Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Friday, January 10, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 60)

U.S. Economy Grew at Faster Pace than Initially Expected in Q3 2019

The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) reported the third estimate for third-quarter (Q3) 2019 gross domestic product (GDP) held at 2.1%, higher than initially forecasted. Real GDP rose by 2.0% in Q2 2019.

Second estimate forecasts ranged from a low of 1.7% to a high of 2.1%. The second consensus forecast was 1.9% and the forecast for the advance was just 1.6%.

Third estimate forecasts ranged from a low of 1.9% to a high of 2.1%. The consensus was 2.1%.

The final reading on Q3 2019 GDP reflects upward revisions to personal consumption expenditures (PCE) and nonresidential fixed investment, which were offset by a downward revision to private inventory investment.

Consumer spending came in at a much stronger 3.2% for Q3 2019. That’s up from 2.9% in the second estimate.

Consumer spending forecasts ranged from a low of 2.8% to a high of 2.9%, and the consensus was 2.8%.

Real gross domestic income (GDI) rose 2.1% in the quarter, compared with a much smaller gain of 0.9% in Q2 2019. The average of real GDP and real GDI—a supplemental measure of U.S. economic activity that equally weights GDP and GDI—also rose 2.1% in Q3, up from 1.4% in Q2.

The third estimate for third-quarter (Q3) 2019

The U.S. Labor Department report initial jobless claims fell 18,000 to a seasonally adjusted 234,000 for the week ending December 14. That follows a jump for the previous week, which was unrevised at 252,000.

Forecasts ranged from a low of 215,000 to a high of 235,000. The consensus forecast was 221,000.

The 4-week moving average came in at 225,500, a slight increase of 1,500 from the previous week’s unrevised average of 224,000.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was unchanged at a very low 1.2% for the week ending December 7. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending December 7 was 1,722,000.

That’s an increase of 51,000 from the previous week’s upwardly (+4k) revised level from 1,667,000 to 1,671,000.

The 4-week moving average was 1,683,500, an increase of 6,250 from the previous week average, which was revised up by 1,250 from 1,676,000 to 1,677,250.

No state was triggered “on” the Extended Benefits program during the week ending November 30.

The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending November 30 were in Alaska (3.1), New Jersey (2.2), Puerto Rico (2.1), West Virginia (2.1), Montana (2.0), California (1.9), Connecticut (1.8), Minnesota (1.8), Pennsylvania (1.8), and Washington (1.8).

The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending December 7 were in California (+11,977), New York (+10,875), Texas (+10,290), Pennsylvania (+8,078), and Georgia (+5,631), while the largest decreases were in Oklahoma (-951), Vermont (-147), and Arkansas (-131).

The U.S. Labor Department report initial jobless

House Democrats Push First Partisan Impeachment in Modern U.S. History

President Donald J. Trump, left, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., right.
President Donald J. Trump, left, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., right.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to approve articles of impeachment against President Donald J. Trump. The 45th President is only the third to be impeached in U.S. history.

But it is the first time in modern history a partisan majority impeached a sitting President of the United States without any support from the minority.

Article I accusing the president of “abuse of power” passed over bipartisan opposition. The vote was 230-197. Two Democrats—Reps. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J.—joined all Republicans to vote against the measure.

Numerous Democrats clapped when the vote on the first article of impeachment closed. Several Republicans booed in response.

Article II accusing the president of “obstruction of Congress” also passed over bipartisan opposition. The vote was 229-198. Three Democrats—Reps. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J., and Jared Golden, D-Me.—joined all Republicans to vote against the measure.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Ha., voted “present” on both articles of impeachment.

While successful, the impeachment effort represented a failure to meet the very standard set by majority leaders of the Democratic Party, themselves. Rep. Van Drew announced he will leave the Democratic Party and become a Republican following that failure.

Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., March 11, 2019

If the evidence isn’t sufficient to win bipartisan support for this, putting the country through a failed impeachment isn’t a good idea.

House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., March 11, 2019

Impeachment should not be partisan. You have to be in a situation to undertake impeachment where you believe that once all the evidence is public, not a majority but a good fraction of the opposition voters who supported the president would say, ‘Well, they had to do it. It was the right thing to do.’

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.., September 20, 2018

Chairman Nadler argued throughout the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton it should “never” be done with the support of one party.

There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment substantially supported by one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other. Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce the divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.., 1998

He echoed that sentiment in more recent prior statements.

“If you’re serious about impeaching a president, it cannot and should not be done on a partisan basis,” he said in a February 2018 MSNBC interview. “You have to have, at least by the end of the process, buy-in from the Republicans, or at least a good number of Republicans.”

The proceedings were sparked by a complaint filed by partisan CIA analyst. The complaint alleged President Trump sought to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate allegations of corruption against former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter Biden.

Both world leaders have repeatedly denied the accusations and the White House released a transcript of their July 25 telephone call as evidence that no wrongdoing occurred during the conversation.

Meanwhile, President Trump largely ignored the votes while holding a big rally attended by thousands in Battle Creek, Michigan.

“By the way, it doesn’t really feel like we’re being impeached. The country is doing better than ever before and we did nothing wrong,” he said. “We have tremendous support.”

Recent polls show the president’s approval rating rising, him leading all his potential Democratic challengers both nationally and in battleground states, and voters opposed to impeachment and removal.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives

Justice Department (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz testifies before the U.S. Congress.
Justice Department (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz testifies before the U.S. Congress.

Justice Department (DOJ) Inspector General Michael Horowitz pushed back on claims his investigation exonerated the FBI of political bias in the probe conducted on the Trump campaign. Questioned on Wednesday by Senator Josh Hawley, R-Mo., the inspector general clarified political bias was a possible motive to open the investigation.

“Was it your conclusion that political bias did not affect any part of the Page investigation, any part of Crossfire Hurricane?” Senator Hawley asked. “We did not reach that conclusion,” Mr. Horowitz replied.

He added that his team did not accept the explanations officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation offered as to why there were “so many errors” in their investigation.

“We have been very careful in the connection with the FISA’s for the reasons you mentioned to not reach that conclusion,” Mr. Horowitz further told Senator Hawley. “As we’ve talked about earlier — the alteration of the email, the text messages associated with the individual who did that, and our inability to explain or understand, to get good explanations so that we could understand why this all happened.”

Last Monday, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released a Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation. Democrats and their allies in big media quickly seized on Mr. Horowitz’s statement that he “did not find documentary or testimonial evidence” of political bias as the predicate.

On Tuesday, the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) responded to the blistering report. The inspector general found seven “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in just the first of four total warrant applications.

The latter three applications contained ten additional major inaccuracies. All seventeen errors were against Mr. Page and Team Trump.

Judge Rosemary Collyer issued an unprecedented public rebuke of the FBI for its handling of warrant applications used to spy on the Trump campaign. She called the bureau’s actions “antithetical to the heightened duty of candor” owed to the secret court.

John Durham, the U.S. Attorney for Connecticut tasked with investigating potential wrongdoings in the origins of the Russia probe, released a rare public statement casting doubt on the idea political bias was not the motive for opening the investigation.

I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department.

Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.  Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.

John Durham, U.S. Attorney for Connecticut

As People’s Pundit Daily (PPD) previously reported, Mr. Durham has expanded his probe and the timeline under investigation. The move—which came after he returned from questioning controversial figures overseas—strongly indicates he did find criminal misconduct.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz pushed back on

Big brother is watching you vector graphic concept to illustrate secret government surveillance programs. (Photo: Adobe)
Big brother is watching you vector graphic concept to illustrate secret government surveillance programs. (Photo: Adobe)

The secret FISA court (FISC) issued an unprecedented public rebuke of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for its handling of warrant applications used to spy on the Trump campaign.

Judge Rosemary Collyer, the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), was responding to the blistering report issued by the Justice Department (DOJ) Office of Inspector General (OIG). She called the actions of the FBI “antithetical to the heightened duty of candor” owed to the court.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz found seven “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in just the first of four total warrant applications. The latter three applications contained ten additional major inaccuracies.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows intelligence agencies to collect information on foreign targets abroad. It also created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

Supporters argued there were rigorous safeguards and robust restrictions on FISA. Critics argued the court served only as a rubber stamp. Of 1,080 requests in 2018, only one application was denied.

Carter Page, a low-level former foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign, found himself at the center of the Russia Collusion Hoax. He found himself on the wrong end of FISA abuse.

Big brother is watching you vector graphic

The Federal Reserve said industrial production and manufacturing production both rebounded 1.1% in November, beating the 0.7% and 0.9% consensus forecasts, respectively. This sharp gain follows a strike-fueled decline in October, and was driven by an increase in motor vehicle output.

Forecasts for industrial production ranged from a low of 0.5% to a high 1.1%. The consensus was 0.9%.

Excluding motor vehicles and parts, the indexes for total industrial production and for manufacturing moved up 0.5% and 0.3%, respectively.

Forecasts for manufacturing output ranged from a low of 0.3% to a high 1.6%. The consensus was 0.7%.

Mining production ticked down slightly by 0.2%, while the output of utilities rose 2.9%. 

At 109.7% of its 2012 average, total industrial production was 0.8% lower in November than it was a year earlier. Capacity utilization for the industrial sector increased 0.7% in November to 77.3%, a rate that is 2.5% below its long-run (1972–2018) average.

Forecasts for the capacity utilization rate ranged from a low of 76.8% to a high 77.6%. The consensus was 77.4%.

Industrial production and manufacturing production both rebounded

Joint Report on New Residential Construction Stronger than Expected

The new residential construction report finds housing starts and building permits came in higher by 3.2% and 1.4%, respectively, both beating forecasts.

The report is released jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Housing Starts

Privately‐owned housing starts came in at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,365,000 in November, or 3.2% (±10.0%) higher than the revised October estimate of 1,323,000. Housing starts are now 13.6% (±12.8%) above the November 2018 rate of 1,202,000.

Single‐family housing starts were estimated at a rate of 938,000, or 2.4% (±5.8%) higher than the revised October figure of 916,000. The rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 404,000 in November.

The forecasts for housing starts ranged from a low of 1,293,000 to a high 1,390,000. The consensus forecast was 1,340,000.

Building Permits

Privately‐owned housing units authorized by building permits came in at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,482,000 in November, or 1.4% (±1.4%) higher than the revised October rate of 1,461,000. Building permits are now 11.1% (±1.8%) higher than the November 2018 rate of 1,334,000.

Single‐family authorizations came in at a rate of 918,000, which is 0.8% (±1.3%) higher than the revised October figure of 911,000. Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 524,000 in November.

The forecasts for building permits ranged from a low of 1,380,000 to a high 1,450,000. The consensus forecast was 1,340,000.

Housing Completions

Privately‐owned housing completions came in at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,188,000, down 6.6% (±8.9%) from the revised October estimate of 1,272,000. However, completions are still 7.3% (±14.8%) higher than the November 2018 rate of 1,107,000.

Single‐family housing completions cane in at a rate of 883,000, which is 3.6% (±10.0%) below the revised October rate of 916,000. The rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 295,000 in November.

The new residential construction report finds housing

I’m on my way back to the United States from England. My election-week coverage (starting here and ending here) is finished, but I’m still in the mood to write about the United Kingdom.

Yesterday, I shared some “Great Moments in British Government” and today I want to look at the U.K.’s single-payer health scheme.

The National Health Service (NHS) is inexplicably popular. Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn basically competed over who would dump the most money into the system.

This near-universal affection is a mystery. There’s a lot of data suggesting the system doesn’t work.

Consider these details from a column by a British doctor.

One of the most curious political phenomena of the western world is the indestructible affection in which the British hold their National Health Service. No argument, no criticism, no evidence can diminish, let alone destroy, it. …Yet again, however, the NHS is in ‘crisis.’ The British Red Cross has called the present situation an incipient humanitarian crisis, as if the country were now more or less in the same category as Haiti after a hurricane… The current NHS has a budget 50 per cent greater than it had 10 years ago. It employs 25 per cent more doctors than it did then. …but the net result, according to those who say the present situation is the worst ever, is that it is less able than ever before to perform satisfactorily its most elementary tasks such as treating emergencies promptly. …The difference in the standard mortality rate of the richest and poorest is now almost double what it was when the NHS began. …in 2014 the Commonwealth Fund of New York, a foundation whose purpose is to promote an effective, efficient and equitable health care system, published a report in which it compared 11 western health care systems. …The measure on which it was next to worst was the number of deaths preventable by health care. …thousands of people die every year in Britain who would have been saved in any other country in Europe.

Here are some passages from a recent editorial by the Wall Street Journal.

The NHS managed to treat only 83.6% of emergency-room patients within four hours in October, compared to 89.1% a year earlier and well short of the government’s target of 95%. …The NHS also missed its target for 93% of patients with suspected cancer to be seen by a specialist within two weeks of referral by a family doctor. In September, 90.1% of patients saw a specialist within two weeks, down from 91.2% in September 2018. A bureaucrat or Senator Elizabeth Warren might think that’s good enough for government work. But it’s definitely not for the nearly 10% of patients and their families who had to live with a suspected cancer diagnosis… Politicians who want a U.S. version of the NHS via Medicare for All should explain why they want Americans to catch this British disease.

Here are some insights from a former British hospital director.

…the people at the very top of the NHS’s regional and national organisations still truly believe in command and control. They are the only people left who still believe in the power of the five year plan to solve pressing public policy problems. They set targets in the same way as the managers of the Soviet tractor factories… The hospital I was involved in had a problem with its A&E waiting times. We were provided with “help” from multiple NHS intervention teams. There were so many of them that they arrived in a bus… Each of them wanted slightly different information, each had a different view of what the problem was… After several weeks of this they came up with an action plan containing 147 individual actions, each of which then had to be measured and monitored and reported back to the intervention teams. We all knew that the action plan was there to tick the box required by the central bureaucracy, not to solve the problem. …Every profession has its own powerful union, dressed up as a professional body, that is quite happy to hold their employer to ransom. When I was on the hospital board it took two years of negotiations to get the pharmacists to work shifts so that the pharmacy could stay open until 7pm.

Even the left-leaning Guardian recognizes there are major problems.

British households will need to pay an extra £2,000 a year in tax to help the NHS cope with the demands of an ageing population, according to a new report that highlights the unprecedented financial pressures on the health system. …The report said the NHS has been struggling to cope… Niall Dickson, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which commissioned the report and represents 85% of NHS bodies, said: “This report is a wake-up call. And its message is simple – if we want good, effective and safe services, we will have to find the resources to pay for them.” …“If we are to have a health and social care system which meets our needs and aspirations, we will have to pay a lot more for it over the next 15 years. This time we won’t be able to rely on cutting spending elsewhere – we will have to pay more in tax…” The report said…the money would have to be found from the three main sources of government revenue: income tax, VAT or national insurance.

An expert from the U.K.’s Taxpayers Alliance exposes some warts in the NHS.

Hardly a day goes by without stories of how cash-strapped the service is and how it is on the brink of collapse. According to pretty much everyone in the newspapers, on the TV, and on social media the solution is simple – more money. …The NHS is certainly in a sickly state, but more money is not the solution. International league tables frequently rank the NHS near the bottom in terms of healthcare quality. Moreover, the UK ranks 19th out of 23 for mortality amenable to healthcare and 20th out of 24 developed countries for cancer survival. The failings of the NHS are perhaps best summed up by The Guardian…: “The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive”. …A specific ‘NHS tax’ is a particularly bad idea. …throwing more money at the NHS is not an adequate solution. Scotland spends more money per capita on healthcare than England, but has longer waiting times for appointments and slower response times for ambulances. …As the head of the NAO Amyas Morse observed… “Over the last ten years, there has been significant real growth in the resources going into the NHS, most of it funding higher staff pay and increases in headcount. The evidence shows that productivity in the same period has gone down, particularly in hospitals.”

Sally Pipes of the Pacific Research Institute also reveals some NHS shortcomings.

The United Kingdom’s single-payer system is in turmoil. It’d be foolish to import that failed model. The NHS has rationed care for decades. But wait times and delays have gotten markedly worse in recent months. The NHS recently canceled55,000 non-urgent operations… Last month, nearly 15 percent of emergency-room patients had to wait more than four hours to be seen by a physician. The conditions are so bad in U.K. hospitals that, in a letter to the nation’s government, 68 British emergency room physicians recently complained about patients “dying prematurely in corridors” as a result of overcrowding. …no amount of money can fix a system in which government bureaucrats, and not markets, determine how to distribute healthcare resources.

Bruce Bawer is certainly not impressed with the NHS.

…the Brits have been brainwashed for generations into thinking their NHS is some kind of miracle. …What makes this NHS-worship especially grotesque is that the NHS, far from being successful, is a world-class disaster. Last July the BBC reported that the NHS was “increasingly” rationing such treatments as “hip and knee replacements and cataract surgery … as well as drugs for conditions such as arthritis.” …the NHS has always “covertly” rationed health care…cutting corners, canceling operations and doctor appointments, and extending already long waiting times even for urgent treatments. In October came reports that patients’ obesity and tobacco use were increasingly being used as excuses for denying them care. In November, a Cambridge University study concluded that 120,000 Brits had perished unnecessarily during the previous seven years…hospitals all over Britain — including operating rooms and maternity wards — were infested by cockroaches, maggots, insects, and rats. …the NHS is no role model. On the contrary, its history is a cautionary tale — and its prospects are nothing less than nightmarish.

Charles Hughes of the Manhattan Institute shares some grim news about the NHS’s performance.

A tracker from the BBC found that for 18 months hospitals across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland have failed to meet any of their three key targets, namely four-hour waits at the emergency department, cancer care within 62 days, and treating at least 92 percent of patients for planned hospital care or surgery within 18 weeks.  Waiting lists have ballooned. As of August 2017, the most recent month of data available, 409,000 had been waiting longer than 18 weeks for hospital treatment, an increase of almost 73,000 from the previous August. The median wait now stands at 7.1 weeks. …Citizens dissatisfied with rationing and wait times are turning to alternative options, forbidden in Canada. About 10 percent of people purchase supplemental private insurance for more timely treatment, many through company offerings. …Profit-driven hospital firms have seen a 15-25 percent year-on-year increase in the number of patients paying for their treatment themselves. People are also venturing abroad in their quest to get needed medical care. According to the Office of National Statistics, the total number of people leaving the U.K. for medical care surged from 48,000 in 2014 to almost 144,000 in 2016.

Some of the rationing and delays are simply due to government incompetence.

Some of it involves targeting certain segments of the population.

The NHS will ban patients from surgery indefinitely unless they lose weight or quit smoking, under controversial plans drawn up in Hertfordshire. The restrictions – thought to be the most extreme yet to be introduced by health services – immediately came under attack from the Royal College of Surgeons. …In recent years, a number of areas have introduced delays for such patients – with some told operations will be put back for months, during which time they are expected to try to lose weight or stop smoking. …The criteria also mean smokers will only be referred for operations if they have stopped smoking for at least eight weeks, with such patients breathalysed before referral.

My understanding is that the NHS does a good job with emergency care (you get maimed in a car accident) and a decent job with routine care (your annual check-up).

But you’re in big trouble if you have a chronic condition. Like people with cancer in Scotland.

More than 1,300 cancer patients in Scotland suffered agonising delays of more than two months to start treatment last year in breach of government targets. New figures show that, on average, 110 patients every month waited longer than 62 days for medical care after they were red-flagged by doctors for suspected cancer. The disclosure has prompted a wave of fresh criticism of the SNP, which in 2007 made a manifesto pledge to “ensure” suspected cancer patients were diagnosed and treated within 62 days.

I want to close by basically replicating some of my conversations from this past week with ordinary people in and around London.

When I highlighted shortcomings of the NHS, they routinely got defensive, admitted that their system isn’t perfect, and then attacked the American health system.

I think I surprised them by then stating that the U.S. healthcare system is a convoluted mix of waste and inefficiency.

I basically tried to give them this short speech, pointing out that our problems also are caused by government.

The Brits mess up their system by having the government directly provide medical care. We mess up our system with government-created third-party payer. In either case, the results aren’t pretty.

The National Health Service (NHS) is inexplicably

Worst Electoral Result for Labour Since 1983

UK Elections on blurred Union Jack flag. The graphic illustration and concept for British elections. (Photo: AdobeStock)
UK Elections on blurred Union Jack flag. The graphic illustration and concept for British elections. (Photo: AdobeStock)

Conservatives have won the biggest majority in the UK General Election since Margaret Thatcher in 1987. It was the worst electoral result for Labour since 1983 (results below).

With 650 of 650 seats declared (updated), Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Tories won 365 seats, a net gain of 47. Jeremy Corbyn and Labour will have 203 seats after losing -59. As resounding of a defeat as it is for Labour, the result (below) were slightly better for them than exit polls projected.

Conservatives were projected to win 368 seats (+51), the largest Conservative majority since Margaret Thatcher in 1983.

Chart projects seats won in the British Parliament.

Labour was projected to hold just 191 seats, a loss of 71 seats and far below the 269 and 209 they held in 1979 and 1983, respectively.

In 1979, the Tories gained 63 to give Prime Minister Thatcher a total 339 seats. They added another 47 in 1983 after Great Britain’s victory in the 1982 Falklands War.

Mr. Corbyn—who faced widespread criticism from within his own ranks—said in an announcement he would no longer seek to lead the Labour Party.

The fate of Brexit and threat of socialism loomed over the 2019 UK General Election. Polls appeared to show significant tightening in the final stretch, though that was clearly not the case.

Prime Minister Johnson campaigned on a simple message of respecting the will of the voters in the Brext Referendum. Labour wanted a new referendum and Liberal Democrats wanted to scrap the vote altogether.

As a result, Conservatives made huge gains in Labour heartlands. In fact, they made historic gains in Labour’s Northern Red Wall, and ran up even larger margins in traditional Tory Blue Wall.

Conservatives gained Sedgefield, the former seat of former Prime Minister Tony Blair. Conservative Ian Levy was victorious in Blyth Valley, a seat held by Labour since 1931. Laura Pidcock, who was thought to be a future leader of the Labour Party, lost to Conservative Richard Holden in North West Durham.

SNP (Scottish National Party) regained nearly all their losses in Scotland from their highpoint in 2015. In Scotland, SNP won 48 seats, the Tories won 6, Liberal Democrats won 4 and Labour only 1.

Jo Swinson, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, was defeated by SNP candidate Amy Callaghan in East Dunbartonshire.

In response, the Pound Sterling has risen to its highest exchange rate since May 2018.

UPDATE—Final 2019 UK General Election Result: Tories increase their official majority. Conservative Derek Thomas HOLDS the seat targeted by Liberal Democrats in St. Ives.

Conservatives have won the biggest majority in

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial