Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
TheCountOfNowhere

General Election Prediction Poll

What do you think the outcome of the election will be?  

269 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think the outcome of the election will be:

    • Labour Win
      32
    • Tory Win
      154
    • Hung Parliament
      83


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, thisisthisitmaybe said:

Corbyn's Labour is very different from New Labour. And his voting record under New Labour was to disagree with pretty much everything the government put forward.

The young are not being played, they are being mobilised in the quest for power. If they can provide the votes to get Corbyn in power, he will happily screw the boomers. The Tories would do the same.

That's why democracy is always loaded in favour of the groups with the most voting power. 

There is a common misconception here that somehow the young and old voting demographic is fixed. The reality is that old pensioners die new pensioners appear to replace them as the population ages.  Thus the idea that the young will magically out vote the old  to put you in power will only occur when the birth rates and death rates in the different demographics make that a reality. Most British boomers were born between 1956 and 1964 and have not even started to draw their state pensions yet so I don't expect them to disappear from the voting booths any time soon. The big achievement from Corbyn was that he managed to get the young to vote at all. That definitely helped him win some key seats but it was not enough to put Labour in power. I don't think that is necessarily going to happen in the immediate future either though I think both parties will probably having serious rethink about the onerous burden that student loans place on the young and will have to think about replacing them with fixed bursaries or education vouchers.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thisisthisitmaybe said:

I have to say I don't blame the yoof at all for rebelling. It isn't the fact that they are having it worse than their parents, but the fact they are having it MUCH WORSE than their parents. For example:

- HPI has been stoked by the Tories who combined austerity with stimulus packages to get reflate the bubble

 

Well tbf the Tories haven't ramped prices that much about 10% up since 2007 nationwide.  That after prices tripled every decade in the preceding forty years.Obviously in some of the Socialist Republics down South like Kensington, Brighton and Islington it is a different story. Indeed in some of the New Tory heartlands like Mansfield and North East Derbyshire you can still pick up a house for diddly squat less than 50k and sub 2004 prices.

While the Tories were drowning their sorrows at the local miner's welfare I guess the Sociaists were celebrating at Pret Manger with a triple latte and praying freedom of movement is going to save their housing equity now a hard Brexit is off.

 

 

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, White Craw said:

AFAIK after 2 rounds of voting by MPs May was the only candidate left and became leader-elect well before September, there being no need for a membership vote?

Yes I think that is correct Leadsom stood down so the vote was never put to the members. I have corrected the post.

Given that May got 60% of MPs votes on the second ballot then the idea that the Parliamentary Conservative party can cynically ditch a leader who the majority of them voted for less than 12 months ago and then go on to win another snap election is even more absurd. If that happens I think Corbyn may have an opportunity to put further Tory scalps in his trophy cabinet. Given Labour have called for Mays resignation it seems odd that the Parliamentary Conservative Party are rushing to do their bidding. I thought the first rule of war was to do the thing your opponents did not want 

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

But they are rebelling by voting for the party that introduced tuition fees and stoked HPI through the 2000s. Labour will do nothing to make the boomers pay for their own care as they'll just use the magic money tree rainforest, further ******ing the young of tomorrow. They are being PLAYED!

Maybe many of them know this (would hope they do).  It's difficult to get a take on.  

That they don't all believe Labour would ever to easily magic and float younger people into fairer positions.

Many could understand Labour doesn't (as far as I can tell anyway) have the stones to make the tough decisions and pushback against ridiculous levels of vested interests and housing financialisation.  

 

So perhaps some younger people who voted labour Labour were informed protest votes, knowing or not expecting Labour to do anythign much for them, but to give Conservatives a bit of a wakeup as well. 

When I read/watch a newspaper video story with a young (mid 20s) warehouse worker, with his wife and newborn baby, worry about Section24 raising their rent (in this instance many not understanding the extreme unfairness they are experiencing) under a leveraged elderly landlord with 165 BTL properties ('providing homes') who is having a right old whinge about S24 (and may have put the frightners on this tenants about rent rises prior to tenant speaking to the newspaper)..... it really frustrates me.   Broken system.  Greed.  Broken.  165 properties (and leveraged enough to worry about S24 for an elderly landlord)....  

And I am not even sure Labour recognise many of the main issues, what with hugs for HTB solutions, and restoring quick Mortgage Guarantees (and then a whole lot more complexity in wider economy and in business, finance and speculative investor money flow).    

They brought in Minimum Wage but all I personally see from that is execs and bosses who awarded themselves far larger pay and bonuses each year into Bubble 1.0.  Pennies for you, £10Ks/£100ks more for us.    I don't see it as 'Austerity' either.  Just an economy with haves and have-even-mores, where work really doesn't pay against housing. (In so many areas).  Bomads, and HPI+ "Growth" celebrating madness.

Quote

 

irrationalactor 2015

...And my homeowning friends outside the South-East, most of them either have a flat they let out (or two) in addition to their own home, or are looking to let out their starter flat now they've upgraded to a house. People don't sell property any more. They hang onto it, get in a serf to pay the mortgage, and wait for capital gain.

It's like there are two kinds of moneyThe kind you earn, and the kind you buy houses with. And one has no connection to the other.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Venger said:

 All happy, and powered by happy Bomads too.   After all, if such a semi is now worth £600K, then parents home must be worth new peak more too.

 

madgainz_pay_what_it_worth.jpg

 

narcissism / nepotism..

it's all f..d up its..   Narparentism

Edited by Saving For a Space Ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, White Craw said:

A minority government needs Parliament to ratify the biggest trade deal of a generation and pass the Great Repeal Bill.  If it fails on either count then there will be economic chaos.  If that's not bear food then I don't know what is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Will! said:

A minority government needs Parliament to ratify the biggest trade deal of a generation and pass the Great Repeal Bill.  If it fails on either count then there will be economic chaos.  If that's not bear food then I don't know what is.

 

Nah there will be another election before we get that far..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Venger said:

Maybe many of them know this (would hope they do).  It's difficult to get a take on.  

That they don't all believe Labour would ever to easily magic and float younger people into fairer positions.

Many could understand Labour doesn't (as far as I can tell anyway) have the stones to make the tough decisions and pushback against ridiculous levels of vested interests and housing financialisation.  

 

So perhaps some younger people who voted labour Labour were informed protest votes, knowing or not expecting Labour to do anythign much for them, but to give Conservatives a bit of a wakeup as well. 

When I read/watch a newspaper video story with a young (mid 20s) warehouse worker, with his wife and newborn baby, worry about Section24 raising their rent (in this instance many not understanding the extreme unfairness they are experiencing) under a leveraged elderly landlord with 165 BTL properties ('providing homes') who is having a right old whinge about S24 (and may have put the frightners on this tenants about rent rises prior to tenant speaking to the newspaper)..... it really frustrates me.   Broken system.  Greed.  Broken.  165 properties (and leveraged enough to worry about S24 for an elderly landlord)....  

And I am not even sure Labour recognise many of the main issues, what with hugs for HTB solutions, and restoring quick Mortgage Guarantees (and then a whole lot more complexity in wider economy and in business, finance and speculative investor money flow).    

They brought in Minimum Wage but all I personally see from that is execs and bosses who awarded themselves far larger pay and bonuses each year into Bubble 1.0.  Pennies for you, £10Ks/£100ks more for us.    I don't see it as 'Austerity' either.  Just an economy with haves and have-even-mores, where work really doesn't pay against housing. (In so many areas).  Bomads, and HPI+ "Growth" celebrating madness.

Selectively targeted finanical repression against the public sector, the young, and the disabled to pay for giveways to howeowners, the retired and the rich i.e. the Tory voting cohorts.

In the aggregate, no austerity. The exact opposite. Keynesian counter-cyclical spending on an unprecedented scale. Meant to hold up the economy while the private sector deleverages and re-balances away from borrowing and consumption. Only that hasn't happened. It's still 2007 as far as the private sector is concerned.

Time to panic yet?

3C75F94E00000578-0-image-a-38_1485264608

Edited by zugzwang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, geezer466 said:

Nah there will be another election before we get that far..........

Yes indeed, the EU may also cease to exist within the next 2 years.

Also labour `won` the election but ended up with the far right  DUP in control. Unexpected much.

Of course as a Brexiteer I`m very happy with this result, I felt pretty bad about voting Tory but love the `well hung` parliament !!

God`s in his heaven and all`s right with his world....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

Well tbf the Tories haven't ramped prices that much about 10% up since 2007 nationwide.  That after prices tripled every decade in the preceding forty years.Obviously in some of the Socialist Republics down South like Kensington, Brighton and Islington it is a different story. Indeed in some of the New Tory heartlands like Mansfield and North East Derbyshire you can still pick up a house for diddly squat less than 50k and sub 2004 prices.

While the Tories were drowning their sorrows at the local miner's welfare I guess the Sociaists were celebrating at Pret Manger with a triple latte and praying freedom of movement is going to save their housing equity now a hard Brexit is off.

 

 

You've got a chip on the wrong shoulder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

Well tbf the Tories haven't ramped prices that much about 10% up since 2007 nationwide.  That after prices tripled every decade in the preceding forty years.Obviously in some of the Socialist Republics down South like Kensington, Brighton and Islington it is a different story. Indeed in some of the New Tory heartlands like Mansfield and North East Derbyshire you can still pick up a house for diddly squat less than 50k and sub 2004 prices.

While the Tories were drowning their sorrows at the local miner's welfare I guess the Sociaists were celebrating at Pret Manger with a triple latte and praying freedom of movement is going to save their housing equity now a hard Brexit is off.

I don't know what you're so angry about but you've clearly lost it. Labour is doing well in places like Islington, Brighton and Cambridge because those areas are full of young private renters who the Tories are more than happy to ignore (except when it's time to collect the rent from them).

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

Well tbf the Tories haven't ramped prices that much about 10% up since 2007 nationwide.  That after prices tripled every decade in the preceding forty years.Obviously in some of the Socialist Republics down South like Kensington, Brighton and Islington it is a different story. Indeed in some of the New Tory heartlands like Mansfield and North East Derbyshire you can still pick up a house for diddly squat less than 50k and sub 2004 prices.

While the Tories were drowning their sorrows at the local miner's welfare I guess the Sociaists were celebrating at Pret Manger with a triple latte and praying freedom of movement is going to save their housing equity now a hard Brexit is off.

Prices in my parts of Manchester/Cheshire are 30%+ above peak 2007...  and about 2007 level generally for £1m+ properties.

Always sensed you hold 2007 as the great-value-marker for prices...

...and it's always "the glory" that you haven't seen much "growth" since 2007 prices in some

On 6/5/2014 at 9:46 AM, crashmonitor said:

I note a small bungalow has just gone under offer a couple of doors down from where I live, the asking was 370k and it has been on for about a year. I do think this suggests the ripple is finally reaching the North Midlands. I didn't expect it to sell, but actually there isn't that much left for sale at the moment in my village near Nottingham.

 Yay for small bungalows selling for £370,000 just outside Nottingham for 2007ish fair value !!  

"Where's the growth?!"  10 years no growth mwwahaha.  Look at the super stability.  HPCers should be oh-so-grateful.

It's buyers and sellers who set prices... not all Gov to blame.  Although Gov influence markets via policy.

HTB saw a massive BTLer double down in my view, with full on raging HPI again in my areas.   QE, Global QE, speculative money flows to UK.

Mansfield, North East Derbyshire price magnificence we should be thankful for as an option we can take yes?   Why don't you go off and live there with your £1m+ net asset wealth.. or joint with your wife (as I recall it), having recently sold your home once again.

No.  Not for me. 

Quote

 

Contractor UK Forums 2015

Poster 1: I have Buy to Let properties up North that have not risen in value since 2005, you can buy a nice 3 bed new build Semi for about £130k. There is no "bubble" and people saying they cant afford to buy are generally incredibly selective about where they want to live.

I get pretty miffed with BTL being the root of all evil. Its only an issue in London, so if you are going to penalise for second homes or investment properties then be selective. Because I tell you know, if you start penalising people buying cheap second homes to let in areas being gentrified that enable other people who wouldnt be able to buy, to instead privately rent, then where are they going to live? The govt will have a much bigger issue on their hands.
-----

Poster 2: Did you know there are places in Britain that are neither London nor "up north"? You seem a bit confused by that point. Most of the UK is way too expensive; it's not a London problem.

And did you also know that £130K is still a lot of money for the average person?

 

------

58 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

I don't know what you're so angry about but you've clearly lost it. Labour is doing well in places like Islington, Brighton and Cambridge because those areas are full of young private renters who the Tories are more than happy to ignore (except when it's time to collect the rent from them).

Makes sense to me.  Should think that is part of it.  Also, :lol:

@zugzwang - agreed.  Good post.  That's how I read it too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

Would that be the same Conservative Party whose MPs gave her 60% of the vote in the second ballot Tory leadership election last September !

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_2016

Glad to see they are expressing repentance for their actions.

For a failed politician Theresa May got a very big share of the popular vote on Thursday with her party getting over 42.4% of those who cast their ballot. Indeed the Tory share of the vote nationally was up more than 5% on 2015. Since 1970 only Margaret Thatcher in 1979 and Tony Blair in 1997 have gone over 43% and those were elections that marked significant points of political change.

I think that Tory MPs and members who believe that ditching May for Johnson, Gove etc and giving the manifesto a quick paint job will suddenly unleash a lot of untapped Conservative votes are simply deluded. The evidence is that to get a significant majority now the winning party need the opposition vote to be split substantially between different parties. Given the collapse of the UKIP vote and the subdued performance of the Lib Dems that did not happen last week. The reason May did not get a majority on Thursday is not that her supporters failed to turn up at the polls but that Corbyn did an excellent job in getting most of the anti-Tory vote united behind him. 

Tactical voting was heavily publicised in the run up to polling day and UKIP & Greens did not stand in every seat. The MSM have missed that in their post mortem of the results and, not surprisingly, the red & blues have been crowing about their boosted vote share! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PopGun said:

You've got a chip on the wrong shoulder.

It's a bit tongue in cheek, but in terms of house prices we are actually on the same side. I might be wrong but the props that were falling away for house price support including freedom of movement look back in play. The price of houses is crazy and they need to correct.

Fwiw I would sooner see a Progressive Alliance than some arrangement with the DUP. The Tories have lost and the current arrangement can't continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, isn't this all media fuelled? There no proof yet that it was a young vs old vote.

What if it was a bit of leave vs remain, too? 

Politics in this globalised country is very difficult to discern left, centre and right any more.

Close calls in everything might be the new normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Noallegiance said:

Again, isn't this all media fuelled? There no proof yet that it was a young vs old vote.

What if it was a bit of leave vs remain, too? 

Politics in this globalised country is very difficult to discern left, centre and right any more.

Close calls in everything might be the new normal.

Trying to pin the result in places like Kensington on the youth vote is nonsense, the highest net worth individuals in the country per capita and the highest median net worth...not just a few billionaires and serfs.

The Remain vote down South has benefited from Freedom of Movement and globalisation and got rich on the back of it.

They voted fir the status quo again.

Meanwhile some of the ''rust belt'' like Mansfield and the lowest decile wealth went Tory.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to 'vent my spleen' regarding this recent fiasco/election...why it shows 'The Political class' in their true light...and why we need reform.

At the cost (supposedly £130M) of an unnecessary election (three years early) May is desperate to hold on to power YET if she 'uses' the DUP she will have to compromise on many points in her manifesto..the same ones that people voted for...how can this be tenable/allowed?

All the naysayers against Corbyn and now saying what a fine leader he is...but should they really have not stood for THEIR constituencies under HIS governship?...Seems their jobs are worth more than their principles.

Why now are the majority of politicians devoid of any real experience (both life and work) outside of the Westminster bubble...contrast this to the upcoming French elections wher the candidates have all had backgrounds outside of politics BEFORE they become politicians i.e. from Dustbin men to Fighter pilots...perhaps we need to make it a requirement of standing that you need to have had a minimum of ten years 'work experience' in a real job before standing for office.

Finally, why can a party (Con) 'win' 317 seats with 27% of the votes (and have potentially won with only 28%) whilst those who chose not to vote/abstain made-up 20% of the sum?...we need proportional representation and a ruling that to gain power you should have say 60-70% of the vote either through outright winning OR coalition...

 

No wonder the voting public feel disenfranchised at the moment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

Trying to pin the result in places like Kensington on the youth vote is nonsense, the highest net worth individuals in the country per capita and the highest median net worth...not just a few billionaires and serfs.

The Remain vote down South has benefited from Freedom of Movement and globalisation and got rich on the back of it.

They voted fir the status quo again.

Meanwhile some of the ''rust belt'' like Mansfield and the lowest decile wealth went Tory.

 

It's fun to guess some of the reasons why things turned as they did.  Choices are limited to express what you want with your vote.  Idealist Labour votes.  Young Protest votes.  Conservative Brexit votes (Scotland gains?).   

Your rust-belt may just have had more minds who were eager for Hard-Brexit idea, perhaps on less by way of immigration or some notion of Brexit prosperity ahead, and it having less to do with lowest-decile wealth.  

For whatever Brexit really means.  Seems to mean many different things to many different people.  I have no clue what the objectives are, and where the clear gainz are to be had.  Not read any convincing explanation, but read a lot about complexity of trade deals.  Maybe Maybot hard-Brexit also played into Kensington, but I like to think high house prices and the rent-farmed also added to votes to Labour.

Quote

 

As always with a question that might be considered an economic question there are so many interlinked parts that an observation of a correlation is just another puzzle.  

h/t Bland Unsight

 

 

Quote

 

Brexit is a back-of-the-envelope proposition. Strip away the post-imperial make-believe and the Little England nostalgia, and there’s almost nothing there, no clear sense of how a middling European country with little native industry can hope to thrive by cutting itself off from its biggest trading partner and most important political alliance.

May demanded a mandate to negotiate—but negotiate what exactly? She literally could not say. All she could articulate were two slogans: “Brexit means Brexit” and “No deal is better than a bad deal.” The first collapses ideology into tautology. The second is a patent absurdity: with “no deal” there is no trade, the planes won’t fly and all the supply chains snap. To win an election, you need a convincing narrative but May herself doesn’t know what the Brexit story is.

Secondly, if you’re going to try the uno duce, una voce trick, you need a charismatic leader with a strong voice. The Tories tried to build a personality cult around a woman who doesn’t have much of a personality. May is a common or garden Home Counties conservative politician. Her stock in trade is prudence, caution, and stubbornness. The vicar’s daughter was woefully miscast as the Robespierre of the Brexit revolution, the embodiment of the British popular will sending saboteurs to the guillotine. She is awkward, wooden, and, as it turned out, prone to panic and indecision under pressure.

But to be fair to May, her wavering embodied a much deeper set of contradictions. Those words she repeated so robotically, “strong and stable,” would ring just as hollow in the mouth of any other Conservative politician. This is a party that has plunged its country into an existential crisis because it was too weak to stand up to a minority of nationalist zealots and tabloid press barons. It is as strong as a jellyfish and as stable as a flea.

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/06/10/britain-the-end-of-a-fantasy/

 

Quote

 

The prime minister was in her Maidenhead constituency when the shock news came.   ....There, campaign staff were quietly confident that at the very least May would increase the Tory majority in the Commons from a slender 17 to around 50.

The poll figures hit everyone like a thunderbolt. They suggested the Tories would lose seats, and Labour make gains. 

..How could both sides – and those who had pounded the doorsteps – be so wrong? Surely Ukip votes, particularly in the north and Midlands, would have switched to the Tories in huge numbers, and not to Labour, as May’s campaign guru, Lynton Crosby, had always predicted?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/10/theresa-may-gamble-backfired-chiefs-of-staff-resign

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Noallegiance said:

Again, isn't this all media fuelled? There no proof yet that it was a young vs old vote.

What if it was a bit of leave vs remain, too? 

Politics in this globalised country is very difficult to discern left, centre and right any more.

Close calls in everything might be the new normal.

Most commentarors recognise the yoof helped corbyn hugely and also he tapped into lower middle class votes who feel fleeced by austerity. So you are right it us not quite young vs old but that is an emerging political faultline and i think the tories are on the wrong side of it. stanley drunkenmiller has been predicting this intergenerational conflict for a number of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

The Remain vote down South has benefited from Freedom of Movement and globalisation and got rich on the back of it.

They voted fir the status quo again.

Meanwhile some of the ''rust belt'' like Mansfield and the lowest decile wealth went Tory.

Young priced-out renters in the South vote Labour, older (often pensioner) homeowners in Mansfield vote Tory. No great shock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

House prices falling, sterling tanking, a lame duck prime minister facing two years of tortorous Brexit negotiations, and another recession imminent.

Supreme clusterf**k from the Tory boys.

tumblr_n50gpqknnq1tyzyxho1_500.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly the wrong time to bring up issues with the election system but I have genuine doubts on why -

1. Citizens of the commonwealth are allowed a vote in the British general elections (52 countries, when no such arrangement is present in those countries) - It is a fact that this bloc predominantly votes Labour, being new immigrants mostly (after a period of time, most acquire British citizenship..) - So new immigrants, some potentially with no intention/eligibility  of settling here, get a say on what the British electorate can have 

2. No  checks on voter identity or eligibility in the  entire election process  - have never been asked to furnish proof of nationality, eligibility, identity. 

3. No investigation on potential for electoral fraud in the postal voting system - How does the system ensure that it is an anonymous vote being cast by an eligible individual

4. Potential for being eligible for the vote in two places - if the voter is registered with multiple councils - say students, but can be anyone with more than one property in two constituencies.

Especially in an election being fought over Brexit and the rights of immigrants and possible restriction on rights to settle, it seems we are asking for the turkeys to vote on Christmas (no offence intended)

Maybe there are good checks and balances and some on the forum may have the answers on why there is potentially no problem with these.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 399 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.