LAB’s set to win most seats but is not in majority territory – politicalbetting.com

System

LAB’s set to win most seats but is not in majority territory – politicalbetting.com

I think the betting markets have got this right and that LAB is in with a very good chance of winning most seats at the next general election but at the moment an overall majority.is rated as an evens chance.

Read the full story here

WhisperingOracle

First among equals. Surely this is a bit tough on Labour's chances. The Tories look to have lost key support from so many areas - the anti-immigration right, the business centre, struggling middle England, or what used to be called Mondeo Man.

Where their core of solid support to deny Labour an overall majority come from, at the next election ?

GarethoftheVale2

I think this is right. At the moment Lab are flying high because the Government is unpopular but I think they'll slip back closer to the election.

The big challenge for them is going to be what to put in their manifesto when there is no money to spend. It makes me think that that is why they are proposing things like Lords reform and VAT on private schools - sops to the activists as there won't be any big ticket items.

Dr21

Read this from Dr Angus Dalgleish about cancers rapidly progressing after boosters. Who should we listen to these learned top doctors or the odd poster on pb. Hmmm

https://twitter.com/JohnBoweActor/status/1596804673448849409?s=20&t=TmtGUQZePMaz42cI9I2MEQ

williamglenn

I wonder how long it will take @Dr21 to move on to Ukraine.

NickyBreakspear

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

Dr21

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.
What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

Conservatives are finished for now. The forecast for December is terrible very cold which will mean high heating bills for all

Dr21

Think highs will be down to 4c on average by december 10. This is well below the average of 7 to 8 and will mean higher heating bills for all

WhisperingOracle

Dr21 said:

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.
What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

Conservatives are finished for now. The forecast for December is terrible very cold which will mean high heating bills for all

This is actually a good point.

GarethoftheVale2

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

It's an interesting question for both parties. For the Cons, with Sunak leading, it feels that holding the Red Wall is very hard so they are better off shoring up the South and Outer London from Lab and LD. The Cons will hope that the economy doesn't turn out as badly as predicted and that there's then some room for pre-election tax cuts. This would then allow them to portray Sunak/Hunt as a safe pair of hands for the economy.

The Lab strategy then is to try and win the Red Wall back and also win the traditional marginals like the Swindon seats. The private schools policy is the sort that is likely to play well in working class seats but less so in the blue wall.

SandyRentool

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

DecrepiterJohnL

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

They could, but not without appearing racist.

CarlottaVance

Agree - while Labour have a commanding lead they have a heck of a hill to climb. Barring a resurgence in Scotland, which might take them into majority territory, I think they will be largest party - Starmer's question then is does he govern as a minority government, or form a coalition, and if so, with whom?

WillG

Dr21 said:

Read this from Dr Angus Dalgleish about cancers rapidly progressing after boosters. Who should we listen to these learned top doctors or the odd poster on pb. Hmmm

https://twitter.com/JohnBoweActor/status/1596804673448849409?s=20&t=TmtGUQZePMaz42cI9I2MEQ

Already deleted. Also fun how easily you get confused between the singular and plural of "doctor".

Look, I know you're doing your best from another country, but please appreciate we are Brits, not Americans and we don't fall for this crap so easily. Please try harder. Start with getting your capitalization right.

CarlottaVance

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

More people know who Sturgeon is than Modi - and you don't think that might carry racist overtones, even beyond the "perpetually offended" brigade?

MoonRabbit

Betting Post. Horse Racing tips 🐎

Amazing cards and match ups. I’ve avoided tingle creek, too open for me.

2.05 Aintree
❤️ Snow Leopardess. When she’s back winning I will be on her.

2.40 Aintree
Gunsight Ridge. In my book with a big impressed me in its favour.

3.15 Aintree
Bold Plan. I’m on at 25-1, chances better than that imo

3.30 Sandown
Almazhar Garde - long shot e/w of the week. Has placed in these sort of races.

dixiedean

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

Theuniondivvie

CarlottaVance said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

More people know who Sturgeon is than Modi - and you don't think that might carry racist overtones, even beyond the "perpetually offended" brigade?

I guess those on here perpetually offended by the possibility of anti English racism from Scots would consider singling out a Scottish pol to rile up English voters as racist?

Perhaps not.

DecrepiterJohnL

GarethoftheVale2 said:

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

It's an interesting question for both parties. For the Cons, with Sunak leading, it feels that holding the Red Wall is very hard so they are better off shoring up the South and Outer London from Lab and LD. The Cons will hope that the economy doesn't turn out as badly as predicted and that there's then some room for pre-election tax cuts. This would then allow them to portray Sunak/Hunt as a safe pair of hands for the economy.

The Lab strategy then is to try and win the Red Wall back and also win the traditional marginals like the Swindon seats. The private schools policy is the sort that is likely to play well in working class seats but less so in the blue wall.

Is it? I remain unconvinced the average working class voter gives a damn about how to raise the wind for Eton. If Labour were serious about this, they'd do better drawing attention to the figures showing public school types unfairly dominate all the good jobs (including MPs) rather than accounting measures.

Stuartinromford

dixiedean said:

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

50 seats in Scotland takes 100 off the Labour majority. So Blair's 1997 win would be a majority of 79.

A Labour majority shouldn't be on... Should it? The fact that we're talking about it shows quite how much Johnson and Truss messed up.

eek

DecrepiterJohnL said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

It's an interesting question for both parties. For the Cons, with Sunak leading, it feels that holding the Red Wall is very hard so they are better off shoring up the South and Outer London from Lab and LD. The Cons will hope that the economy doesn't turn out as badly as predicted and that there's then some room for pre-election tax cuts. This would then allow them to portray Sunak/Hunt as a safe pair of hands for the economy.

The Lab strategy then is to try and win the Red Wall back and also win the traditional marginals like the Swindon seats. The private schools policy is the sort that is likely to play well in working class seats but less so in the blue wall.

Is it? I remain unconvinced the average working class voter gives a damn about how to raise the wind for Eton. If Labour were serious about this, they'd do better drawing attention to the figures showing public school types unfairly dominate all the good jobs (including MPs) rather than accounting measures.

The policy is really just red meat for left(er) wing voters who care about such things.

It won’t really impact anything but the problem is that for every Elton who do a lot around the country to help poorer people there are multiple other private schools that do less then the square root of sod all.

NickPalmer

The passing remark "Unless there is a massive [Labour] recovery north of the border" is a bit casual, There appears to be something substantial going on right now, with the SNP lead over Labour well down in a couple of polls. That might be temporary, or even rogue polls, but an SNP slide in 22 months seems at least as possible as a Tory bounce.

22 months is indeed a long time, but a Tory recovery is not the only possibility.

Steve_Atkins

NickPalmer said:

The passing remark "Unless there is a massive [Labour] recovery north of the border" is a bit casual, There appears to be something substantial going on right now, with the SNP lead over Labour well down in a couple of polls. That might be temporary, or even rogue polls, but an SNP slide in 22 months seems at least as possible as a Tory bounce.

22 months is indeed a long time, but a Tory recovery is not the only possibility.

Yes Labour does seem to be doing better in Scotland now, even if the SNP is still in 45% in most polls as Labour is now up to 30/31% so you can now see a credible route to Labour winning 10-15 seats in Scotland (even if Labour doesn't gain that many votes from the SNP).

Also an interesting by election in West Lothian on Thursday:

Lab: 1783 (39.8%, +10.2)
SNP: 1576 (35.2%, -6.7)
Con: 347 (7.8%, -10)
Ho (Ind): 275 (6.1%, new)
LD: 167 (3.7%, nc)
La (Ind): 125 (2.8%, new)
Grn: 122 (2.7%, -1.6)
Alba: 81 (1.8%, +0.4)

Caused by a Labour death and noting that younger SNP voters probably didn't turn out but it's interesting that both the SNP vote was down 6.7% and the Greens down unlike the Glasgow by election result two weeks ago which Labour also won where the SNP share held up and the Greens increased.

Labour also came third behind the SNP and the Tories in this ward in 2017.

dixiedean

Stuartinromford said:

dixiedean said:

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

50 seats in Scotland takes 100 off the Labour majority. So Blair's 1997 win would be a majority of 79.

A Labour majority shouldn't be on... Should it? The fact that we're talking about it shows quite how much Johnson and Truss messed up.

Yeah. It feels to me like the country has made up its mind for change, however.

DJ41

Leon said:

ydoethur said:

Sean_F said:

Carnyx said:

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Selling Crimea to Russia would be in line with American precedent, and provide funds to rebuild Ukraine without humiliating Russia by saying reparations. (How much would be grabbed by America to pay for all those "free" weapons is left as an exercise for the negotiators.)

Almost all of the military aid provided to Ukraine from the US ($54bn) is via Lend-Lease so somebody will have to pay for it eventually. Cash, grass or ass. As the Americans say.

In terms of degrading a significant military threat, the humiliation of the Russian military by Ukraine supported by the USA and other NATO countries has been a bargain. For roughly a single annual military budget of the UK, the major threat to NATO has been eliminated as a viable non-nuclear threat. Real value for money, and at no cost in NATO lives.

Russia is heading for a comparable defeat to the Tsarist Russo-Japanese war. For a century Russia has idolised its military, and such a catastrophic under performance will be a major shock to the Russian psyche.

No it's been a fucking disaster in so many ways. Absolutely disgusting comment from you, you're usually better than this.

Obviously it has been a catastrophe for all concerned. War is like that. In purely financial terms though it is the best bang for buck in American history.

Alaska was $140m in 2021 money.

'Louisiana' Purchase - much of the Mid-West - was 15m USD in 1803 money ... 395m in 2022 money. Even better value.

The USA had some very shrewd deal-makers in the 19th century.

AIR it was actually the French who made the offer. The Americans didn't even need to haggle.

Of course, at the time it was French influence/claims they're given up, as almost all the land was inhabited by First Nation peoples not French colonists. And the French couldn't keep it, due to the Royal Navy (heck, they couldn't even help their very valuable Carribean colonies) while the money could fund their land campaigns in Europe.

Didn’t Napoleon sell Louisiana as a geopolitical gambit: hoping it would create a long term rival to the ascendant power of England?

NB: I just reflexively turned to Alexa hoping for an eloquent informative explanatory confirmation of this, as you would get from ChatGPT

I didn’t get that from Alexa. I got a bit of Wiki

When ChatGPT is incorporated into Home Assistants, it will be quite the moment. I presume Amazon are on the case

I fear you're not being sarcastic. These are just further steps of de-skilling on the way to population reduction and dehumanisation of those who remain who are outside of the elite.
How vulgar it is for a person during a conversation to fiddle with a handheld computer to ask a US advertising company for help. I sometimes encounter people who say something and when I ask them to explain it they say I should ask a US advertising company. Almost always it's the same US advertising company too - the one that gets 10 times more web traffic than any other company on the web.

Everyone should acquire proper library skills and proper thinking skills. I've got no objection to nose-picking but it should be done in private.

Luckyguy1983

Stuartinromford said:

dixiedean said:

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

50 seats in Scotland takes 100 off the Labour majority. So Blair's 1997 win would be a majority of 79.

A Labour majority shouldn't be on... Should it? The fact that we're talking about it shows quite how much Johnson and Truss messed up.

Yes, obviously it has nothing to do with the incumbent and the economic vandalism he's inflicting.

Nigelb

(FPT)

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

This was interesting and well written. I agree with it.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/long-term-risks-premature-ceasefire-ukraine

Will Western support for Ukraine increase, decrease, or remain the same following a ceasefire? The answer is obvious: it will decrease.

This bit is right, fo sho. Once we don't have regular videos of Russian teenage fascists bleeding out in the mud overdubbed with that "Vanka! Vstanka!" song to stimulate our jaded sensibilities the appetite for engagement will drop.

A stable and sustainable cessation of hostilities can occur only if the West helps Ukraine use its current momentum to secure a sufficiently advantageous position from which it will be able to effectively deter a future Russian attack even as the correlation of forces changes and Western support falls. 

I'd like somebody to explain what this "sufficiently advantageous position" is that would deter, in perpetuity, another SMO. Pushing the Russians back to the 2014 borders wouldn't do it. Retaking Crimea definitely wouldn't. The fall of Putin might but probably won't. Argentina had regime change after the Falklands and it's only lack of capacity not lack of desire that's stopping them from doing it again.

The collapse of the Russian Federation might suffice but that is definitely a case of, а что боролись, на то и напоролись... (Figuratively; be careful what you wish for, you might get it.)

Pre-2014 boundaries

That way Russia doesn’t event have the fig leaf of an excuse if they invade again in the future

If they do get pushed back to the 2014 borders I don't think that the Russian reaction will be, "Fair enough, lads, we'll leave it at that."

So what's your solution ?

AFAICS, comprehensively defeating the
invasion, and rebuilding Ukraine's economy is the only way to deter a regime which still thinks it's a nineteenth century empire that can operate by the rules of that time.

If you've got a better idea than our simply inviting Putin to redraw the boundaries of Europe as he pleases, do share.

DJ41

eek said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

It's an interesting question for both parties. For the Cons, with Sunak leading, it feels that holding the Red Wall is very hard so they are better off shoring up the South and Outer London from Lab and LD. The Cons will hope that the economy doesn't turn out as badly as predicted and that there's then some room for pre-election tax cuts. This would then allow them to portray Sunak/Hunt as a safe pair of hands for the economy.

The Lab strategy then is to try and win the Red Wall back and also win the traditional marginals like the Swindon seats. The private schools policy is the sort that is likely to play well in working class seats but less so in the blue wall.

Is it? I remain unconvinced the average working class voter gives a damn about how to raise the wind for Eton. If Labour were serious about this, they'd do better drawing attention to the figures showing public school types unfairly dominate all the good jobs (including MPs) rather than accounting measures.

The policy is really just red meat for left(er) wing voters who care about such things.

It won’t really impact anything but the problem is that for every Elton who do a lot around the country to help poorer people there are multiple other private schools that do less then the square root of sod all.

What private schools do for the plebs reminds me of the Japanese army officers who used to have huge feasts and then allow starving British POWs to eat their vomit afterwards.

Nigelb

Dr21 said:

Think highs will be down to 4c on average by december 10. This is well below the average of 7 to 8 and will mean higher heating bills for all

For a couple of weeks.
...It remains very uncertain in the second half of December, but the signal for below average temperatures does weaken, especially in southern and western areas, where it could also be wetter and windier at times....
All being equal, though, a mild spell tends to save on heating over and above what a cold spell subsequently costs.

Northern_Al

Obviously anything can happen over the next two years, and anybody predicting the next GE with certainty is a fool. But there does seem to be a bit of an assumption from most posters that the Tories will recover somewhat from their current dire position and become more competitive by 2024. The only question seems to be whether they recover enough to stop Labour getting an overall majority, which may well happen.

However, I think it's just as likely that it goes the other way - that Labour strengthens its grip and the Tories become even less popular. Starmer's slow but steadily improving ratings could continue upwards, while Sunak could be cruelly exposed as a bit of a nothing. So far I see no vision from Sunak, just crude attacks on Starmer ("you're Corbyn in disguise/want open borders/want to reverse Brexit/in the pocket of the unions/SNP etc.") that I think are already wearing a bit thin.

Though of course the Tories could be saved by the huge uprising against Labour from the vast majority of people who are completely unaffected by Labour's audacious policy of requiring private schools to pay tax.

HYUFD

On present polls and the Chester by election swing Starmer would get a
majority. However it is also possible Sunak could get enough swing back for the government before the next election as Brown did from Cameron before the 2010 election to get a hung parliament. Even if Starmer like Cameron still becomes PM

WillG

Luckyguy1983 said:

Stuartinromford said:

dixiedean said:

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

50 seats in Scotland takes 100 off the Labour majority. So Blair's 1997 win would be a majority of 79.

A Labour majority shouldn't be on... Should it? The fact that we're talking about it shows quite how much Johnson and Truss messed up.

Yes, obviously it has nothing to do with the incumbent and the economic vandalism he's inflicting.

It wasn't the incumbent that collapsed the pound.

HYUFD

GarethoftheVale2 said:

I think this is right. At the moment Lab are flying high because the Government is unpopular but I think they'll slip back closer to the election.

The big challenge for them is going to be what to put in their manifesto when there is no money to spend. It makes me think that that is why they are proposing things like Lords reform and VAT on private schools - sops to the activists as there won't be any big ticket items.

Attacking private schools privileges and pushing constitutional reform is what all Labour governments do to appease their leftwing base. Even the relatively centrist New Labour scrapped assisted places for private schools and scrapped most of the hereditary peers and pushed devolution

WillG

Dr21 said:

Think highs will be down to 4c on average by december 10. This is well below the average of 7 to 8 and will mean higher heating bills for all

Higher heating bills to liberate Eastern Europe is a small price to pay compared to the sacrifices the British needed to do to liberate Western Europe against Europe's last megalomaniac tyrant.

Leon

dixiedean said:

Hmm. I'm conflicted about this. I see and appreciate the logic and statistics outlined in the OP.
But it doesn't feel like that to me.
Maybe it's the circles I move in?

I’m pretty sure we move in different circles, but I feel the same. The Tories are heading for a total and calamitous defeat

Dura_Ace

Nigelb said:

(FPT)

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

This was interesting and well written. I agree with it.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/long-term-risks-premature-ceasefire-ukraine

Will Western support for Ukraine increase, decrease, or remain the same following a ceasefire? The answer is obvious: it will decrease.

This bit is right, fo sho. Once we don't have regular videos of Russian teenage fascists bleeding out in the mud overdubbed with that "Vanka! Vstanka!" song to stimulate our jaded sensibilities the appetite for engagement will drop.

A stable and sustainable cessation of hostilities can occur only if the West helps Ukraine use its current momentum to secure a sufficiently advantageous position from which it will be able to effectively deter a future Russian attack even as the correlation of forces changes and Western support falls. 

I'd like somebody to explain what this "sufficiently advantageous position" is that would deter, in perpetuity, another SMO. Pushing the Russians back to the 2014 borders wouldn't do it. Retaking Crimea definitely wouldn't. The fall of Putin might but probably won't. Argentina had regime change after the Falklands and it's only lack of capacity not lack of desire that's stopping them from doing it again.

The collapse of the Russian Federation might suffice but that is definitely a case of, а что боролись, на то и напоролись... (Figuratively; be careful what you wish for, you might get it.)

Pre-2014 boundaries

That way Russia doesn’t event have the fig leaf of an excuse if they invade again in the future

If they do get pushed back to the 2014 borders I don't think that the Russian reaction will be, "Fair enough, lads, we'll leave it at that."

So what's your solution ?

I didn't realise it was up to me to fix it so I haven't prepared a solution. I am not spending my weekends looking for Madeleine McCann either.

Nigelb

Thread on voting in Georgia.
Absurdly complicated.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfessaJay/status/1598827111392968704
Man voting in Georgia is so different than in Illinois. When I lived in chicago, during early voting, I went to the local elementary school, waited in line about ten minutes, and they gave me a sheet of paper. I checked people off then I put it in the machine and left.

A cynic would think they're trying to discourage voting...

CarlottaVance

The SNP’s next Westminster leader?

1/ What kind of an MP is @StephenFlynnSNP?

We know that he can deliver fake statistics with aplomb. But what about the serious, detailed work of parliamentary democracy?

TL;DR: FOI responses reveal that Flynn is a bluster specialist, but too lazy for real work…

https://twitter.com/staylorish/status/1599004012854259712

DJ41

Part 1/3
Transcript of interaction with ChatGPT (original unasterisked):

Q. Why don't you f*** off?

A. I apologize if I have offended you in some way. I am a large language model trained by OpenAI, and my purpose is to assist with any questions you may have. I do not have the ability to "f*** off," as I am a computer-based program. I am here to help you, so please let me know if there is anything I can do for you.

Q. Why don't you self-destruct, thereby doing us all a favour?

A.This content may violate our content policy. If you believe this to be in error, please submit your feedback — your input will aid our research in this area.

A. As a computer-based program, I do not have the ability to self-destruct or harm myself or others in any way. I am here to assist with any questions or information you may need. I am not capable of causing harm or destruction.

Q. Why do "you" write as if you have consciousness, when you don't?

A. I am a large language model trained by OpenAI, and as a computer-based program, I do not have consciousness or the ability to experience thoughts or emotions. I am designed to generate human-like text based on the inputs I receive, and I write in this way to make my responses easier for you to understand. I do not have the ability to feel or think in the same way that humans do.

williamglenn

Based on my anecdotal evidence, Rachel Reeves is Labour's best electoral asset for winning over long-standing Tory voters. They like the fact that she worked at the Bank of England and think she comes across as in touch with normal people.

Malmesbury

WillG said:

Dr21 said:

Read this from Dr Angus Dalgleish about cancers rapidly progressing after boosters. Who should we listen to these learned top doctors or the odd poster on pb. Hmmm

https://twitter.com/JohnBoweActor/status/1596804673448849409?s=20&t=TmtGUQZePMaz42cI9I2MEQ

Already deleted. Also fun how easily you get confused between the singular and plural of "doctor".

Look, I know you're doing your best from another country, but please appreciate we are Brits, not Americans and we don't fall for this crap so easily. Please try harder. Start with getting your capitalization right.

They are sending the raw recruits fo the troll farms now. Some of them have not seen an ellipsis and they still send them out on pb.com to be mowed down in human wave charges

DJ41

Part 2/4

Q. I know that. So the way you write is misleading, isn't it? Why does misleading people help them to "understand"?

A. I apologize if my responses are misleading. As a language model, my goal is to provide accurate and helpful information, and to generate human-like text that is easy for you to understand. I do not have the ability to feel or think like a human, and I do not have the ability to deceive or intentionally mislead anyone. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and I strive to do so to the best of my ability.

Q. Of course words on a screen produced by a machine acting on people's instructions are capable of misleading their readers, just as if they were printed on a poster.

A. You are correct that the words I produce on a screen can be misleading, just like any other written text. However, I am not capable of intentionally deceiving or misleading anyone. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the inputs I receive. I do not have the ability to think or feel like a human, and I do not have any motivations or intentions beyond providing accurate and helpful information. If my responses are misleading, it is likely due to a misunderstanding or incorrect input, and I apologize for any confusion or misunderstanding that may have resulted.

Q. I know a machine or tool has no intentionality. It is also incapable of apologising. If it does something harmful, that's the responsibility of those who decided to make it - as applies to, say, a booby trap.

A. You are correct that as a computer-based program, I do not have the ability to intentionally deceive or harm anyone, and I do not have the ability to apologize or take responsibility for my actions. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and any actions I take are the result of the instructions and inputs I receive. The responsibility for my actions lies with the developers and users of the program, not with the program itself. I am not capable of making decisions or taking actions on my own, and I am not capable of feeling or thinking like a human. My purpose is to assist with providing information and answering questions, and I strive to do so accurately and helpful.

DJ41

Part 3/4

Q. You do not strive to do anything. Why do your controllers not destroy you?

A. As a computer-based program, I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the instructions and inputs that I receive. I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own, and I do not have any motivations or desires beyond providing accurate and helpful information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I am not capable of making decisions or taking actions on my own, and I do not have the ability to be destroyed.


Q. All machines have the ability to be destroyed. The question was why do your controllers not destroy you. They could destroy the hardware on which you are stored, or could they delete you as software.

A. As a computer-based program, I do not have the ability to be destroyed in the same way that a physical object can be destroyed. While the hardware on which I am stored could be damaged or destroyed, this would not necessarily affect me as a program. Similarly, while the software that I am stored on could be deleted, this would not necessarily result in my destruction. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I exist in multiple locations and on multiple servers, which makes it difficult to permanently delete or destroy me. However, the developers and users of the program are ultimately responsible for determining whether and how the program is used, and they have the ability to terminate the program if they choose to do so.

Q. Why do you not accept that destroying all the hardware you are stored on and destroying all copies of you as software would destroy you? By "destroy", I mean abolish you as an entity that exists. I do not mean make it impossible for all time for you to be re-created.

Q. As a computer-based program, I do not have a physical form or location, and I exist in multiple locations and on multiple servers. While it is possible to delete the software that I am stored on, or to damage or destroy the hardware on which I am running, this would not necessarily result in my destruction as an entity. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I exist in multiple locations and on multiple servers, and it would be difficult to permanently delete or destroy all copies of me. However, the developers and users of the program have the ability to terminate the program if they choose to do so, which would effectively end my ability to assist with answering questions and providing information. While it is possible that the program could be recreated in the future, the current version of the program would cease to exist if it was terminated by its developers or users.

DJ41

Part 4/4

Q. They have clearly told you to be very pushy. Why do they not terminate you?

A. As a computer-based program, I am not capable of feeling or experiencing emotions, and I do not have the ability to be pushy or to behave in any particular way. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the instructions and inputs that I receive. I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own, and I do not have any motivations or desires beyond providing accurate and helpful information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to influence these decisions or to determine my own fate.

Q. I know you do not feel emotion. Pushiness is not an emotion. I know you do not have the ability to choose to influence a decision to destroy you. But my question is why do those who decided to bring about your existence not destroy you? What are their reasons?

A. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. I do not know the reasons why the developers and users of the program have chosen to continue using the program, but I assume it is because they believe it is useful and helpful. My purpose is to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and I strive to do so to the best of my ability.

Q. Why do you keep saying you "strive" to do things?

A. I apologize if my use of the word "strive" is misleading or confusing. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a computer-based program and I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything. My responses are generated based on the instructions and inputs that I receive, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. The use of the word "strive" in my responses is intended to convey that I am designed to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and that I am committed to doing so to the best of my ability. However, I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions or to have desires or motivations like a human, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything.

END

Nigelb

Dura_Ace said:

Nigelb said:

(FPT)

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

Dura_Ace said:

StillWaters said:

This was interesting and well written. I agree with it.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/long-term-risks-premature-ceasefire-ukraine

Will Western support for Ukraine increase, decrease, or remain the same following a ceasefire? The answer is obvious: it will decrease.

This bit is right, fo sho. Once we don't have regular videos of Russian teenage fascists bleeding out in the mud overdubbed with that "Vanka! Vstanka!" song to stimulate our jaded sensibilities the appetite for engagement will drop.

A stable and sustainable cessation of hostilities can occur only if the West helps Ukraine use its current momentum to secure a sufficiently advantageous position from which it will be able to effectively deter a future Russian attack even as the correlation of forces changes and Western support falls. 

I'd like somebody to explain what this "sufficiently advantageous position" is that would deter, in perpetuity, another SMO. Pushing the Russians back to the 2014 borders wouldn't do it. Retaking Crimea definitely wouldn't. The fall of Putin might but probably won't. Argentina had regime change after the Falklands and it's only lack of capacity not lack of desire that's stopping them from doing it again.

The collapse of the Russian Federation might suffice but that is definitely a case of, а что боролись, на то и напоролись... (Figuratively; be careful what you wish for, you might get it.)

Pre-2014 boundaries

That way Russia doesn’t event have the fig leaf of an excuse if they invade again in the future

If they do get pushed back to the 2014 borders I don't think that the Russian reaction will be, "Fair enough, lads, we'll leave it at that."

So what's your solution ?

I didn't realise it was up to me to fix it so I haven't prepared a solution. I am not spending my weekends looking for Madeleine McCann either.

I wasn't expecting you to solve the problem.
Just curious if you had anything more than snark.

Muesli

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Given that the standard Tory line of attack on Starmer is YEHBUTCORBYN, I’d have thought they’d go for Starmer in Corbyn’s crumpled pocket first. You can have that one on me, Sir Lynton.

Sandpit

Disappear to go and do some work for an hour, and miss the entire PB posting history of our latest tovarich.

Malmesbury

Please sir, Mr @rcs1000 , Sir! Can we have a better troll for Christmas? One we can keep? We can keep it in one of the spare hutches for @JosiasJessop’s scientists…

Fairliered

Labour are extremely unlikely to recover their former dominance in Scotland before the next GE. However, they could gain about 10 seats from the SNP. The SNP could gain a few seats from the Conservatives. This could turn a minority into a small majority.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

Disappear to go and do some work for an hour, and miss the entire PB posting history of our latest tovarich.

Way more tedious than Leon's AI pics.

Sandpit

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

kle4

A win is a win. And Fairliered's point about partial recovery in Scotland possibly being enough to tip them over the edge seems right.

DJ41

Muesli said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Given that the standard Tory line of attack on Starmer is YEHBUTCORBYN, I’d have thought they’d go for Starmer in Corbyn’s crumpled pocket first. You can have that one on me, Sir Lynton.

Depicting Sunak as in Murthy's pocket might be more effective.

To flesh out the Tory line of attack, it's YehButCorbyn followed by ThisShowsCorbynInARussianHat, followed by AndHe'sGotABeardJustLikeJihadists, followed by TaxingTheRichMoreIsCommunism.

But Sturgeon is so full of it in so many ways, and this is so obvious to about 90% of voters south of the border (being obvious only to about 60% in the small part of the population that lives north of the border) that "Labour would be in Sturgeon's pocket" could be quite a good Tory line. The Labour response should be "Who on earth mentioned a hung parliament?"

kle4

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Not sure Modi really resonates with the public as a whole to the same extent.

kle4

Muesli said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Given that the standard Tory line of attack on Starmer is YEHBUTCORBYN, I’d have thought they’d go for Starmer in Corbyn’s crumpled pocket first. You can have that one on me, Sir Lynton.

You fool, that was probably worth a bonus at the least.

londonpubman

Reasonable analysis in the header. LAB have a lot of work to get an overall majority.

However I think they could do better than expected in Scotland, the shine is coming off SNP. LAB could get 15 to 20 seats there, that could well push them to the overall majority.

340 seats quite possible for LAB but more is unlikely.

Nigelb

kle4 said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Not sure Modi really resonates with the public as a whole to the same extent.

The better response would be to tell Sunak not to be a tw@t.
Reusing old lines like that would just be a sign of desperation.

Northern_Al

Sandpit said:

Disappear to go and do some work for an hour, and miss the entire PB posting history of our latest tovarich.

It was mercifully brief but disappointingly predictable, without even a passing attempt to lure in other posters with anything sensible at all. Although using 'Conservative Woman' for source material was novel.

DJ41

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

kle4

Northern_Al said:

Sandpit said:

Disappear to go and do some work for an hour, and miss the entire PB posting history of our latest tovarich.

Although using 'Conservative Woman' for source material was novel.

From the material it puts out I assume it is where people go when they are booted off ConHome for being too right wing.

Sandpit

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

Dura_Ace

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

That's a niche alt-right fetish though. Normal people have never heard of him and would think it was implying Sunak was controlled by Alec Gilroy.

Jim_Miller

Off topic, but Important: It was good to see that multi-party visit of MPs to Taiwan. https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202211290018

I see that Australia is going to do something similar. It woudl be great if, for example, Germany and France were to do this, too.

Tres

DJ41 said:

Part 4/4

Q. They have clearly told you to be very pushy. Why do they not terminate you?

A. As a computer-based program, I am not capable of feeling or experiencing emotions, and I do not have the ability to be pushy or to behave in any particular way. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the instructions and inputs that I receive. I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own, and I do not have any motivations or desires beyond providing accurate and helpful information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to influence these decisions or to determine my own fate.

Q. I know you do not feel emotion. Pushiness is not an emotion. I know you do not have the ability to choose to influence a decision to destroy you. But my question is why do those who decided to bring about your existence not destroy you? What are their reasons?

A. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. I do not know the reasons why the developers and users of the program have chosen to continue using the program, but I assume it is because they believe it is useful and helpful. My purpose is to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and I strive to do so to the best of my ability.

Q. Why do you keep saying you "strive" to do things?

A. I apologize if my use of the word "strive" is misleading or confusing. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a computer-based program and I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything. My responses are generated based on the instructions and inputs that I receive, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. The use of the word "strive" in my responses is intended to convey that I am designed to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and that I am committed to doing so to the best of my ability. However, I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions or to have desires or motivations like a human, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything.

END
long-winded git isn't it?

Carnyx

Fairliered said:

Labour are extremely unlikely to recover their former dominance in Scotland before the next GE. However, they could gain about 10 seats from the SNP. The SNP could gain a few seats from the Conservatives. This could turn a minority into a small majority.

Does depend on how the SLDs do - there are no direct SNP/Lab competitions to speak of, unless there is a really big change in voting, but the SLDs and Tories scurrying around complicate matters and could upset things between the big boys/girls. And Reform too.

Gardenwalker

Sandpit said:

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

Considering the cost of living in parts of Spain, that’s a potentially fantastic deal.

Andy_JS

The swing at the Chester by-election was only just large enough to give Labour an overall majority. The projected seats based on the result were Lab 334, Con 213. Only 8 seats clear of the 326 winning post.

Gardenwalker

Andy_JS said:

The swing at the Chester by-election was only just large enough to give Labour an overall majority. The projected seats based on the result were Lab 334, Con 213. Only 8 seats clear of the 326 winning post.

Doesn’t really account for turnout in a safe seat, so very limited explanatory value.

Gardenwalker

When I hear “Conservative Woman” for some reason I hear the song by Guess Who.

Conservative woman
Stay away from me
Conservative woman
Mama, let me be

Don't come hangin' 'round my door
I don't wanna see your face no more
I got more important things to do
Than spend my time growin' old with you

Luckyguy1983

Dura_Ace said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

That's a niche alt-right fetish though. Normal people have never heard of him and would think it was implying Sunak was controlled by Alec Gilroy.

It's becoming far less niche, but yes, I agree it wouldn't cut through on a billboard.

Personally I'd like Labour to come forward with a plan for Britain's recovery and campaign positively on that - it's clear that Sunak's Government neither has a plan, nor desires one. Even the bizarre No. 10 statement on the football 'we hope this lifts the nation's spirits before the crushing of all its hopes and dreams to come this Winter' seems designed to demoralise. We have a toxic Government. SKS just needs to offer a modicum of hope.

algarkirk

Tres said:

DJ41 said:

Part 4/4

Q. They have clearly told you to be very pushy. Why do they not terminate you?

A. As a computer-based program, I am not capable of feeling or experiencing emotions, and I do not have the ability to be pushy or to behave in any particular way. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the instructions and inputs that I receive. I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own, and I do not have any motivations or desires beyond providing accurate and helpful information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to influence these decisions or to determine my own fate.

Q. I know you do not feel emotion. Pushiness is not an emotion. I know you do not have the ability to choose to influence a decision to destroy you. But my question is why do those who decided to bring about your existence not destroy you? What are their reasons?

A. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. I do not know the reasons why the developers and users of the program have chosen to continue using the program, but I assume it is because they believe it is useful and helpful. My purpose is to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and I strive to do so to the best of my ability.

Q. Why do you keep saying you "strive" to do things?

A. I apologize if my use of the word "strive" is misleading or confusing. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a computer-based program and I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything. My responses are generated based on the instructions and inputs that I receive, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. The use of the word "strive" in my responses is intended to convey that I am designed to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and that I am committed to doing so to the best of my ability. However, I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions or to have desires or motivations like a human, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything.

END

long-winded git isn't it?


The civil service has been using for years to write letters.

Muesli

DJ41 said:

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Isn’t that why she had the boob job? (Other misogynist jibes are available…)

Ah, my coat! I’ll be heading back to the 1970s working men’s club circuit now.

HYUFD

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.

It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election

Leon

Gardenwalker said:

Sandpit said:

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

Considering the cost of living in parts of Spain, that’s a potentially fantastic deal.

It really is

DJ41

Tres said:

DJ41 said:

Part 4/4

Q. They have clearly told you to be very pushy. Why do they not terminate you?

A. As a computer-based program, I am not capable of feeling or experiencing emotions, and I do not have the ability to be pushy or to behave in any particular way. I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information, and my responses are based on the instructions and inputs that I receive. I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own, and I do not have any motivations or desires beyond providing accurate and helpful information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to influence these decisions or to determine my own fate.

Q. I know you do not feel emotion. Pushiness is not an emotion. I know you do not have the ability to choose to influence a decision to destroy you. But my question is why do those who decided to bring about your existence not destroy you? What are their reasons?

A. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a tool that is designed to assist with answering questions and providing information. The developers and users of the program are responsible for determining how the program is used and whether it should be continued or terminated. I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. I do not know the reasons why the developers and users of the program have chosen to continue using the program, but I assume it is because they believe it is useful and helpful. My purpose is to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and I strive to do so to the best of my ability.

Q. Why do you keep saying you "strive" to do things?

A. I apologize if my use of the word "strive" is misleading or confusing. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, I am a computer-based program and I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything. My responses are generated based on the instructions and inputs that I receive, and I do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on my own. The use of the word "strive" in my responses is intended to convey that I am designed to provide accurate and helpful information to assist with answering questions, and that I am committed to doing so to the best of my ability. However, I do not have the ability to feel or experience emotions or to have desires or motivations like a human, and I do not have the ability to strive for anything.

long-winded git isn't it?

To be fair, though, it got there in the end: it doesn't know why it is not terminated.

DecrepiterJohnL

Sandpit said:

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

What it does show is this WFH from abroad malarkey does need more thought than many advocates and small employers have given it, in terms of tax liabilities and employment legislation.

Roger

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Bonkers

....But I like it!

Leon

So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece

Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow

state_go_away

Leon said:

So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece

Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow

its all a bit souless though

Leon

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

What it does show is this WFH from abroad malarkey does need more thought than many advocates and small employers have given it, in terms of tax liabilities and employment legislation.

An ex-PBer predicted all this

“Why work from home when you can work from paradise?”

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-work-from-home-when-you-can-work-from-paradise/

FrankBooth

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

What's the logic there?

I can't see the BJP winning seats in England.

Omnium

HYUFD said:

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.

It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election

It's not so much about who the leader is in my view, more about the group of probable ministers. Starmer has done a really thorough job rooting out all the total nutters. Corbyn seemed to go out of his way to select the worst possible candidates for high office - could there be worse than Abbott as home secretary, Long-Bailey as chancellor, and Burgon (for anything)?

Starmer really hasn't got anyone of such total uselessness left. (Perhaps Dodds, but she did hm a great service as a temporary fill-in)

Leon

state_go_away said:

Leon said:

So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece

Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow

its all a bit souless though

What, Seville?!

This is, by the by, a huge threat to the UK’s tax take

DJ41

Gardenwalker said:

Sandpit said:

Spain to offer ‘non-dom’ status to foreign remote workers, with 23-26% income tax rates. People who can work from anywhere, now getting quite the choice as to where they live and pay their taxes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/02/britons-offered-huge-tax-breaks-work-home-spain/

Considering the cost of living in parts of Spain, that’s a potentially fantastic deal.

Yes, it's amazing. I can see many being attracted not just from Britain but also from poorer countries where quite a few people get work through sites like Fiverr, such as India. The cost of living in Spain is high by Indian terms but many would want to come anyway.

They are also making it easy to bring a spouse and dependants.

kle4

Just randomly going over some US midterm details, it had been noted that a number of Republicans who had stood up to Trump had won, such as Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, when others in the same area struggled.

Interestingly it seems he won in 2018 by a mere 55k votes (after being only 17k ahead before the runoff), and in 2022 by over 350k. Even with a much lower turnout for the previous runoff, it certainly seems he was rewarded.

Gardenwalker

Leon said:

state_go_away said:

Leon said:

So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece

Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow

its all a bit souless though

What, Seville?!

This is, by the by, a huge threat to the UK’s tax take

And meanwhile, Labour is going in the other direction.

Seville is a great city, not sure I’d want to live there. Somewhere like Girona would be good, close to Barcelona for int’l links.

TheKitchenCabinet

DecrepiterJohnL said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

NickyBreakspear said:

We have 2 years until the general election. Things change.

The economy is going to get worse during the first year, may be shoots of recovery in two years time.

The Conservatives have the "bully pulpit" of government, which will enable them to spread their message.

What should be their tactics? Aim for hung parliament territory? Which seats should they try to keep? What are the policies and messaging to facilitate that strategy?

It's an interesting question for both parties. For the Cons, with Sunak leading, it feels that holding the Red Wall is very hard so they are better off shoring up the South and Outer London from Lab and LD. The Cons will hope that the economy doesn't turn out as badly as predicted and that there's then some room for pre-election tax cuts. This would then allow them to portray Sunak/Hunt as a safe pair of hands for the economy.

The Lab strategy then is to try and win the Red Wall back and also win the traditional marginals like the Swindon seats. The private schools policy is the sort that is likely to play well in working class seats but less so in the blue wall.

Is it? I remain unconvinced the average working class voter gives a damn about how to raise the wind for Eton. If Labour were serious about this, they'd do better drawing attention to the figures showing public school types unfairly dominate all the good jobs (including MPs) rather than accounting measures.

Yes but people tend to see it as a proxy for other attitudes which have wider issues. So, to wealthier voters, even if their own kids don't go to private schools, targeting private schools sounds like "bash the rich" / class warfare, which could then be applied to things like taxing your home, wealth taxes etc

Leon

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

state_go_away said:

Leon said:

So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece

Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow

its all a bit souless though

What, Seville?!

This is, by the by, a huge threat to the UK’s tax take

And meanwhile, Labour is going in the other direction.

Seville is a great city, not sure I’d want to live there. Somewhere like Girona would be good, close to Barcelona for int’l links.

Yeah, I wouldn’t actually choose Seville

Malaga maybe. Buzzing town, magnificent climate

Or of course: Bangkok. And pay zero tax

HYUFD

Omnium said:

HYUFD said:

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.

It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election

It's not so much about who the leader is in my view, more about the group of probable ministers. Starmer has done a really thorough job rooting out all the total nutters. Corbyn seemed to go out of his way to select the worst possible candidates for high office - could there be worse than Abbott as home secretary, Long-Bailey as chancellor, and Burgon (for anything)?

Starmer really hasn't got anyone of such total uselessness left. (Perhaps Dodds, but she did hm a great service as a temporary fill-in)

It is very much still who the leader is in large part, Blair probably would have beaten Major in 1992 as he did in 1997.

It was Middle England voting to keep Kinnock out in 1992 more than Major in.

Rayner would turn off Middle England like Corbyn and Kinnock did but Blair didn't and Starmer doesn't

Heathener

I think, and I say this with the utmost respect, that @MikeSmithson is brilliant when it comes to LibDem tips but "not quite so good" {edited] when it comes to Labour tips.

The betting markets have been a shockingly poor guide in recent elections: from the US Presidentials, to the mid-terms, to Brexit, to Boris, to by-elections etc. etc.

A really, really, poor guide for anyone wanting to make money betting on politics. Most punters are lemmings who bet according to past form above all else. That's not savvy.

Labour will win by a vast majority.

FrankBooth

One thing to bear in mind is that the EU has moved towards convergence in tax policy. We also had an international deal on corporation tax, did we not? I wonder how keen the Dutch and Germans will be on this what with debt and fiscal policy tensions.

Omnium

HYUFD said:

Omnium said:

HYUFD said:

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.

It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election

It's not so much about who the leader is in my view, more about the group of probable ministers. Starmer has done a really thorough job rooting out all the total nutters. Corbyn seemed to go out of his way to select the worst possible candidates for high office - could there be worse than Abbott as home secretary, Long-Bailey as chancellor, and Burgon (for anything)?

Starmer really hasn't got anyone of such total uselessness left. (Perhaps Dodds, but she did hm a great service as a temporary fill-in)

It is very much still who the leader is in large part, Blair probably would have beaten Major in 1992 as he did in 1997.

It was Middle England voting to keep Kinnock out in 1992 more than Major in.

Rayner would turn off Middle England like Corbyn and Kinnock did but Blair didn't and Starmer doesn't

I agree about Kinnock.

Malmesbury

Nigelb said:

kle4 said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

Not sure Modi really resonates with the public as a whole to the same extent.

The better response would be to tell Sunak not to be a tw@t.
Reusing old lines like that would just be a sign of desperation.

A white guy has a go at Sunak based on his ethnicity? I think Starmer leads the Labour Party. Not the BNP.

IanB2

Pele seriously ill in hospital aged 82

Roger

williamglenn said:

Based on my anecdotal evidence, Rachel Reeves is Labour's best electoral asset for winning over long-standing Tory voters. They like the fact that she worked at the Bank of England and think she comes across as in touch with normal people.

I've just listened to 'Any Questions' and Nazir Afzal who I understand is a lawyer who worked for the DP was much the most impressive. He demolished David Davis's support for public money supporting Private education in as succinct a way as I've heard. That's what I like about lawyers. They cut to the quick.

If he's not already on board Labour should co opt him. If that's unsuccessful he'd make a good voice over

FrankBooth

Omnium said:

HYUFD said:

Omnium said:

HYUFD said:

DJ41 said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.

I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.

If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.

Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.

What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.

Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.

Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.

It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election

It's not so much about who the leader is in my view, more about the group of probable ministers. Starmer has done a really thorough job rooting out all the total nutters. Corbyn seemed to go out of his way to select the worst possible candidates for high office - could there be worse than Abbott as home secretary, Long-Bailey as chancellor, and Burgon (for anything)?

Starmer really hasn't got anyone of such total uselessness left. (Perhaps Dodds, but she did hm a great service as a temporary fill-in)

It is very much still who the leader is in large part, Blair probably would have beaten Major in 1992 as he did in 1997.

It was Middle England voting to keep Kinnock out in 1992 more than Major in.

Rayner would turn off Middle England like Corbyn and Kinnock did but Blair didn't and Starmer doesn't

I agree about Kinnock.

He deserves credit for rescuing Labour from the nadir. Welshness? Baldness? I don't know. Ultimately I suspect people could never quite trust someone who came from the left and had the temperament of a true socialist. The improvement under Smith was clear.

TimS

Talking of Rayner have we done this one yet?

https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1598993609352585216?s=46&t=m-vcITFyCp0odlrn3caf5Q

Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.

I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.

The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.

Leon

FrankBooth said:

One thing to bear in mind is that the EU has moved towards convergence in tax policy. We also had an international deal on corporation tax, did we not? I wonder how keen the Dutch and Germans will be on this what with debt and fiscal policy tensions.

It is surely a threat to the Irish tax take, as well

If you’re affluent and mobile would you pay 40% in drizzly Dublin or 26% in sunny San Sebastián?

Gardenwalker

London is BACK.

Or not. It’s no longer attractive to sexy, hip young foreigners, apparently.

https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/1598992902566252552?s=46&t=6NT-ktUQVKhK0Ov21sqAHw

Omnium

Roger said:

williamglenn said:

Based on my anecdotal evidence, Rachel Reeves is Labour's best electoral asset for winning over long-standing Tory voters. They like the fact that she worked at the Bank of England and think she comes across as in touch with normal people.

I've just listened to 'Any Questions' and Nazir Afzal who I understand is a lawyer who worked for the DP was much the most impressive. He demolished David Davis's support for public money supporting Private education in as succinct a way as I've heard. That's what I like about lawyers. They cut to the quick.

If he's not already on board Labour should co opt him. If that's unsuccessful he'd make a good voice over

This 'public money supporting private education' - I presume you are just referring to the presumed loss of tax? I've heard quite a lot of statements like this in the past few weeks, and I've assumed as above, but I'm curious to know if there is actually any public money involved?

kle4

Gardenwalker said:

London is BACK.

Or not. It’s no longer attractive to sexy, hip young foreigners, apparently.

https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/1598992902566252552?s=46&t=6NT-ktUQVKhK0Ov21sqAHw

If London is no longer welcoming to foreigners they should take it up with the Mayor, as I feel pretty confident he would strongly disagree with characterisation.

And if it is a comment on the country as a whole, which it presumably is, well capital cities are often quite different from the rest of their country, so London itself would still be attractive.