a lasting governing majority since Major, with the small blip of Cameron's majority not lasting and being overtaken by the Europe question. Did Thatcher break this age drift? Has something else happened that is making it near impossible for Tories to win a majority? I wonder if the Anyone But Conservative alliance is just too strong and that, as we see now, even unpopular parties with the voters will gain enough tactical votes once an election is called to keep Tories out of power. Is the base of each party enough that, if either side decides to vote tactically, we are now in an era of weak governments and the only response would be electoral reform and a more conciliatory approach to politics, with more emphasis on coalitions and common ground. With Labour losing Scotland they can't find a majority anywhere, and enough of the Wets seem happy voting for the LDs. The working class is shifting more Tory than the past, but I bet that will have a racial tinge to it, and therefore the working class that does still vote Labour will be more concentrated and therefore more efficient, whereas the white working class vote that the Tories get will be more spread thin, possibly just bolstering them in safe seats rather than winning Lab / LD seats...
Housing affordability is important.
The young will not become more Conservative as they age if they don't own their own home.
It has risen but by 34 over 50% own their own home, coincidentally 35 is the age voters now stop voting Labour with Tories leading with 35 to 54s
You might like to consider what home ownership levels are in areas which are trending towards the Conservatives and what they are in areas which are trending away from the Conservatives.
Home ownership levels are now rising again which is good news don't you think?
Eh up.. Corbyn's got the unredacted version of the US trade talks papers.. about to 'reveal' what it says about the NHS.
Says the uncensored docs leave Johnson's claims NHS not on the table in tatters.
Not a bad dead cat after last night.
Nobody in Labour can explain why we would pay £500m a week* more for US drugs when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
*Mirror number.
We have no need to make such a deal. US Pharma, OTOH, would very much like an extra £500m per week. To do the much vaunted Trade Deal with the USA, the NHS is a target from the US side Nobody in the Conservatives can explain why we would reduce a trade surplus with the USA when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
Eh up.. Corbyn's got the unredacted version of the US trade talks papers.. about to 'reveal' what it says about the NHS.
Says the uncensored docs leave Johnson's claims NHS not on the table in tatters.
Not a bad dead cat after last night.
Nobody in Labour can explain why we would pay £500m a week* more for US drugs when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
*Mirror number.
IIRC, because I did look it up but have forgotten the exact figure, that would be an increase larger than the entire current NHS drug budget. It's bonkers to suggest we would want such a deal.
Why is Bojo having his AN interview so close to the election? He should get it over with pronto.
Postal votes? Loads of people will have sent them off and voted Con. @Big_G_NorthWales, for example, just to pick one at random from on here, Boris might bomb horribly with Neil but he will be unable to switch his vote to Labour. He might want to, he might lose sleep over it, but it will be too late.
Short of Corbyn, McDonnell and co standing down I'm not sure any changes will make anyone who has voted Tory losing sleep.
Eh up.. Corbyn's got the unredacted version of the US trade talks papers.. about to 'reveal' what it says about the NHS.
Says the uncensored docs leave Johnson's claims NHS not on the table in tatters.
Not a bad dead cat after last night.
Nobody in Labour can explain why we would pay £500m a week* more for US drugs when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
*Mirror number.
IIRC, because I did look it up but have forgotten the exact figure, that would be an increase larger than the entire current NHS drug budget. It's bonkers to suggest we would want such a deal.
As I said in another post, we (the UK) do not want such a deal. The US, OTOH, would love such a deal. Trump is in the Whitehouse. He has said the NHS is on the table if we want a deal. America First!
Documents about 'possible' discussions from over 2 years ago, when Boris wasn't PM? weak sauce.
On the contrary. The situation now - a trade deal with Trump's America with us outside the EU and led by a friend of Trump - makes NHS concessions far more likely than it would have appeared 2 years ago.
So now Andrew Neil has done demonstrated that Corbyn is completely out of his depth and unsuited to being PM, when do we get the spectacle of him doing the same to Johnson?
Trade deals tend to make the cost of imports FALL.
Which is why domestic producers often oppose them.
Not trade deals with the USA - under Obama just as much as under Trump. Which is why British consumers oppose them. Only Americans and naively dogmatic idealogues support trade deals with the USA Especially with a USA led by an obsessive Make America Great protectionist.
What a shame. I always found his recipes a bit too fussy, but he was a delight to watch.
It took a long time for him to realise that taking his restaurant cooking to domestic environment simply didn’t work. It needed major modification (aka simplification). In that sense, he opened the door for chefs who grasped that significantly faster.
Indeed. It is also why I took on many of Jamie Oliver's recipes (back when he was a fresh-faced slip of a lad). Also, rather surprisingly, Gordon F***ing Ramsy has produced some splendid recipes on Youtube and he never swears in them so even better.
Eh up.. Corbyn's got the unredacted version of the US trade talks papers.. about to 'reveal' what it says about the NHS.
Says the uncensored docs leave Johnson's claims NHS not on the table in tatters.
Not a bad dead cat after last night.
Nobody in Labour can explain why we would pay £500m a week* more for US drugs when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
*Mirror number.
IIRC, because I did look it up but have forgotten the exact figure, that would be an increase larger than the entire current NHS drug budget. It's bonkers to suggest we would want such a deal.
As I said in another post, we (the UK) do not want such a deal. The US, OTOH, would love such a deal. Trump is in the Whitehouse. He has said the NHS is on the table if we want a deal. America First!
Trump can ask for the moon on a stick, it doesn't mean we would give it to him. Especially if it had a £26 billion a year price tag.
Why is Bojo having his AN interview so close to the election? He should get it over with pronto.
Postal votes? Loads of people will have sent them off and voted Con. @Big_G_NorthWales, for example, just to pick one at random from on here, Boris might bomb horribly with Neil but he will be unable to switch his vote to Labour. He might want to, he might lose sleep over it, but it will be too late.
Short of Corbyn, McDonnell and co standing down I'm not sure any changes will make anyone who has voted Tory losing sleep.
Our postal votes arrive next week.
I vote in the ballot box. It is an important part of democracy for me, I enjoy doing it - and since we had kids we have always made sure to take them with us when we go to vote so they can see us doing it and learn how important it is
Another bombshell: these documents prove Corbyn lied on the TV debate. Not once do these documents mention “full market access for US products”, despite Corbyn implying he was reading verbatim from the documents https://t.co/fXAZvAQfqFhttps://t.co/6nAgl0gO5G
This big NHS reveal is turning out to be the political equivalent of a drunk windmilling and flailing on a Saturday night.
If you're not watching Sky then turn it on and see how pathetic it looks.
Fair enough though, if Boris had been destroyed the night before the Tories would be doing something similar.
I don't know why they try these big set pieces in the mornings, as there's bound to be an absolute bin fire in the afternoon, which ends up leading the 6 O'Clock News.
I'm not a fan of the Neil/Paxman approach. I've always felt a more "subtle" interview style is better for both interviewer and the interviewee but appreciate I'm in the minority there.
I feel the same. I find the Grand Inquisitor style tedious and not conducive to helping me form (or change) a view. I would like a full hour with a deeper, more sincere conversation.
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
Corbyn just trying to move the focus back to the NHS which is one of Labour's stronger areas tbh. Their supporters will ignore the fact they're lieing toerags and just scream and scream and scream about the TORAH the TORAH, I mean the TORIES.
I suspect not a lot. It is why we don't really see people becoming more Tory with age like previous generations did.
The age divide is much larger than it has ever been, so I can't make sense of your statement.
I am saying that historically previous generations trended Tory as they aged. I think that less likely for those born from the mid Seventies onwards. The economics in the tweet is part of the reason, social attitudes have a part too. It is why the Tories have not encouraged youngsters to register to vote, while other parties have.
The cohort a bit older than that have trended Tory massively as they've passed age 65, such that the difference between the Tory lead in the 65+ age group, and the general population, is now much larger than it has ever been. On the face of it that suggests that the rate at which people become Tory as they age is even greater than in the past.
Certainly that is true of the boomer cohort, but will it be true for Gen X and Millenials? I think we are looking at a cohort effect, not an age effect.
It is fairly simple. There is an age impact that as you get older you dislike change more, become more risk averse and develop nostalgia, so in short on average people get more conservative, at least with a small c. On top of that there is a separate capitalist question, which is what Corbynism is challenging. The current over 65s have done better from capitalism than any generation before and will likely do better than at least the next two or three generations that follow them. Of course they strongly prefer establishment to Corbynism. The generations that are really struggling to get a house or build up capital are obviously going to be more open to smashing the system and see what happens. It will be up to the next Tory government to restore the balance between the generations. If they do not then eventually in a capitalist democracy, where those without capital become the majority, we end up with Corbynism.
The screenshot on guido doesn't say that at all - it mentions discussions about impacts of patents on NHS access to generics and clarifies in parentheses that generics are cheaper drugs. Unless patent terms are reduced, access to generics will stay the same (or decrease if patent terms extended). I don't think the pictued doc says anything interesting/non-obvious at all, but it certainly doesn't say anything about the NHS getting cheaper drugs from a US trade deal.
So am I understanding right from Corbyn's big reveal - US trade talks are quite advanced so we could get a deal soon and the UK hasn't agreed to NHS being on the table?
I'm not a fan of the Neil/Paxman approach. I've always felt a more "subtle" interview style is better for both interviewer and the interviewee but appreciate I'm in the minority there.
I feel the same. I find the Grand Inquisitor style tedious and not conducive to helping me form (or change) a view. I would like a full hour with a deeper, more sincere conversation.
I thought Emily's quiet, deadly destruction of Prince Andrew was much more interesting...
Finally watched the Corbyn-Neil interview. Of course I think he cane across shiftily, but i suspect both sides will be able to mine for social media clips so probably a score draw. However what interests me is this: Neil asked is the phrase “Rothschild Zionists rule Israel and the world” anti Semitic or not? Corbyn didn’t and wouldn’t give a straight answer. A simple yes would have closed it down The only reason why I can think he wouldn’t have done that is he was aware/afraid that Neil had evidence that a friend/ally of Corbyn’s had said that (it turned out to be someone called Liam Moore who I’ve never heard of) Can anyone else explain why Corbyn wouldn’t answer this question? It looked terrible.
Perhaps watch again if you can bear it. Because he did answer it. He said it was an antisemitic trope.
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
Corbyn just trying to move the focus back to the NHS which is one of Labour's stronger areas tbh. Their supporters will ignore the fact they're lieing toerags and just scream and scream and scream about the TORAH the TORAH, I mean the TORIES.
All Boris has to do is say if the NHS is not protected hell walk away from a trade deal
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
Big G, you could at least credit Laura K for her tweet
I think that is about right. What a contrast with the amoral Johnson.
What have we done to deserve these two?
It encapsulates the choice very clearly - and also makes it very easy.
Would you rather have an amoral leader along the lines of Nixon or Kennedy or an absolutist leader along the lines of Khrushchev or Mao?
Remember this is not theoretical. John McDonnell quoted admiringly from the writings of one of the 20th centuries' greatest mass murderers in Parliament only a few years ago.
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
Big G, you could at least credit Laura K for her tweet
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
The link would certainly be interesting. Do you think you'll be able to get it?
My question was regarding the Euro. It is the intention of an independent SNP led Scotland to rejoin the EU, and it might be a condition of membership.
And it might not. Twisting itself in circles over events that the likely winners of the GE says it will not even allow Scotland to decide upon would be a grievous waste of effort for the SNP at the moment. As it happens I wouldn't have much objection to joining the Euro but the chances of that option getting a fair hearing are between nada & f.a.
It wasn't intended as a gotcha question - I'm genuinely interested in the answer. While I'm in favour of retaining the union, I'm not an absolutist on the issue, and if there is a popular will for independence (which for now is not at all clear), then it will happen. I can understand the reluctance to trade in hypotheticals, but it's a pretty key issue for the future of any independent Scotland.
Fair enough. My position is the same as it was in 2014, I'm open to the options, though at least the currency union with its Pollyanaesque presumption of good will from Westminster has been taken out and shot (ably helped by the current mob of reactionaries and ultra nationalists running the BJ project). The giving hostage words to fortune point is crucial; if the current incumbent PM of the UK can openly lie about what Sturgeon said, just imagine the week in, week out crowing if she took a distinct position on the Euro. Apart from anything else Sturgeon cannot speak for the EU, and they're not going to speak out on the subject.
So whilst the press will try and dissect the reality of this statement from Labour, most people will just get the trickle: NHS, Tories, USA. It will bump against their priors: privatisation, US healthcare is awful, Trump. Even if the reality isn't as bad as Labour are making out, it will move the needle.
I think that is about right. What a contrast with the amoral Johnson.
What have we done to deserve these two?
"we" voted for populism, if the electorate at large = "we". Brexit, Johnson and Corbyn are all the product of this stupidity.
I agree but think on top of that, we have surrendered our parties to idiots. "Normal" people (hate that phrase but cant think of better...) prefer to go out for dinner with friends, watch the football or go to a theatre or concert, than engage in party politics in their free time. We have left it to the extremists, who in turn make engaging in party politics even more soul destroying, creating a negative loop pushing our parties to the extreme. Perhaps it is time to admit many of us, myself definitely included, dont put enough time into civic society.
So whilst the press will try and dissect the reality of this statement from Labour, most people will just get the trickle: NHS, Tories, USA. It will bump against their priors: privatisation, US healthcare is awful, Trump. Even if the reality isn't as bad as Labour are making out, it will move the needle.
Or as it looks at the moment they're spending the press conference talking about anti semitism and getting hammered for their lack of evidence. Must be a sign they know they are struggling in the polls?
IIRC, because I did look it up but have forgotten the exact figure, that would be an increase larger than the entire current NHS drug budget. It's bonkers to suggest we would want such a deal.
As I said in another post, we (the UK) do not want such a deal. The US, OTOH, would love such a deal. Trump is in the Whitehouse. He has said the NHS is on the table if we want a deal. America First!
Trump can ask for the moon on a stick, it doesn't mean we would give it to him. Especially if it had a £26 billion a year price tag.
So Boris & the Brexiteers banging on about how the EU stops us having a Trade Deal with the USA is just another Brexit fantasy?
Looks like a decent YouGov for the blues despite Labour closing the gap by 1. Greens on 2% will fully be going to Labour and not much more to squeeze for well anyone there really.
So whilst the press will try and dissect the reality of this statement from Labour, most people will just get the trickle: NHS, Tories, USA. It will bump against their priors: privatisation, US healthcare is awful, Trump. Even if the reality isn't as bad as Labour are making out, it will move the needle.
I think that is about right. What a contrast with the amoral Johnson.
What have we done to deserve these two?
It encapsulates the choice very clearly - and also makes it very easy.
Would you rather have an amoral leader along the lines of Nixon or Kennedy or an absolutist leader along the lines of Khrushchev or Mao?
Remember this is not theoretical. John McDonnell quoted admiringly from the writings of one of the 20th centuries' greatest mass murderers in Parliament only a few years ago.
What choice? Corbyn's chances of leading the next Government are vanishingly small.
The best hope for someone like me is that a Hung Parliament leads to the removal of both leaders and other desireable outcomes like stopping Brexit.
That's an interesting consistent rise on the red line (and consistent fall on yellow) that doesn't seem to be mirrored in all other polls.
Looks like the remainers willing to lend votes to the LDs are falling away. A Level Politics textbooks in the future will view Jo's 'I'm running to be Prime Minister' claim in the same way as 'Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government'.
Would also be interested to see the breakdown of Other, to see where votes are shifting to SNP/Plaid.
So whilst the press will try and dissect the reality of this statement from Labour, most people will just get the trickle: NHS, Tories, USA. It will bump against their priors: privatisation, US healthcare is awful, Trump. Even if the reality isn't as bad as Labour are making out, it will move the needle.
I doubt it will cut through at all
It will be the big issue in the final week. Trump is here. His ego require him to be the big issue of the day whether it is helpful or not, and his mouth normally ensures he is.
"Liam Fox was at first meeting which was back in July 2017 - Most of the documents do not relate to medicines or the NHS and can't see in documents yet mentions of other ministers there" Laura K.
This is all going to be furiously disputed through the day, no question ..trying to get link to the full documents so you can have a proper look - important tho Corbyn doesn't provide evidence that ministers have agreed that health service shoudl be part of a trade deal with US
The link would certainly be interesting. Do you think you'll be able to get it?
I think it was a tweet from Guido but a lot happening this morning
I think that is about right. What a contrast with the amoral Johnson.
What have we done to deserve these two?
It encapsulates the choice very clearly - and also makes it very easy.
Would you rather have an amoral leader along the lines of Nixon or Kennedy or an absolutist leader along the lines of Khrushchev or Mao?
Remember this is not theoretical. John McDonnell quoted admiringly from the writings of one of the 20th centuries' greatest mass murderers in Parliament only a few years ago.
What choice? Corbyn's chances of leading the next Government are vanishingly small.
The best hope for someone like me is that a Hung Parliament leads to the removal of both leaders and other desireable outcomes like stopping Brexit.
It is a slim hope but I'll vote for it anyway.
You’re as foolish as the Leave voters who didn’t really want Leave, but voted for it just to give the government a kicking, then hated what they’d done when they found out.
If enough people think as myopically as you - ‘Oh Corbyn can’t win, I’m save to vote against the Toroes’, then of course Corbyn can win. And will win.
Comments
weak sauce.
*Mirror number.
Might work but it's pretty obvious.
This is entirely meaningless, as nigh on 99% of these things would never happen.
To do the much vaunted Trade Deal with the USA, the NHS is a target from the US side
Nobody in the Conservatives can explain why we would reduce a trade surplus with the USA when there is absolutely no need to make such a deal.
Which is why domestic producers often oppose them.
https://youtu.be/6TvNt-fhsew
As to why we'd agree to it, presumably in order to get access to whatever US markets we want in return?
This great coup is backfiring big time on Corbyn
What have we done to deserve these two?
Trump is in the Whitehouse. He has said the NHS is on the table if we want a deal.
America First!
Election 2019: A choice between Dumb and Dumber.
Only Americans and naively dogmatic idealogues support trade deals with the USA
Especially with a USA led by an obsessive Make America Great protectionist.
https://youtu.be/-2ccgDhRsTY
https://order-order.com/2019/11/27/excl-read-full-corbyns-unredacted-trade-documents/
If you're not watching Sky then turn it on and see how pathetic it looks.
Fair enough though, if Boris had been destroyed the night before the Tories would be doing something similar.
Canada? They've already said there's no point, because we've conceded so much already. Australia? Not interested.
Who else is on Johnson's priority list? The Faeroes?
Corbyn just making shit up in a panic after yesterday....
wheels coming off already.
Their supporters will ignore the fact they're lieing toerags and just scream and scream and scream about the TORAH the TORAH, I mean the TORIES.
On top of that there is a separate capitalist question, which is what Corbynism is challenging. The current over 65s have done better from capitalism than any generation before and will likely do better than at least the next two or three generations that follow them. Of course they strongly prefer establishment to Corbynism.
The generations that are really struggling to get a house or build up capital are obviously going to be more open to smashing the system and see what happens.
It will be up to the next Tory government to restore the balance between the generations. If they do not then eventually in a capitalist democracy, where those without capital become the majority, we end up with Corbynism.
I don't think the pictued doc says anything interesting/non-obvious at all, but it certainly doesn't say anything about the NHS getting cheaper drugs from a US trade deal.
Ummm . . . sounds like good news to me?
So that’s it. Labour has an empty bench. The reserves have been thrown into battle. Let the Last Fortnight commence
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1199638318331379712
@AlastairJT
·
7m
Jeremy Corbyn's 'documents' refer to things dating up to June 2019.
Boris Johnson became Prime Minister in July 2019.
Even if they claimed what he thought they did (they don't, the NHS isn't for sale) - Corbyn is intentionally misleading the public.
Johnson canned those talks.
Suggests Labour now on low 30s. Tory share stubborn though.
Would you rather have an amoral leader along the lines of Nixon or Kennedy or an absolutist leader along the lines of Khrushchev or Mao?
Remember this is not theoretical. John McDonnell quoted admiringly from the writings of one of the 20th centuries' greatest mass murderers in Parliament only a few years ago.
Very silly from Labour.
My position is the same as it was in 2014, I'm open to the options, though at least the currency union with its Pollyanaesque presumption of good will from Westminster has been taken out and shot (ably helped by the current mob of reactionaries and ultra nationalists running the BJ project).
The giving hostage words to fortune point is crucial; if the current incumbent PM of the UK can openly lie about what Sturgeon said, just imagine the week in, week out crowing if she took a distinct position on the Euro. Apart from anything else Sturgeon cannot speak for the EU, and they're not going to speak out on the subject.
Miss Vance, that sounds wretched, not redacting the names of civil servants who are just doing their jobs.
It appears I was right not that I expect any of the aforesaid PB Tories to admit it.
BTW the rumour I posted about the u redacted NHS sell off were also correct to my surprise will have to believe the source in future.
Perhaps it is time to admit many of us, myself definitely included, dont put enough time into civic society.
Jeremy Corbyn repeats to @PickardJE no income tax or national insurance rises for those earning under £80k.
But last night said Marriage Allowance - a tax break for those earning under £80k - would go.
Watch by the end of the day.
Nice try though.
The best hope for someone like me is that a Hung Parliament leads to the removal of both leaders and other desireable outcomes like stopping Brexit.
It is a slim hope but I'll vote for it anyway.
Would also be interested to see the breakdown of Other, to see where votes are shifting to SNP/Plaid.
"Liam Fox was at first meeting which was back in July 2017 - Most of the documents do not relate to medicines or the NHS and can't see in documents yet mentions of other ministers there" Laura K.
If enough people think as myopically as you - ‘Oh Corbyn can’t win, I’m save to vote against the Toroes’, then of course Corbyn can win. And will win.