Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

No overall majority back as favourite in the GE betting – politicalbetting.com

245678

Comments

  • eekeek Posts: 22,060
    Ratters said:

    The trouble for the Tories is there is now a direct link between their policy actions and the need for banks to hike mortgage rates by huge amounts and wider economic hardship.

    Now a lot of that was already inevitable due to the global inflationary pressures. But the mini-budget puts the blame at the government's door for reckless measures that favoured high earners and bankers, while having the stupidity to not realise firing the permanent secretary to the Treasury and sidelining the OBR would result in a loss of market confidence in the context of a huge increase in spending and scattergun tax cuts.

    A change in leader may slow the bleeding, but I don't think they can recover.

    Every big economic event has a person who can be associated with it.

    For Black Friday it was George Soros
    For 2008 you have Northern Rock / Fred the Shred / RBS (I note that the holding company is now called Nat West)
    For last week you have Kwasi / Liz and nothing is going to change that
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    UK law often incorporates EU law: so we'll have a law covering (say) live animal transport, that has both the EU minimum requirements in, and then appropriate stuff for the UK. Are we going to junk all of it? How could that be done without passing a new Animal Transport Act? If we just repeal the existing law, does that mean we suddenly are without any regulation regarding the transport of animals in the UK?
    Isn't that the idea?

    That'll be the RSPCA on the case now, too.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,312
    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Remember kids: other people need to buy into your plans. You don't operate in a vacuum, and just because you head a government, it doesn't mean that other people have agency.

    Some interesting passages in David Stockman’s book about Reaganomics…

    Not least the quote where he attacks “the false belief that in a capitalist democracy we can peer deep into the veil of the future and chain the ship of state to an exacting blueprint”.

    More here 👇🏻 https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1576237270205665281
    Stockman's complaint was that Reagan failed to cut spending, so he probably wouldn't criticise Truss from the same direction as you.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,625
    In the post-Putin months the battle for power will be between Kadyrovites and Wagner on the one hand, and pragmatists on the other. I expect the former will win.

    https://twitter.com/ralee85/status/1576248373350629376?s=21&t=3-LcxzUpXfqSsFDOCDab8g

    https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1576238662358294528?s=21&t=3-LcxzUpXfqSsFDOCDab8g

    Russia will then descend into something akin to a warlord realm.

    That’s assuming no nukes in the meantime.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,453

    Some talk about plans above.

    Right now, there is no plan.

    We kind of know what the original plan was:

    1. Send a message that Britain was open for business via tax cuts and supply side reform.

    2. Deliver a short-lived boom to get you through an election.

    3. Post-election austerity.

    Part 1 has blown up; they know they are going to have to go straight to Part 3 to make the books balance, though they don’t know precisely how.

    Meanwhile, they are trying to figure out whether the public will accept the excuse that speculators / Putin / the woke IMF / the remoaner “orthodoxy” are to blame.

    I suspect the public already have it figured out.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,060
    edited October 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    UK law often incorporates EU law: so we'll have a law covering (say) live animal transport, that has both the EU minimum requirements in, and then appropriate stuff for the UK. Are we going to junk all of it? How could that be done without passing a new Animal Transport Act? If we just repeal the existing law, does that mean we suddenly are without any regulation regarding the transport of animals in the UK?
    Congratulations - you've spotted the flaw in the plan - that our laws will completely fall apart because one (or more) of the building blocks has been removed.

    Sadly Truss and co don't seem to have grasped that point even though it may or may not have been explained to her.

    And that can be explained very simply by this

    https://mobile.twitter.com/garius/status/1563111065386307585

    Everyone who's ever spoken to me about working with her says that she consistently creates her own version of reality that works for her, and then just utterly refuses to accept any argument that isn't her reality.

    And I suspect that's what has happened her. Someone has (probably jokingly) given her a quick fix so she's gone for it.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,624
    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,497

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,312
    eek said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    UK law often incorporates EU law: so we'll have a law covering (say) live animal transport, that has both the EU minimum requirements in, and then appropriate stuff for the UK. Are we going to junk all of it? How could that be done without passing a new Animal Transport Act? If we just repeal the existing law, does that mean we suddenly are without any regulation regarding the transport of animals in the UK?
    Congratulations - you've spotted the flaw in the plan - that our laws will completely fall apart because one (or more) of the building blocks has been removed.

    Sadly Truss and co don't seem to have grasped that point even though it may or may not have been explained to her.
    Remember though that Sunak was promising to do exactly the same.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,497
    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Doesn't need to be 30. There could be recovery to some extent. But a perception has been locked.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
    She was high profile at business, although there are questions as to whether that was a good performance or a good spin doctor.

    Elsewhere, she was awful. Really bad.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,497
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
    She was high profile at business, although there are questions as to whether that was a good performance or a good spin doctor.

    Elsewhere, she was awful. Really bad.
    Maybe so, but not so bad she became known for being bad.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,414
    edited October 2022
    Omnium said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Torbynism...

    "The Conservative Party has lept further out to the right than Jeremy Corbyn was out to the left."

    The Tories are entering their 'Jeremy Corbyn era,' Nick Boles tells @AyeshaHazarika https://twitter.com/TimesRadio/status/1576245085481598976/video/1

    Those who voted Tory 'to keep Corbyn out' must be feeling a bit embarrassed now.
    I think otherwise - it's probably the only good decision on which their sanity hangs.
    That's a view, but not a wholly incontestable one, which says much about the current Trussterfuckup.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
    She was high profile at business, although there are questions as to whether that was a good performance or a good spin doctor.

    Elsewhere, she was awful. Really bad.
    Maybe so, but not so bad she became known for being bad.
    Not to the wider public. As I recall those working with the departments she was working in thought she was off the wall. That was certainly the case at Education, although to be fair that's true of most of them.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,622
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
    And that she’s a glutton for punishment?
  • Think a lot of people are underestimating the inertia that comes from 14 years of government and how this influences voters.

    To an extent, Starmer doesn’t have to have a standout thing that wins over millions and millions of Tories.

    This might be an oversimplification, but compare now to 2017 and 2019.

    1) A less popular Tory PM than either 2019 or 2017

    2) A far less divisive Labour leader than 2019 or 2017 - particularly for Tory and Lib Dem switchers

    3) No second referendum plan or anti-Brexit rhetoric to turn off leave voters from Labour. Similarly, the Lib Dems may not have as divisive stance here next election either

    4) A cost of living crisis, that is now much more associated with Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng than was attached to Boris Johnson when he was still PM

    5) Specifically - much higher mortgage payments on the horizon for tons of Tory voting homeowners, and lots of those in the Red Wall that voted Tory once in 2019

    6) Partygate still having a dampening effect on Tory enthusiasm. This is something that in particular I think older Tories hated - I have a rich uncle who has voted Tory forever and this annoyed him more than any single other thing, still to this day.

    7) Wider demographic changes that may favour Labour including the struggles of some to get on the property ladder, as arguably turned people in their 30s into Tories in years gone by.

    8) Policy proposals such as Labour’s Great British Energy could enjoy much more support across the spectrum after the energy crisis and be harder for a Tory candidate to scaremonger against on ideological grounds given the experience of the last two years.

    Considering Corbyn got 40% of the vote in 2017… I don’t think all the above factors make it as unlikely as some of you think that Starmer continues this, does quite a bit better than Corbyn, and strolls to a comfortable majority next time around without needing Scotland.

    With all the above, and more,
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,453
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Torbynism...

    "The Conservative Party has lept further out to the right than Jeremy Corbyn was out to the left."

    The Tories are entering their 'Jeremy Corbyn era,' Nick Boles tells @AyeshaHazarika https://twitter.com/TimesRadio/status/1576245085481598976/video/1

    Those who voted Tory 'to keep Corbyn out' must be feeling a bit embarrassed now.
    I think otherwise - it's probably the only good decision on which their sanity hangs.
    Corbyn looks sane compared to this lot
    I rather think it's the only feather in the Tory cap left that he certainly would have been worse. Far worse.

    (Even Labour think that)
    I rather doubt that he could have been worse. It is hard to figure how anyone could be worse than this shower.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,060

    Some talk about plans above.

    Right now, there is no plan.

    We kind of know what the original plan was:

    1. Send a message that Britain was open for business via tax cuts and supply side reform.

    2. Deliver a short-lived boom to get you through an election.

    3. Post-election austerity.

    Part 1 has blown up; they know they are going to have to go straight to Part 3 to make the books balance, though they don’t know precisely how.

    Meanwhile, they are trying to figure out whether the public will accept the excuse that speculators / Putin / the woke IMF / the remoaner “orthodoxy” are to blame.

    I suspect the public already have it figured out.
    Well most of them have - but there does appear to be 20% or so who are either doing

    1) going to do very well from Truss's plans
    2) don't pay attention to the news
    3) or terminally thick...
  • kle4 said:

    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Doesn't need to be 30. There could be recovery to some extent. But a perception has been locked.
    30 reduces the PCP to 3 seats. I expect SKS would be happy enough with 20.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,579

    eek said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    UK law often incorporates EU law: so we'll have a law covering (say) live animal transport, that has both the EU minimum requirements in, and then appropriate stuff for the UK. Are we going to junk all of it? How could that be done without passing a new Animal Transport Act? If we just repeal the existing law, does that mean we suddenly are without any regulation regarding the transport of animals in the UK?
    Congratulations - you've spotted the flaw in the plan - that our laws will completely fall apart because one (or more) of the building blocks has been removed.

    Sadly Truss and co don't seem to have grasped that point even though it may or may not have been explained to her.
    Remember though that Sunak was promising to do exactly the same.
    Absolutely.

    A reminder that the entire Tory Party no longer serve any worthwhile purpose.

    Someone (the electorate) needs to deBa’ath their asses.
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 140

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,579
    eek said:

    Some talk about plans above.

    Right now, there is no plan.

    We kind of know what the original plan was:

    1. Send a message that Britain was open for business via tax cuts and supply side reform.

    2. Deliver a short-lived boom to get you through an election.

    3. Post-election austerity.

    Part 1 has blown up; they know they are going to have to go straight to Part 3 to make the books balance, though they don’t know precisely how.

    Meanwhile, they are trying to figure out whether the public will accept the excuse that speculators / Putin / the woke IMF / the remoaner “orthodoxy” are to blame.

    I suspect the public already have it figured out.
    Well most of them have - but there does appear to be 20% or so who are either doing

    1) going to do very well from Truss's plans
    2) don't pay attention to the news
    3) or terminally thick...
    News takes a week or so to sink in.
    Wouldn’t be surprised to see them go sub-20 in one poll.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,969
    Bang in line with my longstanding 40/40/20 view.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,984
    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Maybe. But 1997 had a lasting effect, I think. If the public think that Starmer is selling New Labour (Blair era) Part Deux, minus the Iraq war stuff, then that is a very big tent in British politics.

    Think Social Democrats in much of Europe.

    Combine with a Conservative kamikazi meltdown….
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,414
    edited October 2022
    mickydroy said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
    Thank you Mickey, especially for ignoring my typos.

    I will have a good look at the two candidates and also assess whether Labour under SKS will bring in some form of PR.

    Then I'll spin a coin!
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,453
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    4h
    Times read:

    * Truss allies - including Cab ministers - alarmed. They worry public has made mind up

    * Truss frustrated with Treasury for failing to anticipate market turmoil

    ====

    Perhaps you shouldn't have sacked the permanent sec on the first morning, eh, Liz?

    That said, I am just filling in an application for a part-time job administering various qualifications for a government department.

    The sheer asininity of the questions and procedures they use is driving me up the wall. I have to say, no wonder they're not getting great candidates in the civil service if this is typical.
    Falling out with the Treasury as an institution is not going to end well I suspect given how little capital she has and how inexperienced she is. A more wily pol with a longer time might be able to slow engineer some change - she does not possess either of these.
    Can we just dispose of one point? Truss is NOT an INEXPERIENCED politician. She has been in govt for 12 years. It is not like she arrived in Westminster last week.

    She might be denser than Osmium, but she cannot claim inexperience of Cabinet govt.
    She in fact had a rapid rise through the ranks - I think she was the first MP elected in 2010 to make it into the Cabinet - and if you count Chief Secretary to the Treasury has been permanently in it since 2014, across 5 different departments, and surviving across 3 very different Premiers, which shows political skill and competence.

    You would think.
    And that she’s a glutton for punishment?
    Maybe she should have been a whip....?

    Has anyone seen my hat and coat?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,171

    eek said:

    Some talk about plans above.

    Right now, there is no plan.

    We kind of know what the original plan was:

    1. Send a message that Britain was open for business via tax cuts and supply side reform.

    2. Deliver a short-lived boom to get you through an election.

    3. Post-election austerity.

    Part 1 has blown up; they know they are going to have to go straight to Part 3 to make the books balance, though they don’t know precisely how.

    Meanwhile, they are trying to figure out whether the public will accept the excuse that speculators / Putin / the woke IMF / the remoaner “orthodoxy” are to blame.

    I suspect the public already have it figured out.
    Well most of them have - but there does appear to be 20% or so who are either doing

    1) going to do very well from Truss's plans
    2) don't pay attention to the news
    3) or terminally thick...
    News takes a week or so to sink in.
    Wouldn’t be surprised to see them go sub-20 in one poll.
    Funny if that happened right at peak conference.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,984
    mickydroy said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
    Given recent events, the press could “break” for Labour, 1997 style.
  • glwglw Posts: 8,872
    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Are you from the future? I'd wait until the conference if over before making a call like that. God knows what stupid things Tories are going to say over the next few days.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,969
    eek said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    Oh it's not just environmental laws - a lot of employment law is going as well

    And there won't be time to replace them so the plan is clearly to junk everything and see what they can get away with...
    Remember when they promised that after Brexit we would have more exacting labour and environmental rules than the EU? I mean, I never believed that for a second but that was the basis on which they fought and won the 2019 election. And you wonder why people have no faith in politicians.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,579
    Keir is no Blair.

    But Truss is no Major, whose worst crime was thought to be ineffectiveness against wider sleazeballs, Brexity bastards, and Tory boys.

    The bastards have taken over the Tories.
    The public will vote tactically to eviscerate them.
  • Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Remember kids: other people need to buy into your plans. You don't operate in a vacuum, and just because you head a government, it doesn't mean that other people have agency.

    Some interesting passages in David Stockman’s book about Reaganomics…

    Not least the quote where he attacks “the false belief that in a capitalist democracy we can peer deep into the veil of the future and chain the ship of state to an exacting blueprint”.

    More here 👇🏻 https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1576237270205665281
    Stockman's complaint was that Reagan failed to cut spending, so he probably wouldn't criticise Truss from the same direction as you.
    Ron didn't think he needed to cut spending. That's the entire gist of the Laffer Curve. If Liz now thinks that spending cuts are the solution then she's abandoned the Reagan model and has become an Osborne disciple.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,396
    edited October 2022
    I’m warming to Liz.



  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605

    mickydroy said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
    Given recent events, the press could “break” for Labour, 1997 style.
    Isn't it only the Sun of Labour-supporting papers in 1997 that's backing the Tories now?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,579
    edited October 2022

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    I've become aware of some discussion amongst 'lefty lawyers' about the The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill that has just been placed before Parliament.

    "If passed, REULRR will effectively sweep away any and all EU laws that the Government hasn't actively decided to keep.

    It does this by:

    Repealing EU derived laws by the end of 2023. The government will be able to extend that deadline to 23 June 2026 (the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum) but can't further extend it.
    Repealing the principle of supremacy of EU law by the end of 2023. Currently, any EU decision reached before 1 January 2021 is binding on UK courts unless the government departs from it. However, this bill will subjugate all EU law in favour of UK law by default.
    Repealing directly effective EU law rights and obligations in UK law by the end of 2023; and
    Establishing a new priority rule requiring retained direct EU legislation to be interpreted and applied consistently with domestic legislation.


    https://imbusiness.passle.net/post/102hxsn/what-truss-did-on-my-holidays-its-much-more-than-just-the-mini-budget

    What this may mean, if I have understood it correctly, is that all those environmental EU regulations that have been transposed in to UK law by default and the government hasn't specifically decided to keep, will just be junked automatically, at the end of 2023.

    Interesting (but perhaps not suprising) that the tories have tried to bury this one amongst the chaos of the budget announcements.

    Oh it's not just environmental laws - a lot of employment law is going as well

    And there won't be time to replace them so the plan is clearly to junk everything and see what they can get away with...
    Remember when they promised that after Brexit we would have more exacting labour and environmental rules than the EU? I mean, I never believed that for a second but that was the basis on which they fought and won the 2019 election. And you wonder why people have no faith in politicians.
    The budget has been welcomed by Nigel Farage, Patrick Minford, and the corpse of General Pinochet.

    That’s all you need to know, really.
  • I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    Hello! Thanks for the nice welcome, yes long time lurker but recently started commenting a lot more!

    First of all of course it will change a lot before the next election, but currently the tactical voting site I linked says Lib Dem.

    I think, if the past year or so’s informal alliance holds, we will see situations where Labour and the Lib Dems have seats that they write off and run a paper candidate, barely campaigning in.

    Looking it up Tewkesbury has been Tory since 1997. I know it doesn’t work exactly like this, but a combined Labour + LD vote would have won in 1997, 2001, 2005, narrowly lost in 2010, but be decisively beaten in 2015, 2017 and 2019. I would reckon that Labour would be better placed handing this off to the Lib Dems.

    It really does raise the issue of tactical voting operations being vital here - they could make the difference between seats like this being won and lost.

  • Kwasi on the other hand.


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957
    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.
  • ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 140

    Think a lot of people are underestimating the inertia that comes from 14 years of government and how this influences voters.

    To an extent, Starmer doesn’t have to have a standout thing that wins over millions and millions of Tories.

    This might be an oversimplification, but compare now to 2017 and 2019.

    1) A less popular Tory PM than either 2019 or 2017

    2) A far less divisive Labour leader than 2019 or 2017 - particularly for Tory and Lib Dem switchers

    3) No second referendum plan or anti-Brexit rhetoric to turn off leave voters from Labour. Similarly, the Lib Dems may not have as divisive stance here next election either

    4) A cost of living crisis, that is now much more associated with Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng than was attached to Boris Johnson when he was still PM

    5) Specifically - much higher mortgage payments on the horizon for tons of Tory voting homeowners, and lots of those in the Red Wall that voted Tory once in 2019

    6) Partygate still having a dampening effect on Tory enthusiasm. This is something that in particular I think older Tories hated - I have a rich uncle who has voted Tory forever and this annoyed him more than any single other thing, still to this day.

    7) Wider demographic changes that may favour Labour including the struggles of some to get on the property ladder, as arguably turned people in their 30s into Tories in years gone by.

    8) Policy proposals such as Labour’s Great British Energy could enjoy much more support across the spectrum after the energy crisis and be harder for a Tory candidate to scaremonger against on ideological grounds given the experience of the last two years.

    Considering Corbyn got 40% of the vote in 2017… I don’t think all the above factors make it as unlikely as some of you think that Starmer continues this, does quite a bit better than Corbyn, and strolls to a comfortable majority next time around without needing Scotland.

    With all the above, and more,

    I think there was a sort of cult following factored into the support for Corbyn, in a way similar to Johnson/Brexit, I dont see Starmer ever having a cult following, but having said that he is twice the man of either Corbyn or Johnson, and probably what the country needs now
  • rcs1000 said:

    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.

    Just over seven years ago.
  • @PedestrianRock

    Thanks PR.

    Yes that rather confirms my view but I will wait and see what SKS says about voting reform.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,579

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Infallible rule: never trust an Old Etonian or Goldman Sachs alumni.

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 18,020
    Off topic...

    I woke in the middle of the night with a sore throat and bunged up nose. I thought that Covid had finally got me, but a negative test suggests just a normal bug.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    rcs1000 said:

    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.

    If this is stability and strong government, then I am really, really glad that we didn't go for any of that chaos with Ed Miliband.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,969
    rcs1000 said:

    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.

    And what a period of strong and stable government we have had.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,026
    I've gone from betting on a Labour majority ...

    ... to betting on a Labour landslide.

    Unprecedented result for unprecedented times. That's what makes for precedent.

    The next General Election will be talked about for the next one hundred years (whatever Leon's doomsday beliefs).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957

    rcs1000 said:

    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.

    Just over seven years ago.
    They were still in power just over six years ago, but yes, I could have phrased it better.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,459
    edited October 2022

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Staggering - really.

    I thought I'd seen it all with this lot.

    Needless to say this will re-played on a loop every time their nonsense about being "in it together" while benefits are down-rated comes on.
  • ydoethur said:

    mickydroy said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
    Given recent events, the press could “break” for Labour, 1997 style.
    Isn't it only the Sun of Labour-supporting papers in 1997 that's backing the Tories now?
    Yes - but I remember the Times backed Blair in 2001 and 2005. Might we see them potentially backing Starmer in 2024?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,624

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    That’s dreadful . Terrible optics but I really don’t think they give a fig anymore.
  • rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    One trusts you did not associate with him, Smithson Jnr?
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,368

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    National polls will not be relevant. The next election is going to be fought, I am sure, like a series of byelections.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605

    ydoethur said:

    mickydroy said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    I think that is a very valid point, its easy to engineer tactical voting at a byelection, but nationwide is going to take some organising, my advice for what it's worth, is to vote for who ever was in second place to the Tories at the last GE, there is a long way to go, and the Tory press haven't really turned their fire on Starmer yet, but make no mistake they will, then see what it does to the polls
    Given recent events, the press could “break” for Labour, 1997 style.
    Isn't it only the Sun of Labour-supporting papers in 1997 that's backing the Tories now?
    Yes - but I remember the Times backed Blair in 2001 and 2005. Might we see them potentially backing Starmer in 2024?
    The Express also backed Labour in 2001. Partly I think linked to his Diana performance.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,348

    I’m warming to Liz.



    Why did Truss do that?
    Anything to do with Fracking?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,984
    mickydroy said:

    Think a lot of people are underestimating the inertia that comes from 14 years of government and how this influences voters.

    To an extent, Starmer doesn’t have to have a standout thing that wins over millions and millions of Tories.

    This might be an oversimplification, but compare now to 2017 and 2019.

    1) A less popular Tory PM than either 2019 or 2017

    2) A far less divisive Labour leader than 2019 or 2017 - particularly for Tory and Lib Dem switchers

    3) No second referendum plan or anti-Brexit rhetoric to turn off leave voters from Labour. Similarly, the Lib Dems may not have as divisive stance here next election either

    4) A cost of living crisis, that is now much more associated with Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng than was attached to Boris Johnson when he was still PM

    5) Specifically - much higher mortgage payments on the horizon for tons of Tory voting homeowners, and lots of those in the Red Wall that voted Tory once in 2019

    6) Partygate still having a dampening effect on Tory enthusiasm. This is something that in particular I think older Tories hated - I have a rich uncle who has voted Tory forever and this annoyed him more than any single other thing, still to this day.

    7) Wider demographic changes that may favour Labour including the struggles of some to get on the property ladder, as arguably turned people in their 30s into Tories in years gone by.

    8) Policy proposals such as Labour’s Great British Energy could enjoy much more support across the spectrum after the energy crisis and be harder for a Tory candidate to scaremonger against on ideological grounds given the experience of the last two years.

    Considering Corbyn got 40% of the vote in 2017… I don’t think all the above factors make it as unlikely as some of you think that Starmer continues this, does quite a bit better than Corbyn, and strolls to a comfortable majority next time around without needing Scotland.

    With all the above, and more,

    I think there was a sort of cult following factored into the support for Corbyn, in a way similar to Johnson/Brexit, I dont see Starmer ever having a cult following, but having said that he is twice the man of either Corbyn or Johnson, and probably what the country needs now
    Sadly, that is wishful thinking

    Given CV comparisons, Starmer could be just as much of a failure as any of them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    nico679 said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    That’s dreadful . Terrible optics but I really don’t think they give a fig anymore.
    It's becoming painfully apparent they never did.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,510

    I’m warming to Liz.



    Why did Truss do that?
    Anything to do with Fracking?
    No longer his place.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,453
    edited October 2022
    glw said:

    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Are you from the future? I'd wait until the conference if over before making a call like that. God knows what stupid things Tories are going to say over the next few days.
    They are doomed no matter what.

    If they give Truss & Co a standing ovation, that will go down badly in the country

    If they are sullen and moody, the Press will make hay with it and it will depress their support.

    This really has been the Tories' Ratner Week.
  • @PedestrianRock

    Thanks PR.

    Yes that rather confirms my view but I will wait and see what SKS says about voting reform.

    I don’t think he will take a stance on it until the election. It might be too easy an attack line to lend itself to the ‘Coalition of Chaos’ thing.

    What would be funny, though, is that there’s a scenario where the Tories look like hypocrites on the Coalition of Chaos front - if they end up on 270ish votes they could cling to power by doing a deal with the SNP, in exchange for IndyRef2. In such a scenario, you would imagine that the SNP would hold the same power over Labour and the Lib Dems, but they might refuse it and prefer to try for Confidence and supply without them. It would be an all time gamble, but if they’re worried that Labour and the Lib Dems would force through PR and therefore hurt the chances of IndyRef2 happening for the foreseeable future, the SNP might gamble, reasoning that lower popularity in Westminster in the future wouldn’t matter if they won independence.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    edited October 2022

    mickydroy said:

    Think a lot of people are underestimating the inertia that comes from 14 years of government and how this influences voters.

    To an extent, Starmer doesn’t have to have a standout thing that wins over millions and millions of Tories.

    This might be an oversimplification, but compare now to 2017 and 2019.

    1) A less popular Tory PM than either 2019 or 2017

    2) A far less divisive Labour leader than 2019 or 2017 - particularly for Tory and Lib Dem switchers

    3) No second referendum plan or anti-Brexit rhetoric to turn off leave voters from Labour. Similarly, the Lib Dems may not have as divisive stance here next election either

    4) A cost of living crisis, that is now much more associated with Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng than was attached to Boris Johnson when he was still PM

    5) Specifically - much higher mortgage payments on the horizon for tons of Tory voting homeowners, and lots of those in the Red Wall that voted Tory once in 2019

    6) Partygate still having a dampening effect on Tory enthusiasm. This is something that in particular I think older Tories hated - I have a rich uncle who has voted Tory forever and this annoyed him more than any single other thing, still to this day.

    7) Wider demographic changes that may favour Labour including the struggles of some to get on the property ladder, as arguably turned people in their 30s into Tories in years gone by.

    8) Policy proposals such as Labour’s Great British Energy could enjoy much more support across the spectrum after the energy crisis and be harder for a Tory candidate to scaremonger against on ideological grounds given the experience of the last two years.

    Considering Corbyn got 40% of the vote in 2017… I don’t think all the above factors make it as unlikely as some of you think that Starmer continues this, does quite a bit better than Corbyn, and strolls to a comfortable majority next time around without needing Scotland.

    With all the above, and more,

    I think there was a sort of cult following factored into the support for Corbyn, in a way similar to Johnson/Brexit, I dont see Starmer ever having a cult following, but having said that he is twice the man of either Corbyn or Johnson, and probably what the country needs now
    Sadly, that is wishful thinking

    Given CV comparisons, Starmer could be just as much of a failure as any of them.
    Whoever inherits the howling Wilderness that Truss is about to leave behind, is going to be a failure. It's impossible to see how anyone could be a success given the mess they are going to have to clear up.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,308
    edited October 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    It's amazing to think that - just over six years ago - it was Cameron and Osborne in charge, having just secured a majority Government.

    And a few years before VAT on pastry wraps was dominating the political discourse. So everything's recoverable.
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 140
    Heathener said:

    I've gone from betting on a Labour majority ...

    ... to betting on a Labour landslide.

    Unprecedented result for unprecedented times. That's what makes for precedent.

    The next General Election will be talked about for the next one hundred years (whatever Leon's doomsday beliefs).

    What would you class as a landslide, 100 seat majority, if so you have made a very brave call
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,221

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Vile creatures.
  • Kwasi on the other hand.


    Probably too big a stretch but is there any way the Tory party could be guilty of insider trading here?

    Private market sensitive comments given to direct participants whilst withheld from the public.
    Participants reported to act on information.
    Participants donate back to Tory party.
    Is it perhaps less of a conspiracy to think that the removal of the 45p rate was a sort of bung - “We’re gonna lose the next election no matter what, but if we get rid of this, we might get some valuable donation money in our coffers from the rich that will leave us in a better position in 2029 onwards”
  • glw said:

    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Are you from the future? I'd wait until the conference if over before making a call like that. God knows what stupid things Tories are going to say over the next few days.
    They are doomed no matter what.

    If they give Truss & Co a standing ovation, that will go down badly in the country

    If they are sullen and moody, the Press will make hay with it and it will depress their support.

    This really has been the Tories' Ratner Week.
    If they sacked Truss and put Wallace in charge this week their polling would almost double.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 18,020
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    He played rugby for Wakefield?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,254
    nico679 said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    That’s dreadful . Terrible optics but I really don’t think they give a fig anymore.
    If they did he'd resign.

    Or at least, be sacked.

    You can't remotely defend either of them on the doorsteps.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I you want a quick and easy way to 10-50k Twitter followers then jsut use Alistair's How to be a Pro-Russian Ukraine War Account.

    First you need the correct iconography in your Twitter name. I'd go with ☦️🇺🇸🇷🇺
    Second, declare a city in Ukraine key to Russia's plans and a total fortress that Ukraine would be a fool to attack
    Third, when Ukraine attacks make a post with a few hours declaring the attack a Ukrainian debacle and that hundred, possible thousands are dead long with 50+ armoured fighting vehicles lost.
    Fourth, when verified Ukrainian advances are made clear post that it's all part of the plan and the UAF are being lured into a trap because Russia are masters of some made up word, anything Russian sounding will do.
    Fifth, as advances continue hype up the arrival of elite reinforcements who will smash the UAF
    Sixth, this is the tricky bit - write a long form blog posy about how Russia have Ukraine exactly where they want them and release it 4-12 hours before confirmation that Ukraine has liberated the city.
    Seventh, praise Russia for making Ukraine waste irreplaceable NATO ammo
    Eight, declare that city was unimportant and is part of a broader strategic feint.
    Ninth, (optional) complain about Vegan food
    Tenth, repeat this as many times as your ego can take until you eventually crack under the weight of Shiba memes being posted in your responses and you lock your account.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,605
    Seven years ago today, we were talking about Osborne v Johnson for next PM, and Putin invading Syria. Leavened with some talk about how nuttier members of the party might look for a Leaver as leader.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/3005/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-ipsos-mori-boost-for-boris-in-the-cameron-successor-stakes/p1

    Plus ça change...
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,625

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    Hello! Thanks for the nice welcome, yes long time lurker but recently started commenting a lot more!

    First of all of course it will change a lot before the next election, but currently the tactical voting site I linked says Lib Dem.

    I think, if the past year or so’s informal alliance holds, we will see situations where Labour and the Lib Dems have seats that they write off and run a paper candidate, barely campaigning in.

    Looking it up Tewkesbury has been Tory since 1997. I know it doesn’t work exactly like this, but a combined Labour + LD vote would have won in 1997, 2001, 2005, narrowly lost in 2010, but be decisively beaten in 2015, 2017 and 2019. I would reckon that Labour would be better placed handing this off to the Lib Dems.

    It really does raise the issue of tactical voting operations being vital here - they could make the difference between seats like this being won and lost.

    One approach would be to take the pre-election national polling and compare with the last constituency election result, then come up with an adjusted set of numbers.

    Eg let’s say last election in the constituency was say 51% Tory, 28% LD, 18% Labour and 3% other.

    Nationally it was 43.6% Tory, 32.2% Labour, 11.5% LD.

    Pre-election poll average says Labour 42%, Tory 34%, LD 12%.

    Con 51 x 34/43.6 = 39.7, LD 28 x 12/11.5 = 29.2, Lab 18 x 42/32.2 = 23.5%. Therefore in this case vote Lib Dem.

  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,348

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    Before the fall of the Red Wall constituencies, I believed that there were some places that would never switch from Labour to the Tories.
    I can't see many Blue Wall constituencies switching to Labour, but is that a failure of imagination on my part?
    Obviously a number of extremely blue constituencies have recently switched from Tory to Lib Dem in By Elections, so I can't help thinking that the bar for Tory voters to switch to LibDem is lower than for Tory to Labour.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,396
    edited October 2022
    I’ve struck a bet with a friend.

    Tories to poll 15% or lower with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide Westminster poll before the locals.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,624

    nico679 said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    That’s dreadful . Terrible optics but I really don’t think they give a fig anymore.
    If they did he'd resign.

    Or at least, be sacked.

    You can't remotely defend either of them on the doorsteps.
    Surely giving hedge fund managers an insight into future spending cuts is very dodgy to say the least. They really are taking the pxss out of the public .
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,453

    glw said:

    nico679 said:

    I would be astonished if we saw any thing close to those 30+ poll leads for Labour again .

    That was peak anger from the public coupled with the media coverage .

    Are you from the future? I'd wait until the conference if over before making a call like that. God knows what stupid things Tories are going to say over the next few days.
    They are doomed no matter what.

    If they give Truss & Co a standing ovation, that will go down badly in the country

    If they are sullen and moody, the Press will make hay with it and it will depress their support.

    This really has been the Tories' Ratner Week.
    If they sacked Truss and put Wallace in charge this week their polling would almost double.
    No it would not, because most people have absolutely no idea who Wallace is. He has no way of offsetting the damage she has caused.

    The big problem is that Boris and the ERG's Soviet-style purges of the impure removed all the talented, well known names and there is no way to get them back. It will be very interesting to see what Gauke et al have to say over the next few days.
  • Talk TV (I know!) discussing the Mirror apologising to Kwasi for "wrongly captioning" an article about him.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957
    Alistair said:

    I you want a quick and easy way to 10-50k Twitter followers then jsut use Alistair's How to be a Pro-Russian Ukraine War Account.

    First you need the correct iconography in your Twitter name. I'd go with ☦️🇺🇸🇷🇺
    Second, declare a city in Ukraine key to Russia's plans and a total fortress that Ukraine would be a fool to attack
    Third, when Ukraine attacks make a post with a few hours declaring the attack a Ukrainian debacle and that hundred, possible thousands are dead long with 50+ armoured fighting vehicles lost.
    Fourth, when verified Ukrainian advances are made clear post that it's all part of the plan and the UAF are being lured into a trap because Russia are masters of some made up word, anything Russian sounding will do.
    Fifth, as advances continue hype up the arrival of elite reinforcements who will smash the UAF
    Sixth, this is the tricky bit - write a long form blog posy about how Russia have Ukraine exactly where they want them and release it 4-12 hours before confirmation that Ukraine has liberated the city.
    Seventh, praise Russia for making Ukraine waste irreplaceable NATO ammo
    Eight, declare that city was unimportant and is part of a broader strategic feint.
    Ninth, (optional) complain about Vegan food
    Tenth, repeat this as many times as your ego can take until you eventually crack under the weight of Shiba memes being posted in your responses and you lock your account.

    I'm sorry, you also need to put things in there about the dangers of Covid vaccines, or no-one in Pro-Russian Twitter will take you seriously:


  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783

    Talk TV (I know!) discussing the Mirror apologising to Kwasi for "wrongly captioning" an article about him.

    Wasn't it the use of a wrong photo?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/01/mirror-apologises-for-using-picture-of-wrong-person-in-kwasi-kwarteng-story
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 11,194
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957
    Alistair said:

    I you want a quick and easy way to 10-50k Twitter followers then jsut use Alistair's How to be a Pro-Russian Ukraine War Account.

    First you need the correct iconography in your Twitter name. I'd go with ☦️🇺🇸🇷🇺
    Second, declare a city in Ukraine key to Russia's plans and a total fortress that Ukraine would be a fool to attack
    Third, when Ukraine attacks make a post with a few hours declaring the attack a Ukrainian debacle and that hundred, possible thousands are dead long with 50+ armoured fighting vehicles lost.
    Fourth, when verified Ukrainian advances are made clear post that it's all part of the plan and the UAF are being lured into a trap because Russia are masters of some made up word, anything Russian sounding will do.
    Fifth, as advances continue hype up the arrival of elite reinforcements who will smash the UAF
    Sixth, this is the tricky bit - write a long form blog posy about how Russia have Ukraine exactly where they want them and release it 4-12 hours before confirmation that Ukraine has liberated the city.
    Seventh, praise Russia for making Ukraine waste irreplaceable NATO ammo
    Eight, declare that city was unimportant and is part of a broader strategic feint.
    Ninth, (optional) complain about Vegan food
    Tenth, repeat this as many times as your ego can take until you eventually crack under the weight of Shiba memes being posted in your responses and you lock your account.

    You also forgot: Block anyone who posts anything even vaguely questioning of your views.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783
    rcs1000 said:

    Alistair said:

    I you want a quick and easy way to 10-50k Twitter followers then jsut use Alistair's How to be a Pro-Russian Ukraine War Account.

    First you need the correct iconography in your Twitter name. I'd go with ☦️🇺🇸🇷🇺
    Second, declare a city in Ukraine key to Russia's plans and a total fortress that Ukraine would be a fool to attack
    Third, when Ukraine attacks make a post with a few hours declaring the attack a Ukrainian debacle and that hundred, possible thousands are dead long with 50+ armoured fighting vehicles lost.
    Fourth, when verified Ukrainian advances are made clear post that it's all part of the plan and the UAF are being lured into a trap because Russia are masters of some made up word, anything Russian sounding will do.
    Fifth, as advances continue hype up the arrival of elite reinforcements who will smash the UAF
    Sixth, this is the tricky bit - write a long form blog posy about how Russia have Ukraine exactly where they want them and release it 4-12 hours before confirmation that Ukraine has liberated the city.
    Seventh, praise Russia for making Ukraine waste irreplaceable NATO ammo
    Eight, declare that city was unimportant and is part of a broader strategic feint.
    Ninth, (optional) complain about Vegan food
    Tenth, repeat this as many times as your ego can take until you eventually crack under the weight of Shiba memes being posted in your responses and you lock your account.

    I'm sorry, you also need to put things in there about the dangers of Covid vaccines, or no-one in Pro-Russian Twitter will take you seriously:


    mRNA is protein? My university professors would be astounded. Someone's getting a Nobel.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,690
    NEW: The King, a passionate environmental campaigner, has abandoned plans to attend next month’s Cop27 climate change summit after Liz Truss told him to stay away…

    He had intended to deliver a speech at the meeting of world leaders in Egypt.

    Truss, who is also unlikely to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh gathering, objected to the King’s plans during a personal audience at Buckingham Palace last month.


    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1576267291817234432
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783
    edited October 2022

    NEW: The King, a passionate environmental campaigner, has abandoned plans to attend next month’s Cop27 climate change summit after Liz Truss told him to stay away…

    He had intended to deliver a speech at the meeting of world leaders in Egypt.

    Truss, who is also unlikely to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh gathering, objected to the King’s plans during a personal audience at Buckingham Palace last month.


    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1576267291817234432

    [intake of breath] The Royalists will be on her case now, never mind the RSPCA and RSPB and NT.
  • Carnyx said:

    Talk TV (I know!) discussing the Mirror apologising to Kwasi for "wrongly captioning" an article about him.

    Wasn't it the use of a wrong photo?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/01/mirror-apologises-for-using-picture-of-wrong-person-in-kwasi-kwarteng-story
    Oh that is laughable! :lol:
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,625
    TimS said:

    I think some of you are being overly pessimistic on the chances of a Labour majority.

    The Lib Dem factor is something that is really interesting and not being spoken about. These crazy polls that have Labour 50% and above seem to imply a big chunk of the Tory protest vote of years gone by, that might have just voted Lib Dem rather than Labour, are not doing so.

    Another factor - tactical voting. This played a vital part in Blair’s 1997 landslide, and was used to great effect in bye-election victories for the Lib Dems and Labour in 2021+2022. Theoretically, it should be possible to organise tactical voting on a much larger scale than at any election before nowadays. There was a lot of this encouraged in 2019 (https://tactical.vote/faq/ and others) but the distance between the offerings of Labour and the Lib Dems on issues such as Brexit, and what people thought of Corbyn, was far further apart than will be the case in 2024.

    A wildcard might be if the Lib Dems come out in favour of full rejoin for the next election - but it doesn’t look like they’ll do that, we can’t completely rule it out though.

    Barring something like that, a huge tactical voting operation in 2024 could very much make up for the difficulties that Labour would otherwise have had at winning majorities without Scotland

    Hi PR. You new around here? If so, welcome and thanks for your thoughtful post. It encourages to write of the dilemma that I face here in Tewkesbury constituency.

    It is as you imagine solid Tory heartland with a long-established MP, Laurence Robertson who is a perfectly decent if somewhat inactive representative for his constituents. No problem for me who to vote for last time. I wasn't happy with Corbyn and Robertson is clearly going to win so I voted for the LD who came a distant but respectable second.

    It's more of a quandary now though with Labour touching 50% nationally. On that sort of polling, even the likes of Robertson are in danger, but the tactical voter needs to think carefully who to opt for. Would the LD or Labour Candidate be best placed to beat him?

    Not sure, and this kind of dilemma certainly makes predicting the outcome of the next GE kind of difficult.

    Any thoughts?
    Hello! Thanks for the nice welcome, yes long time lurker but recently started commenting a lot more!

    First of all of course it will change a lot before the next election, but currently the tactical voting site I linked says Lib Dem.

    I think, if the past year or so’s informal alliance holds, we will see situations where Labour and the Lib Dems have seats that they write off and run a paper candidate, barely campaigning in.

    Looking it up Tewkesbury has been Tory since 1997. I know it doesn’t work exactly like this, but a combined Labour + LD vote would have won in 1997, 2001, 2005, narrowly lost in 2010, but be decisively beaten in 2015, 2017 and 2019. I would reckon that Labour would be better placed handing this off to the Lib Dems.

    It really does raise the issue of tactical voting operations being vital here - they could make the difference between seats like this being won and lost.

    One approach would be to take the pre-election national polling and compare with the last constituency election result, then come up with an adjusted set of numbers.

    Eg let’s say last election in the constituency was say 51% Tory, 28% LD, 18% Labour and 3% other.

    Nationally it was 43.6% Tory, 32.2% Labour, 11.5% LD.

    Pre-election poll average says Labour 42%, Tory 34%, LD 12%.

    Con 51 x 34/43.6 = 39.7, LD 28 x 12/11.5 = 29.2, Lab 18 x 42/32.2 = 23.5%. Therefore in this case vote Lib Dem.

    Or indeed using actual Tewkesbury results and current polling average from MRP:

    C 58.4 x 29/43.6 = 38.8, LD 21.8 x 11/11.5 = 20.8 , Lab 15.2 x 49/32.2 = 23.1.

    In which case you might marginally go for Labour but probably need to think about local dynamics. Looks like a Lib Dem prospect to me (or more likely a Tory hold unless there’s very strong tactical voting).

    Decent vote for Greens last time too, perhaps assume that stays the same.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    It is a big place IIRC, so not surprising.
  • rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    Well, he would say that, wouldn't he....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    I was at Trinity at the same time as Kwasi, albeit I was a year or two ahead of him.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,783

    Carnyx said:

    Talk TV (I know!) discussing the Mirror apologising to Kwasi for "wrongly captioning" an article about him.

    Wasn't it the use of a wrong photo?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/01/mirror-apologises-for-using-picture-of-wrong-person-in-kwasi-kwarteng-story
    Oh that is laughable! :lol:
    I rseally, really didn't want to hint at the nature of it. I do wonder what the radio said that gave you the impression it was the other way round.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    How many students are in a college at one time? I've always wondered. The dining halls look quite small on the two or three occasions I have been to visit when there's a conference on during summer months. Maybe 300 seating?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957
    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    It is a big place IIRC, so not surprising.
    It's not that big a place: c. 180 to 200 students per year. I probably spoke to 95% of my year group at one point or another.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,055
    Off topic, but I think this Washington Post story ($) will interest many of you: https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/09/30/warming-up-dundee-scotland/

    "Some cities have a past that is beautiful in the present. Old buildings and public spaces effortlessly become tourist attractions long after their reason for being has disappeared. Venice is like that. So is Paris.

    Other cities carry their past into the present as an unavoidable burden, sprucing up their edges with beautiful things, new and old, to distract attention. Dundee, on the east coast of Scotland, is one of those. So is Baltimore, my home."

    David Brown recommends Dundee as a tourist destination, though in a way that might not attract every American tourist. (I found his descriptions of Dundee's past -- and present -- fascinating, but don't know how many other Americans would.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    How many students are in a college at one time? I've always wondered. The dining halls look quite small on the two or three occasions I have been to visit when there's a conference on during summer months. Maybe 300 seating?
    There are probably 700 undergraduates at Trinity at any one time (there will be a small number of fourth years and people who change course).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,254
    What a difference a month makes in UKraine:

    https://twitter.com/ukrukrukr888/status/1576268452062695424
  • pingping Posts: 3,282
    edited October 2022
    Carnyx said:

    NEW: The King, a passionate environmental campaigner, has abandoned plans to attend next month’s Cop27 climate change summit after Liz Truss told him to stay away…

    He had intended to deliver a speech at the meeting of world leaders in Egypt.

    Truss, who is also unlikely to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh gathering, objected to the King’s plans during a personal audience at Buckingham Palace last month.


    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1576267291817234432

    [intake of breath] The Royalists will be on her case now, never mind the RSPCA and RSPB and NT.
    She has no protection. It’s going to be story after story from now on. From every angle.

    If she isn’t already, she’s going to be the most hated woman in Britain.

    I almost feel sorry for her…
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,957
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Kwasi on the other hand.


    Do they never learn?
    Trinity Hall people are thick as mince.
    Kwasi went to proper Trinity.
    My brother was a contemporary of Kwarteng at Trinity, but he studied Mathematics and was involved with the Lib Dems, so probably didn't know him.
    I was at Trinity at the same time as Kwasi, albeit I was a year or two ahead of him.
    I knew him reasonably well - to the extent of going for a drink occasionally with him when we both worked in finance.
This discussion has been closed.