FT General Election Poll 2019

[Alf Bentley]

9 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

 

Mansfield voted 70.9% in favour of Leave. Kensington 68.7% in favour of Remain. There's only Canterbury out of those three that is somewhat of an anomaly. There's certainly a change in the class system and those gaps were certainly dwindling even prior to Brexit, but I think it's fair to say that Brexit is still massive in terms of having an effect on that swing. 

 

 

You got me curious, as I originate from East Kent and still have a nephew and a good mate down there.....

 

Canterbury constituency (as opposed to council area) seems to have voted 53% Remain: https://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/news/did-canterbury-vote-to-leave-or-remain-in-the-eu-184610/

 

I'd add:

- It now has 2 universities in what is quite a small town ("city") so the high youth population & big youth vote last time will be a big part of the surprise result

- The constituency also includes Whitstable, which has seen a big influx of people, including commuters, moving out from London....possibly also more liberally-inclined than the previous electorate.

[Guest MattP]

3 hours ago, David Guiza said:

There's certainly somewhat of a change, but i'm not sure the class values have changed on the whole. The 2017 election was still dominated by Brexit, and people voting Tory to push through a majority Government and 'get Brexit done' or opposition parties to prevent/restrict Brexit. 

 

Mansfield voted 70.9% in favour of Leave. Kensington 68.7% in favour of Remain. There's only Canterbury out of those three that is somewhat of an anomaly. There's certainly a change in the class system and those gaps were certainly dwindling even prior to Brexit, but I think it's fair to say that Brexit is still massive in terms of having an effect on that swing. 

There are also other contributing factors like The Sun turning their back on Labour and the Daily Mail being pro-Tory/Brexit. Out of the 'working class' papers, there's only really the Mirror that offers anything pro-Labour. Most people I work with, and have worked with in the past, look at Mail Online on a daily basis and that is going to have an effect whether it be conscious or not. 

 

I will say that the Tories have done a fantastic job of making Labour out to be the 'elite' and selling Boris as a 'bloke', and if any party can convince the working class to admire people like Jacob Rees-Mogg they've done a good job.  

There are people almost as posh as JRM on the Labour front bench these days, just listen to Barry Gardiner.

 

I think the influence of newspapers is really overplayed as well in this day and age - the circulation of the Sun is massively down on what is one and if you are a Mail reader I doubt you'll be a Labour voter anyway.

 

I think the more we go on, culture, morals and traditions will dictate more how we vote than class or economics. 

 

I said it at the time but the 2016 referendum was a massive realisation for me that my politics are far more in line with John Mann and Caroline Flint than David Cameron and George Osborne - I cringe now when I see Michael Heseltine and David Mellor on TV calling for Brexit to be stopped, had I been old enough I would have been voting for these europhiles as well.

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

There are people almost as posh as JRM on the Labour front bench these days, just listen to Barry Gardiner.

 

I think the influence of newspapers is really overplayed as well in this day and age - the circulation of the Sun is massively down on what is one and if you are a Mail reader I doubt you'll be a Labour voter anyway.

 

I think the more we go on, culture, morals and traditions will dictate more how we vote than class or economics. 

 

I said it at the time but the 2016 referendum was a massive realisation for me that my politics are far more in line with John Mann and Caroline Flint than David Cameron and George Osborne - I cringe now when I see Michael Heseltine and David Mellor on TV calling for Brexit to be stopped, had I been old enough I would have been voting for these europhiles as well.

I do agree with you to an extent, but these papers also have large online readerships who don't necessarily access their sites for political reasons but can end up being influenced by what they see there. Obviously the same applies to people who may use the Mirror online for sports/celeb/general news stories too.

[HappyHamza]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

I don't think it is at all anymore.

 

Let's not forget at the last election the Tories won Mansfield and Labour won Kensington and Canterbury.

 

This has been closing for years anyway (remember Thornberry and her mocking of the St George's flag under Militand) Brexit just seems to have sped it up. 

I think brexit is the reason so many are voting Tory, coupled with the decades long and highly successful campaign by the media to convince everybody that public spending is bad. Corbyn was never going to be able to fight the incessant smear campaign.  It was really rather amazing what he managed last time round in the face of the media attacks.

 

But the party has been really stupid in not taking the chance to change leader. Had Keir Starmar been leading Labour and brexit not been an issue I can't see much beyond a labour landslide. 

 

Nobody is able to defend the last 9 years of austerity, the lack of tory ideas for our country going forward or the embarrassing liar that our prime minister is. Most tory voters appear to recognise these flaws tbf. Everybody is talking about voting for the least worst option atm.

[Guest MattP]

"The Andrew Neil Interviews" start tonight - 7.30 BBC1.

 

This is where you really get to see politicians squirm, starts with Sturgeon.

[David Guiza]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

You got me curious, as I originate from East Kent and still have a nephew and a good mate down there.....

 

Canterbury constituency (as opposed to council area) seems to have voted 53% Remain: https://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/news/did-canterbury-vote-to-leave-or-remain-in-the-eu-184610/

 

I'd add:

- It now has 2 universities in what is quite a small town ("city") so the high youth population & big youth vote last time will be a big part of the surprise result

- The constituency also includes Whitstable, which has seen a big influx of people, including commuters, moving out from London....possibly also more liberally-inclined than the previous electorate.

I took my first trip there the other week. I was due to be going on the Eurotunnel but they were experiencing delays of 5 hours so I gave up (assume it was Brexit prep ) and took a day out to Canterbury instead; lovely part of the country. 

 

Universities must certainly make a big difference, as they do in other towns/cities too. I know it did when we lived in Warwickshire, it was only really through Coventry and Warwick students who lived in Leamington/Kenilworth that anything but a Tory majority was possible. Though, in the case of the Uni of Warwick, quite a few of the students would have been voting Tory too.

 

I do find the London and Greater London change interesting, but London is such a complex and standalone place that it's hard to gauge too much. 

 

29 minutes ago, MattP said:

There are people almost as posh as JRM on the Labour front bench these days, just listen to Barry Gardiner.

 

I think the influence of newspapers is really overplayed as well in this day and age - the circulation of the Sun is massively down on what is one and if you are a Mail reader I doubt you'll be a Labour voter anyway.

 

I think the more we go on, culture, morals and traditions will dictate more how we vote than class or economics. 

 

I said it at the time but the 2016 referendum was a massive realisation for me that my politics are far more in line with John Mann and Caroline Flint than David Cameron and George Osborne - I cringe now when I see Michael Heseltine and David Mellor on TV calling for Brexit to be stopped, had I been old enough I would have been voting for these europhiles as well.

Certainly so, but none of them quite have the full JRM package of posh. Speaking of which, I'm glad to see he's been found alive and well after going missing from the Tory campaign for a while. Almost like they're hiding him from the public (hardly a first I know).

 

You say that, but from first hand my Dad certainly used to be a Labour voter and was brought up in a strong working class Labour household but I would put money on him voting Tory in the past few years. Since retiring and having more time on his hands, he's become far more of a DM reader and there's definitely been a marked change in his opinion on certain subjects - like the lovely Meghan for example. Now of course that's one solitary subjective example, and I'm sure there's a lot more to it than a change in newspaper, but it certainly contributes. As VB alluded too also, there are countless people who wouldn't consider themselves avid Mail readers, but head to the site on an almost daily basis through boredom on lunch periods etc. Yes, the same can be said for other sites, but there's no denying that the right have a stronghold on British media at the current time. Controlling the media is so important, even in these days of a dying print media world. Particularly when papers like the Guardian are hardly advocates of the opposition leader.

 

I find class really interesting, particularly as I'm not entirely sure where I fall on the class spectrum, I've got one parent comes from a very affluent background, and the other a very working class, whilst I grew up somewhere in the middle. I'm basically a Waitrose food loving, trainee Lawyer with a mild passion for Cricket on the one hand, and a fairly strong socialist, weekly Tesco shopper and die hard Football fan on the other.  

 

Thanks to University I have got friends from all different sorts of backgrounds, and I do think that is one of the best parts of going to University from a social perspective. Sure you could argue that it isn't necessarily a representative example of society because they are all students and of a certain age bracket, but there aren't many other experiences in life where you get to live, discuss, debate etc in such close proximity to such varied cultures, classes, religions etc on a daily basis for 3 years. Thanks to Uni I have good friends ranging from European migrants now living in the UK to some from the pretty poor areas in Merseyside and affluent areas of Kent/Surrey etc and consequently see/hear their views on issues on a regular basis since then too. 

 

I think you're right in that the lines are becoming blurred, but I think class is still a defining characteristic in politics and will perhaps grow depending on what happens with Brexit. There are still people in this country that wouldn't be seen dead voting Tory, or Labour, because of their views that stem from the class system - there are still many that yearn for a meritocracy and consider Tories to be a blockage to that ever happening, and there are still many who resent Thatcher so much that they wouldn't ever say the name etc. Similarly there are still many who wouldn't vote Labour because their ancestors never did and they certainly aren't going to change that history etc. 

 

Either way, it will be interesting (and hopefully not depressing) to see how Brexit further changes the landscape as it unfolds, if it ever does unfold. Will these working class towns and cities be as willing to vote Tory if it does turn out to be an unmitigated disaster? Will those who have defected from Labour ever come back if Brexit is a success and the Labour party show no signs of change? Will a smaller party, like the Greens, grow in prominence as society changes?

 

It's certainly interesting how ones political inspiration changes as you grow older/have realisations. I still don't have any one singular person who I think represents close to 100% of where I stand, but I'm sure that will change in time. 

 

As an aside, I cannot see David Mellor's name without thinking of an old podcast series I used to listen to that broadcasted from the same building as him. There was fairly comments from the hosts about David flouncing into Pret A Manger and throwing his weight around, whilst making remarks to women that perhaps belong a few decades back plus THAT hair. 

 

 

 

[EnderbyFox]

 

[Guest MattP]

35 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

 

This is "Tory wobble" week - where the polling started to close up last time.

[FerrisBueller]

https://twitter.com/pickardje/status/1198998239128805377?s=21

 

This is gold (ashamed to be sharing anything by the Daily Mail)

[Jimothy]

Jesus Christ, thank God shes stepping down. Imagine if this was Abbott. 

 

 

[StanSP]

52 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Jesus Christ, thank God shes stepping down. Imagine if this was Abbott. 

 

 

Such weird logic.

 

The company I work for employs 400 people.

If they say they want to increase it by 200, that doesn't include the employees that are already there . It's 200 NEW employees.

 

She's off her head. You're right, if Abbott said this it'd be all over the news and social media.

[Strokes]

13 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Such weird logic.

 

The company I work for employs 400 people.

If they say they want to increase it by 200, that doesn't include the employees that are already there . It's 200 NEW employees.

 

She's off her head. You're right, if Abbott said this it'd be all over the news and social media.

If the tories employed 50,000 new nurses but made 60,000 current redundant. Would you let them walk around saying they’d employed 50,000 new nurses?

[Guest MattP]

Good to see Sturgeon here finally being asked some tough questions here.

 

She genuinely thinks she'll be able to join the EU with the pound after we've left

[The Guvnor]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

Good to see Sturgeon here finally being asked some tough questions here.

 

She genuinely thinks she'll be able to join the EU with the pound after we've left

There is no hiding place with Andrew Neil 

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

There is no hiding place with Andrew Neil 

Nope. So meticulous, loved the stuff about her making her health target the law. Boris not the only leader in the UK to act unlawfully. 

 

Corbyn tomorrow.

[Jimothy]

19 minutes ago, Strokes said:

If the tories employed 50,000 new nurses but made 60,000 current redundant. Would you let them walk around saying they’d employed 50,000 new nurses?

They didn't say new, they said more. If we currently have 50,000 nurse, they are promising we will have 100,000, but really we'll only have 81,000.

[Strokes]

Just now, Facecloth said:

They didn't say new, they said more. If we currently have 50,000 nurse, they are promising we will have 100,000, but really we'll only have 81,000.

More is right though.

If the target is to have staff levels at 500,000 in 5 years (This is an example) and you have currently 475,000 but are predicted to lose 25,000 in 5 years. You need 50,000 more nurses. If you think you can stem the number leaving, and still achieve the same number it’s still 50,000 more nurses really.

[Jimothy]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

More is right though.

If the target is to have staff levels at 500,000 in 5 years (This is an example) and you have currently 475,000 but are predicted to lose 25,000 in 5 years. You need 50,000 more nurses. If you think you can stem the number leaving, and still achieve the same number it’s still 50,000 more nurses really.

No, no it's not. You are looking to employ 25,000 more and retain 25,000. Stating there will be 50,000 more because you think you can keep some you thought might lose is bullshit, lying and misleading. Only in British politics could 500,000 be 50,000 more then 475,000 and voters lap it up and believe it.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

No, no it's not. You are looking to employ 25,000 more and retain 25,000. Stating there will be 50,000 more because you think you can keep some you thought might lose is bullshit, lying and misleading. Only in British politics could 500,000 be 50,000 more then 475,000 and voters lap it up and believe it.

Retaining staff is cheaper than training new staff, stopping them leaving is an efficient way of keeping the numbers up. 
You can argue all you like over the details. If the NHS don’t lose staff they expected to lose. The numbers have increased from predictions.

[Jimothy]

5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Retaining staff is cheaper than training new staff, stopping them leaving is an efficient way of keeping the numbers up. 
You can argue all you like over the details. If the NHS don’t lose staff they expected to lose. The numbers have increased from predictions.

It's still not 50,000 more nurses ffs, no matter how you dress it up. Just admit they mislead, and move on.

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

It's still not 50,000 more nurses ffs, no matter how you dress it up. Just admit they mislead, and move on.

It’s is more.

[StanSP]

10 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Retaining staff is cheaper than training new staff, stopping them leaving is an efficient way of keeping the numbers up. 
You can argue all you like over the details. If the NHS don’t lose staff they expected to lose. The numbers have increased from predictions.

The statement made isn't to have 31,000 and retain 19,000. They've explicitly said 50,000 more nurses. To any normal person that means 50,000 on top of what you already have. 

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

The statement made isn't to have 31,000 and retain 19,000. They've explicitly said 50,000 more nurses. To any normal person that means 50,000 on top of what you already have. 

If they added 50,000 and just let the 19,000 leave the end figure would be the same. 
Only you would have 19,000 inexperienced staff, this is better if you ask me

 

[Jimothy]

Just now, Strokes said:

It’s is more.

It's not! Its retaining some and adding sone more. C'mon on mate your smarter than this you don't have to look stupid just to defend the tories.

 

The numbers will be forever changing. People will leave, they'll retire, they'll pass away, and yes if nobody joins between now and 6 months time we'd have less nurses. But if we want to have 50,000 more nurse than let's say the 450,000 (made up) we have now, we need to end up with 500,000 not 481,000.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

It's not! Its retaining some and adding sone more. C'mon on mate your smarter than this you don't have to look stupid just to defend the tories.

 

The numbers will be forever changing. People will leave, they'll retire, they'll pass away, and yes if nobody joins between now and 6 months time we'd have less nurses. But if we want to have 50,000 more nurse than let's say the 450,000 (made up) we have now, we need to end up with 500,000 not 481,000.

If the figure of adding 50,000 but letting 19,000 leave is the same as adding 31,000 and not letting them leave. Then it’s the same. It is more