Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review 2017 – how the parties have performed

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited December 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review 2017 – how the parties have performed

To describe 2017 as a year of two halves would be absolutely correct, as the general election held on June 8th marked a distinct dividing line not only at Westminster (between a Conservative majority of 12 and no majority) but also in local by-elections with the electoral pendulum swinging rapidly from one side to the other and so therefore it is best to look at the year before and after the general election

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • First?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    I will tell people what you say, Harry, but I fear they will still tell me local by-elections are boring.
  • Breaking news:

    Dr-FauxSuks mob ahead of some plastic 'Yorkshire' team (from Scotland). Early-days yet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    Thanks, Harry!
  • Great summary - thank you Mr Hayfield. Though I wouldn't call a 4% swing seismic.....

    FPT - if only HMRC would do more on tax dodging:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5234597/gary-lineker-and-david-beckham-lose-court-battle-claim-back-480million-tax/
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 7,948
    A year of two halves.

    With UKIP collapse and a quiet LD recovery.
  • Each week, local government contests seem to throw up unusual results. However, with the larger amount of data that a calendar year brings and the great work Harry puts in to analysing the data, it seems that local by-elections are a fair indication of what's going on.

    In that, I include this year's county council elections which is in my view the pivot point of the year.

    I recall mentioning to a local Labour bigwig at my county council election count that John Claude Juncker was Theresa May's greatest ally. It was his interfering comments in the county council election polling week, played on effectively by Mrs May, that had driven Conservatives out to vote.

    I said to the Labour bigwig that he needed to get Labour HQ to get on the blower to Juncker and tell him to keep his mouth shut.

    Whether they did or not, JCJ became a trappist for the rest of the General Election campaign while Mrs May along with her advisers took all the wrong messages from the county council election results with all that flowed from that.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    A most interesting analysis - I suspect a more nuanced dig would reveal that the end of the year saw things become more settled and reflective of the current very close polling between the 2 parties. How the new year pans out depends largely on both the economy and Brexit. there are plenty [maybe too many] forecasts of plague and pestilence and if they do not materialise i suspect a Tory recovery could happen. Of course there are always events......
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957
    I'm told we are definitely hitting an economic catastrophe and that alone is reason to overrule democracy. Never mind the 5% unemployment and record stock prices.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-42512023
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 10,725
    To be fair the last couple of weeks, this week and the early part of next are not going to ones for a great call from the public for anything even faintly political.
  • There is speculation in the Tory party that he wants to become mayor of London, and Standard sources also believe that when he joined the paper he had the mayoralty "at the back of his mind". It would be a familiar tactic: Boris Johnson used his editorship of the Spectator to launch a successful City Hall bid in 2008. The conjecture is that Sadiq Khan will win again in 2020, after which Osborne could use six years in charge of London's paper to mount a challenge. And, after that, who's to say he won't springboard back to the national level again?

    Sceptics will argue that Osborne now has too much bad blood with former colleagues, that the editor of a newspaper won't ever make it to Number Ten. But in an era when a reality TV star can become president of the US, anything is possible. And if the political comeback doesn't work, he's always got his media career. There are even whispers that there's one other newspaper he would like to run, a paper where he reportedly once spent an evening after the 2010 election sitting on the editorial "backbench" alongside its editor, Paul Dacre. That's right: the Daily Mail.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/george-osborne-westminster-comeback
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,640
    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,640

    There is speculation in the Tory party that he wants to become mayor of London, and Standard sources also believe that when he joined the paper he had the mayoralty "at the back of his mind". It would be a familiar tactic: Boris Johnson used his editorship of the Spectator to launch a successful City Hall bid in 2008. The conjecture is that Sadiq Khan will win again in 2020, after which Osborne could use six years in charge of London's paper to mount a challenge. And, after that, who's to say he won't springboard back to the national level again?

    Sceptics will argue that Osborne now has too much bad blood with former colleagues, that the editor of a newspaper won't ever make it to Number Ten. But in an era when a reality TV star can become president of the US, anything is possible. And if the political comeback doesn't work, he's always got his media career. There are even whispers that there's one other newspaper he would like to run, a paper where he reportedly once spent an evening after the 2010 election sitting on the editorial "backbench" alongside its editor, Paul Dacre. That's right: the Daily Mail.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/george-osborne-westminster-comeback

    Running the Daily Mail and aspiring to be Mayor of London are utterly incompatible.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
  • RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548

    There is speculation in the Tory party that he wants to become mayor of London, and Standard sources also believe that when he joined the paper he had the mayoralty "at the back of his mind". It would be a familiar tactic: Boris Johnson used his editorship of the Spectator to launch a successful City Hall bid in 2008. The conjecture is that Sadiq Khan will win again in 2020, after which Osborne could use six years in charge of London's paper to mount a challenge. And, after that, who's to say he won't springboard back to the national level again?

    Sceptics will argue that Osborne now has too much bad blood with former colleagues, that the editor of a newspaper won't ever make it to Number Ten. But in an era when a reality TV star can become president of the US, anything is possible. And if the political comeback doesn't work, he's always got his media career. There are even whispers that there's one other newspaper he would like to run, a paper where he reportedly once spent an evening after the 2010 election sitting on the editorial "backbench" alongside its editor, Paul Dacre. That's right: the Daily Mail.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/george-osborne-westminster-comeback

    Apparently Osborne is totally addicted to the Sidebar of Shame.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    rcs1000 said:

    There is speculation in the Tory party that he wants to become mayor of London, and Standard sources also believe that when he joined the paper he had the mayoralty "at the back of his mind". It would be a familiar tactic: Boris Johnson used his editorship of the Spectator to launch a successful City Hall bid in 2008. The conjecture is that Sadiq Khan will win again in 2020, after which Osborne could use six years in charge of London's paper to mount a challenge. And, after that, who's to say he won't springboard back to the national level again?

    Sceptics will argue that Osborne now has too much bad blood with former colleagues, that the editor of a newspaper won't ever make it to Number Ten. But in an era when a reality TV star can become president of the US, anything is possible. And if the political comeback doesn't work, he's always got his media career. There are even whispers that there's one other newspaper he would like to run, a paper where he reportedly once spent an evening after the 2010 election sitting on the editorial "backbench" alongside its editor, Paul Dacre. That's right: the Daily Mail.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/george-osborne-westminster-comeback

    Apparently Osborne is totally addicted to the Sidebar of Shame.
    Who isn't? :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248
    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248
    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    Remainers - 33%
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    This polling is a helpful reminder that most Remainers are not the spiteful types that think anyone that disagrees with them is a racist yokel.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,716

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,630
    The key thing that has been clear in local by elections both before and after the general election is the collapse in voteshare of UKIP after the Brexit vote to the benefit of the main 3 parties.

    In seat terms though it is interesting that the biggest gains from both the Tories and UKIP have been by the LDs rather than UKIP taking the year as a whole and it will be interesting to see if that continues next year especially as the LDs have more scope for growth in London and are leading the Opposition to local plans.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,640
    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    If the last two years are any indication, not looking likely makes it a sure bet....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548
    Elliot said:

    I'm told we are definitely hitting an economic catastrophe and that alone is reason to overrule democracy. Never mind the 5% unemployment and record stock prices.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-42512023
    How good a predictor of future economic performance are stock prices? (I ask in all seriousness.)

    If you did a scatter chart, with last twelve month share price performances on one axis, and forward three year economic growth on the other, I suspect you'd see (at best) zero correlation, and it's quite possible you'd see a negative one. Stock prices (and unemployment too) tend to be lagging indicators. So, Iceland, Ireland, Spain, Greece, the UK and the US in 2007 would have been in rude health on these measures.

    The big issue the UK has as an economy is that we've gone from major net creditors to the world (i.e., they owed us money), to being debtors.

    This has happened because we've run a treble deficit: our government has spent more than it's brought in; the people spend more than they earn; and we import more from abroad than we export.

    None of these things have anything at all do with Brexit.

    Countries who have had pretty awful economic slowdowns typically have two or three of those deficits. Greece, Spain and Ireland in 2007/8 ran treble deficits. (Although at least Spain and Ireland had very low government debt-to-GDP, which we do not.)

    We do have the distinct advantage of not being in the Euro. We also have better demographics than, for example, Italy.

    But the future economic indicators for the UK are flashing at least yellow, and possibly red. Worse, politicians are so determined to avoid any risk of a Brexit slowdown that they are allowing inbalances to grow. This means that when the inevitable recession comes, it will likely be extremely painful.
  • Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957
    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Even if support among Remainers doubled, you would still only have 40% of the population, when realistically you need 65%+ for politicians to be willing to overturn the result, or even run another referendum. Cabinet ministers or unelected Lords blocking it would likely be seen badly by the public, and I doubt FTA negotiation details are the sort of thing that preoccupy the British public too much.

    The bump in Brexit support after the interim deal actually suggests there is a bigger latent majority for Brexit, which is held down by them thinking the negotiations are being screwed up.
  • Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    This polling is a helpful reminder that most Remainers are not the spiteful types that think anyone that disagrees with them is a racist yokel.
    The sneering metropolitan elite - which includes Adonis: speaking on behalf of the 16%. But as in their minds, they're the only ones who count, 16 is greater than 84.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548
    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    The only thing that would cause a tipping point would be if a large number of people felt their prosperity was newly imperilled by Brexit.

    Is that possible? Yes.

    Is that - despite all my negativity about the British economy - likely? No.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957
    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    I'm told we are definitely hitting an economic catastrophe and that alone is reason to overrule democracy. Never mind the 5% unemployment and record stock prices.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-42512023
    How good a predictor of future economic performance are stock prices? (I ask in all seriousness.)

    But the future economic indicators for the UK are flashing at least yellow, and possibly red. Worse, politicians are so determined to avoid any risk of a Brexit slowdown that they are allowing inbalances to grow. This means that when the inevitable recession comes, it will likely be extremely painful.
    It was my understanding that both corporate debt and household debt had come down as a share of GDP since 2007. I understand government debt has climbed, but the growth has reduced and is about to turn negative (in GDP terms).

    Isn't it also the case that a lot of this is the flip side of foreigners wanting to invest in the UK?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,716

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    This polling is a helpful reminder that most Remainers are not the spiteful types that think anyone that disagrees with them is a racist yokel.
    The sneering metropolitan elite - which includes Adonis: speaking on behalf of the 16%. But as in their minds, they're the only ones who count, 16 is greater than 84.
    I was somewhat astonished at the previous thread of some Londoners sneering at the idea of community. I also dislike the sneering at Londoners as being a cesspit. Our national community has clearly been coming apart for a long time before Brexit and we need a focus on restitching it for many years to come.
  • Once the information Mr. Papadopoulos had disclosed to the Australian diplomat reached the F.B.I., the bureau opened an investigation that became one of its most closely guarded secrets. Senior agents did not discuss it at the daily morning briefing, a classified setting where officials normally speak freely about highly sensitive operations.

    Besides the information from the Australians, the investigation was also propelled by intelligence from other friendly governments, including the British and Dutch.


    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 957
    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    This polling is a helpful reminder that most Remainers are not the spiteful types that think anyone that disagrees with them is a racist yokel.
    Is there a prize for guessing who you might mean?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548
    edited December 2017
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    I'm told we are definitely hitting an economic catastrophe and that alone is reason to overrule democracy. Never mind the 5% unemployment and record stock prices.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-42512023
    How good a predictor of future economic performance are stock prices? (I ask in all seriousness.)

    But the future economic indicators for the UK are flashing at least yellow, and possibly red. Worse, politicians are so determined to avoid any risk of a Brexit slowdown that they are allowing inbalances to grow. This means that when the inevitable recession comes, it will likely be extremely painful.
    It was my understanding that both corporate debt and household debt had come down as a share of GDP since 2007. I understand government debt has climbed, but the growth has reduced and is about to turn negative (in GDP terms).

    Isn't it also the case that a lot of this is the flip side of foreigners wanting to invest in the UK?
    Corporate debt has come down meaningfully.

    But net household indebtedness, despite improving significantly between 2010 and 2014, has not. Between the end of Q2 2014 (it's post crisis low) and Q2 2017 (the latest numbers we have available), unsecured personal debt has increased 25%. As a percentage of income, we're now only just below the levels of 2007.

    I think the OECD gross savings rate data makes the point that we are spending above our means: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNS.ICTR.ZS?year_high_desc=true

    The good news is we're ahead of Greece (just). But we're miles behind everyone else, and our rate has continued to fall and to fall and to fall.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    The only way an intervention by Macron could stop Brexit would be a massive move on FOM and even then I suspect the die is now cast.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
    Except the UK will veto any big pushes for integration, so it suits his interests not to do anything to stop Brexit.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,778
    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll. Shame on you :smiley:
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 27,653
    edited December 2017

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,371
    edited December 2017
    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll. Shame on you :smiley:
    Surprised No percentage was so high.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,419
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
    Until it fell disastrously apart, with the departure of the second largest contributor to the whole shebang.....
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Lol - there's nothing like a good poll and that is nothing like a good poll.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812

    IanB2 said:

    Mr Pedley of this Parish:

    twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/947122561002983425

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    twitter.com/lordashcroft/status/946788932750102528
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/947154054635053056
    Will be interested to see his lordship's real poll....
  • RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll. Shame on you :smiley:
    I think Mr Glenn mistakes Twitter for the real world....a bit like Lord Adonis......
  • RobD said:

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
    Except the UK will veto any big pushes for integration, so it suits his interests not to do anything to stop Brexit.
    And then there's his electorate.....

  • RobD said:

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
    Except the UK will veto any big pushes for integration, so it suits his interests not to do anything to stop Brexit.
    And then there's his electorate.....

    Prefer Britain to stay in EU (net):

    Denmark: +47
    Sweden: +41
    Germany: +34
    Finland: +31
    France: +1
  • Sadly I may have spannahed DrFuaxSuks team: Sorry. Some good-news from the Al-Beeb sport archives though: The Belgae are finally being shown the red-card! :)
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,723
    Elliot said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Even if support among Remainers doubled, you would still only have 40% of the population, when realistically you need 65%+ for politicians to be willing to overturn the result, or even run another referendum. Cabinet ministers or unelected Lords blocking it would likely be seen badly by the public, and I doubt FTA negotiation details are the sort of thing that preoccupy the British public too much.

    The bump in Brexit support after the interim deal actually suggests there is a bigger latent majority for Brexit, which is held down by them thinking the negotiations are being screwed up.
    This is a typical example of how a lot of people think about this subject. It is logical, well based on evidence and seems to make sense. Why would a government risk halting or reversing Brexit given how well supported it is, and even if support were to drop a bit more?

    The trouble is that EU membership isn't a trivial side issue. Just about any national policy you care to mention is affected one way or another by what is happening elsewhere on the continent we live on. Giving up our influence might not sound too drastic in the abstract. When it gets down to specific cases it will look a lot less sensible.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited December 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    There is speculation in the Tory party that he wants to become mayor of London, and Standard sources also believe that when he joined the paper he had the mayoralty "at the back of his mind". It would be a familiar tactic: Boris Johnson used his editorship of the Spectator to launch a successful City Hall bid in 2008. The conjecture is that Sadiq Khan will win again in 2020, after which Osborne could use six years in charge of London's paper to mount a challenge. And, after that, who's to say he won't springboard back to the national level again?

    Sceptics will argue that Osborne now has too much bad blood with former colleagues, that the editor of a newspaper won't ever make it to Number Ten. But in an era when a reality TV star can become president of the US, anything is possible. And if the political comeback doesn't work, he's always got his media career. There are even whispers that there's one other newspaper he would like to run, a paper where he reportedly once spent an evening after the 2010 election sitting on the editorial "backbench" alongside its editor, Paul Dacre. That's right: the Daily Mail.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/george-osborne-westminster-comeback

    Apparently Osborne is totally addicted to the Sidebar of Shame.
    He always was a total [INAPPROPRIATE WORD FOR SEXUAL ACTS OF A SOLO NATURE].
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,343

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    Top trolling from Ashcroft, and proof if it were needed that Twitter is an echo chamber of political opinion.
  • On Topic. Local Byelections.
    For The Libdems it was a Year of 3 halves :
    a slow rise to around 20% in April
    a collapse to 8% in early July
    & a rapid rise to maybe 21% now.
    I make no predictions as to what happens next.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited December 2017

    On Topic. Local Byelections.
    For The Libdems it was a Year of 3 halves :
    a slow rise to around 20% in April
    a collapse to 8% in early July
    & a rapid rise to maybe 21% now.
    I make no predictions as to what happens next.

    If 2017 and indeed 2016 should have taught us anything, it is that only a fool makes predictions.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    Has the good lord gone a bit silly? How the hell is anything about such a twitter poll 'notable'?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    The only thing that would cause a tipping point would be if a large number of people felt their prosperity was newly imperilled by Brexit.

    Is that possible? Yes.

    Is that - despite all my negativity about the British economy - likely? No.
    Indeed - all outcomes are possible, without enough political will on many sides (and which would require popular will to give them them political will) but it it a convoluted and complicated path to get there, quite frankly.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
  • It seems that Adonis accepts that Brexit cannot be stopped or changed, and is preparing the ground for the longer struggle. Far from being a call to arms against Brexit, it could be that Adonis’s resignation marks the moment the ultra-Remainers admit defeat in this war and start to prepare to fight the next one.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/andrew-adonis-theresa-may-eu-resignation-rejoin-brexit-a8134671.html
  • kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    Has the good lord gone a bit silly? How the hell is anything about such a twitter poll 'notable'?
    I suspect the good lord has given Twitter 'enough rope'.....
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,211
    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
  • RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
  • RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll. Shame on you :smiley:
    Hook, line and sinker there from Mr Glenn :)
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,211
    edited December 2017

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
  • RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.
    not sure it changes the point though - it is still a minority view
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,640
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
    As are the LibDems.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
    As are the LibDems.
    If the public does turn against, the LDs deserve to be the ones who benefit, since they have been pretty clear where they stand (not entirely, there was confusion about remain/rejoin post referendum). But other factors in who benefits most in a two party system will always count against them there.

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
    It'll work itself out over time, I'm not worried.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 2,805
    Ukip's fave race-war theorist happy that UK is still Brexiting. Yes, but he'll get no part in making what happens after it.
  • kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
    As are the LibDems.
    If the public does turn against, the LDs deserve to be the ones who benefit, since they have been pretty clear where they stand (not entirely, there was confusion about remain/rejoin post referendum). But other factors in who benefits most in a two party system will always count against them there.

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
    It'll work itself out over time, I'm not worried.
    Unless people's views change as they get older......
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,640

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
    As are the LibDems.
    If the public does turn against, the LDs deserve to be the ones who benefit, since they have been pretty clear where they stand (not entirely, there was confusion about remain/rejoin post referendum). But other factors in who benefits most in a two party system will always count against them there.

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
    It'll work itself out over time, I'm not worried.
    Unless people's views change as they get older......
    Unless unless the housing market remains closed to them despite advancing age...
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited December 2017

    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited December 2017

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
    I accidentally clicked on your site (linked to on the right);

    http://www.nickpalmer.org.uk/

    "This Account Has Been Suspended.
    Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible."
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,343
    edited December 2017
    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?

    Government needs people who can offer solutions to problems, any idiot can point out the problems themselves.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,131
    ydoethur said:

    On Topic. Local Byelections.
    For The Libdems it was a Year of 3 halves :
    a slow rise to around 20% in April
    a collapse to 8% in early July
    & a rapid rise to maybe 21% now.
    I make no predictions as to what happens next.

    If 2017 and indeed 2016 should have taught us anything, it is that only a fool makes predictions.
    It's risky to make predictions, especially about the future
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,796
    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    Wow.

    Sir, I salute the most awesome post in the history of trolling.

    That's even better than my suggestion that Labour should bring back Blair.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548
    edited December 2017
    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited December 2017
    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Were you hibernating between ~April & ~June this year?!

    https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto

    Page 65/66: "An ageing society" ... was a good start.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,131
    edited December 2017
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    Has the good lord gone a bit silly? How the hell is anything about such a twitter poll 'notable'?
    The poll's not notable. The fact that Remainers took it seriously and tried hard to influence the result is interesting
  • jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 500
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Good to see you have mellowed a bit,pb is a civilising influence.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Maybe politicians should have courage of their convictions and try leading debates rather than merely responding to them. If nothing else, if they actually want to go down that path, relying on the public to get to that point without such leadership is very risky.
    As are the LibDems.
    If the public does turn against, the LDs deserve to be the ones who benefit, since they have been pretty clear where they stand (not entirely, there was confusion about remain/rejoin post referendum). But other factors in who benefits most in a two party system will always count against them there.

    RobD said:



    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/946463439437877248

    Some of those numbers are surprisingly low.
    I'm always suspicious of polls quoted to prove a point where the full question and range of answers isn't stated. I suspect here that there were four or more options, with "2nd referendum" being at one extreme.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/j689my8z0m/TheChallenge_Nov17_Results_w.pdf

    Helpfully 2nd vote / abandon Brexit entirely got about the same number of responses, so you can double the numbers if you want a full picture of "no Brexit"
    Huh. Thought so.

    Edit: some of the other results show a worryingly stark generational gap. Two nations, really.
    It'll work itself out over time, I'm not worried.
    Unless people's views change as they get older......
    Which is one way it will work out.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    Charles said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    Voodoo poll.

    Desperate, much?

    Has the good lord gone a bit silly? How the hell is anything about such a twitter poll 'notable'?
    The poll's not notable. The fact that Remainers took it seriously and tried hard to influence the result is interesting
    I disagree, there has already been ample evidence of how movements on twitter are not significant, that some group tried hard to influence something on it doesn't strike me as notable anymore than the poll itself.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,343
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
  • jayfdee said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Good to see you have mellowed a bit,pb is a civilising influence.
    Malcolm is by far one of the most interesting posters on PB. It takes a very long time studying his comments to work out what his political position is* and I get the impression it is a very long way from what most people seem to think.

    *I don't claim to have succeeded yet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,812
    edited December 2017

    jayfdee said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Good to see you have mellowed a bit,pb is a civilising influence.
    Malcolm is by far one of the most interesting posters on PB. It takes a very long time studying his comments to work out what his political position is* and I get the impression it is a very long way from what most people seem to think.

    *I don't claim to have succeeded yet.
    Malc's a true blue PB Tory. :D
  • jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 500

    jayfdee said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Good to see you have mellowed a bit,pb is a civilising influence.
    Malcolm is by far one of the most interesting posters on PB. It takes a very long time studying his comments to work out what his political position is* and I get the impression it is a very long way from what most people seem to think.

    *I don't claim to have succeeded yet.
    Well he definitely hates "Troughers, " and most Politicians who he regards as Troghers, SNP excused.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,343
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Very good Malcolm. Happy New Year to you :)
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 998

    jayfdee said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    Shake the money tree, free money for millennials. People who have worked all their lives should have their money confiscated and have it given to whinging whining millennial clowns who would not know a days hard work if it slapped them on the face, poor diddums they deserve it. Lazy gits want to get out and start grafting , earn their keep rather than whinge about people who have spent 50 years toiling to get where they are.
    Good to see you have mellowed a bit,pb is a civilising influence.
    Malcolm is by far one of the most interesting posters on PB. It takes a very long time studying his comments to work out what his political position is* and I get the impression it is a very long way from what most people seem to think.

    *I don't claim to have succeeded yet.
    Far right nationalist would be my guess... - natural instincts are conservative, but he hates Conservatives.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    But local elections are almost totally irrelevant to national politics, and have no bearing whatsoever on general elections.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 998
    stevef said:

    But local elections are almost totally irrelevant to national politics, and have no bearing whatsoever on general elections.

    Local politics is a significant state subsidy of political parties - lots of busy bodies paid a few K to spend their spare time campaigning with a couple of hours a year pointing at pot holes on the side.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,419

    RobD said:

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Labour will call for one, once the public wants one. And not before.
    But will the public want one? That doesn’t look likely.
    I think a lot of Remainers (and sorry Leavers) think Brexit is now inevitable and are resigned to it. "Let's move on" or "Let's go for a soft Brexit". And that, of course, is how passionate Leavers want Brexit to seem - inevitable.

    But if it ceases to seem inevitable for any reason, there will be a tipping point and sentiment could quickly change. Catalysts could be a big fallout in the Cabinet, or a major blockage by the HoL, or an intervention by Macron (please stay), or serious FTA problems.

    Macron et al are not minded to ask us to stay. Quite frankly the UK leaving removes a headache for Federalists in that we would always be unhappy with further integration.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/30/macron-2018-brexit-french-president-europe-leaving-eu?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=258616&subid=12968901&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    How much of this is actually based on what he will do, as opposed to what the author hopes he will do? Macron wants to get on with more integration, getting the UK out makes that a lot easier.
    The usual French position is to keep the British in, but without influence. I don't see Macron deviating from that. The two tier system whereby France and Germany control the inner ring, and the UK and others in the outer ring gets sucked in later worked quite well.
    Except the UK will veto any big pushes for integration, so it suits his interests not to do anything to stop Brexit.
    And then there's his electorate.....

    Prefer Britain to stay in EU (net):

    Denmark: +47
    Sweden: +41
    Germany: +34
    Finland: +31
    France: +1
    Did someone say Die Hard?

    Is it Christmas again already?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,548
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
    It's a very good point: falling house prices means lower mortgage availability, and higher net interest margins.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,521
    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    I'm told we are definitely hitting an economic catastrophe and that alone is reason to overrule democracy. Never mind the 5% unemployment and record stock prices.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-42512023
    How good a predictor of future economic performance are stock prices? (I ask in all seriousness.)

    But the future economic indicators for the UK are flashing at least yellow, and possibly red. Worse, politicians are so determined to avoid any risk of a Brexit slowdown that they are allowing inbalances to grow. This means that when the inevitable recession comes, it will likely be extremely painful.
    It was my understanding that both corporate debt and household debt had come down as a share of GDP since 2007. I understand government debt has climbed, but the growth has reduced and is about to turn negative (in GDP terms).

    Isn't it also the case that a lot of this is the flip side of foreigners wanting to invest in the UK?
    Corporate debt has come down meaningfully.

    But net household indebtedness, despite improving significantly between 2010 and 2014, has not. Between the end of Q2 2014 (it's post crisis low) and Q2 2017 (the latest numbers we have available), unsecured personal debt has increased 25%. As a percentage of income, we're now only just below the levels of 2007.

    I think the OECD gross savings rate data makes the point that we are spending above our means: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNS.ICTR.ZS?year_high_desc=true

    The good news is we're ahead of Greece (just). But we're miles behind everyone else, and our rate has continued to fall and to fall and to fall.
    One reason I was so angry with the coalition. The total obsession (for two or three years) with the budget deficit but nothing on the real mess in the British economy - the housing market.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,343
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
    It's a very good point: falling house prices means lower mortgage availability, and higher net interest margins.
    I always wonder if those wishing house prices to fall have factored in mortgage offers being 80% LTV rather than 95%. For a first time buyer, the issues around finance are much more important than issues around the actual price of the property.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 252
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
    I suspect that the gradual decrease in private landlords following the recent tax changes and government announcements may significantly effect prices in certain areas.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,521
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
    It's a very good point: falling house prices means lower mortgage availability, and higher net interest margins.
    I always wonder if those wishing house prices to fall have factored in mortgage offers being 80% LTV rather than 95%. For a first time buyer, the issues around finance are much more important than issues around the actual price of the property.
    Isn't that attitude typical of what is wrong. That what really matters is whether you are able to buy not how much debt you are taking on?
  • We've had to wait for the penultimate day of the year to see PB's best graphs of 2017. Even better than the Venn Diagram featuring Santa Claus and the Spanish Inquisition.

    My local election prediction for 2018 is that the Kippers will lose every seat they are defending in May, just like last time.
  • Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pong said:


    Spot on.

    The tories need to apologize to this chap and beg him to come back on board.

    What is he suggesting we do about it?
    The big, unacknowledged, problem is that we're addicted to the Bank of Bricks and Mortar.

    Let's say we increase supply through more building, lower demand by cutting immigration, and therefore reduce the price of housing by 30%. This makes it much easier for millennials to end up home owners, which is good.

    But it also results in dramatically lower labour mobility, as people with negative equity can no longer move house. It also means that people up their savings rate to compensate for no longer having as much equity in their home. This would result in a significant reduction in the level of aggregate demand, likely tipping the economy into recession.

    Gordon Brown and George Osborne made a terrible mess of the UK economy. It will likely take another decade, and a Chancellor of the caliber of Howe, Lawson or Clarke, to turn it back around.
    Agree entirely. The other issue is that demand for housing is closely correlated with supply and demand of mortgage finance. As soon as house prices start to fall banks will want higher deposits which will cause further price falls as demand dries up. It could take a fair few years for that situation to normalise, during and after which time, as you say, there will be huge problems of negative equity - as was seen in the early 1990s.
    It's a very good point: falling house prices means lower mortgage availability, and higher net interest margins.
    I always wonder if those wishing house prices to fall have factored in mortgage offers being 80% LTV rather than 95%. For a first time buyer, the issues around finance are much more important than issues around the actual price of the property.
    Isn't that attitude typical of what is wrong. That what really matters is whether you are able to buy not how much debt you are taking on?
    No. It depends upon both how much you can buy and how much you can pay.

    I'd rather buy a house for say 200k at 3% interest than 100k at 15% interest. The money I'm losing is the interest.
This discussion has been closed.