Don’t knows and Brexit are Starmer’s Kryptonite – politicalbetting.com

System

Don’t knows and Brexit are Starmer’s Kryptonite – politicalbetting.com

?Undecided voters lean *heavily* Tory when we take into account demographic data like age and education. And these voters are projected to swing more than 160 seats(!!!) at the next General Election, slashing Labour's lead. So how did we get here? 2/

Read the full story here

CD13

It makes a nice change to have a thread without so much cheering on one side to the exclusion of all others.

Foxy

I wonder how valid it is to take the DK and allocate them by their age voting patterns. They are uncertain for a reason, and may well break quite differently to their peers.

IanB2

Third! HNY to all.

IanB2

I am not sure of the methodology, but anyone around the median age for a PB’er will have lived through the decade when Mrs T seemed universally unpopular, lost every by-election going and shedloads of councillors, seemed always massively behind in the polls, yet come the election Labour never seemed to win. Until 1997.

I suspect this analysis is closer to the money than the projections of the Tories being reduced to a rump of seats, much as I would love to see the latter as their entirely deserved fate.

The vested and self-interest driving support for the Tories is always there, underneath, and currently they might as well rename themselves the Pensioners’ Party. One recent poll had support for them among the youngest voting cohort down to 2%.

FrequentLurker

I agree, Foxy: it's an assumption, and I'm not sure whether we've any hard evidence about how segments such as these have broken in the past.

I don't bet -- my wife's a Methodist! -- I've just been coming here for aeons as I think Mike (and many other) 's insights are um, deeply insightful. But if I did bet, I'd see considerable value in some markets at the moment. In my view:
• Tory majority at next GE is 10% to 20%;
• Labour majority at next GE is 40 to 45%; and
• Hung parliament at next GE (=SKS as PM, almost certainly) is 40 to 45%.

In other words, it's about 50-50 whether 1992 is the closest recent-time precedent for where we are now, or whether 1997 is.

The biggest factor is that there are still 2 years to go.
Labour is entirely capable of imploding in that time. When you add in the uncertainty around the Don't Knows, the strong likelihood of a partial swing-back to the party of Government over the next part of the electoral cycle, SKS's perceived lack of charisma (and as Mike would doubtless say, leader ratings count for a lot!) -- any fatalism amongst Tory backbenchers seems a bit premature just yet.

Nigelb

IanB2 said:

I am not sure of the methodology, but anyone around the median age for a PB’er will have lived through the decade when Mrs T seemed universally unpopular, lost every by-election going and shedloads of councillors, seemed always massively behind in the polls, yet come the election Labour never seemed to win. Until 1997.

I suspect this analysis is closer to the money than the projections of the Tories being reduced to a rump of seats, much as I would love to see the latter as their entirely deserved fate.

The vested and self-interest driving support for the Tories is always there, underneath, and currently they might as well rename themselves the Pensioners’ Party. One recent poll had support for them among the youngest voting cohort down to 2%.

Thatcher wax never universally unpopular.
The difference is that there are now no true believers in the brilliance of the current incarnation of the Tory party.
And there's no equivalent of the SDP to split the anti-Tory vote.

But you're probably correct about the vested interest vote. And of.course one person's vested interest is another's matter of principle.
None of us are wholly objective.

IanB2

Nigelb said:

IanB2 said:

I am not sure of the methodology, but anyone around the median age for a PB’er will have lived through the decade when Mrs T seemed universally unpopular, lost every by-election going and shedloads of councillors, seemed always massively behind in the polls, yet come the election Labour never seemed to win. Until 1997.

I suspect this analysis is closer to the money than the projections of the Tories being reduced to a rump of seats, much as I would love to see the latter as their entirely deserved fate.

The vested and self-interest driving support for the Tories is always there, underneath, and currently they might as well rename themselves the Pensioners’ Party. One recent poll had support for them among the youngest voting cohort down to 2%.

Thatcher wax never universally unpopular.
The difference is that there are now no true believers in the brilliance of the current incarnation of the Tory party.
And there's no equivalent of the SDP to split the anti-Tory vote.

But you're probably correct about the vested interest vote. And of.course one person's vested interest is another's matter of principle.
None of us are wholly objective.

Of course, and I said ‘seemed’, because those poll deficits weren’t always there.

Polling suggests, however, that the oft-seen suggestion that the SDP split the ‘anti-Tory vote’ was, certainly in 1983, wrong, since under a forced choice more of their voters would have backed the Tories without a third party to vote for. I suspect the false narrative persists because it gives the left a handy scapegoat for their own self-inflicted fiasco.

MattW

Morning all, happy new year all (in lower case), and thanks for the header.

Looking at the first stories that came my way this morning (including the Times one linked above), I think we are in for a very shitty year of manufactured mini-stories-becoming-faux-scandals in our media, and it's tough to be interested.

Time for a reboot, and I'm very tempted to take a break for the start of the year.

So have a good few days (or weeks), all.

And we have local elections this time, so it's time to ask our local politicians about active travel and similar.

Foxy

FrequentLurker said:

I agree, Foxy: it's an assumption, and I'm not sure whether we've any hard evidence about how segments such as these have broken in the past.

I don't bet -- my wife's a Methodist! -- I've just been coming here for aeons as I think Mike (and many other) 's insights are um, deeply insightful. But if I did bet, I'd see considerable value in some markets at the moment. In my view:
• Tory majority at next GE is 10% to 20%;
• Labour majority at next GE is 40 to 45%; and
• Hung parliament at next GE (=SKS as PM, almost certainly) is 40 to 45%.

In other words, it's about 50-50 whether 1992 is the closest recent-time precedent for where we are now, or whether 1997 is.

The biggest factor is that there are still 2 years to go.
Labour is entirely capable of imploding in that time. When you add in the uncertainty around the Don't Knows, the strong likelihood of a partial swing-back to the party of Government over the next part of the electoral cycle, SKS's perceived lack of charisma (and as Mike would doubtless say, leader ratings count for a lot!) -- any fatalism amongst Tory backbenchers seems a bit premature just yet.

I think we all expect some swingback though this has varied a lot in magnitude from election to election. I also expect a lot of DKs will turn out and vote, as they always do, so the assumptions in this MRP are not completely unreasonable.

It does rather smack of double counting to allocate the DK this way AND have swingback. Surely these DK are the mechanism of swingback?

Starmer shouldn't be complacent though, and to be fair shows no sign of being so.

MattW

Hah - catching up on yesterday evening's thread I see a lot of people are also rebooting.

Best of luck, all.

New patterns, and a couple of new activities coming my way I think.

SirNorfolkPassmore

Isn't there a reasonable amount of evidence that undecided voters tend to break for the challenger?

I appreciate the point on the demographics of this group, but it isn't entirely clear to me that the high number of undecided voters is bad for the reds rather than blues.

kamski

"What's worse, a lot of pollsters are predicting that Labour's current 20-point is unsustainable potentially 2 years out from an election."

Surely a bit of double counting there. If the polls narrow it will probably be because of current waverers saying they will vote Tory.

Casino_Royale

FrequentLurker said:

I agree, Foxy: it's an assumption, and I'm not sure whether we've any hard evidence about how segments such as these have broken in the past.

I don't bet -- my wife's a Methodist! -- I've just been coming here for aeons as I think Mike (and many other) 's insights are um, deeply insightful. But if I did bet, I'd see considerable value in some markets at the moment. In my view:
• Tory majority at next GE is 10% to 20%;
• Labour majority at next GE is 40 to 45%; and
• Hung parliament at next GE (=SKS as PM, almost certainly) is 40 to 45%.

In other words, it's about 50-50 whether 1992 is the closest recent-time precedent for where we are now, or whether 1997 is.

The biggest factor is that there are still 2 years to go.
Labour is entirely capable of imploding in that time. When you add in the uncertainty around the Don't Knows, the strong likelihood of a partial swing-back to the party of Government over the next part of the electoral cycle, SKS's perceived lack of charisma (and as Mike would doubtless say, leader ratings count for a lot!) -- any fatalism amongst Tory backbenchers seems a bit premature just yet.

Welcome.

Great first post.

TheScreamingEagles

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Isn't there a reasonable amount of evidence that undecided voters tend to break for the challenger?

I appreciate the point on the demographics of this group, but it isn't entirely clear to me that the high number of undecided voters is bad for the reds rather than blues.

ICM’s spiral of silence showed that most don’t knows ended up voting for the same party they voted at the last election.

Casino_Royale

On topic, I agree with OGH and @TheScreamingEagles - it's why I've been so reticent in betting on a Labour majority at current odds.

The one thing that could be terminal for the Tories is a new insurgent party on the Right (that's what did for them in the 2019 euros) but if that doesn't materialise, or Reform fades, then this analysis could come true.

OldKingCole

Good morning all, and a very happy New Year to one and all.
At least on a personal basis!
The enormous majorities forecast for labour recently were always, surely, unattainable.

What we can hope for, and perhaps reasonably expect, is a higher standard of behaviour of parliamentarians, both inside, and outside the chamber!

OnlyLivingBoy

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

OnlyLivingBoy

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

DecrepiterJohnL

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

ydoethur

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

Speaking of double counting, I see vanilla is doing what vanilla does best!

OnlyLivingBoy

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

Speaking of double counting, I see vanilla is doing what vanilla does best!

Yes, not sure how that happened!

IanB2

TheScreamingEagles said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Isn't there a reasonable amount of evidence that undecided voters tend to break for the challenger?

I appreciate the point on the demographics of this group, but it isn't entirely clear to me that the high number of undecided voters is bad for the reds rather than blues.

ICM’s spiral of silence showed that most don’t knows ended up voting for the same party they voted at the last election.

For dissatisfied voters, telling pollsters they're going to vote for the other lot (or stay at home) is a way of indicating discontent rather than (necessarily) a statement of intent.

ydoethur

OnlyLivingBoy said:

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

Speaking of double counting, I see vanilla is doing what vanilla does best!

Yes, not sure how that happened!

Usually, it's when it's saving a draft as you click 'publish,' and then it has a draft saved and the published version. So if you clicked publish again, possibly accidentally, you get the double post.

OldKingCole

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

OnlyLivingBoy

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

Speaking of double counting, I see vanilla is doing what vanilla does best!

Yes, not sure how that happened!

Usually, it's when it's saving a draft as you click 'publish,' and then it has a draft saved and the published version. So if you clicked publish again, possibly accidentally, you get the double post.

I was just on the website version, edited my post and clicked save. Usually that replaces the initial post rather than posting twice.

Casino_Royale

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

That would almost certainly be challenged under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the ECHR.

SirNorfolkPassmore

TheScreamingEagles said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Isn't there a reasonable amount of evidence that undecided voters tend to break for the challenger?

I appreciate the point on the demographics of this group, but it isn't entirely clear to me that the high number of undecided voters is bad for the reds rather than blues.

ICM’s spiral of silence showed that most don’t knows ended up voting for the same party they voted at the last election.

But isn't the point that several pollsters DO adjust for this in their published figures? It varies, but I believe YouGov and Opinium don't adjust (or didn't historically) but Ipsos and Savanta ComRes do adjust.

Isn't there a double counting risk in that at least some of the polls already adjust exactly to deal with the point you make?

I'm not saying there won't be swingback - there will almost certainly be swingback as a reversion to the mean point (the scope for Tories to drop further is less than potential to come off the floor). I'm just not certain you've identified an additional and separate point here - although I accept I don't know current pollster methodologies inside out.

Casino_Royale

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

The old school tie domination of professions is a bit of a myth - and, unless Labour secretly plan on withdrawing from the ECHR, I don't think they could completely ban private education either - but, even if they did, it wouldn't make professions more accessible or society fairer.

This neo-socialist thinking (which I know is just an devil's advocate argument you're suggesting, not putting forward as your personal view) to target the bourgeoise is a very old one, and we know where it leads.

Sunil_Prasannan

Happy New Year everyone, hope 2023 will be a good one!

DecrepiterJohnL

Casino_Royale said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

That would almost certainly be challenged under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the ECHR.

Much as I'd like to see religious indoctrination abolished, I doubt such a measure would be electorally popular, even without its dubious legality.

ydoethur

OnlyLivingBoy said:

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

ydoethur said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Good morning and a happy new year to all. This is interesting analysis but I wonder if there is some double counting at work in the argument that this don't knows effect could be compacted by swing back as we approach the election. Presumably some of the swing back will occur through these Tory leaning don't knows returning to the party, and so you can't simply add the two phenomena together. Overall, yes these are valid points but I think the electorate is ready to give Labour some kind of majority (but not 500 seats).

Edit - I see Kamski has made exactly the same point!

Speaking of double counting, I see vanilla is doing what vanilla does best!

Yes, not sure how that happened!

Usually, it's when it's saving a draft as you click 'publish,' and then it has a draft saved and the published version. So if you clicked publish again, possibly accidentally, you get the double post.

I was just on the website version, edited my post and clicked save. Usually that replaces the initial post rather than posting twice.

It had already published the two versions before you edited it. My post was quoting the second and I clicked 'quote' before the edit appeared but after you had done it.

So it was the initial publish that caused the blip.

Taz

Happy New Year people

Can’t be worse than the one just gone !

I see the slavery reparations story is moving up a gear. More descendants of slave owners are to be targetted for reparations. No blame is attached to the descendants however.

This story is given some prominence as it’s a well known actor however it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

https://news.sky.com/story/benedict-cumberbatch-barbados-may-hit-stars-family-with-reparation-claim-over-historic-links-to-slave-trade-12777375

DougSeal

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Casino_Royale said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

That would almost certainly be challenged under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the ECHR.

Much as I'd like to see religious indoctrination abolished, I doubt such a measure would be electorally popular, even without its dubious legality.

Rather than a blanket ban it may be possible under the ECHR to stop state religious schools, a la France. A total bar on religious schooling wouldn’t work for the reasons Casino set out.

squareroot2

Happy New Year to all. 2023 could not be any worse than 2022..or could it?

DougSeal

Hope everyone is out to be the best they can be in 2023! In my case I have hired Sergei Bubka as my personal trainer to help me improve my pole vault PB this year!

Foxy

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

IanB2

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

"significant consumer spending"? That's a stretch.

FF43

Happy 2023 to one and all.

The assumption behind this analysis is that all expressions of "Don't Know" can be disregarded. They will vote Conservative as they did last time and not vote for Labour or sit on their hands. This is despite large numbers of similar previous voters happily stating they will vote Labour.

I think we can say some of them will revert to their previous positions. We don't know if it's a few or most. On current polling information, a 50 seat Labour majority is the worst case for that party and as unlikely as the headline figure of 519 Labour seats.

Based on current polling. As always, the polling can shift. (But not necessarily to Labour's disadvantage).

I would say current polling is more like 1995 than 1990. Relevant to this analysis perhaps because relatively few of the 1995 "Don't Knows" reverted to the Tories in 1997.

SirNorfolkPassmore

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

On point 6, worth remembering that 2019 was a very good year for Lib Dems, Greens, and independent/other candidates as it was the fag end of May and there was a lot of "Bollocks to Brexit" and general plague on all their houses. It was poor for the Tories, but also quite poor for Labour who lost a handful of seats net (Corbyn was at the peak of the antisemitism issue and poorly placed to take advantage of May's woes).

For that reason, I think Labour will have good local elections in 2023 from a relatively low base. Tories also have a relatively low base but numerically will probably still lose a lot of seats as we're looking at a LOT of small seats in district councils in this round - they still won 40% of seats up in 2019 on 28% of the vote and still run a lot of the councils up this year. That isn't great when budgets are very tight for local authorities, and they'll almost inevitably be cutting services AND raising Council Tax close to the cap at the worst possible time in the electoral cycle - a tough time to defend when in control.

Benpointer

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

I missed the part where Starmer proposed banning private education.

Casino_Royale

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

Interesting predictions.

I am not very good at this game but I'm glad I'm big on Biden, put it that way.

Daveyboy1961

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

ThomasNashe

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

3) is a bit of an eye-catcher!

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Dr. Foxy, it'll certainly be an interesting year if Xi is deposed. I'd be surprised, but there we are.

Stuartinromford

FF43 said:

Happy 2023 to one and all.

The assumption behind this analysis is that all expressions of "Don't Know" can be disregarded. They will vote Conservative as they did last time and not vote for Labour or sit on their hands. This is despite large numbers of similar previous voters happily stating they will vote Labour.

I think we can say some of them will revert to their previous positions. We don't know if it's a few or most. On current polling information, a 50 seat Labour majority is the worst case for that party and as unlikely as the headline figure of 519 Labour seats.

Based on current polling. As always, the polling can shift. (But not necessarily to Labour's disadvantage).

I would say current polling is more like 1995 than 1990. Relevant to this analysis perhaps because relatively few of the 1995 "Don't Knows" reverted to the Tories in 1997.

The other thing is that the fundamentals- people will generally be poorer on 31/12/23 than they are now and the sense of public services falling over is much stronger than in the mid 90s- are grim for government support.

And it's hard to see what a good government would do about those, or where we would get a good government from.

"The opposition are mediocre and won't solve the problems we created" isn't the best of election pitches.

Foxy

IanB2 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

"significant consumer spending"? That's a stretch.

People are not as afraid of debt as they should be!

Benpointer

Here are my 2023 predictions. Confident* of improving on my 2/10 for 2022 :-)

1. Ukraine stalemate to continue throughout the year with little change.
2. Inflation to remain above 5% by year end.
3. Trump still to be be the leading GOP POTUS candidate by year end.
4. May local elections to be a record loss for the Tories.
5. …despite which, Sunak to still be PM at the end of the year.
6. Labour polling lead to continue in to 10% - 20% range through the year.
7. FTSE100 at 6,500 by year end.
8. Australia to win the Ashes this summer.
9. France to win the RU world cup.
10. England to win the Women’s Football World Cup.

(*not very)

Benpointer

Daveyboy1961 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

Er... 3)!

Dura_Ace

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:


2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

On 31/12/2023 we'll be weeks away from the start of the 2024 Presidential Election campaign and I think both sides will want it resolved, one way or the other, by then. Biden will want something he can market as a victory and the GOP will want the end of the blank cheques to the Beggar King and probably a Russian victory that they can market as a Biden failure.

Zelensky certainly can't negotiate this side of the Ukrainian Presidential Election which is scheduled to be in April. That is going to be a very uncertain prospect and not just because of disruption from the SMO. In 2019 Zelensky was elected on the back of the money and TV channel (1+1) of Igor Kolomoysky. VZ and IK used to be very tight (Zelensky's production company laundered about $30m of Kolomoysky's ill-gotten through Belize and Panama - Paradise Papers). However, once he was President, Zelensky did a total Johnson on Kolomoysky stripping him of Ukrainian citizenship and exiling him to Cyprus.

HYUFD

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

Daveyboy1961

Benpointer said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

Er... 3)!

apart from 3....

Casino_Royale

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Mexicanpete

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

So a New Year, and looking good for the Conservatives as we speak. The spectre of 1992 does loom large over Starmer.

I thought the economy would do for the Conservatives but reading today's posts that appears not to be the case. Brexit, taxation, Starmer's ineptitude and public schools seem to be the drivers for the inevitable Conservative victory.

noneoftheabove

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

So a New Year, and looking good for the Conservatives as we speak. The spectre of 1992 does loom large over Starmer.

I thought the economy would do for the Conservatives but reading today's posts that appears not to be the case. Brexit, taxation, Starmer's ineptitude and public schools seem to be the drivers for the inevitable Conservative victory.

Also Clegg damaging the LDs on tuition fees and who can forget Brown selling some gold. On reflection, perhaps the Tories should be close to favourites?

BlancheLivermore

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:


2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

On 31/12/2023 we'll be weeks away from the start of the 2024 Presidential Election campaign and I think both sides will want it resolved, one way or the other, by then. Biden will want something he can market as a victory and the GOP will want the end of the blank cheques to the Beggar King and probably a Russian victory that they can market as a Biden failure.

Zelensky certainly can't negotiate this side of the Ukrainian Presidential Election which is scheduled to be in April. That is going to be a very uncertain prospect and not just because of disruption from the SMO. In 2019 Zelensky was elected on the back of the money and TV channel (1+1) of Igor Kolomoysky. VZ and IK used to be very tight (Zelensky's production company laundered about $30m of Kolomoysky's ill-gotten through Belize and Panama - Paradise Papers). However, once he was President, Zelensky did a total Johnson on Kolomoysky stripping him of Ukrainian citizenship and exiling him to Cyprus.

Go SMO!

It's very, very S

Mexicanpete

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Pete, to be fair, the last time Labour won they promised a referendum, then reneged.

DecrepiterJohnL

Benpointer said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

I missed the part where Starmer proposed banning private education.

Starmer did not propose banning private education. However, I did suggest earlier in this thread that, paradoxically, it might have been better for Labour's electoral chances than merely imposing VAT.

kjh

Happy new year everyone. Considering I broke both my legs 2022 wasn't awful for me as it seems for many, for which I am grateful.

I see sarcasm is going strong at the start of the year. You do realise that it completely goes over the head of one poster don't you?

Stuartinromford

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Alternatively, he'll follow the public (about 2/3 of the way back) rather then leading. Undignified, but necessary given his history.

We're currently at about 1/3 of the public thinking this whole Brexit thing is a good
idea. The numbers might stick there, or they might continue to drift down. But there is a threshold where the question can't be avoided any more. What's unclear is where that threshold is.

kjh

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

MaxPB

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

noneoftheabove

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Benpointer said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

I missed the part where Starmer proposed banning private education.

Starmer did not propose banning private education. However, I did suggest earlier in this thread that, paradoxically, it might have been better for Labour's electoral chances than merely imposing VAT.

From a manifesto perspective virtually no-one will change their mind to voting Labour if they have a policy to introduce VAT on private schools or even ban them. Those who support charging VAT won't see it as even a top 25 issue. Whereas there will be a significant number who might have voted Labour but would switch to the Tories if they had such a policy as for them it could be a top 3 issue.

If Labour really want to do this, it does not need to be in a manifesto either way, Chancellors tinker with tax all the time.

ThomasNashe

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Foxy

Daveyboy1961 said:

Benpointer said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

Er... 3)!

apart from 3....

My thinking is that firstly the anti zero covid protests, then the current chaos will do him in. Nobody likes a strongman who has been exposed as weak. The CCP is ruthless enough to ditch leaders.

I think the people power protests that brought an end to zero covid, then the current chaos leave Xi looking very weak.

MaxPB

ThomasNashe said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Nobody asked for unfunded tax cuts, though. That was the major issue with their approach. I think most people recognise that the UK has a growth issue and that the dead hand of the treasury is a major part of it.

Leon

HNY, PB

Predictions for 2023? I agree with the Co-founder of OpenAI (tho of course he is hyping his own product)

“Prediction: 2023 will make 2022 look like a sleepy year for AI advancement & adoption.”

https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1609244547460255744?s=46&t=OcgtZolQlvLhNy35bwM8Jg

Foxy

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

No, he won't. He is far too timid, but will relax red tape on a lot of other issues, so dynamic alignment on standards etc to soften the worst of Brexit. EEA application possibly in a second term if Brexit popularity continues to nosedive.

Mexicanpete

kjh said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

I suspect in the two years between now and the GE the incumbent Government will need to reset our trading partnership with the EU. Any move towards single market and more particularly FoM will be resisted until it no longer can. So the RedWall stays at home or votes Farage, but the BlueWall is saved. That is always assuming the economy is running along nicely by the next GE.

The Labour LOTO after Starmer therefore will not have to concern herself with Brexit. It will have once and for all been "done" by Sunak, or by Johnson.

Northern_Al

noneoftheabove said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

So a New Year, and looking good for the Conservatives as we speak. The spectre of 1992 does loom large over Starmer.

I thought the economy would do for the Conservatives but reading today's posts that appears not to be the case. Brexit, taxation, Starmer's ineptitude and public schools seem to be the drivers for the inevitable Conservative victory.

Also Clegg damaging the LDs on tuition fees and who can forget Brown selling some gold. On reflection, perhaps the Tories should be close to favourites?

And don't forget Bernie Ecclestone.

MaxPB

Leon said:

HNY, PB

Predictions for 2023? I agree with the Co-founder of OpenAI (tho of course he is hyping his own product)

“Prediction: 2023 will make 2022 look like a sleepy year for AI advancement & adoption.”

https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1609244547460255744?s=46&t=OcgtZolQlvLhNy35bwM8Jg

I do wonder whether artists will begin to make copyright claims against the likes of OpenAI using their work for training data. The licence fees for training content could become horrendous very, very quickly.

FF43

kjh said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

I doubt the UK will be in the EU, Single Market or Customs Union any time soon. Not because of Starmer's untrustworthiness or wooliness, but because it requires the EU to agree new treaaties, when they have zero appetite to reopen negotiations on the TCA and NIP and they would be long drawn out if they did start.

It's actually easier for the UK to go back to FoM because that can be done within the visa regimes of each party. It might actually happen once people recognise the debilitating and now largely unavoidable costs of Brexit.

Foxy

MaxPB said:

ThomasNashe said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Nobody asked for unfunded tax cuts, though. That was the major issue with their approach. I think most people recognise that the UK has a growth issue and that the dead hand of the treasury is a major part of it.

Conservatives have been in control of the Treasury for the last 12 years including the current PM, so not likely to change now.

I don't see the Treasury as a brake on growth, that is more down to short termism by management and excessive financialisation by speculators with very short term horizons. They can add liquidity, and do asset stripping but our teenage scribblers have no long term vision. They just want a quick buck and get out.

BlancheLivermore

Orthodox Christmas on Saturday

Is there any way of it all being over by Saturday that doesn't involve nuclear war?

DecrepiterJohnL

MaxPB said:

ThomasNashe said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Nobody asked for unfunded tax cuts, though. That was the major issue with their approach. I think most people recognise that the UK has a growth issue and that the dead hand of the treasury is a major part of it.

Alternatively, Dominic Cummings' proposed DARPA-lite could be revived. We did used to have the National Enterprise Board and National Research Development Corporation, which were merged into the British Technology Group, privatised, and sold to America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTG_(company)

TimS

Foxy said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Benpointer said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

Er... 3)!

apart from 3....

My thinking is that firstly the anti zero covid protests, then the current chaos will do him in. Nobody likes a strongman who has been exposed as weak. The CCP is ruthless enough to ditch leaders.

I think the people power protests that brought an end to zero covid, then the current chaos leave Xi looking very weak.

It would take a very brave CCP politician to shove out Xi now. He has a pretty iron grip, it would be akin to couping Stalin or Mao. Can’t see it happening,

Other than 3 I think I agree with your predictions. As for Major regime changes this year, well there’s no big general election in the US or a big European power - nothing in Germany, Italy, UK, France.

In terms of “democratic” elections the big one to watch is Turkey in June. Erdogan is behind in most of the polls to various possible runoff candidates. But everyone expects him to win by fair means or foul. Still, it could set up some tricky scenarios over the summer particularly given the West relies on Turkey for support over Ukraine. Other than that, only really Pakistan of geopolitical importance.

The vulnerable dictatorships to watch are of course Iran and Belarus. My sense is that Iran has managed to ride out the recent wave of unrest. Belarus though… it feels a case of when not if.

As a wild card if Russia really goes South, keep an eye on the balance of power in Syria.

prh47bridge

DougSeal said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Casino_Royale said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

That would almost certainly be challenged under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the ECHR.

Much as I'd like to see religious indoctrination abolished, I doubt such a measure would be electorally popular, even without its dubious legality.

Rather than a blanket ban it may be possible under the ECHR to stop state religious schools, a la France. A total bar on religious schooling wouldn’t work for the reasons Casino set out.

Possible but hugely expensive. In almost all cases, the land and premises used by state funded religious schools are owned by charitable trusts. The government would have to buy these or build new schools. Since this represents around one third of all state funded schools, that would cost a lot.

It is often suggested that state funded schools should no longer be able to prioritise admissions on faith grounds. This would also be hugely expensive as introducing such a policy would almost certainly lead to the closure of all Roman Catholic schools and possibly some others as well.

IanB2

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

"significant consumer spending"? That's a stretch.

People are not as afraid of debt as they should be!

True, but lenders ought to be getting more concerned about ability to repay

DecrepiterJohnL

Leon said:

HNY, PB

Predictions for 2023? I agree with the Co-founder of OpenAI (tho of course he is hyping his own product)

“Prediction: 2023 will make 2022 look like a sleepy year for AI advancement & adoption.”

https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1609244547460255744?s=46&t=OcgtZolQlvLhNy35bwM8Jg

OpenAI has Google running scared that ChatGPT will replace it as everyone's first choice for search.
https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/25/in_brief_ai/

A New Chat Bot Is a ‘Code Red’ for Google’s Search Business
A new wave of chat bots like ChatGPT use artificial intelligence that could reinvent or even replace the traditional internet search engine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/technology/ai-chatgpt-google-search.html (£££)

FF43

Foxy said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Benpointer said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Foxy said:

Time for some 2023 predictions, on 31st Dec 2023:

1) Sunak to still be PM

2) Russia Ukraine War to be an ongoing stalemate, with positions not far from where they were in Jan 2022.

3) President Xi to be deposed in China, and China driving world economic recovery.

4) Biden to announce he will run again. He seems to be enjoying himself. Trump to disappear further down his rabbit hole, and looking unlikely to be the Republican nominee.

4) Musk to step back from Twitter, under threat of losing control of Tesla.

5) UK inflation to drop, but still be 5% by year end. GDP to hover around the zero mark, with neither significant growth nor major recession, buoyed by significant consumer spending. BoE base rate 4.5% at year end.

6) May local elections to be poor for the Tories, but not a wipeout, and lacklustre for Labour. A good night for LibDems and Greens.

7) The most certain of all: NI to remain fossilised in pointless deadlock, with no Stormont government nor real progress on the NIP.

so in effect, no change then...

Er... 3)!

apart from 3....

My thinking is that firstly the anti zero covid protests, then the current chaos will do him in. Nobody likes a strongman who has been exposed as weak. The CCP is ruthless enough to ditch leaders.

I think the people power protests that brought an end to zero covid, then the current chaos leave Xi looking very weak.

Xi Jinping's grasp on power is baffling when he makes mistake after mistake in an environment that generally has low tolerance for failure. There are parallels - I'm not quite sure how they play out - with Leonid Brezhnev.. It seems if you can get control of the committees you're made.

MaxPB

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

ThomasNashe said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Nobody asked for unfunded tax cuts, though. That was the major issue with their approach. I think most people recognise that the UK has a growth issue and that the dead hand of the treasury is a major part of it.

Conservatives have been in control of the Treasury for the last 12 years including the current PM, so not likely to change now.

I don't see the Treasury as a brake on growth, that is more down to short termism by management and excessive financialisation by speculators with very short term horizons. They can add liquidity, and do asset stripping but our teenage scribblers have no long term vision. They just want a quick buck and get out.

But that model is what the treasury has supported for 20+ years. In fact it has constantly blocked moves to change the investment environment to stop financial engineering both by Labour and Tory chancellors as "picking winners" and "market interference".

The treasury is rammed with those same kind of people who can't see beyond tomorrow's GDP figures and short term optimisation strategy. Which is why London gets £22bn in public transport investment but the North got HS2 cancelled at £17bn. Or why why RR are now basically funding their whole nuclear play from the US rather than relying on the treasury to do what's right, or Moltex finding more luck with Canada than our own treasury. Projects that don't move their numbers in their broken models get chopped and foreign investors, usually state backed, pick up the pieces and future UK productivity and profit is offshored.

You may know about healthcare issues, you have never dealt with the treasury first hand. It's a fucking nightmare.

RochdalePioneers

Morning all! This is interesting research, and the DK's swinging back towards the Tories sounds plausible. But I have to point out that 21% say they won't vote. Its very likely that many of these were Brexit / 2019 Tory voters, so them not voting puts a big hole in the Tory tally in all those key seats. And how many others were blue wall actual Conservatives who just won't vote for the party in its current state?

TimS

Interesting analysis on the coming Turkish elections:

https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/post-2023-election-scenarios-in-turkey

One comment I noted which explains the contrast between Erdogan’s apparent omnipotence in foreign affairs to the extent of being able to bully Putin, and his fragility at home:

“In contrast to authori­tarian states such as Venezuela, Russia, and Iran, Turkey lacks sizeable reserves of natu­ral commodities, whose windfall would help Erdoğan weather a post-election storm“

A key point about Turkey since it lost the Ottoman Empire: it’s resource-poor and beholden to global markets.

RochdalePioneers

OldKingCole said:

Good morning all, and a very happy New Year to one and all.
At least on a personal basis!
The enormous majorities forecast for labour recently were always, surely, unattainable.

What we can hope for, and perhaps reasonably expect, is a higher standard of behaviour of parliamentarians, both inside, and outside the chamber!

Yes, the British polity is increasingly corrupt and self-serving. That story about 1 in 10 Tory peers having donated more than £100k to the party, the PPE fast track, Lord Lebedev of Siberia, Tom Watson's witchhunt getting him ermine and Lying Boris having the taxpayer cover his legal bills - there is so much obviously wrong with politics.

kjh

FF43 said:

kjh said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

I doubt the UK will be in the EU, Single Market or Customs Union any time soon. Not because of Starmer's untrustworthiness or wooliness, but because it requires the EU to agree new treaaties, when they have zero appetite to reopen negotiations on the TCA and NIP and they would be long drawn out if they did start.

It's actually easier for the UK to go back to FoM because that can be done within the visa regimes of each party. It might actually happen once people recognise the debilitating and now largely unavoidable costs of Brexit.

Oh I agree. I was just commenting upon CR's post which I think is broadly accurate. I think Starmer will be very cool re Single Market and Custom Union in anything he says before an election, but much warmer towards it after if PM with a decent majority.

FF43

noneoftheabove said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Benpointer said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

I missed the part where Starmer proposed banning private education.

Starmer did not propose banning private education. However, I did suggest earlier in this thread that, paradoxically, it might have been better for Labour's electoral chances than merely imposing VAT.

From a manifesto perspective virtually no-one will change their mind to voting Labour if they have a policy to introduce VAT on private schools or even ban them. Those who support charging VAT won't see it as even a top 25 issue. Whereas there will be a significant number who might have voted Labour but would switch to the Tories if they had such a policy as for them it could be a top 3 issue.

If Labour really want to do this, it does not need to be in a manifesto either way, Chancellors tinker with tax all the time.

The interesting thing about Starmer's proposal to tax private education is that a cautious politician sees that as an electoral winner for him. He may be right or he may be wrong, but it's interesting he thinks that.

Leon

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

HNY, PB

Predictions for 2023? I agree with the Co-founder of OpenAI (tho of course he is hyping his own product)

“Prediction: 2023 will make 2022 look like a sleepy year for AI advancement & adoption.”

https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1609244547460255744?s=46&t=OcgtZolQlvLhNy35bwM8Jg

I do wonder whether artists will begin to make copyright claims against the likes of OpenAI using their work for training data. The licence fees for training content could become horrendous very, very quickly.

Already happening

https://www.wired.com/story/this-copyright-lawsuit-could-shape-the-future-of-generative-ai/

It won’t stop the tech tho. The potential is too great, profits too big, benefits (and pitfalls) too mighty. Has humanity ever resisted innovation? How many societies are like Bhutan?

Scott_xP

The biggest decision facing Tory MPs in 2023. How best to lose the next election > Mail On Sunday > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11589113/Will-Rishi-Skywalker-fight-Election-honour-try-zap-Starmer-sneaky-tax-trap.html

eek

MaxPB said:

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

ThomasNashe said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

How did that approach work out for Truss and Kwarteng?

Nobody asked for unfunded tax cuts, though. That was the major issue with their approach. I think most people recognise that the UK has a growth issue and that the dead hand of the treasury is a major part of it.

Conservatives have been in control of the Treasury for the last 12 years including the current PM, so not likely to change now.

I don't see the Treasury as a brake on growth, that is more down to short termism by management and excessive financialisation by speculators with very short term horizons. They can add liquidity, and do asset stripping but our teenage scribblers have no long term vision. They just want a quick buck and get out.

But that model is what the treasury has supported for 20+ years. In fact it has constantly blocked moves to change the investment environment to stop financial engineering both by Labour and Tory chancellors as "picking winners" and "market interference".

The treasury is rammed with those same kind of people who can't see beyond tomorrow's GDP figures and short term optimisation strategy. Which is why London gets £22bn in public transport investment but the North got HS2 cancelled at £17bn. Or why why RR are now basically funding their whole nuclear play from the US rather than relying on the treasury to do what's right, or Moltex finding more luck with Canada than our own treasury. Projects that don't move their numbers in their broken models get chopped and foreign investors, usually state backed, pick up the pieces and future UK productivity and profit is offshored.

You may know about healthcare issues, you have never dealt with the treasury first hand. It's a fucking nightmare.

Simple example on HS2 - because they can’t estimate the benefits of local services running on the east coast and midland mainlines the economic benefit used in the models was zero.

Pro_Rata

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! This is interesting research, and the DK's swinging back towards the Tories sounds plausible. But I have to point out that 21% say they won't vote. Its very likely that many of these were Brexit / 2019 Tory voters, so them not voting puts a big hole in the Tory tally in all those key seats. And how many others were blue wall actual Conservatives who just won't vote for the party in its current state?

Happy New Year.

I fear in 2023, I may become a substantial bore on what actually happened in the 1997 GE, and that Con abstention was the single biggest driver of that result

In all the vote flows and counter flows that happened, it is difficult to make a case that GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 Lab constituted more than around 12% of the GE 1992 Con vote (perhaps around 1.5m of the 14m source votes possible) and a little below 10% is realistic.

Where as, with the turnout drop, it is difficult to make a case for GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 DNV was less than 15% of the 1992 Con vote, and perhaps it could be as much as 18%.

So, those DKs might simply be Tory false hope if they cannot be enthused.

RochdalePioneers

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

This is the British disease. We've always been innovators. But stopped being capitalists and got swept along by 80s-style spivism. Why invest in something ourselves and take the risk when we can sell it to someone else and take the reward?

If Labour want something chunky to get their teeth into, it's this. We need to start being capitalists again, and as the Tories aren't capable of saying no to their spiv patrons then it falls onto Labour to rebuild our economic way of life.

TimS

RochdalePioneers said:

MaxPB said:

In other news another small UK based nuclear startup needs money and the government is set to refuse, but foreign wealth funds have been queuing up to invest. It's absolutely maddening that the UK government just seems incapable of backing UK industry and is comfortable letting foreign states snap up businesses and IP and future profitability.

It's time for someone to come in and smash up the Treasury, fire all of the "we know best" mandarins who couldn't grow a whelk stall let alone an economy and refocus the whole energy of the state into making the economy grow and for the UK benefit from the growth rather than the Saudi Arabian wealth fund or Tencent.

This is the British disease. We've always been innovators. But stopped being capitalists and got swept along by 80s-style spivism. Why invest in something ourselves and take the risk when we can sell it to someone else and take the reward?

If Labour want something chunky to get their teeth into, it's this. We need to start being capitalists again, and as the Tories aren't capable of saying no to their spiv patrons then it falls onto Labour to rebuild our economic way of life.

It would be the work of generations. Not sure how we do it. British business (not just government) bought into the US paradigm that you focus on your core capability and divest or outsource everything else. Except we went a bit further and divested or outsourced half our core capabilities too.

Casino_Royale

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

Yes, I could be wrong, but it's my considered view. I note that some of your fellow riders also accept this and think Starmer will say "now we've taken a look at the books; it's much worse than we thought" as the reason for acting differently once in office.

But maybe you'd prefer if I didn't critique Starmer or Labour at all and just talked about how brilliant they are.

FF43

kjh said:

FF43 said:

kjh said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

I doubt the UK will be in the EU, Single Market or Customs Union any time soon. Not because of Starmer's untrustworthiness or wooliness, but because it requires the EU to agree new treaaties, when they have zero appetite to reopen negotiations on the TCA and NIP and they would be long drawn out if they did start.

It's actually easier for the UK to go back to FoM because that can be done within the visa regimes of each party. It might actually happen once people recognise the debilitating and now largely unavoidable costs of Brexit.

Oh I agree. I was just commenting upon CR's post which I think is broadly accurate. I think Starmer will be very cool re Single Market and Custom Union in anything he says before an election, but much warmer towards it after if PM with a decent majority.

What Starmer can't say is different from people think. It isn't that he can't say we will be rejoining the SM, CU and/or the EU as soon as we can. It's that we are unable to rejoin those arrangements even if we wanted to. He can't say we're stuffed but we're going to have to live with it.

eek

Pro_Rata said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! This is interesting research, and the DK's swinging back towards the Tories sounds plausible. But I have to point out that 21% say they won't vote. Its very likely that many of these were Brexit / 2019 Tory voters, so them not voting puts a big hole in the Tory tally in all those key seats. And how many others were blue wall actual Conservatives who just won't vote for the party in its current state?

Happy New Year.

I fear in 2023, I may become a substantial bore on what actually happened in the 1997 GE, and that Con abstention was the single biggest driver of that result

In all the vote flows and counter flows that happened, it is difficult to make a case that GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 Lab constituted more than around 12% of the GE 1992 Con vote (perhaps around 1.5m of the 14m source votes possible) and a little below 10% is realistic.

Where as, with the turnout drop, it is difficult to make a case for GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 DNV was less than 15% of the 1992 Con vote, and perhaps it could be as much as 18%.

So, those DKs might simply be Tory false hope if they cannot be enthused.

So you follow my logic that people usual vote for not for their preferred option but for their least worst option. And if they prefer one party but the other party isn’t scary (see Blair in 1997 rather than Kinnock in 1992) they may well not bother digging out their photo Id and walking to the polling booth.

Which is why Starmer will do the sensible thing and ignore topics such as Brexit because keep quiet avoids encouraging 2019 Tory voters from going out and voting Tory again.

TimS

Pro_Rata said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! This is interesting research, and the DK's swinging back towards the Tories sounds plausible. But I have to point out that 21% say they won't vote. Its very likely that many of these were Brexit / 2019 Tory voters, so them not voting puts a big hole in the Tory tally in all those key seats. And how many others were blue wall actual Conservatives who just won't vote for the party in its current state?

Happy New Year.

I fear in 2023, I may become a substantial bore on what actually happened in the 1997 GE, and that Con abstention was the single biggest driver of that result

In all the vote flows and counter flows that happened, it is difficult to make a case that GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 Lab constituted more than around 12% of the GE 1992 Con vote (perhaps around 1.5m of the 14m source votes possible) and a little below 10% is realistic.

Where as, with the turnout drop, it is difficult to make a case for GE 1992 Con -> GE 1997 DNV was less than 15% of the 1992 Con vote, and perhaps it could be as much as 18%.

So, those DKs might simply be Tory false hope if they cannot be enthused.

Great, so the best hope for the Tories in 2024 is a core vote strategy then. Expect a blue pledge card:

1. Protect the triple lock
2. Flights to Rwanda
3. Terminate the NIP
4. Pull out of the ECHR
5. Remove all speed bumps
6. Reintroduce imperial weights and measures
7. Pledge a referendum on capital punishment

eek

Casino_Royale said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

Yes, I could be wrong, but it's my considered view. I note that some of your fellow riders also accept this and think Starmer will say "now we've taken a look at the books; it's much worse than we thought" as the reason for acting differently once in office.

But maybe you'd prefer if I didn't critique Starmer or Labour at all and just talked about how brilliant they are.

Except we can’t rejoin the EU because they don’t want us nor need us as @FF43 points out below.

Casino_Royale

prh47bridge said:

DougSeal said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Casino_Royale said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That the DKs are mainly former Tories is why I am doubtful of Labour's wisdom in attacking public schools. Surely this cohort is unlikely to find this policy attractive on ideological grounds, else they'd already have been voting Labour, whereas those with family at (or intended for) public schools might be tipped back onto the blue pile.

But the key observation might be that private education goes beyond traditional public schools, through tutors who are represented on pb, to ad hoc after-school establishments often based in former shops, which around here are mainly used by the Labour-leaning Asian community, and that is without counting specifically Muslim religious education.

Otoh, last night's Only Connect makes me think you can tell a school is posh if the teachers are called beaks.

Paradoxically, in electoral terms, as well as to end the old school tie domination of many lucrative and influential professions, it might be better for Labour to completely ban private education rather than make it 20 per cent more expensive.

Surely, it’s religious education, which should be banned, at least as a first step!

That would almost certainly be challenged under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the ECHR.

Much as I'd like to see religious indoctrination abolished, I doubt such a measure would be electorally popular, even without its dubious legality.

Rather than a blanket ban it may be possible under the ECHR to stop state religious schools, a la France. A total bar on religious schooling wouldn’t work for the reasons Casino set out.

Possible but hugely expensive. In almost all cases, the land and premises used by state funded religious schools are owned by charitable trusts. The government would have to buy these or build new schools. Since this represents around one third of all state funded schools, that would cost a lot.

It is often suggested that state funded schools should no longer be able to prioritise admissions on faith grounds. This would also be hugely expensive as introducing such a policy would almost certainly lead to the closure of all Roman Catholic schools and possibly some others as well.

It'd be akin to a modern day dissolution of the monasteries.

Foxy

RochdalePioneers said:

OldKingCole said:

Good morning all, and a very happy New Year to one and all.
At least on a personal basis!
The enormous majorities forecast for labour recently were always, surely, unattainable.

What we can hope for, and perhaps reasonably expect, is a higher standard of behaviour of parliamentarians, both inside, and outside the chamber!

Yes, the British polity is increasingly corrupt and self-serving. That story about 1 in 10 Tory peers having donated more than £100k to the party, the PPE fast track, Lord Lebedev of Siberia, Tom Watson's witchhunt getting him ermine and Lying Boris having the taxpayer cover his legal bills - there is so much obviously wrong with politics.

One further prediction. Johnson will get away with a slap on the wrist from the Standards committee, adding to the stench of self serving Tory corruption.

RochdalePioneers

FF43 said:

kjh said:

Mexicanpete said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Yes if Sunak wins back DKs and some RefUK voters he could get a hung parliament yet.

Starmer has to rule out the single market and customs union to win back the redwall seats without which he can't become PM

He will rule it out and then do it once in office.

Thank goodness you are as you claim "not partisan" but instead someone who simply sees clearly through the lies of non-Conservative charlatans.

To be fair to CR that does not seem like an unreasonable prediction, although I suspect any statements will be a lot woollier than rule it in or out.

I doubt the UK will be in the EU, Single Market or Customs Union any time soon. Not because of Starmer's untrustworthiness or wooliness, but because it requires the EU to agree new treaaties, when they have zero appetite to reopen negotiations on the TCA and NIP and they would be long drawn out if they did start.

It's actually easier for the UK to go back to FoM because that can be done within the visa regimes of each party. It might actually happen once people recognise the debilitating and now largely unavoidable costs of Brexit.

Forget the EU, that ship has sailed. The two points of interest are the things which are not EU and thus not voted on in 2016: CU and EEA. I doubt we will even ask to join either. But we remain buffered up at the front of both being propelled along by them. So changing the relationship so that we accept this is a political challenge rather than diplomatic.

We are not going to sign any major trade deals as counterparties either aren't interested (US) or will fuck us harder than a "stepmom" on you know where (Australia). Most of the New Truss Trade Deals rolled over the existing EU - Counterparty deal to continue applying to the UK.

So we don't rejoin the CU but do a customs deal like Turkey has. We don't rejoin the EEA but mutually recognise that we remain dynamically aligned and drop the barriers. We don't allow free movement, but we open the door to people who want to come here to work in the jobs that we can't fill. That will be the Starmer compromise. Fulfilling Brexit - we left the EU - and working to deliver the benefits of Brexit by not crippling the economy as the Tory brexiteers have done.