Howdy, Stranger!

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

Compulsory voting ID – A CON gift to LAB & the LDs? – politicalbetting.com

1234568»

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,916
    Andy_JS said:

    The revamped UKPollingReport website is currently predicting the following number of seats based on the latest polls.

    Lab 369
    Con 187
    SNP 45
    LD 26
    Oth 22
    Grn 1

    https://pollingreport.uk/seats

    Rishi getting more seats than Major in 1997 and Hague in 2001 there then
  • What a goal at The Emirates.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    LAB+CON+LD+SNP change =-6%

    Broken sleazy political class on the slide?
    Does anyone believe for a moment that Reform UK are going to get more votes than the Lib Dems? I mean, Ed is a bit of a disaster but seriously? It is just nonsense.
    Opinion polls are of limited value in any case, but these kinds of numbers for the moribund and deeply obscure RefUK are utterly laughable. They'll be doing well come the next GE to match the Brexit Party's 2% national share from last time.

    I'm assuming that these pollsters must be prompting for them, and that most of their supposed vote would vanish into thin air if this were not the case; besides which, are they going to have either the money or the support to stand candidates in that many seats in any event?
    I wondered how many of their alleged supporters thought that they were actually indicating their support for a Referendum party. It frankly makes no sense but if the abbreviation Ref UK was used that is possible. After all has even 1 person in 100 heard of Tice, let alone be willing to vote for his party.
    I don't know if this has been done, but it would be interesting to see how much support could be mustered in a poll for an entirely fictitious political party if it were inserted as one of the available prompted choices - especially if it were given an appealingly button-pushing name? The NHS Action Party or the Pensioners' Party could probably drum up 5% without too much difficulty.
    I think it is worth exploring because there are 7-8% points floating free here. If they really mean Reform UK I think we can assume most of these will go back to the Tories. If, however, they thought they were voting for a referendum then they almost certainly wouldn't. If Reform UK even stand in 10% of seats at the next election I will be surprised.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    The revamped UKPollingReport website is currently predicting the following number of seats based on the latest polls.

    Lab 369
    Con 187
    SNP 45
    LD 26
    Oth 22
    Grn 1

    https://pollingreport.uk/seats

    Rishi getting more seats than Major in 1997 and Hague in 2001 there then
    A moral win then
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,684
    DavidL said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Don't think it was as high as that. According to this source they had 14k troops out of 156k, so slightly under 10%. Still a very serious contribution though.
    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/juno-beach
    Plus navy, aircrew etc
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Why is their contribution supposed to have been airbrushed? Just wondering. (I really like Goerge Blackburn's books on being a Canadian artilleryman in the Normandy campaign and NWE. But I don't think he was on D-Day, not that it matters given the contribution they clearly made to the war.)
    Broadly D-Day is seen as a US and British affair. For sure the USA had two beaches, and dropped two airborne divisions, the Brits had two beaches and dropped one airborne division. But the Canadians had a beach to themselves, and their navy was present too off shore.
    Canadian Navy was pretty substantial by the end of the war. The third biggest in the world.

    From almost nothing, too. Dreadful problems in getting up ro speed, unsurprisingly, from such a small beginning.

    Made a lot of weapons and equipment too. Bofors guns, aircraft, Ram tanks, Sexton SP guns.
    Speaking of Commonwealth weaponry, one of my favourite twitter accounts is Dreadnought Holiday. This little beauty popped up a couple of months ago, put paid to any NZ invasion plans the Japanese might have had I'm sure.


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,137
    DavidL said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    LAB+CON+LD+SNP change =-6%

    Broken sleazy political class on the slide?
    Does anyone believe for a moment that Reform UK are going to get more votes than the Lib Dems? I mean, Ed is a bit of a disaster but seriously? It is just nonsense.
    Opinion polls are of limited value in any case, but these kinds of numbers for the moribund and deeply obscure RefUK are utterly laughable. They'll be doing well come the next GE to match the Brexit Party's 2% national share from last time.

    I'm assuming that these pollsters must be prompting for them, and that most of their supposed vote would vanish into thin air if this were not the case; besides which, are they going to have either the money or the support to stand candidates in that many seats in any event?
    I wondered how many of their alleged supporters thought that they were actually indicating their support for a Referendum party. It frankly makes no sense but if the abbreviation Ref UK was used that is possible. After all has even 1 person in 100 heard of Tice, let alone be willing to vote for his party.
    I don't know if this has been done, but it would be interesting to see how much support could be mustered in a poll for an entirely fictitious political party if it were inserted as one of the available prompted choices - especially if it were given an appealingly button-pushing name? The NHS Action Party or the Pensioners' Party could probably drum up 5% without too much difficulty.
    I think it is worth exploring because there are 7-8% points floating free here. If they really mean Reform UK I think we can assume most of these will go back to the Tories. If, however, they thought they were voting for a referendum then they almost certainly wouldn't. If Reform UK even stand in 10% of seats at the next election I will be surprised.
    They have consistently performed poorly at by-election too.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,363

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Why is their contribution supposed to have been airbrushed? Just wondering. (I really like Goerge Blackburn's books on being a Canadian artilleryman in the Normandy campaign and NWE. But I don't think he was on D-Day, not that it matters given the contribution they clearly made to the war.)
    Broadly D-Day is seen as a US and British affair. For sure the USA had two beaches, and dropped two airborne divisions, the Brits had two beaches and dropped one airborne division. But the Canadians had a beach to themselves, and their navy was present too off shore.
    Canadian Navy was pretty substantial by the end of the war. The third biggest in the world.

    From almost nothing, too. Dreadful problems in getting up ro speed, unsurprisingly, from such a small beginning.

    Made a lot of weapons and equipment too. Bofors guns, aircraft, Ram tanks, Sexton SP guns.
    Speaking of Commonwealth weaponry, one of my favourite twitter accounts is Dreadnought Holiday. This little beauty popped up a couple of months ago, put paid to any NZ invasion plans the Japanese might have had I'm sure.


    Oh yes, the Bob Semple Tank!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025

    DavidL said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Don't think it was as high as that. According to this source they had 14k troops out of 156k, so slightly under 10%. Still a very serious contribution though.
    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/juno-beach
    Plus navy, aircrew etc
    Chunky, especially given their relative population. But not 20%.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    HYUFD said:

    @pollreport
    ·
    Mar 15
    Do you support or oppose stricter gun laws in the United States?

    WOMEN
    Support 66%
    Oppose 28%

    MEN
    Support 41%
    Oppose 54%

    (Quinnipiac U. Poll, 3/9-13/23)

    That's amazing. Have we ever seen a gender difference like that, anywhere?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,363
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Why is their contribution supposed to have been airbrushed? Just wondering. (I really like Goerge Blackburn's books on being a Canadian artilleryman in the Normandy campaign and NWE. But I don't think he was on D-Day, not that it matters given the contribution they clearly made to the war.)
    Broadly D-Day is seen as a US and British affair. For sure the USA had two beaches, and dropped two airborne divisions, the Brits had two beaches and dropped one airborne division. But the Canadians had a beach to themselves, and their navy was present too off shore.
    Canadian Navy was pretty substantial by the end of the war. The third biggest in the world.

    From almost nothing, too. Dreadful problems in getting up ro speed, unsurprisingly, from such a small beginning.

    Made a lot of weapons and equipment too. Bofors guns, aircraft, Ram tanks, Sexton SP guns.
    Speaking of Commonwealth weaponry, one of my favourite twitter accounts is Dreadnought Holiday. This little beauty popped up a couple of months ago, put paid to any NZ invasion plans the Japanese might have had I'm sure.


    Oh yes, the Bob Semple Tank!
    just found some actual archive film I didn't even know existed.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCEwgbWySok
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    LAB+CON+LD+SNP change =-6%

    Broken sleazy political class on the slide?
    Does anyone believe for a moment that Reform UK are going to get more votes than the Lib Dems? I mean, Ed is a bit of a disaster but seriously? It is just nonsense.
    Opinion polls are of limited value in any case, but these kinds of numbers for the moribund and deeply obscure RefUK are utterly laughable. They'll be doing well come the next GE to match the Brexit Party's 2% national share from last time.

    I'm assuming that these pollsters must be prompting for them, and that most of their supposed vote would vanish into thin air if this were not the case; besides which, are they going to have either the money or the support to stand candidates in that many seats in any event?
    I wondered how many of their alleged supporters thought that they were actually indicating their support for a Referendum party. It frankly makes no sense but if the abbreviation Ref UK was used that is possible. After all has even 1 person in 100 heard of Tice, let alone be willing to vote for his party.
    I don't know if this has been done, but it would be interesting to see how much support could be mustered in a poll for an entirely fictitious political party if it were inserted as one of the available prompted choices - especially if it were given an appealingly button-pushing name? The NHS Action Party or the Pensioners' Party could probably drum up 5% without too much difficulty.
    I think it is worth exploring because there are 7-8% points floating free here. If they really mean Reform UK I think we can assume most of these will go back to the Tories. If, however, they thought they were voting for a referendum then they almost certainly wouldn't. If Reform UK even stand in 10% of seats at the next election I will be surprised.
    They have consistently performed poorly at by-election too.
    Let's face it, by the election they may not even exist.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    Electoral calculus makes it 479-94 with no tactical effects.

    And OK, that's not going to happen (is it?).

    But the nearest comparable polls in '92-'97 were the ICM/Guardian series. Gold standard, Spiral of Silence, all that jazz.

    Their polls in 1995 were all in the range Conservative 29 +/- 3
    Labour 50 +/- 3
    Lib Dem 20 +/- 3

    We all know history doesn't repeat and Starmer isn't Blair. And there's still only a bit less than 2 years to go.

    But Conservatives need something to change the narrative. What?
    Many more Conservatives will rally round as the election approaches to close the gap.
    Yes, with Boris out and Truss booted there's a lot of people who will just amble back to the party over the next 12-18 months.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    The revamped UKPollingReport website is currently predicting the following number of seats based on the latest polls.

    Lab 369
    Con 187
    SNP 45
    LD 26
    Oth 22
    Grn 1

    https://pollingreport.uk/seats

    Rishi getting more seats than Major in 1997 and Hague in 2001 there then
    Also Labour only just projected to get more seats than the Tories in 2019 when their lead was around 12%.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,038
    edited March 2023
    Driver said: "The US electoral system is not one that I would have thought people would have advocated emulating. It takes them weeks to have an official winner."

    Just a reminder: There is no single US electoral system; there are 51 systems, one for each state, and one for DC. (And some states decentralize even further, having different rules for different size jurisdictions.)

    Some states, which vote almost entirely on machines, report very quickly. Others take longer. For example, my home state, Washington, now votes almost entirely by mail. (You can vote in person, but it takes an extra effort for most people, since there aren't many places to do it.)

    And a ballot is valid as long as it is postmarked on the day of the election, or deposited in one of the many large metal boxes set up for votes by, as I recall, 8 PM.

    So election officials here don't even have all of the ballots on election day.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,684
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Don't think it was as high as that. According to this source they had 14k troops out of 156k, so slightly under 10%. Still a very serious contribution though.
    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/juno-beach
    Plus navy, aircrew etc
    Chunky, especially given their relative population. But not 20%.
    Happy to concede on precise numbers, but point remains.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,128
    Carnyx said:

    The Metropolitan police service is riddled with deep-seated racism, sexism and homophobia and has failed to change despite numerous official reviews urging it to do so, an official report will say.

    The report from Louise Casey, which is due to be published on Tuesday, will excoriate Britain’s biggest police force, the Guardian has been told. Senior government and policing figures are aware of its contents, with one describing it as “horrible” and another as “atrocious”. One source with knowledge of the findings said the report would make clear that the Met was in the “last-chance saloon”.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/16/met-police-on-last-chance-as-casey-report-to-condemn-failure-to-change

    That's just going to trigger another round of excruciating Wokery and frenetic virtue-signalling turned up to 11.

    They're not actually going to do anything about it.
    Wokery? That's sure one way to describe not wanting to be assaulted by someone in a Met Police uniform (or just out of it).
    I think it fair to say that there will be a large amount of bullshit “training courses” by the usual suspects.

    A small number of officers will be sacked. Se for bizarrely trivial offences, while obviously guilty ones get a pay on the back.

    A feature of such organisations is that they use such events as a weapon against “problematic staff”. So a witch hunt for racists and homophobes can be used to get rid of people who do things like reporting homophobia and racism. No actual racists or homophones need be harmed.

    In the past, anti-corruption drives in police forces have been remarkably effective at finding tiny mistakes in expenses by anti-corruption campaigners within the police.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    Electoral calculus makes it 479-94 with no tactical effects.

    And OK, that's not going to happen (is it?).

    But the nearest comparable polls in '92-'97 were the ICM/Guardian series. Gold standard, Spiral of Silence, all that jazz.

    Their polls in 1995 were all in the range Conservative 29 +/- 3
    Labour 50 +/- 3
    Lib Dem 20 +/- 3

    We all know history doesn't repeat and Starmer isn't Blair. And there's still only a bit less than 2 years to go.

    But Conservatives need something to change the narrative. What?
    Many more Conservatives will rally round as the election approaches to close the gap.
    The Tories need a break. Britain needs change.
    When did the polls in 1996-7 start to narrow significantly?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    New Thread

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,457

    Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    Electoral calculus makes it 479-94 with no tactical effects.

    And OK, that's not going to happen (is it?).

    But the nearest comparable polls in '92-'97 were the ICM/Guardian series. Gold standard, Spiral of Silence, all that jazz.

    Their polls in 1995 were all in the range Conservative 29 +/- 3
    Labour 50 +/- 3
    Lib Dem 20 +/- 3

    We all know history doesn't repeat and Starmer isn't Blair. And there's still only a bit less than 2 years to go.

    But Conservatives need something to change the narrative. What?
    Many more Conservatives will rally round as the election approaches to close the gap.
    The Tories need a break. Britain needs change.
    When did the polls in 1996-7 start to narrow significantly?
    Here's the wikigraph;



    The kink in 1995 is the bounce Major got for daring his party to sack him. After that, there was a bit of a drift through late 1995 and 1996, though mostly as non-ICM converged with ICM.

    Then Labour's ratings fell some more as the campaign started. But that was more a Lab-Lib swing. Depending on which seats that happens in, that isn't necessarily to the Conservatives' advantage.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Speaking of "dominions" about the easiest way to get a rise out of a Canuck this century, is to start referring to the "Dominion of Canada''.

    Nah, to get a rise out of Canadians just call them Americans.
    Why are you so driven by getting a rise out of people?

    I can't say trolling people gives me any sense of satisfaction or positive feeling, but you really seem to enjoy it.
    I’ve never called any Canadians Americans.

    I know a lot of Canadians though.

    The other thing that boils their piss.

    Their contribution on D-Day, constantly airbrushed.
    Yep, one fifth of the landing troops, give or take.
    Why is their contribution supposed to have been airbrushed? Just wondering. (I really like Goerge Blackburn's books on being a Canadian artilleryman in the Normandy campaign and NWE. But I don't think he was on D-Day, not that it matters given the contribution they clearly made to the war.)
    Broadly D-Day is seen as a US and British affair. For sure the USA had two beaches, and dropped two airborne divisions, the Brits had two beaches and dropped one airborne division. But the Canadians had a beach to themselves, and their navy was present too off shore.
    Thanks. Juno Beach, sure. Surprising it is downplayed at all.
    My father-in-law until a few years ago had a holiday home in Courseulles-sur-Mer (Juno Beach) within a couple of hundred metres of the beach. The first time I went there I looked at an old brick wall of the next door house from the courtyard. The whole wall was covered with pock-marks which I rapidly realised must have been holes from machine-gun fire. Amazingly no one in my wife's family had never realised this until then!

    I was very disappointed when my father-in-law sold it as it is a beautiful part of the world. Some stunning scenery, plenty of history and great, economical food (local restaurant used to do a great 3 course set menu for €12). Great for cycling too.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    Electoral calculus makes it 479-94 with no tactical effects.

    And OK, that's not going to happen (is it?).

    But the nearest comparable polls in '92-'97 were the ICM/Guardian series. Gold standard, Spiral of Silence, all that jazz.

    Their polls in 1995 were all in the range Conservative 29 +/- 3
    Labour 50 +/- 3
    Lib Dem 20 +/- 3

    We all know history doesn't repeat and Starmer isn't Blair. And there's still only a bit less than 2 years to go.

    But Conservatives need something to change the narrative. What?
    Many more Conservatives will rally round as the election approaches to close the gap.
    Yes, with Boris out and Truss booted there's a lot of people who will just amble back to the party over the next 12-18 months.
    If this developing financial crisis turns nasty people are more likely to turn further against the tories.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    ohnotnow said:

    Will Guido Crosetto be the new Archduke Franz Ferdinand?

    Russian Wagner Group puts €15m bounty on Italian minister’s head

    Guido Crosetto has been critical of the Kremlin, making him a possible assassination target for the mercenary group


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/03/16/russian-wagner-group-places-15m-bounty-italian-minister-guido/

    I hope they quadruple the protection detail on Ben Wallace.

    Isn't the Wagner Group about done, morphing from an allegedly crack (also wack) elite military strike force, into a badly-led, worse-supported, below-average penal brigade?

    Even by Mad Vlad's pathetic standards! Which is why he's reportedly cut Satan's F-Troop off from recruiting more drone-fodder from Russia's most elite prisons and borshtals (sp).

    There was a short piece on R4's PM programme tonight with some Ukrainian soldiers talking about fighting the Wagner troops. Seems they are using the criminal/junky/whatever 'troops' as cannon fodder to flush out where the Ukrainian positions are - then sending the better troops in to engage in proper combat.

    It all sounded utterly horrific.
    It was on bbc news tonight. Looked horrific in the trenches with rats running through etc.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,680
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Reform surge.

    "Westminster Voting Intention:
    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-1)
    RFM: 9% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDM: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (-1)
    Via
    @Omnisis
    , 15 Mar.
    Changes w/ 8-9 Mar."

    Lab on 425 seats or so on that.
    Electoral calculus makes it 479-94 with no tactical effects.

    And OK, that's not going to happen (is it?).

    But the nearest comparable polls in '92-'97 were the ICM/Guardian series. Gold standard, Spiral of Silence, all that jazz.

    Their polls in 1995 were all in the range Conservative 29 +/- 3
    Labour 50 +/- 3
    Lib Dem 20 +/- 3

    We all know history doesn't repeat and Starmer isn't Blair. And there's still only a bit less than 2 years to go.

    But Conservatives need something to change the narrative. What?
    Many more Conservatives will rally round as the election approaches to close the gap.
    Yes, with Boris out and Truss booted there's a lot of people who will just amble back to the party over the next 12-18 months.
    There seems to be a little uptick to the Tory share over the last couple of months - maybe 0.5% a month. IF it continues for 18 months, that's 9%.


  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 718

    Do PBers realize - let alone approve - that there is no longer no such a-thing as the Dominion of New Zealand? In fact, not since circa 1946.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_of_New_Zealand

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realm_of_New_Zealand

    There has been no such thing as the Principality of Wales since 1535, but when has that stopped anyone...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    How the decline in SNP membership has played out...

    Year end 2019 — 125,691
    Year end 2020 — 105,393
    Year end 2021 — 103,884
    Year end 2022 — 82,598
    15 February 2023 — 72,186


    https://twitter.com/BBCJamesCook/status/1636411552541847553?s=20

    Coincidence that the witchunt on Salmond start late 2019, I think not. A lot of people got names of the perpetrators before they got it hushed up and papers sealed. Many will be bricking it now
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited March 2023
    Scottish Conservative council by-election gain from SNP in Dunblane and Bridge of Allan
    Conservative: 1832 (41%, +10.9)
    SNP: 1202 (26.9%, +1.1)
    Labour: 600 (13.4%, +1.6)
    Lib Dem: 399 (8.9%, -0.4)
    Green: 389 (8.7%, -7.3)
    Family: 50 (1.1%, +0.4)
    (Non-returns 6.2% in 2022)

    Con elected stage 6.

    hat tip Ballot Box Scotland
This discussion has been closed.