UK Politics: The Overton Defenestration

[Werthead]

India has jumped Britain and France to become the world's 5th-biggest economy.

According to India, anyway. There's likely to be some argument about that. Depending the ranking system, Britain is now 7th (below India and France). It's quite a big drop to Italy, who aren't doing well either, so we should be safe from further slippage for now.

[Chaircat Meow]

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

India has jumped Britain and France to become the world's 5th-biggest economy.

According to India, anyway. There's likely to be some argument about that. Depending the ranking system, Britain is now 7th (below India and France). It's quite a big drop to Italy, who aren't doing well either, so we should be safe from further slippage for now.

This is why measuring economies at exchange rates is less than super helpful. It is simply a reflection of the £s fall vs the $. In PPP terms India has been ahead of the UK for a long time (and China overtook the US in 2013) but vastly below in per capita PPP terms.

 

edit: I have never seen measurements of nominal gdp from the 1870s. 

[mormont]

NI Deputy FM Martin McGuinness resigns.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38561507

Big development with potentially big consequences. Another election in NI at the very least, in the midst of Brexit negotiations. But it's suggested that this goes deeper than the issue at hand, with SF frustrated at the DUP in general and not likely to be happy to simply go back to working with them afterwards, which means another major distraction for the UK government.

[Werthead]

On 09/01/2017 at 4:33 PM, mormont said:

NI Deputy FM Martin McGuinness resigns.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38561507

Big development with potentially big consequences. Another election in NI at the very least, in the midst of Brexit negotiations. But it's suggested that this goes deeper than the issue at hand, with SF frustrated at the DUP in general and not likely to be happy to simply go back to working with them afterwards, which means another major distraction for the UK government.

It's not like the UK government has anything else to worry about, like the crumbling rail network, the disintegrating health and social care systems, the failing prison system, under-investment in police and the military, an education system not fit for purpose and something else I've probably forgotten about. Dunno what that could be.

[SeanF]

 

On ‎12‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 6:03 PM, Chaircat Meow said:

This is why measuring economies at exchange rates is less than super helpful. It is simply a reflection of the £s fall vs the $. In PPP terms India has been ahead of the UK for a long time (and China overtook the US in 2013) but vastly below in per capita PPP terms.

 

edit: I have never seen measurements of nominal gdp from the 1870s. 

Given that India has 20 times the UK's population, it doesn't mean very much anyway.

[Maltaran]

Another Labour MP quits, which means Corbyn now has to defend two by-elections, and Stoke is an opportunity for Nuttall to see how many working class Labour voters he can pull to UKIP.

[mormont]

Maybe it's the bald head, maybe it's the dead eyes, but Nuttall comes over much more unsettling than Farage. He looks and feels like a guy hiding dubious far-right magazines in his desk. I doubt he'll be leading UKIP to any breakthroughs.

Of course, Head Backbencher Corbyn has continued to stumble around being irrelevant so Labour may lose the seat. But if they do, I'd bet on the Tories taking it.

[Hereward]

I think Labour will definitely lose it, unless they have a charismatic local Leaver hidden away somewhere. But I'd put my money on UKIP rather than the Tories. I don't think a place like Stoke has that many more potential Tory voters than voted for them in 2015.

[Maltaran]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

Maybe it's the bald head, maybe it's the dead eyes, but Nuttall comes over much more unsettling than Farage. He looks and feels like a guy hiding dubious far-right magazines in his desk. I doubt he'll be leading UKIP to any breakthroughs.

Of course, Head Backbencher Corbyn has continued to stumble around being irrelevant so Labour may lose the seat. But if they do, I'd bet on the Tories taking it.

The Tories will take Copeland (they're already putting out leaflets pointing out Corbyn's anti-nuclear policies, and this is just up the road from where they build the Trident subs), but I'd agree with Hereward on Stoke. I don't think the Lib Dems have enough in either place to get a shock upset, despite Copeland being right next door to Farron's seat.

[mormont]

I dunno. Consider: UKIP last time were only marginally ahead of the Tories in third. Since then, there was the referendum, which seems to have decreased the usually reliable UKIP turnout in other by-elections. And, as I said, Nuttall is not a personable candidate and has terrible poll ratings - if he even stands, and it's far from clear that he will. If he doesn't stand, UKIP aren't overstaffed with viable alternatives.

If Farage couldn't win a by-election before the referendum, I just don't believe Nuttall can win one afterwards.

[Hereward]

But Corbyn wasn't leader last time. The Labour vote is going to shrink in such a traditional working class seat, and no way are they going to the Tories, who will probably also lose some hardline Remain voters to the LibDems. I cannot see a seat that voted 70% Leave not boosting UKIP support regardless of the candidate.

[mormont]

47 minutes ago, Hereward said:

But Corbyn wasn't leader last time. The Labour vote is going to shrink in such a traditional working class seat, and no way are they going to the Tories, who will probably also lose some hardline Remain voters to the LibDems. I cannot see a seat that voted 70% Leave not boosting UKIP support regardless of the candidate.

Why not?

Farage and the diehard Eurosceptics are devoting a lot of energy to saying things like 'we need to keep pressing the government, it's not over, the Remainers are trying to hijack things'. They're doing that precisely because they know and fear that a lot of casual Leave voters see the referendum as done and dusted, and are now more likely to prioritise other issues and return to the fold of the major parties. Meanwhile UKIP are trying to articulate some reason for existing beyond creating pressure for a referendum that has now happened.

Sleaford was a heavily Eurosceptic seat too: the UKIP vote went down (albeit slightly, and from a low base). At this point in time UKIP will do well to shore up their existing vote, not boost it. And their existing vote in this constituency wasn't nearly enough to win.

Turnout matters, of course. A lot of Labour voters will stay home. Corbyn has the worst ratings of any party leader. But you know who has the next worst? Nuttall. I've seen two polls with a net of -17 and -22. Way behind Tim Farron, let alone Theresa May.

I agree the Labour vote will go down: the Lib Dem stop-UKIP defectors will likely go back to their own party and many Labour voters will stay home. But I also think an equal number of Labour defectors to UKIP will stay home. And Tory defectors to UKIP will go back to the Tories. Remember that UKIP beat the Tories by only 33 votes in 2015. 

[Hereward]

Sleaford isn't Stoke, it's a middle class/agricultural area, i.e traditionally Conservative. The Tories only did well in 2015 in Stoke because LibDems defected en masse to them . That won't happen again. The Labour to UKIP swing was of similar size and I expect it to continue in Stoke as it will in other distressed industrial seats where people will not contemplate a Tory.

Edit: Checking the figures suggests that Lib Dem votes broke to both Labour and the Tories in Stoke. Either way, those votes will mainly be going back to the LibDems, so that's still bad for the Tories, but worse for Labour.

[mormont]

Comparisons with Sleaford need to be qualified, I know, but my point is that saying that a constituency voted heavily for Leave isn't sufficient to say they'll keep voting for UKIP.

Lib Dem defections to Labour and the Tories will likely revert, I agree, but that won't be enough for UKIP to win. UKIP increased their share of the vote in 2015 from 4.4% to 22.7%, which is impressive, but to win, they need to almost repeat that, in percentage terms. Turnout was already low (50%), but to win with 7,000 votes, they'd need turnout to be more like 33% to get a winning percentage on 7,000 votes, and that would have to affect everyone else but not them, which is unlikely to say the least. Realistically they need to attract more votes.

Where do those come from? Those Lib Dems aren't going to switch to UKIP. More Labour defectors? There has to be a ceiling on that, and why would we presume they haven't already hit it? Tories? Possibly, but I don't really know of any prior instance of government supporters defecting in a by-election to give the opposition a bloody nose. People who didn't turn out last time, but will this time, while habitual voters stay home? No.

So I can see Labour having a closer result than before. But I can't see where UKIP get the votes to win.

[Maltaran]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

So I can see Labour having a closer result than before. But I can't see where UKIP get the votes to win.

If it happens, I suspect it'll be more with Labour voters staying home than UKIP gaining them. 33% turnout is about what you'd expect for a by-election in that kind of seat anyway.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

So does this mean Cameron won't need his Panama offshore accounts anymore in a post-Brexit Britain?

Well played, sir.

[The guy from the Vale]

I find his choice of words more concerning. "If we're forced to change our economic model, [...]"? You weren't forced. You made your bed, now you have to lie in it. Nobody forced Breit from outside.

[Hereward]

He's not saying Britain was forced to leave the EU. He's saying that if the EU plays hardball on economic and trade links, which he hopes doesn't happen, Britain will have to be tough in return. That seems like a statement of the obvious.

[The guy from the Vale]

That's not how it's reported in the German media though. It's also quite important to note that Britain's impending economic isolation is not being forced on it from outside. You don't leave an economic area but stay inside, just without the parts you don't like. That doesn't even work for Switzerland.

[Zoë Sumra]

"Hard Brexit" means retiring later, Britons warned

Not that that is in any way concerning.  On the plus side for the national finances, the impending lack of healthcare will mean that we all stop living long enough to retire...