Germany Vol.6 (Grand Coalition 2018 #GroKo, et al.)

Germany: Merkel’s next cabinet shows youth trend (11/03/2018) | @dwnews
Chancellor: Angela Merkel (CDU)
Chief of Staff at the Chancellery: Helge Braun (CDU)
Minister of the Interior, Heimat and Construction: Horst Seehofer (CSU)
The fight for the Foreign Ministry: Heiko Maas (SPD)
Finance Minister: Olaf Scholz (SPD)
Minister of Defense: Ursula von der Leyen (CDU)
Economic and Energy Affairs Minister: Peter Altmaier (CDU)
Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection: Katarina Barley (SPD)
Minister of Labor and Social Affairs: Hubertus Heil (SPD)
Minister for the Environment: Svenja Schulze (SPD)
Minister for Health: Jens Spahn (CDU)
Minister of Education and Research: Anja Karliczek (CDU)
Minister for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth: Franziska Giffey (SPD-Mayor Berlin-Neukolln)
Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development: Gerd Muller (CSU)
Minister of Transport and Digital Infrastructure: Andreas Scheuer (CSU)
Minister for Food and Agriculture: Julia Klockner (CDU)
@cducsubt @CDU @CSU
German Elections: Mapping Economic Policy Preferences (09/14/2017) | Caspar Kolster @gmfus
Germany: A New Government Is off to a Weak Start (03/14/2018) | @stratfor
Coalition watch – The making of a new German government (14/03/2018) | Soren Amelang, Kerstine Appunn, Sven Egenter, Benjamin Wehrmann, Julian Wettengel CLEW
Angela Merkel sworn in for fourth term as German Chancellor (03/14/2018) | Judith Vonberg @CNN
Angela Merkel re-elected as German chancellor to fourth term after five months of political deadlock (14/03/2018) | @tomemburyd @independent
The SPD just won the Frankfurt mayoralty in a landslide. So why are Germany’s cities going red? (03/15/2018) | Stephen Jorgenson-Murray @CityMetric
Merkel secures fourth term in power after SPD backs coalition deal (04/03/2018) | Philip Oltermann @guardian
The last thing Germany – and Europe – needs is a grand coalition (23/02/2018) | Timothy Garton Ash @guardian
German coalition talks to continue on Monday and focus on health and labor (02/04/2018) | Michelle Martin & Andreas Rinke @reuters

Germany Vol.5 (Economy, et al.)

Germany’s Economy: Successes and Challenges (11/28/2017) | Kimberly Amadeo @thebalance
The Economic Miracle and Beyond
Germany: The Party System from 1963 to 2000 | Kimberly A. Allan
Focus Germany @DeutscheBank #dbresearch
How the German elections may affect Brexit | @leopoldtraugott @OpenEurope
German elections: Merkel looking for a (new) deputy (08/29/2017) | Daniel van Schoot and Stefan Koopman
Deutsche Bundesbank
Deutsche Bank
Commerzbank A.G.
KfW Group
DZ Bank Group
UniCredit Bank AG (HypoVereinsbank)
Landesbank Baden-Wurttemberg
Bayerische Landesbank
Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale
Germany | @TheEconomist
Articles on German politics | @ConversationUS

UK Vol.112 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.36)

Indiana Vol.3

US Policy Changes Vol.76 (Trade, Energy, National Security, Financial Regulation, Tax, Values, et al.)

Great stuff!

Export Monitor 2017 (w PDFs; 08/18/2017) | Joseph Parilla and Nick Marchio @BrookingsInst

When renegotiating NAFTA, Trump should re-evaluate his premises on international trade (08/17/2017) | Dany Bahar @BrookingsInst

NAFTA renegotiation: Separating fact from fiction (08/17/2017) | Amanda Waldron @BrookingsInst

American Energy Policy (w PDF; April 2017) | Daniel Poneman @BelferCenter

Is the United States the new Saudi Arabia? (01/26/2018) | Samantha Gross @BrookingsInst

Learning from Katrina to care for Hurricane Harvey’s youngest victims (09/06/2017) | Jon Valant @BrookingsInst

Trump’s border wall is standard practice in other parts of the world (01/23/2018) | Michael Rubin @BrookingsInst

Hitting the wall: On immigration, campaign promises clash with policy realities (w PDF; 06/22/2017) | John Hudak, Elaine Kamarck, and Christine Stenglein @BrookingsInst

Strengthening and streamlining bank capital regulation (w PDFs; 09/07/2017) | Robin Greenwood, Samuel G. Hanson, Jeremy C. Stein, and Adi Sunderam @BrookingsInst

What Treasury’s financial regulation report gets right and where it goes too far (06/13/2017) | Nellie Liang @BrookingsInst

Hoarding the American Dream (Podcast & Transcript; 06/16/2017) | Richard V. Reeves, Bill Finan, and Fred Dews @BrookingsInst

Professionalism in politics: The paradox of populism (Podcast & Transcript; 06/28/2017) | Jonathan Rauch, Benjamin Wittes, and Adrianna Pita @BrookingsInst

Winners and losers in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Podcast; 12/22/2017) | Fred Dews and Adam Looney @BrookingsInst

Next Task for GOP: Spend Less and Help the Poor – Republicans did well to cut corporate taxes, not so well at expanding opportunity. (12/19/2017) | Michael R. Strain @bpolitics

Who would pay for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act? (w PDF; 12/08/2017) | William G. Gale, Surachai Khitatrakun, and Aaron Krupkin @BrookingsInst

Senate tax bill: Lower rates for corporations? Check. Broadening the tax base? Not so much. (12/05/2017) | Adam Looney and Hilary Gelfond @BrookingsInst

Relax, the housing market will be fine after tax reform (11/09/2017) | Alex Brill @AEI

Is the rent “too damn high”? Or are incomes too low? (12/19/2017) | Jenny Schuetz @BrookingsInst

Where the robots are (08/14/2017) | Mark Muro @BrookingsInst

Signs of digital distress: Mapping broadband availability and subscription in American neighborhoods (09/12/2017) | Adie Tomer, Elizabeth Kneebone, and Ranjitha Shivaram @BrookingsInst

Segregation and changing populations shape Rust Belt’s politics (09/14/2017) | John C. Austin @BrookingsInst

Census shows nonmetropolitan America is whiter, getting older, and losing population: Will it retain political clout? (06/27/2017) | William H. Frey @BrookingsInst

A primer on gerrymandering and political polarization (07/06/2017) | Fred Dews @BrookingsInst

The geography of desperation in America (07/24/2017) | Carol Graham, Sergio Pinto, and John Juneau II @BrookingsInst

Will the release of the JFK assassination records put to rest one of the most widely believed conspiracy theories? (w Video; 10/27/2017) | Karlyn Bowman @AEI

The Rudeness of King Donald (12/04/2017) | Niall Ferguson @BostonGlobe

Iran Nuclear Agreement Vol.5

Iran Nuclear Agreement Vol.2

Why the Iran protests matter (Voice; 01/02/2018) | Suzanne Maloney @BrookingsFP
Iran nuclear deal: Key details (13/10/2017) | @BBC
Iran Nuclear Agreement (PDF; 09/15/2017) | Kenneth Katzman & Paul K. Kerr @CRS4Congress
Full text of the Iran nuclear deal (14/07/2015) | @washingtonpost
Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions and Political Theory (06/03/2012) | Allison Kushner @FPA_ORG
Saving the Iran Nuclear Deal, Despite Trump’s Decertification (13/10/2017) | @CrisisGroup
The Real Promise of the US-Iran Agreement – Yes, it will prevent Iran from developing nukes. But it could also transform the Middle East, bringing  order and peace to a region falling into chaos. (07/16/2015) | @thenation
Proxy War Over Iran Nuclear Deal Divides U.S., Europe at UN (10/12/2017) | Kambiz Foroohar @bpolitics
The Iran Nuclear Deal – A Simple Guide (03/31/2015) | @nytimes
Trade – Iran | @EU_Commission

US Policy Changes Vol.74 (National Security Strategy)

The below excerpt of National Security Strategy of the United States of America DECEMBER 2017 (PDF) is on our own.

The American people elected me to make America great again. …
During my first year in office, you have witnessed my America First foreign policy in action. …
The United States faces an extraordinarily dangerous world, filled with a wide range of threats that have intensified in recent years. …
We are rallying the world against the rogue regime in North Korea and confronting the danger posed by the dictatorship in Iran, which those determined to pursue a flawed nuclear deal had neglected. …
At home, we have restored confidence in America’s purpose. …
The whole world is lifted by America’s renewal and the reemergence of American leadership. …

… Putting America first is the duty of our government and the foundation for U.S. leadership in the world.
A strong America is in the vital interests of not only the American people, but also those around the world who want to partner with the United States in pursuit of shared interests, values, and aspirations.
… Liberty and independence have given us the flourishing society Americans enjoy today-a vibrant and confident Nation, welcoming of disagreement and differences, but united by the bonds of history, culture, beliefs, and principles that define who we are.
… American political, business, and military leaders worked together with their counterparts in Europe and Asia to shape the post-war order through the United Nations, the Marshall Plan, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and other institutions designed to advance our shared interests of security, freedom, and peace. …
A Competitive World
… China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity. …
…jihadist terrorists such as ISIS and al-Qa’ida continue to spread a barbaric ideology that calls for the violent destruction of governments and innocents they consider to be apostates. …
… North Korea-a country that starves its own people-has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that could threaten our homeland. …
An America First National Security Strategy
First, our fundamental responsibility is to protect the American people, the homeland, and the American way of life.
Second, we will promote American prosperity. …
Third, we will preserve peace through strength by rebuilding our military so that it remains preeminent, deters our adversaries, and if necessary, is able to fight and win. …
Fourth, we will advance American influence because a world that supports American interests and reflects our values makes America more secure and prosperous. …

… North Korea seeks the capability to kill millions of Americans with nuclear weapons. … Non-state actors undermine social order through drug and human trafficking networks…
Secure U.S. Borders and Territory
Defend Against Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
…deploying a layered missile defense system focused on North Korea and Iran to defend… Enhanced missile defense is not intended to undermine strategic stability or disrupt longstanding strategic relationships with Russia or China. …
Combat Biothreats and Pandemics
Strengthen Border Control and Immigration Policy
Pursue Threats to Their Source
Defeat Jihadist Terrorists
Dismantle Transnational Criminal Organizations
Keep America Safe in the Cyber Era
…assess risk across six key areas: national security, energy and power, banking and finance, health and safety, communications, and transportation. …
Promote American Resilience

… Working with our allies and partners, the United States led the creation of a group of financial institutions and other economic forums that established equitable rules and built instruments to stabilize the international economy and remove the points of friction that had contributed to two world wars. …
… Experience shows that these countries distorted and undermined key economic institutions without undertaking significant reform of their economies or politics. They espouse free trade rhetoric and exploit its benefits, but only adhere selectively to the rules and agreements. …
Rejuvenate the Domestic Economy
… Departments and agencies will eliminate unnecessary regulations that stifle growth, drive up costs for American businesses, impede research and development, discourage hiring, and incentivize domestic businesses to move overseas. …
… Federal, state, and local governments will work together with private industry to improve our airports, seaports and waterways, roads and railways, transit systems, and telecommunications. …
Promote Free, Fair, and Reciprocal Economic Relationships
…will pursue bilateral trade and investment agreements with countries that commit to fair and reciprocal trade and will modernize existing agreements to ensure they are consistent with those principles. …
Lead in Research, Technology, Invention, and Innovation
… The Department of Defense and other agencies will establish strategic partnerships with U.S. companies to help align private sector R&D resources to priority national security applications. …
Promote and Protect the U.S. National Security Innovation Base
…will reduce the illicit appropriation of U.S. public and private sector technology and technical knowledge by hostile foreign competitors. …
…will review visa procedures to reduce economic theft by non-traditional intelligence collectors. …
Embrace Energy Dominance
…will streamline the Federal regulatory approval processes for energy infrastructure, from pipeline and export terminals to container shipments and gathering lines, while also ensuring responsible environmental stewardship.

… Three main sets of challengers-the revisionist powers of China and Russia, the rogue states of Iran and North Korea, and transnational threat organizations, particularly jihadist terrorist groups-are actively competing against the United States and our allies and partners. …
… China and Russia want to shape a world antithetical to U.S. values and interests. China seeks to displace the United States in the Indo-Pacific region, expand the reaches of its state-driven economic model, and reorder the region in its favor. Russia seeks to restore its great power status and establish spheres of influence near its borders. The intentions of both nations are not necessarily fixed. …
For decades, U.S. policy was rooted in the belief that support for China’s rise and for its integration into the post-war international order would liberalize China. Contrary to our hopes, China expanded its power at the expense of the sovereignty of others. China gathers and exploits data on an unrivaled scale and spreads features of its authoritarian system, including corruption and the use of surveillance. It is building the most capable and well-funded military in the world, after our own. Its nuclear arsenal is growing and diversifying. Part of China’s military modernization and economic expansion is due to its access to the U.S. innovation economy, including America’s world-class universities.
Russia aims to weaken U.S. influence in the world and divide us from our allies and partners. …
Renew America’s Competitive Advantages
Renew Capabilities
Defense Industrial Base
…will work with industry partners to strengthen U.S. competitiveness in key technologies and manufacturing capabilities. …
Nuclear Forces
… America’s newly re-established National Space Council, chaired by the Vice President, will review America’s long-range space goals and develop a strategy that integrates all space sectors to support innovation and American leadership in space.
… To prevent the theft of sensitive and proprietary information and maintain supply chain integrity, the United States must increase our understanding of the economic policy priorities of our adversaries and improve our ability to detect and defeat their attempts to commit economic espionage. …
Diplomacy and Statecraft
Competitive Diplomacy
… Diplomacy is indispensable to identify and implement solutions to conflicts in unstable regions of the world short of military involvement. It helps to galvanize allies for action and marshal the collective resources of like-minded nations and organizations to address shared problems. Authoritarian states are eager to replace the United States where the United States withdraws our diplomats and closes our outposts. …
… Diplomats must identify opportunities for commerce and cooperation, and facilitate the cultural, educational, and people-to-people exchanges that create the networks of current and future political, civil society, and educational leaders who will extend a free and prosperous world.
Tools of Economic Diplomacy
… Economic tools?including sanctions, anti-money-laundering and anti-corruption measures, and enforcement actions?can be important parts of broader strategies to deter, coerce, and constrain adversaries. …
Information Statecraft
… China, for example, combines data and the use of AI to rate the loyal of its citizens to the state and uses these ratings to determine jobs and more. Jihadist…
Russia uses information operations as part of its offensive cyber efforts to influence public opinion across the globe. …
… Local voices are most compelling and effective in ideological competitions. We must amplify credible voices and partner with them to advance alternatives to violent and hateful messages. …

… During the Cold War, a totalitarian threat from the Soviet Union motivated the free world to create coalitions in defense of liberty. Today’s challenges to free societies are just as serious, but more diverse. …
… The United States offers partnership to those who share our aspirations for freedom and prosperity. We lead by example. “The world has its eye upon America,” Alexander Hamilton once observed. “The noble struggle we have made in the cause of liberty, has occasioned a kind of revolution in human sentiment. …
Encourage Aspiring Partners
… China and Russia target their investments in the developing world to expand influence and gain competitive advantages against the United States. China is investing billions of dollars in infrastructure across the globe. Russia, too, projects its influence economically, through the control of key energy and other infrastructure throughout parts of Europe and Central Asia. …
… The United States will promote a development model that partners with countries that want progress, consistent with their culture, based on free market principles, fair and reciprocal trade, private sector activity, and rule of law. The United States will shift away from a reliance on assistance based on grants to approaches that attract private capital and catalyze private sector activity. …
Achieve Better Outcomes in Multilateral Forums
… Authoritarian actors have long recognized the power of multilateral bodies and have used them to advance their interests and limit the freedom of their own citizens. If the United States cedes leadership of these bodies to adversaries, opportunities to shape developments that are positive for the United States will be lost. All institutions are not equal, however. …
… The United Nations can help contribute to solving many of the complex problems in the world, but it must be reformed and recommit to its founding principles. We will require accountability and emphasize shared responsibility among members. If the United States is asked to provide a disproportionate level of support for an institution, we will expect a commensurate degree of influence over the direction and efforts of that institution. …
…  The United States will promote the free flow of data and protect its interests through active engagement in key organizations, such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), the UN, and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
Champion American Values
… America’s core principles, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, are secured by the Bill of Rights, which proclaims our respect for fundamental individual liberties beginning with the freedoms of religion, speech, the press, and assembly. Liberty, free enterprise, equal justice under the law, and the dignity of every human life are central to who we are as a people. …
… We support, with our words and actions, those who live under oppressive regimes and who seek freedom, individual dignity, and the rule of law. We are under no obligation to offer the benefits of our free and prosperous community to repressive regimes and human rights abusers. We may use diplomacy, sanctions, and other tools to isolate states and leaders who threaten our interests and whose actions run contrary to our values. …

… Although the United States seeks to continue to cooperate with China… Its efforts to build and militarize outposts in the South China Sea endanger the free flow of trade, threaten the sovereignty of other nations, and undermine regional stability. China has mounted a rapid military modernization campaign designed to limit U.S. access to the region…
… Our alliance and friendship with South Korea, forged by the trials of history, is stronger than ever. We welcome and support the strong leadership role of our critical ally, Japan. Australia has fought alongside us in every significant conflict since World War I… New Zealand is a key U.S. partner contributing to peace and security across the region. We welcome India’s emergence as a leading global power and stronger strategic and defense partner. We will seek to increase quadrilateral cooperation with Japan, Australia, and India.
In Southeast Asia, the Philippines and Thailand remain important allies and markets for Americans. Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore are growing security and economic partners of the United States. …
… We will work with allies and partners to achieve complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula and preserve the non-proliferation regime in Northeast Asia.
…we will cooperate on missile defense with Japan and South Korea to move toward an area defense capability. We remain ready to respond with overwhelming force to North Korean aggression and will improve options to compel denuclearization of the peninsula. We will improve law enforcement, defense, and intelligence cooperation with Southeast Asian partners to address the growing terrorist threat. We will maintain our strong ties with Taiwan in accordance with our “One China” policy…
… Russia is using subversive measures to weaken the credibility of America’s commitment to Europe, undermine transatlantic unity, and weaken European institutions and governments. With its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine…
China is gaining a strategic foothold in Europe by expanding its unfair trade practices and investing in key industries, sensitive technologies, and infrastructure. Europe also faces immediate threats from violent Islamist extremists. Attacks by ISIS and other jihadist…
… We will encourage European foreign direct investment in the United States to create jobs. We will work with our allies and partners to diversify European energy sources to ensure the energy security of European countries. We will work with our partners to contest China’s unfair trade and economic practices and restrict its acquisition of sensitive technologies.
… We expect our European allies to increase defense spending to 2 percent of gross domestic product by 2024, with 20 percent of this spending devoted to increasing military capabilities. …
Middle East
… For generations the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians has been understood as the prime irritant preventing peace and prosperity in the region. Today, the threats from jihadist terrorist organizations and the threat from Iran are creating the realization that Israel is not the cause of the region’s problems. States have increasingly found common interests with Israel in confronting common threats. …
… We remain committed to helping our partners achieve a stable and prosperous region, including through a strong and integrated Gulf Cooperation Council. We will strengthen our long-term strategic partnership with Iraq as an independent state. We will seek a settlement to the Syrian civil war that sets the conditions for refugees to return home and rebuild their lives in safety. … We remain committed to helping facilitate a comprehensive peace agreement that is acceptable to both Israelis and Palestinians. …
South and Central Asia
… We will help South Asian nations maintain their sovereign as China increases its influence in the region. …
Western Hemisphere
Stable, friendly, and prosperous states in the Western Hemisphere enhance our security and benefit our economy. Democratic states connected by shared values and economic interests will reduce the violence, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration that threaten our common security…
… Transnational criminal organizations—including gangs and cartels—perpetuate violence and corruption, and threaten the stability of Central American states including Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. In Venezuela and Cuba, governments cling to anachronistic leftist authoritarian models that continue to fail their people. Competitors have found operating space in the hemisphere.
China seeks to pull the region into its orbit through state-led investments and loans. Russia continues its failed politics of the Cold War by bolstering its radical Cuban allies as Cuba continues to repress its citizens. Both China and Russia support the dictatorship in Venezuela and are seeking to expand military linkages and arms sales across the region. …
… China is expanding its economic and military presence in Africa, growing from a small investor in the continent two decades ago into Africa’s largest trading partner today. Some Chinese practices undermine Africa’s long-term development by corrupting elites, dominating extractive industries, and locking countries into unsustainable and opaque debts and commitments. …
… We will offer American goods and services, both because it is profitable for us and because it serves as an alternative to China’s often extractive economic footprint on the continent. …

… It is realist because it acknowledges the central role of power in international politics, affirms that sovereign states are the best hope for a peaceful world, and clearly defines our national interests. It is principled because it is grounded in the knowledge that advancing American principles spreads peace and prosperity around the globe. We are guided by our values and disciplined by our interests. …

Free papers, reports, et al. Vol.24

Here are tweets of great stuff retweeted by @_WorldSolutions.

Germany Vol.4 (Coalition talks)

US Policy Changes Vol.73 (US business school professors Vol.6)

Here is a part of U.S. business schools’ tweets on economic/social/technological issues in which their professors/alumni are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those from September to November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or people.]

US Policy Changes Vol.71 (US business school professors Vol.4)

Here is a part of U.S. business schools’ tweets on economic/social/technological issues in which their professors/alumni are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those from September to November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or people.]

US Policy Changes Vol.70 (US business school professors Vol.3)

Here is a part of U.S. business schools’ tweets on economic/social/technological issues in which their professors/alumni are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those from September to November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or people.]

US Policy Changes Vol.69 (US business school professors Vol.2)

Here is a part of U.S. business schools’ tweets on economic/social/technological issues in which their professors are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those from September to November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or professors.]

US Policy Changes Vol.68 (US business school professors Vol.1)

Here is a part of U.S. business schools’ tweets on economic/social/technological issues in which their professors are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those from September to November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or professors.]

US Policy Changes Vol.67 (US law professors Vol.3)

Here is a part of U.S. law schools’ recent tweets on legal and political issues in which their professors are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those in November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or professors.]

US Policy Changes Vol.66 (US law professors Vol.2)

Here is a part of U.S. law schools’ recent tweets on legal and political issues in which their professors are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those in November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or professors.]

US Policy Changes Vol.65 (US law professors Vol.1)

Here is a part of U.S. law schools’ recent tweets on legal and political issues in which their professors are featured, quoted, et al. (mainly those in November 2017). Great stuff!
[We don’t have affiliations with these schools or professors.]

UK Vol.104 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.29)

UK Vol.102 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.27)

Spain Vol.2 (Catalunya Vol.2)


Balkan Vol.3 (Bosnia & Herzegovina, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia)

former Yugoslavia
Bosnia & Herzegovina




UK Vol.94 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.23)

Here are tweets on Brexit.

UK Vol.93 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.22: 2017 General Election – results, et al.)

Here are articles on the general election results, et al. Excerpts are on our own.

Election 2017 – UK results | @BBC

Interactive map: Britain’s general election 2017 – Live election results reported here, seat by seat | @economist

UK general election 2017 | @YouGov ElectionCentre

Election results 2017: full list and map | @FT
GE2017uk 649results

General Election 2017 (incl London interactive) | @standardnews

Live Now: U.K. General Election Results | @bpolitics

General election 2017: expert comment and analysis from @UCLPublicPolicy

Ungovernable  Hung Parliaments are so 2010 (27/5/2017) | @robfuller91 @medium

Corbyn, and an election surprise (26/5/2017) | @openDemocracy

Media coverage of the 2017 General Election campaign [report 3 – covering 18th-31st May inclusive] (w Video; 2/6/2017) | @lboroCRCC

Why do our party leaders tour the country? And will it affect Thursday’s election result? (4/6/2017) | @MiddletonAlia @PSABlog

2017 General Election live opinion poll | @gritdigital

UK Snap General Election Polling Results 19th April 2017 (PDF) | @opinion_life

UK general election 2017 poll tracker: All the latest results as Conservatives battle Labour Polls are a crucial part of the election wallchart – even if they’ve got a bad rep. Here are the latest results and analysis of what it all means (8/6/2017) | @mikeysmith,@taylorjoshua1,@danbloom1 @MirrorPolitics

We are becoming segregated into young and old communities without realising (5/6/2017) | Albert Sabater, Elspeth Graham, Nissa Finney (@univofstandrews) @ConversationUK

The Young Vote in 2017: Stat Attack (11/5/2017) | @bennosaurus @PSABlog

An economist views the UK’s snap general election (5/6/2017) | Jan Toporowski @OUPEconomics
… On 11 May the Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney reassured the markets that the ‘good Brexit deal’ would stabilise our economy after 2019, and the markets were duly sedated. …
… For the Europeans, this will be the fourth ‘deal’ that Britain will have secured: the first on entry in 1973; the second under Margaret Thatcher in 1984 when ‘we got our money back’; the third obtained by David Cameron in 2016; and the fourth that is to come resulting from our exit from the European Union.
… Indeed the more our politicians demand that we give them ‘a strong negotiating position’ with Europe, the more they are hedging their electoral promises with the alibi that, if they do not deliver, it will be because we did not give them a sufficiently ‘strong negotiating position’, or they were taken advantage of by the Europeans. …
In this respect the election is not needed at this moment, in particular for the Brexit process which leaves our government only 21 months to settle the complex questions arising out of Brexit. Out of these questions, the more obviously insoluble conundrums are Northern Ireland…

Dr Jonathan Leader Maynard discusses what more can be done to prevent UK terrorism (6/6/2017) | @Politics_Oxford

Observer editorial: There has been a shameful lack of leadership from all parties. But we can no longer tolerate Theresa May’s agenda for post-Brexit Britain (4/6/2017) | @guardian
… She has provided no further detail about her Brexit negotiating strategy, sticking to her disastrous mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal. She has signalled immigration control will be her top priority, even though securing it will mean leaving the single market, jeopardising everything else voters care deeply about – jobs and growth and the future of our public services.
There are echoes of Ed Miliband’s social democratic priorities in parts of her manifesto and she should be applauded for signalling that unfettered free markets are not the route to social and economic justice. She sets out proposals for greater state intervention in markets that stack the odds against consumers and workers and unfairly, and often obscenely, advantage CEOs and senior executives. Dropping the commitment to the triple lock on the state pension is a tentative first step towards recognising the need for intergenerational rebalancing.
But her manifesto is thin on detail and May is no stranger to adopting contradictory rhetoric and positions. …
But Corbyn’s ability to run a decent election campaign cannot be taken as a sign he would make a competent premier. Last summer, he failed to win the support of 80% of his MPs in a confidence vote. Many had vowed to give him a chance but withdrew support on grounds of competency, with stories emerging of a chaotic operation. …

The Conservative manifesto and social care: policy-making on the hoof (22/5/2017) | @MelanieHenwood @LSEpoliticsblog
… The publication of the Conservative Manifesto unexpectedly outlined a change of direction when Theresa May seemed to dismiss the ‘capped cost’ model of funding which was brought into legislation by the Coalition Government in the 2014 Care Act, and implementation was delayed by the incoming Conservative government in July 2015 on the grounds that it would give local government longer to prepare and to have adequate resources. The manifesto made no reference either to the Care Act, or to the capped cost model, but remarked that “where others have failed to lead, we will act”. Further detail will follow in a green paper, but the sketchiness of the proposals has already proved a major flaw.
The manifesto lamented the costs of caring for older generations, “borne by working people through their taxes” and proposed a way forward that would be “more equitable, within and across the generations.” Except, it hasn’t quite played out like that. Some might think that ditching legislation that has not yet been fully implemented is disingenuous; others may see it simply as May’s blatant attempt to stamp her own brand of conservatism all over policy and political doctrine, and distance herself from her predecessors. What this episode reveals more than anything is political naivety, poor judgement, and lack of understanding of the complexity of social care. …

Theresa May, Borrowing from Labour, Vows to Extend Protections for Workers (15/5/2017) | @_StephenCastle @nytimes
Since emerging as prime minister from the political wreckage of last year’s vote to quit the European Union, Theresa May has told Britain’s voters little about what she believes, aside from stressing her desire for a clean break from the bloc.
But with an election looming, Mrs. May is promoting some strikingly centrist social and economic policies, reaching out across the political divide to traditional supporters of the opposition Labour Party, many of whose incomes were squeezed after the financial crash. …
“We are seeing a willingness to think of intervention that would have been seen as anathema by hard-core Thatcherites,” said @ProfTimBale , professor of politics at @QMPoliticsIR. …
… May’s main election strategy is to argue that she is better placed than her less popular Labour rival, Mr. Corbyn, to provide the “strong and stable leadership” which has become her mantra. …
Analysts ascribe the intellectual basis of Mrs. May’s brand of conservatism to Nick Timothy, one of her two closest aides. Mr. Timothy was raised in Birmingham, one of Britain’s industrial heartlands, and is a admirer of the type of municipal politics practiced by Joseph Chamberlain, who transformed the leadership of the city in the 19th century and whose legacy has also been cited as an inspiration by Mrs. May. …

The political economy of the Conservative Manifesto: a hallucinatory celebration of the state (24/5/2017) | Abby Innes @LSEEI
… As Hans Werner Sinn notes, since governments have stepped in when markets have failed historically, it can hardly be expected that a reintroduction of the market through the backdoor will work. More problematically still, supply-side reforms assume that if you bring businesses into the state, you get the best of states and markets and not the worst of both regimes: a lean and more efficient bureaucracy and not an informationally and organisationally fragmented state increasingly beset by conflicts of interests; the dynamism of competitive enterprises and not the financially extractive practices of low-performing public service industry monopolies.
The challenge that faces the next government is that these reforms have failed in the terms by which they were justified. Ruth Dixon and Christopher Hood find that reported administration costs in the UK have risen by 40 per cent in constant prices over the last thirty years despite a third of the civil service being cut over the same period, whilst total public spending has doubled. Running costs were driven up most in the outsourced areas and failures of service, complaints, and judicial challenges have soared. Government has attempted to resolve these self-inflicted market failures with regulatory oversight to codify tasks – consider teaching or medical care – un-codifiable in their most important aspects. Bureaucratic monitoring at levels un-dreamed of in the 1970s has joined informational and structural fragmentation, professional demoralisation and increased costs. …
A voter could not tell from this manifesto whether a Conservative government would restore the integrity of the state or follow along the path of its supply-sider predecessors whose striking achievement has been a creeping corporate extraction of public authority and funding. It is worth remembering that their putative goal in theory was the night-watchman state of libertarian fantasy: a state that protects only contract, property rights and sovereignty and that has never existed in the history of capitalism, let alone democratic capitalism. The evidence of May’s current administration is that she endorses the supply-side diagnosis. The Conservative leadership is waving Disraeli’s hat but it is still wearing Milton Friedman’s trousers.

The Hard Brexit road to Indyref2 (14/3/2017) | @IPR_NickP @UniofBathIPR
… Two factors explain Nicola Sturgeon’s decision: the intransigence of Conservative-Unionism and the weakness of the Labour Party. Intransigence is in part an artifact of the Prime Minister’s governing style, which combines “personal animus and political diligence”, as David Runciman has written. She sticks to a position doggedly and keeps things close to her in No10. She is capable of ruthless revenge, to the point of petulance, as Michael Heseltine recently discovered. It is a statecraft that has served her well until now. It is not one that is suited to sharing power in a process of negotiation and compromise across a fractured union.
Her choice of the hard route to Brexit has also narrowed her scope for flexibility. …
History is in danger of repeating itself. The last time the United Kingdom was challenged by the aspirations for greater self-determination of a significant proportion of one its nations was during the long struggle for Irish Home Rule. Conservative-Unionists met that challenge by suppression, not accommodation. It didn’t end well.
The second factor is the decline of the Labour Party. …
Labour’s vacillation on Europe means that it is currently largely voiceless in the national debate on Brexit. It is shedding votes to the Liberal Democrats as a consequence. It fears a further loss of support to UKIP and the Conservatives if it backs membership of the single market and customs union in the Brexit negotiations. But the prospect of the breakup of the UK, the unstitching of the Northern Irish settlement, and economic decline in its heartlands should give it cause to consider the national interest, not just the party interest. …

Agricultural policy after Brexit (23/5/2017) | @Dieter_Helm @OUPEconomics @pixabay
… The CAP pays the bulk of the subsidies as a payment for owning land (called Pillar I). The economic effects of Pillar I subsidies are obvious: increasing the revenues per hectare raises the price of a hectare. Land prices capitalise the subsidies, creating barriers to entry. As a result, the CAP has also now established a fund to help young farmers get into the industry, in the face of the obstacles the CAP itself creates. The rest of the subsidy goes on rural development and environmental schemes (called Pillar II). These are often poorly designed.
…the first option is to shift some of the subsidy from paying to own land towards more spending on the environment – i.e. shifting the balance from Pillar I to Pillar II.
The second is more radical, switching to a system of paying public money for public goods. …

Local elections 2017: Six key lessons for the general election (5/5/2017) | @JohnCurticeOnTV @BBC

Local election 2017 results in England, Wales and Scotland – and what does it mean for the general election? (6/5/2017) | @Ashley_J_Kirk,@Patrick_E_Scott @Telegraph_Data,@Telegraph

UpVote episode 6: Labour’s surge and the secrets behind Brexit – Professor Paul Whiteley (@uniessexgovt) simulated the Brexit referendum a million times – and Remain won 66 per cent (w Voice; 1/6/2017) | @rowlsmanthorpe @WiredUK

Why Britain voted to Leave (and what Boris Johnson had to do with it) (4/5/2017) | Harold D. Clarke, Matthew Goodwin and Paul Whiteley @lsebrexitvote
… Though Leavers were divided on how to deal with immigration, our findings also point to the important role of ‘cues’ from leaders, specifically Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage. Johnson had a particularly important effect –if you liked Boris then even after controlling for a host of other factors you were significantly more likely to vote for Brexit. Farage was less popular among the professional middle-classes but he was more popular among blue-collar workers and left behind voters, underlining how these rival messengers were able to reach into different groups of voters. …

Why immigration was key to Brexit vote – Brexit reflected ‘a complex and cross-cutting mix of calculations, emotions and cues’ but anxiety over immigration was the dominant factor (15/5/2017) | Matthew Goodwin @IrishTimes
… Where did Remain go wrong? David Cameron and the Remainers recognised that many voters were risk averse and concerned about the economic effects of Brexit. “Project Fear”… Although a plurality of voters felt negatively about both sides, a larger number saw Leave – not Remain – as more positive, honest, clear about their case and as having understood people’s concerns. While more than twice as many people saw Leave rather than Remain as representing “ordinary people”, more than twice as many saw Remain rather than Leave as representing “the establishment”. …

The level of economic optimism within a country may be a key factor in determining voter turnout (1/11/2014) | Troy Cruickshank @LSEEuroppblog

P.S. 10 June

UK Vol.92 (Post-EUref #Brexit Vol.21: 2017 General Election – Manifestos of UKIP, Green Party)

Here are manifestos of United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and Green Party. Excerpts are on our own.

——- UKIP Britain Together: The UKIP 2017 General Election Manifesto (issuu or PDF)
3 Britain Together: Paul Nuttall, UKIP Leader
5 Introduction to the 2017 UKIP Manifesto
• Raise the threshold for paying income tax to £13,500, cut taxes for middle earners, abolish the TV licence and cut VAT on household bills
• Scrap tuition fees for science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine students
• Provide up to 100,000 new homes for younger people every year
• Maintain all pensioner benefits and the pensions Triple Lock
• Protect disability and carer’s benefits
• Spend a genuine two per cent of GDP on defence, plus £1 billion every year
• Fund 20,000 more police officers, 7,000 more prison officers, and 4,000 more border force staff
• Revive our coastal communities and fishing villages
• Cut Business Rates for the smallest businesses
• Commission a dedicated hospital ship to assist our armed forces and deliver humanitarian medical assistance worldwide
6 Brexit Britain: The Key Tests
Article 50 is not just a two-year process, as it makes provision for negotiations to extend for an indefinite time beyond that. We are likely to find ourselves facing protracted and tortuous negotiations with a recalcitrant, bullying EU for quite some time. The EU has no incentive to negotiate a ‘good deal’ for the UK because it does not want us to leave.
The UK has massive exposure to the liabilities of the European Central Bank, the European Investment Bank, and various other ‘financial mechanisms’ of the EU so long as we remain a member. We will be expected to contribute to any Eurozone bailouts. The EU will also have to plug a huge financial hole of some 12 per cent of the gross EU budget when Britain leaves. These are just two very good reasons for the EU to keep us dangling on the hook for as long as possible.
The longer the EU can keep Britain in, the greater the opportunity for a new government to reverse the referendum decision, or sign up to some kind of associated membership agreement which, to all intents and purposes, will be just like EU membership.
… The EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was cobbled together in 1970 as Denmark, Ireland, Norway and the UK were on course to join the then EEC. Together, these countries held 90 per cent of Western European fish stocks. 80 per cent of those stocks were British. …
UKIP will repeal this little-known convention, an agreement between twelve European nations and the UK, which recognises the historic fishing rights of vessels from the contracting parties to fish in the band of waters between six and twelve nautical miles from the UK coast.
When the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy ceases to apply, the UK will automatically establish control of a 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone giving our fishermen sole access to the seas within 200 miles of the UK coastline, or at the mid-point between two countries’ coastlines. However, the existence of the pre-EU 1964 Convention could offer a back door to continued EU fishing in British waters, as vessels belonging to signatory nations could cite this legislation and claim ‘historic rights’ to fishing within the 6 to 12 nautical mile band around the UK. …
…it could be worth as much as £6.3 billion to the UK economy in net-to-plate income alone. …
The British Passport
10 Sound National Finances, A Lower Cost of Living
UKIP has always made the case for lower taxes and an end to wasteful public spending programmes. We will scrap white elephant vanity proj