Is there any way back for the Tories? – politicalbetting.com

System

Is there any way back for the Tories? – politicalbetting.com

Although things are slightly better on the poll chart for the Tories the party still has very substantial double-digit deficits to make-up if it is to stand any chance at all at the next election of remaining in power. On the face of it this looks impossible.

Read the full story here

EPG

Mathematically if Labour really had a 20% lead and they were concentrated in the less-red parts of England and Wales, 123 gains are not a problem. The issue is they probably don't have that lead sustainably, to the extent that Conservative voters were saying they wanted to sack Truss.

StuartDickson

Second, like Scottish Labour.

ThePoliticalParty

3rd like Su's appointment next week

148grss

I'd be interested to know what (if any) work has been done talking just to those who were voting Con pre Truss and now post Truss are thinking of voting Labour. If the issue is pocketbook (my mortgage / rent / food) has increased due to inflation, then I don't see a way out for Sunak. If it's an issue of scandal and incompetence, I think he can do better (although his current performance isn't great). Seeing stories of Tory MPs already sending letters in seems ridiculous and like the party is just ungovernable, and I think a GE before 2024 will be necessary, if just for party discipline.

Alongside that, it does seem that the papers and all have kind of just decided that Labour are going to win the next election, and so don't seem to be as deferential as previous to the Tories. The links between the Tory party and the media are still there, but something has broken (whether it's just they can't deny their eyes any longer, or media savvy pols are pushing narratives in different directions, I can't tell).

Scott_xP

...

StuartDickson

Why is Lab Maj so long when they have a stonking poll lead?

NOM 2.3
Lab Maj 2.42
Con Maj 5.7

Ghedebrav

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

StuartDickson

Scott_xP said:

...

If they were that little he could just stomp on them. The problem is they are the size of the Honey Monster, but not remotely cuddly.

Nigelb

StuartDickson said:

Why is Lab Maj so long when they have a stonking poll lead?

NOM 2.3
Lab Maj 2.42
Con Maj 5.7

It's those pesky Scots.

StuartDickson

ThePoliticalParty said:

3rd like Su's appointment next week

3rd rate

Morris_Dancer

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

Driver

There is a significant disconnect between the polling and actual votes being cast - the Chester by election will be an interesting data point.

Plus we haven't had any proper leadership ratings for Sunak yet as far as I'm aware.

Hung parliament still looks the favourite with a small Labour majority the second favourite - UNS seat calculators know nothing of logistics, which remains Labour's biggest weakness in getting a majority.

wooliedyed

148grss said:

I'd be interested to know what (if any) work has been done talking just to those who were voting Con pre Truss and now post Truss are thinking. If the issue is pocketbook (my mortgage / rent / food) has increased due to inflation, then I don't see a way out for Sunak. If it's an issue of scandal and incompetence, I think he can do better (although his current performance isn't great). Seeing stories of Tory MPs already sending letters in seems ridiculous and like the party is just ungovernable, and I think a GE before 2024 will be necessary, if just for party discipline.

Alongside that, it does seem that the papers and all have kind of just decided that Labour are going to win the next election, and so don't seem to be as deferential as previous to the Tories. The links between the Tory party and the media are still there, but something has broken (whether it's just they can't deny their eyes any longer, or media savvy pols are pushing narratives in different directions, I can't tell).

The letters stuff does feel a bit 'fatal flaw in the integrity of the party', but the Tory party has needed to split for 30 years or more, maybe they need to take the opportunity soon.
I 'think' they can bumble along low 30s and 15 or so down and prevent a majority as we close in and the 'Labour, definitely' respondees start to accept their vote will be real and consequential rather than earnest/angry and protestful answers to a poll. More than that though or low Tory voting intention and we are into cascade failure territory

StuartDickson

Nigelb said:

StuartDickson said:

Why is Lab Maj so long when they have a stonking poll lead?

NOM 2.3
Lab Maj 2.42
Con Maj 5.7

It's those pesky Scots.

Not convinced.

Yes, SLab are struggling, but even if SLab only make a handful of gains, polling in England and Wales suggests that the Tories are going to get obliterated, which would leave Scotland irrelevant. Again.

Ghedebrav

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

Also a lot of those for whom environmental issues are a big deal can be cynical about COP, as essentially a bit of political greenwashing combined with a tasty junket.

wooliedyed

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

It might feed into a 'U Turner' narrative though

Ishmael_Z

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Jonathan

The Tories have a tsunami of problems to solve. The most difficult one by far, the one that will cause them the most headaches, the one that makes all the other problems a thousand times harder is themselves. They are by far their biggest problem. They are split, adrift, confused, tired and delight most in shooting themselves in the foot. Sunak didn’t fix that. Only opposition can.

MoonRabbit

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

A thought on the polls and the 'narrative'. Opinium has given some column inches on 'comeback' from the usual suspects, but tonights Redfield might be interesting. Thursday saw almost no movement compared to the others and indeed Redfield are now the upper end outlier, more than even People Polling who have been consistently upper end. So, if the general bounce is ongoing we might see a double effect movement tonight reinforcing the Sun etc 'comeback kid' stuff. Conversely, another high 20s to 30 lead and its 'comeback stalls, sack Suella!'
The Thursdsy poll had over a 20 point lead for Labour with over 65s, higher than the 50 to 65 lead which stuck out like a sore thumb........ be interesting to see what turns out
Generally this week should show us if we are amidst a bounce or one has occured and ceased/peaked

We do say on PB big political events take two weeks or more before they clearly register in polls - so we should still be watching, asking right questions, and reserving judgement as yet, like punters do with watched horses in horse racing.

The right questions are not the size of lead, there’s too much LLG in size of lead, it’s the Tory share recovery to watch for. Before the Starmergasm, Truss had some consistent 35s from Techne and a 34 from Opinium. To what extent does Sunak Honeymoon raise the Tory polling average is still the measure to be watching.

The trouble with using Opinium as part of comeback narrative is the swingback distorts the average and impression - what they actually got from voters was likely something around 25 for Tory share before swingback, that sort of return has to be higher in the next Opinium for a real Honeymoon bounce, ditto all the other firms.

So when new polls come this week, ignore the lead, the “this is the Tory score last time, this is it this time” is the only thing to measure in this CRUCIAL couple of months in the history of the Tory Party.

I partly agree, however i think the lead is important too, it defines the scale of challenge to prevent majority, be largest party etc, as are numvers of seitchers and 2019 vote retention .
I agree they need to get into the 30s to help with avoiding disaster downstream though

The Tories could advance 1 from the firm, yet the lead drop 8 or more, if the low Libs and Green Starmergasm gobbled start to come home reducing labour share. So lead dropping could be fools gold.

Actually the real churn is probably Con and Dont know to Ref, don’t know and Lib and green and Lab to con, Lab to Lib and green during in last week and coming weeks - to be truly psephological

“this is the Tory score last time from this firm, this is it this time” is the main story to give PB posters and readers, other things may be a bit of a rabbit hole.

wooliedyed

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well i said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

Jonathan

wooliedyed said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

It might feed into a 'U Turner' narrative though

COP on or COP off. What a mess. Just pick a line and stick to it ffs.

Roger

I'm beginning to think we've unfairly maligned the Tory members. They knew Rishi was a knob. Probably not as much of a one as he's turned out to be but a knob nonetheless.

Well done Moon Rabbit. You were one of the first on here to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt.

OnlyLivingBoy

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

TheScreamingEagles

Keeping Suella Braverman as Home Secretary should help the Tories and ensure another Tory majority.

TOPPING

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

IanB2

Politics.co.uk says letters are already going in for Sunak, although the article focuses on the sacking of JRM and it is hard to believe even Tory MPs care that much.

Jonathan

IanB2 said:

Politics.co.uk says letters are already going in for Sunak, although the article focuses on the sacking of JRM and it is hard to believe even Tory MPs care that much.

Is the letter dated St Crispins Day by any chance?

TheScreamingEagles

If one of my staff member did the shit that Braverman has done then lied about it the way Braverman has they'd be getting their P45.

She is a national security risk.

Gerry Adams as Home Secretary would be a lesser threat to national security than Braverman.

Pulpstar

Finally worked out where Russia got the "Z" inspiration from.

Greg Lemond !

wooliedyed

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

A thought on the polls and the 'narrative'. Opinium has given some column inches on 'comeback' from the usual suspects, but tonights Redfield might be interesting. Thursday saw almost no movement compared to the others and indeed Redfield are now the upper end outlier, more than even People Polling who have been consistently upper end. So, if the general bounce is ongoing we might see a double effect movement tonight reinforcing the Sun etc 'comeback kid' stuff. Conversely, another high 20s to 30 lead and its 'comeback stalls, sack Suella!'
The Thursdsy poll had over a 20 point lead for Labour with over 65s, higher than the 50 to 65 lead which stuck out like a sore thumb........ be interesting to see what turns out
Generally this week should show us if we are amidst a bounce or one has occured and ceased/peaked

We do say on PB big political events take two weeks or more before they clearly register in polls - so we should still be watching, asking right questions, and reserving judgement as yet, like punters do with watched horses in horse racing.

The right questions are not the size of lead, there’s too much LLG in size of lead, it’s the Tory share recovery to watch for. Before the Starmergasm, Truss had some consistent 35s from Techne and a 34 from Opinium. To what extent does Sunak Honeymoon raise the Tory polling average is still the measure to be watching.

The trouble with using Opinium as part of comeback narrative is the swingback distorts the average and impression - what they actually got from voters was likely something around 25 for Tory share before swingback, that sort of return has to be higher in the next Opinium for a real Honeymoon bounce, ditto all the other firms.

So when new polls come this week, ignore the lead, the “this is the Tory score last time, this is it this time” is the only thing to measure in this CRUCIAL couple of months in the history of the Tory Party.

I partly agree, however i think the lead is important too, it defines the scale of challenge to prevent majority, be largest party etc, as are numvers of seitchers and 2019 vote retention .
I agree they need to get into the 30s to help with avoiding disaster downstream though

The Tories could advance 1 from the firm, yet the lead drop 8 or more, if the low Libs and Green Starmergasm gobbled start to come home reducing labour share. So lead dropping could be fools gold.

Actually the real churn is probably Con and Dont know to Ref, don’t know and Lib and green and Lab to con, Lab to Lib and green during in last week and coming weeks - to be truly psephological

“this is the Tory score last time from this firm, this is it this time” is the main story to give PB posters and readers, other things may be a bit of a rabbit hole.

Yes, i do take your point but if the lead drops far enough we enter 'comeback from here is possible' territiry even on, say, an average of 29. So the lead is irrelevant until it isnt.....
The priority for hanging on is get into the 30s though, yes.

Nigelb

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

Jonathan

TheScreamingEagles said:

If one of my staff member did the shit that Braverman has done then lied about it the way Braverman has they'd be getting their P45.

She is a national security risk.

Gerry Adams as Home Secretary would be a lesser threat to national security than Braverman.

She said sorry. It’s all ok apparently.

TheScreamingEagles

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

Xtrain

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

Exactly. Stick to your guns Rishi. We've had enough of leaders swaying whichever way the MSM blows them.

mwadams

Isn't Labour's message basically "We know you have voted Tory in the past, but we all know that the Conservatives need a spell in opposition to sort themselves out. You don't have to tell anyone, but, when the pencil hits the ballot paper, don't vote for more of the last couple of years, please."

Cooper's TV interview this morning would seem to be exactly in this mould. Deliver a sensible, measured line that is more sorrowful than strident, and keep doing that until election day.

wooliedyed

Nigelb said:

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

But exactly what Tories 2022 edition would cook up

Ghedebrav

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Jonathan

mwadams said:

Isn't Labour's message basically "We know you have voted Tory in the past, but we all know that the Conservatives need a spell in opposition to sort themselves out. You don't have to tell anyone, but, when the pencil hits the ballot paper, don't vote for more of the last couple of years, please."

Cooper's TV interview this morning would seem to be exactly in this mould. Deliver a sensible, measured line that is more sorrowful than strident, and keep doing that until election day.

It’s been good to see Cooper step up. One of signs that Labour are getting ready is that they are not a one man band. The key shadows are performing very well.

Nigelb

🇷🇺 MoD just released this picture of Oleksandr Volodymyrovyč Ševčenko, commander of the 35th Marine Infantry Brigade who organised the attack on the Black Sea Fleet on the 29th October.

https://twitter.com/BaghdadLavrov/status/1586773097922936832

Anabobazina

Jonathan said:

IanB2 said:

Politics.co.uk says letters are already going in for Sunak, although the article focuses on the sacking of JRM and it is hard to believe even Tory MPs care that much.

Is the letter dated St Crispins Day by any chance?

Yes, all 26 of them.

Curious.

Roger

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

Rishi's had some crap thrown at him this week but that's over the top.

mwadams

Jonathan said:

mwadams said:

Isn't Labour's message basically "We know you have voted Tory in the past, but we all know that the Conservatives need a spell in opposition to sort themselves out. You don't have to tell anyone, but, when the pencil hits the ballot paper, don't vote for more of the last couple of years, please."

Cooper's TV interview this morning would seem to be exactly in this mould. Deliver a sensible, measured line that is more sorrowful than strident, and keep doing that until election day.

It’s been good to see Cooper step up. One of signs that Labour are getting ready is that they are not a one man band. The key shadows are performing very well.

I agree. And for the people who complain that it is not exactly "Blairite Walking on Sunshine as Things Can Only Get Better" - I wonder what tone TB would have struck if he'd been working against the downslope as he came into office?

Ishmael_Z

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

History suggested that it was bloody impossible to shit the political bed as thoroughly as Johnson did, or to be PM for only 45 days without dying on day 45, until those things happened. I don't see why your crude quantitative point overrides those two equally obvious and objective facts.

Happy with my lab maj position.

RochdalePioneers

TheScreamingEagles said:

If one of my staff member did the shit that Braverman has done then lied about it the way Braverman has they'd be getting their P45.

She is a national security risk.

Gerry Adams as Home Secretary would be a lesser threat to national security than Braverman.

"I had to email the file to my personal email" would have been considered a serious security breach in several of my former employers. Once. Never mind 6 times. And that was only documents that were commercially sensitive never mind ones that involve national security.

Two obvious questions:
1 Is Braverman so stupid that she doesn't understand this, or so arrogant that she doesn't care?
2 How many times did she do with whilst Attorney General, with what documents?

Anabobazina

Roger said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

Rishi's had some crap thrown at him this week but that's over the top.

TheScreamingEagles

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

History suggested that it was bloody impossible to shit the political bed as thoroughly as Johnson did, or to be PM for only 45 days without dying on day 45, until those things happened. I don't see why your crude quantitative point overrides those two equally obvious and objective facts.

Happy with my lab maj position.

I largely agree with you, I was just trying to understand the mentality of some punters.

Scott_xP

RochdalePioneers said:

1 Is Braverman so stupid that she doesn't understand this, or so arrogant that she doesn't care?

Yes

Ishmael_Z

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Good thing too, uncle Matthew is a superb creation and the pursuit of love is the most perfect novel in the English language.

Ishmael_Z

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

HYUFD

The Tories have an outside chance of a hung parliament if they restore economic stability but Labour are almost certainly likely to win a majority or most seats

bondegezou

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

Is net gain the right metric to look at? To win a seat, you have to get more voters than any of the other candidates. What you got the previous time doesn’t matter on the day.

History suggests that Labour have won an overall majority more often than a party made 123 gains.

Nigelb

wooliedyed said:

Nigelb said:

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

But exactly what Tories 2022 edition would cook up

No, they have another way to deal with sewage.
Here's our third story (!) from Mark Spencer's morning round

Tory minister blasted for 'blaming the public' over sewage dumping into the sea
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1587044662501670914

Jonathan

HYUFD said:

The Tories have an outside chance of a hung parliament if they restore economic stability but Labour are almost certainly likely to win a majority or most seats

Tories would need to figure out what they would want to do with another five years. That’s quite a challenge for them.

MoonRabbit

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Slackbladder said:

Nigelb said:

Do you think the prime minister Rishi Sunak should or should not attend the COP27 climate change conference in Egypt in November?

Definitely should: 36%
Probably should: 25%
Probably should not: 11%
Definitely should not: 9%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1587046726921224192

Ask the same question about attending the local village fete. We probably want our politicians to do everything.

Or it could be, despite right wing media being very stridently opposed to Net Zero, no matter how you phrase the polling question vast majority of Tory voters support Net Zero, so Sunak has arsed this one up.

Unforced Error from Captain Unforced Error!

This is something that would be described as an unforced error by his haters no matter what he did.

You don’t regard no to COP becoming yes to COP as a u-turn?

Not what I said. Thought I haven't seen anything beyond "he can't go" "changing" to "he'd like to go but it might not be possible".

What I said is: if he'd said from the outset he was going, you'd have called that an unforced error because he should have stayed home dealing with more urgent domestic matters.

Nope. myself and about 80% of people took it as obvious he’d pop in, would not have batted an eye lid if he done so, especially after the hard work and national pride put into recent UK COP.

It only become a story to criticise him with when he made it one, by pandering to the vocal right wing minority who loath Net Zero policy.

That those so vocal in their loathing of Net Zero are in such minority even on the right, and weak and wobbly Sunak arsed up pandering to them, is the only take out from this U Turn story.

I mean, the bit in bold is just entirely nonsense.

Do try to keep up with British politics Driver. It’s becoming quite a bore having to bring you up to speed every five minutes 😇

OnlyLivingBoy

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

As your chart demonstrates, Labour has taken power after winning an election on three occasions since 1945, and on two of those it achieved a net gain of more than 123 seats. So it's not that far fetched. Thanks to Corbyn Labour arguably lost a lot of seats it would have held under a better leader, and so perhaps some of those seats it needs to win back will be relatively easy to pick up now Corbyn is gone.
Like I say, I am not necessarily predicting it (it's too far out from the next election to be certain of anything) but I think it's not hard to see it happening. My gut feeling is it is underpriced.

mwadams

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

History suggested that it was bloody impossible to shit the political bed as thoroughly as Johnson did, or to be PM for only 45 days without dying on day 45, until those things happened. I don't see why your crude quantitative point overrides those two equally obvious and objective facts.

Happy with my lab maj position.

Or has Corbyn's Clusterfuck actually made it easier to get a record turnaround? If a lot of that majority was purely a response to him and his kind, their (perceived, at the very least) consignment into the dustbin of Labour history makes it a softer target.

Carnyx

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Nigelb

Ishmael_Z said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

Once he was leader he had no need to make her Home Secretary.
And several good reasons not to.

EPG

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

I think migration is more a mobilising issue for the cultural right, not the cultural left, and climate change is the opposite. There are a few dozen loseable constituencies where above-income people are prone to switch from blue to orange / green on that basis. Edit, the really unwinnable people for the Tories are exactly the ones who think COP is a pointless greenwash and only unwashed Communism will do.

Driver

.

MoonRabbit said:

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Driver said:

MoonRabbit said:

Slackbladder said:

Nigelb said:

Do you think the prime minister Rishi Sunak should or should not attend the COP27 climate change conference in Egypt in November?

Definitely should: 36%
Probably should: 25%
Probably should not: 11%
Definitely should not: 9%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1587046726921224192

Ask the same question about attending the local village fete. We probably want our politicians to do everything.

Or it could be, despite right wing media being very stridently opposed to Net Zero, no matter how you phrase the polling question vast majority of Tory voters support Net Zero, so Sunak has arsed this one up.

Unforced Error from Captain Unforced Error!

This is something that would be described as an unforced error by his haters no matter what he did.

You don’t regard no to COP becoming yes to COP as a u-turn?

Not what I said. Thought I haven't seen anything beyond "he can't go" "changing" to "he'd like to go but it might not be possible".

What I said is: if he'd said from the outset he was going, you'd have called that an unforced error because he should have stayed home dealing with more urgent domestic matters.

Nope. myself and about 80% of people took it as obvious he’d pop in, would not have batted an eye lid if he done so, especially after the hard work and national pride put into recent UK COP.

It only become a story to criticise him with when he made it one, by pandering to the vocal right wing minority who loath Net Zero policy.

That those so vocal in their loathing of Net Zero are in such minority even on the right, and weak and wobbly Sunak arsed up pandering to them, is the only take out from this U Turn story.

I mean, the bit in bold is just entirely nonsense.

Do try to keep up with British politics Driver. It’s becoming quite a bore having to bring you up to speed every five minutes 😇

I saw your totally different reply to the same comment on the previous thread, thanks.

TimS

Nigelb said:

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

Not only not a good idea, but bad in purely policy terms too - having a numpty in charge of the home office is really not sensible. You can get away with putting them in quieter depts.

And the word sewage reminds me why the environment, COP included, is not some kind of Westminster bubble issue that doesn't bother people. This week we have an image spreading like wildfire of brown sea in Cornwall due - apparently - to raw sewage release. I've no idea whether it's accurate or a doctored photo but this issue, that the Tories are so obsessed with deregulation that they happily stand by as the environment is poisoned and we swim in shit: that has major cut through.

Not only does it have cut through, but it has it in precisely that voting group they should be really worried about: small c conservative, middle aged and elderly, and inclined to vote Tory in ordinary times. Quite a lot of the most affected coastal constituencies are targets for Labour (in the SE and North) or the Lib Dems (in the SW). Plus, the sewage story has a collateral impact on other areas of political opinion:

- Brexit and the loss of EU regulations
- Net Zero / credibility of conservatives on the environment
- planning policy and housebuilding and anything else where community consent is needed for development

mwadams

HYUFD said:

The Tories have an outside chance of a hung parliament if they restore economic stability but Labour are almost certainly likely to win a majority or most seats

And, in fact, a decent Tory performance leaving Labour in a significantly better economic position, at the expense of a smaller overall majority would be ideal for them. On current showing I think that's optimistic, though.

Ghedebrav

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Ishmael_Z

Nigelb said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

Once he was leader he had no need to make her Home Secretary.
And several good reasons not to.

We neither of us know that. If he had promised to make her HS immediately, then yes he could have ratted on the deal, but there's all sorts of senses in which that would be effectively impossible.

TheScreamingEagles

Even the Welsh are embarrassed about being Welsh.

Wales want to stop being called Wales after the World Cup

The Football Association of Wales is understood to have already had informal discussions with Uefa over its name change

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/10/31/wales-want-stop-called-wales-world-cup/

MoonRabbit

StuartDickson said:

Scott_xP said:

...

If they were that little he could just stomp on them. The problem is they are the size of the Honey Monster, but not remotely cuddly.

I disagree, if Tis just this particular issue alone. The Tory Right can be very vocal on Net Zero commitments, but are in a polling minority not just all voters, but in the right wing sub sample.

And that makes this Scaredy-Cat Sunak picture rather accurate, do you see my point?

Of course in theory people can just stomp on spiders, but Scaredy-cats like Sunak would be too busy running away.

Casino_Royale

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

History doesn't mean crap.

Support for parties is a mile wide but an inch deep these days.

That applies to the Tories, and also Labour.

Carnyx

Ghedebrav said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Thank you! I was wondering if there was any significance.

Mexicanpete

Jonathan said:

HYUFD said:

The Tories have an outside chance of a hung parliament if they restore economic stability but Labour are almost certainly likely to win a majority or most seats

Tories would need to figure out what they would want to do with another five years. That’s quite a challenge for them.

Continue to fill their boots, and the boots of their donors, friends and relatives?

Carnyx

TimS said:

Nigelb said:

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

Not only not a good idea, but bad in purely policy terms too - having a numpty in charge of the home office is really not sensible. You can get away with putting them in quieter depts.

And the word sewage reminds me why the environment, COP included, is not some kind of Westminster bubble issue that doesn't bother people. This week we have an image spreading like wildfire of brown sea in Cornwall due - apparently - to raw sewage release. I've no idea whether it's accurate or a doctored photo but this issue, that the Tories are so obsessed with deregulation that they happily stand by as the environment is poisoned and we swim in shit: that has major cut through.

Not only does it have cut through, but it has it in precisely that voting group they should be really worried about: small c conservative, middle aged and elderly, and inclined to vote Tory in ordinary times. Quite a lot of the most affected coastal constituencies are targets for Labour (in the SE and North) or the Lib Dems (in the SW). Plus, the sewage story has a collateral impact on other areas of political opinion:

- Brexit and the loss of EU regulations
- Net Zero / credibility of conservatives on the environment
- planning policy and housebuilding and anything else where community consent is needed for development

You could add the weird weather, too, to the sense of unease.

Ishmael_Z

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Swinbrook, Oxfordshire.

You really must read the novel.

TimS

mwadams said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

History suggested that it was bloody impossible to shit the political bed as thoroughly as Johnson did, or to be PM for only 45 days without dying on day 45, until those things happened. I don't see why your crude quantitative point overrides those two equally obvious and objective facts.

Happy with my lab maj position.

Or has Corbyn's Clusterfuck actually made it easier to get a record turnaround? If a lot of that majority was purely a response to him and his kind, their (perceived, at the very least) consignment into the dustbin of Labour history makes it a softer target.

I would agree. Always hard to be sure about counter-factuals but I could imagine a 2019 result without Corbyn of a rather narrower Tory majority and more effective tactical voting between Lib Dems and Labour.

TheScreamingEagles

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

algarkirk

StuartDickson said:

Why is Lab Maj so long when they have a stonking poll lead?

NOM 2.3
Lab Maj 2.42
Con Maj 5.7

Because before looking ahead 2 years you might look back 2 years and see that 2 years ago the Tories had quite decent poll figures. So the present moment is an unreliable guide to the future.

RochdalePioneers

TheScreamingEagles said:

Even the Welsh are embarrassed about being Welsh.

Wales want to stop being called Wales after the World Cup

The Football Association of Wales is understood to have already had informal discussions with Uefa over its name change

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/10/31/wales-want-stop-called-wales-world-cup/

"No, its spelled "Wales" but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove"

Heathener

So I see that the dirty sleazy tory stories are bubbling up again. Sunak's honeymoon didn't last long, did it? This is like 1992-97 multipled 1000x with a crippling economy.

You just watch his personal ratings slide over the next 12 months. This was peak Rishi.

It will be a shellacking next election.

RochdalePioneers

TheScreamingEagles said:

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

Don't worry. Breaking the Ministerial Code is neither a resignation nor a sacking offence these days. Indeed she'll probably get promoted to First Secretary of State for whipping the Tofu-eating wokeraty into such a flap.

glw

Something that occurs to me about Braverman forwarding documents to her personal email address, where is the Rights Management system? Surely if the documents are confidential then it shouldn't be possible to forward them to a personal email address. Do the Home Office not use such systems?

Anabobazina

Nigelb said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

Once he was leader he had no need to make her Home Secretary.
And several good reasons not to.

Yes, exactly. I said this on here at the time. It would have been really quite straightforward to renege on a technicality – indeed the department itself expressing severe reservations about her reappointment would have been reason far beyond a 'technicality'. It really is baffling why Sunak rehired her.

Heathener

TheScreamingEagles said:

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

She isn't fit to be a cleaner in the Home Office let alone its leader.

Are the tory party in parliament REALLY this talentless?

FFS

Ishmael_Z

TheScreamingEagles said:

Even the Welsh are embarrassed about being Welsh.

Wales want to stop being called Wales after the World Cup

The Football Association of Wales is understood to have already had informal discussions with Uefa over its name change

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/10/31/wales-want-stop-called-wales-world-cup/

I'd concentrate on the footie, lads, or it'll be another 64 years before it becomes an issue again.

Anabobazina

TheScreamingEagles said:

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

I have now lost track of how many times this brainless clownette has broken the law as home secretary in her short tenure tenures

Ishmael_Z

Anabobazina said:

Nigelb said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

Once he was leader he had no need to make her Home Secretary.
And several good reasons not to.

Yes, exactly. I said this on here at the time. It would have been really quite straightforward to renege on a technicality – indeed the department itself expressing severe reservations about her reappointment would have been reason far beyond a 'technicality'. It really is baffling why Sunak rehired her.

Watch and learn. If he gets to sack her for cause before Christmas, I will be thinking that's rather clever.

bondegezou

As I said before, Sunak will surprise on the downside. People thought he might be a competent centrist, but he’s only a competent centrist compared to Truss.

EPG

Austerity, alienating the Tory right, and midterm poll deficits, all added up to a majority last time it happened, albeit one that led to the four most ineffectual administrations in postwar British history.

TOPPING

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Thank you! I was wondering if there was any significance.

The Duke of Norfolk lives in Sussex and the Earl of Leicester lives in Norfolk.

Go figure.

Nigelb

.

Ishmael_Z said:

Nigelb said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TOPPING said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

It suits the PB narrative but it could easily be that Rishi rates her.

No, because if he just rated her he would have left her on the naughty step for 6 weeks. It is the timescale which confirms the gun to his head.

Once he was leader he had no need to make her Home Secretary.
And several good reasons not to.

We neither of us know that. If he had promised to make her HS immediately, then yes he could have ratted on the deal, but there's all sorts of senses in which that would be effectively impossible.

He simply would have needed to publish what has been published in the last few days.
The case for not re-appointing her is unassailable on its merits.

Anabobazina

Morris_Dancer said:

Suggestion: the COP stuff is absolutely irrelevant.

People generally care about the cost of living crisis. Those who are into more right wing matters care about the Channel boats. Those more on the left care about the not unrelated matter of the Home Secretary and housing/hotel rooms for illegal immigrants.

Whose vote is swayed either way by whether Sunak goes to the conference?

People really into green affairs, but who also are very amenable to voting Conservative?

That's not exactly a big constituency.

Is that right though? Many of the rural shire Tories I've encountered are actually rather environmentalist in their outlook, or at least have a passion for the countryside and its protection.

MoonRabbit

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

Surely the 1945 result could not have come as a shock to anyone? During campaign they must have picked up on it’s a disaster out there. To have a result that size many voters must have shifted long in advance, and that couldn’t have gone unnoticed either?

Ishmael_Z

TOPPING said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Thank you! I was wondering if there was any significance.

The Duke of Norfolk lives in Sussex and the Earl of Leicester lives in Norfolk.

Go figure.

Devonshire in Derbyshire.

Anabobazina

TOPPING said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Thank you! I was wondering if there was any significance.

The Duke of Norfolk lives in Sussex and the Earl of Leicester lives in Norfolk.

Go figure.

The Duke of Devonshire lives in Derbyshire.

I wonder how these various gentry would like to be repatriated?

I reckon the Earl would put up the biggest fight!!

Nigelb

TimS said:

Nigelb said:

wooliedyed said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Well I said earlier it looks like he is using her as a lightning rod/sewage sponge. Im not sure it will work or is a good idea however.

A combined lighting rod/sewage sponge is definitely not a good idea.

Not only not a good idea...

Ben Franklin would have been horrified.

Scott_xP

Free Radiohead...

boy, do I have news for you about atonal music enjoyers https://twitter.com/Komaniecki_R/status/1587090650587078657/photo/1

OllyT

TheScreamingEagles said:

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

Let us not forget that IIRC this was the woman that Johnson believed was the best choice available to be his Attorney General. It's almost as though he didn't mind having someone in that position with a flexible attitude to law-breaking.

Dura_Ace

TheScreamingEagles said:

** NEW: It was Suella Braverman who made the decision to stop booking hotels for Manston migrants, according to six current and former senior govt sources **

** This led to unlawful detentions and was a ministerial code breach, two senior sources said **

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-31/uk-officials-accuse-braverman-of-unlawful-decision-on-migrants

Leaky Sue is fucked. We're going to have Shappsie back.

Carnyx

TheScreamingEagles said:

Even the Welsh are embarrassed about being Welsh.

Wales want to stop being called Wales after the World Cup

The Football Association of Wales is understood to have already had informal discussions with Uefa over its name change

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/10/31/wales-want-stop-called-wales-world-cup/

Hardly surprising. Wales is English for Furriner Slaves, or maybe Slave-grade Furriners.

if the UK was called Pays des Rosbifs you'd want to change that to something in English (with Welsh, Gaelic and Irish variants).

RochdalePioneers

Anyway, with seemingly everyone in Whitehall briefing against Braverman, and with an endless pile of provable examples where she has broken the law / ministerial code, which moron will be sent onto tomorrow's media round to defend her?

Previously we could rely on Simon DIng Dong Clarke, but he got sacked. Perhaps he'd be willing to do it anyway, in the hope that he replaces her later in the morning?

TOPPING

Anabobazina said:

TOPPING said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Carnyx said:

Ghedebrav said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ghedebrav said:

I'm not buying the idea that Braverman was cynically chosen to act as a lightning rod.

Much more likely that it was just a bad choice. Even if the lightning rod theory were true it's a massive own goal; above all else Sunak needs to project competence and stability; immediately embroiling in what looks like an avoidable problem - alongside the leaks, which should still be resignation-worthy - could well dampen or arrest any polling bounce (I still think there'll be a bounce though).

Seems nonsense. whereas her being the price of ERG support seems entirely possible.

Yeah, it is totally feasible. Still stupid though. The ERG will never be happy, ever. Reminds me of Jessica Mitford on her father, a prototypical ERGer:

"Lord Redesdale wouldn't receive any 'outsiders' such as 'Huns', 'Frogs', Americans, Africans and any other 'foreigners', which included other people's children, most friends of the girls and almost all young men. An exception was made for some (but by no means all) relatives and some choice red-faced and tweed-clad neighbours."

Hmm, haven't read the novel, but was Redesdale, erm, seated in Redesdale? It's a pretty isolated place, unless you are a forester, squaddy or Roman archaeologist, or just passing over Carter Bar.

Lived in the Cotswolds, I think.

Thank you! I was wondering if there was any significance.

The Duke of Norfolk lives in Sussex and the Earl of Leicester lives in Norfolk.

Go figure.

The Duke of Devonshire lives in Derbyshire.

I wonder how these various gentry would like to be repatriated?

I reckon the Earl would put up the biggest fight!!

Careful. He is a man of great ability in the tradition of Ben Wallace and IDS as a former Jock Guard.

DecrepiterJohnL

RochdalePioneers said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If one of my staff member did the shit that Braverman has done then lied about it the way Braverman has they'd be getting their P45.

She is a national security risk.

Gerry Adams as Home Secretary would be a lesser threat to national security than Braverman.

"I had to email the file to my personal email" would have been considered a serious security breach in several of my former employers. Once. Never mind 6 times. And that was only documents that were commercially sensitive never mind ones that involve national security.

Two obvious questions:
1 Is Braverman so stupid that she doesn't understand this, or so arrogant that she doesn't care?
2 How many times did she do with whilst Attorney General, with what documents?

Mine too. Though come to think of it, I did discover some daily reports being emailed to the personal accounts of people who no longer worked for the company (and might even have died in one case). Things get set up during prototyping and development, then carried over to production.

Ishmael_Z

MoonRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

I don't really get why a Labour majority is so hard to envisage. The Conservatives will have been in power for over a decade at the next election. Their position in 2019 was flattered by the special circumstances of Brexit and Corbyn. Sunak is a much weaker candidate that 2019-era Johnson. The economic backdrop is very poor. Public services are in a bad state. Brexit - the Tories' sole "achievement" - is unpopular. And Labour has a solid and reassuring (if somewhat uninspiring) front bench team. These seem like the kind of circumstances that could produce a big enough swing for Labour to get a majority.
I'm not saying it's nailed on, but surely it's not hard to see it happening?

History suggests it is very difficult to make a net gain of at least 123 seats.

Corbyn's toxic legacy really has screwed Labour.

Surely the 1945 result could not have come as a shock to anyone? During campaign they must have picked up on it’s a disaster out there. To have a result that size many voters must have shifted long in advance, and that couldn’t have gone unnoticed either?

You'd be amazed how many GE results are unexpected: 1992, 2010, 2015, 2017 frinstance which should ve gone lab, con, nom, con lansdslide.. Also, other things on their mind than polling in 1945. I believe that certainly Churchill was pretty flabberghasted.