Dorries in the cabinet was another one of those awesome Brexit dividends.
Wouldn't have happened if your side had just accepted the result.
Don’t be that dense.
Don't be that touchy.
The argument that nothing that's happened since Brexit is the fault of either those who voted for it, or the governments that have been in power since, is a pretty dire one.
It's also not the argument that Endillion made...
Saying that a government appointment by a Brexit PM is the responsibility of those who voted for neither thing is pretty close to it.
Otherwise what exactly is Endillion's point ?
A Remain leaving MPs fought to stop Brexit (eg voting May's Deal down) B That led to Parliamentary gridlock C Which couldn't be resolved by normal means D Which meant Johnson got to be PM E And appointed a Brexiteer-dominated Cabinet (including Dorries)
If A) hadn't happened, then neither would E). Those responsible for A who thought they were being oh-so-clever also have to take responsibility for E.
That's a chain of events not of responsibility.
Indeed so. "X wouldn't have happened if Y" is a chain of events.
No, that's a thought experiment which breaks a chain of events and postulates that the one at the end would then not have occurred. It can be a fun game to play but it doesn't work to assign blame or responsibility.
Eg WW2 wouldn't have happened if Hitler had been accepted to art school in 1908. Even if this were true it wouldn't be correct to assign any responsibility to the admissions tutor at that art school for WW2.
For 'blame' you have to keep things simple and direct. Who did the bad thing - in this case putting Nadine Dorries in the cabinet - and what were their motives for doing so? Were their motives benign and therefore a mitigation?
Answers: 'Boris Johnson' ... 'to take the piss' ... 'no and no'.
In the dizzying plethora of polls, what stands out is that Labour is pretty consistent at around 45/46. It's the Tories that are all over the place.
I put this down to a) the fickleness of Tories generally, and b) the fact that it's just dawning on them that the Budget was poor. The polls with the lowest Tory share are picking up on the fact that the only immediate beneficiaries were the top 1% or so of earners with ridiculously huge pension pots. Everybody else? A bit more help with child care in a couple of years and a whole load of fiscal drag during higher inflation - that's your lot.
One other thought. There's scant evidence that the brilliant small boats policy has moved the polls in the Tories' favour a jot. Well done, British voters.
On Boris. The issue isn't whether he lied about breaking the rules. The issue is his Claude Rains statement at PMQS. He said he was shocked and angry to hear about cheese and wine parties, after the Stratton video emerged. But we now know he'd personally attended this event.
Number of people saying "this event didn't break the rules". It did break the rules. People were fined for it. It's just that for some reason Boris wasn't fined for it. But as I say, that's not the issue. The issue is Boris claimed to be shocked and angry at these sort of events.
Alastair Meeks @AlastairMeeks · 32m Pollsters seem to be in complete disarray trying to work out what's going on with the Conservatives. Labour's polling position seems to be generally agreed upon.
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
Alastair Meeks @AlastairMeeks · 32m Pollsters seem to be in complete disarray trying to work out what's going on with the Conservatives. Labour's polling position seems to be generally agreed upon.
Theory: there's one group of pollsters reporting what people say, and one group trying to work out what they really mean.
In the dizzying plethora of polls, what stands out is that Labour is pretty consistent at around 45/46. It's the Tories that are all over the place.
I put this down to a) the fickleness of Tories generally, and b) the fact that it's just dawning on them that the Budget was poor. The polls with the lowest Tory share are picking up on the fact that the only immediate beneficiaries were the top 1% or so of earners with ridiculously huge pension pots. Everybody else? A bit more help with child care in a couple of years and a whole load of fiscal drag during higher inflation - that's your lot.
One other thought. There's scant evidence that the brilliant small boats policy has moved the polls in the Tories' favour a jot. Well done, British voters.
I suspect that the difference in the polls is mostly how to the former Tories who are now DJ/WNV. How many will grudgingly return, and how many won't is the key variable.
Dorries in the cabinet was another one of those awesome Brexit dividends.
Wouldn't have happened if your side had just accepted the result.
Don’t be that dense.
Don't be that touchy.
The argument that nothing that's happened since Brexit is the fault of either those who voted for it, or the governments that have been in power since, is a pretty dire one.
It's also not the argument that Endillion made...
Saying that a government appointment by a Brexit PM is the responsibility of those who voted for neither thing is pretty close to it.
Otherwise what exactly is Endillion's point ?
A Remain leaving MPs fought to stop Brexit (eg voting May's Deal down) B That led to Parliamentary gridlock C Which couldn't be resolved by normal means D Which meant Johnson got to be PM E And appointed a Brexiteer-dominated Cabinet (including Dorries)
If A) hadn't happened, then neither would E). Those responsible for A who thought they were being oh-so-clever also have to take responsibility for E.
That's a chain of events not of responsibility.
The difference being what, exactly? If you're too stupid to see the obvious consequences of your actions, you aren't responsible? If I shoot myself playing Russian Roulette, can I avoid responsibility because it's the bullet's fault?
Both sides decided compromise was out and went for winner-takes-all. It was obvious at the time (and much commented on here) that one side was going to look like geniuses and the other was going to get a nasty shock.
Nadine Dorries in the cabinet was the obvious consequence of voting against Mrs May's Brexit deal? Now that IS what you call superforecasting! I quite rate myself on this sort of thing but you are different gravy.
Was struck by this line from the Washington Post...
"Xi’s visit shows sides being taken, with China, Russia and Iran lining up against the United States, Britain and other NATO allies..."
Whether its because or despite of Brexit, a left leaning American newspaper instinctively separates Britain as a leader apart from the rest of NATO.
Not because WaPo or most Americans see Britain as a "leader" but rather because we believe that UK is more closely aligned AND reliable ally than the rest of NATO, with possible exception of Canada.
Yet Canada wasn't called out. Neither were NATO stalwarts like the Baltics. It is because the UK is seen as more important. A junior partner to the US, for sure, but above everyone else.
What you characterize as "calling out" is really a busy journalist typing furiously to make deadline.
Personally thing you are making way too much re: this particular choice of words. But drop the "leader" bit and we pretty much concur.
We appear to be back to overanalysing meaningless midterm polls based on whether we like them or not.
Thank God for that. (Although this is a very short term complaint - less than 12 hours ago we were discussing the implosion of the western world's financial system.)
We spent five years doing that between 2010 and 2015, apart from a brief foray into tax on pasties. I remember the brief frisson of excitement at 10.30 when the Sun's yougove came out and confirmed nothing had changed since yesterday. Oh, for politics to be that boring again.
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
Actually, I've been slightly surprised at how well Rishi has done, especially with the NI Protocol deal, which seems to be the closest we're going to get the giving something to all sides.
Nothing that he has done so far would be enough to change the Tories fate at the next election... but I suspect there are quite a few out there like us who are silently and rather grudgingly impressed with Rishi, especially after trilogy of disaster that was May > Johnson > Truss.
As an expert psephologist, I can conclusively and definitively declare that one, or both, of the above are utterly wrong.
Both have Labour on 45%.
I can read, you know ...
That doesn't affect what I said. Even if Labour is on 45%, the rest of the polls' findings makes that essentially meaningless.
As an even more expert psephologist I can declare Labour won’t get as high a PV as 45% at the next election. Nobody ever does.
Boris' 42.4% was a reasonable stab at it....
May’s 42.3% and Corbyn’s 40% wasn’t far off either.
But none of remotely near the 46% Labour getting. It’s impossible for the two main parties to hit 46% in this modern era.
So all these 20%+ Labour polls and even 11% lead seen today has a gap based on something that just cannot happen, the final result will have lower labour than every single one of these polls.
I don’t think the locals will tell us anything about how GE will go, we have seen parties thrashed a year to go and go on to defend majorities.
Where one firm today says Tory’s 20 and another had them on 35, we can use this as a starting point to see how they herd as the election day gets closer. Will the eve of election polls from these two pollsters have a 15% difference in Con %?
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
I don't mind Rishi. He has the manner of an eager puppy that is hard to dislike, and Hunt is the only other competent one in a cabinet of numpties.
I won't be voting for his party though, and it is a bit like Forbes appealing outside the SNP. Popularity with voters who won't vote for you can be a bit useless.
Alternatively people polling Sunak fans please explain
WHich fans need to explain Redfield and Wilton?
(Presumably, part of wha't going on here is the big unknown being how many grumpy Conservative-inclined voters will eventually trudge back into the Conservative fold, however grumpily. If the Conservative canvas records are any good, they will be the people Conservative canvassers are talking to most, which might give an impression that quite a few voters are going that way... more than actually are.)
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
I don't mind Rishi. He has the manner of an eager puppy that is hard to dislike, and Hunt is the only other competent one in a cabinet of numpties.
I won't be voting for his party though, and it is a bit like Forbes appealing outside the SNP. Popularity with voters who won't vote for you can be a bit useless.
Or a negative drag. For example, one of the problems for Paul Vallas in next month's Chicago mayoral runoff, is his cheering section of MAGA-megaphones.
Which seeing as how he got virtually all of the Republican-conservative vote in the March municipal election, is NOT helpful in trying to win over predominately Democratic swing voters in the Windy City.
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
Harold Wilson had a rather pleasant speaking voice, didn't he?
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Politico.com - DeSantis says he won’t get involved with Trump’s potential indictment ‘in any way’ Under Florida law, the governor can intervene in an extradition matter if it is contested.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday told reporters he won’t get involved in Donald Trump’s potential extradition if the former president is indicted by the Manhattan district attorney.
In his first comments on Trump’s likely indictment, DeSantis said he only knew about “rumors” of a pending arrest of Trump related to an investigation into payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election cycle.
“I have no interest in getting involved in some type of manufactured circus...
This is clearly a different DeSantis from the one that flew migrants from Texas to dump them outside the VP's front door ?
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
Harold Wilson had a rather pleasant speaking voice, didn't he?
Yes, granted. Possibly also Callaghan. I'm actually only thinking back as far as Thatcher. My first memory of politics is the 1983 general election - specifically seeing Michael Foot's wife being knocked down by a low-hanging tree in an open top bus (?).
"It is the same story with the technology sector. Once the vaunted centre of grassroots entrepreneurialism, a lack of antitrust measures from both Republicans and Democrats has allowed technology companies to morph into quasi-monopolies. Google controls over 90 per cent of the search-engine market; Microsoft owns over 74 per cent of computer-operating-system software; Amazon has nearly half of the US online retail market share and a significant proportion of cloud computing; Google and Apple together account for 90 per cent of smartphone operating systems.
Such immense market power encourages executives not to take risks and innovate, but rather to consolidate their dominance by acquiring smaller competitors. Amazon, Meta and Google now account for two-thirds of all online-advertising revenues, which now represent the majority of all ad sales. These oligopolies also seem poised to dominate emerging technologies, from cloud services and underwater fibre-optic cables to AI."
General Boles @GeneralBoles · 12m My sources are telling me the Privileges Committee are unable to publish Johnson's evidence as he appears to have submitted 78 pages of a badly researched Shakespeare biography by mistake.....more as I get it
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
He's only 29. Possibly past his peak, but he's probably got another five years at the top level.
Anyone would think we're about to have an election with the number of polls at the moment.
Do the pollster know something we don't?
Consistent thing in all the polls, Starmer leads Sunak.
Rishi Rich or Dreary Keith! What a choice....
I must admit, I quite like Rishi. Possibly my favourite ever PM. He really isn't annoying me at all yet, apart from the mild irritation of his voice. But the only PMs not to have an annoying voice were Truss and Brown.
I don't mind Rishi. He has the manner of an eager puppy that is hard to dislike, and Hunt is the only other competent one in a cabinet of numpties.
I won't be voting for his party though, and it is a bit like Forbes appealing outside the SNP. Popularity with voters who won't vote for you can be a bit useless.
Popularity with voters who will vote for you no matter what is also not desperately useful. You need to appeal to the voters in the corridor of uncertainty.
359 seats seems a bit low for a predicted vote share of 46%.
Labour seats coming down. Carries on like this, we'll be at the point where they are getting asked "Who will you govern with?"
Indeed, I was going to look at the individual seats to see what the projected percentage majorities are like in the 34 seats that are giving Labour a majority wrt this forecast. Because most of the seats that are currently being projected to be won by Labour with a majority of less than 5% are probably not going to be won by the party on election day due to swingback.
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
Depends really, if Kane wins them the title or champions league then £100m is nothing really.
Dorries in the cabinet was another one of those awesome Brexit dividends.
Wouldn't have happened if your side had just accepted the result.
Don’t be that dense.
Don't be that touchy.
The argument that nothing that's happened since Brexit is the fault of either those who voted for it, or the governments that have been in power since, is a pretty dire one.
It's also not the argument that Endillion made...
Saying that a government appointment by a Brexit PM is the responsibility of those who voted for neither thing is pretty close to it.
Otherwise what exactly is Endillion's point ?
A Remain leaving MPs fought to stop Brexit (eg voting May's Deal down) B That led to Parliamentary gridlock C Which couldn't be resolved by normal means D Which meant Johnson got to be PM E And appointed a Brexiteer-dominated Cabinet (including Dorries)
If A) hadn't happened, then neither would E). Those responsible for A who thought they were being oh-so-clever also have to take responsibility for E.
That's a chain of events not of responsibility.
The difference being what, exactly? If you're too stupid to see the obvious consequences of your actions, you aren't responsible? If I shoot myself playing Russian Roulette, can I avoid responsibility because it's the bullet's fault?
Both sides decided compromise was out and went for winner-takes-all. It was obvious at the time (and much commented on here) that one side was going to look like geniuses and the other was going to get a nasty shock.
Nadine Dorries in the cabinet was the obvious consequence of voting against Mrs May's Brexit deal? Now that IS what you call superforecasting! I quite rate myself on this sort of thing but you are different gravy.
Voting against May's Deal meant either No Deal or No Brexit (this was very obvious at the time). Dorries in Cabinet is the sort of negative side effect that became much more likely to happen due to No Deal being put onto the table by those who wanted No Brexit.
Frankly. it was one of the least worst possible side effects of such an irresponsible course of action.
As an expert psephologist, I can conclusively and definitively declare that one, or both, of the above are utterly wrong.
Both have Labour on 45%.
I can read, you know ...
That doesn't affect what I said. Even if Labour is on 45%, the rest of the polls' findings makes that essentially meaningless.
As an even more expert psephologist I can declare Labour won’t get as high a PV as 45% at the next election. Nobody ever does.
Boris' 42.4% was a reasonable stab at it....
May’s 42.3% and Corbyn’s 40% wasn’t far off either.
But none of remotely near the 46% Labour getting. It’s impossible for the two main parties to hit 46% in this modern era.
So all these 20%+ Labour polls and even 11% lead seen today has a gap based on something that just cannot happen, the final result will have lower labour than every single one of these polls.
I don’t think the locals will tell us anything about how GE will go, we have seen parties thrashed a year to go and go on to defend majorities.
Where one firm today says Tory’s 20 and another had them on 35, we can use this as a starting point to see how they herd as the election day gets closer. Will the eve of election polls from these two pollsters have a 15% difference in Con %?
Will make the exit poll eagerly anticipated if they do!
As an expert psephologist, I can conclusively and definitively declare that one, or both, of the above are utterly wrong.
Which one is utterly wrong on the labour share?
I have to say, not that I want the Tories to win, but I would laugh heartily if a poll showed them in the lead, especially after all the shite they have had poured on them/poured on themselves.. and most especially because the left would go ballistic...
The privileges committee won’t be publishing the Bozo defence today .
The last thing they want is 48 hrs of the fat lying oafs arse licking friends in the media attempting to beatify him .
I want Johnson gone as much as anyone, but delaying the report by 24 hours will not prevent his supporters from doing everything they can to mitigate the allegations
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
Depends really, if Kane wins them the title or champions league then £100m is nothing really.
Well he will never do it for Spurs. Spurs choke...
Delta seems more plausible although Tories probably a little on the high side
Against that the budget has held up & they have done well in the latest banking crisis
I wouldn’t be massively surprised to see a 43/32 Lab/Con split at the next GE - i.e pretty much 2019 in reverse.
Interestingly electoral calculus gives that as a Lab majority of circa 86 so pretty much the same seat result but reversed, too. Clearly that could be boosted by SNPMeltdown
Politico.com - DeSantis says he won’t get involved with Trump’s potential indictment ‘in any way’ Under Florida law, the governor can intervene in an extradition matter if it is contested.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday told reporters he won’t get involved in Donald Trump’s potential extradition if the former president is indicted by the Manhattan district attorney.
In his first comments on Trump’s likely indictment, DeSantis said he only knew about “rumors” of a pending arrest of Trump related to an investigation into payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election cycle.
“I have no interest in getting involved in some type of manufactured circus...
This is clearly a different DeSantis from the one that flew migrants from Texas to dump them outside the VP's front door ?
The privileges committee won’t be publishing the Bozo defence today .
The last thing they want is 48 hrs of the fat lying oafs arse licking friends in the media attempting to beatify him .
I want Johnson gone as much as anyone, but delaying the report by 24 hours will not prevent his supporters from doing everything they can to mitigate the allegations
It received the papers mid afternoon and it will take time for officials to review it and prepare for publication. It makes total sense it would be done for tomorrow - it's another manufactured grievance where Boris will claim there was an attempt to muzzle him or some such shit.
Out of interest, how many PB Tories think the Tories will win the next GE? Of the top of my head MarqueeMark does, and I think MaxPB seems to believe they have a chance now. Dunno about HYUFD.
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Provided I can land and fly from CDG on Wednesday I don't care.
The privileges committee won’t be publishing the Bozo defence today .
The last thing they want is 48 hrs of the fat lying oafs arse licking friends in the media attempting to beatify him .
I want Johnson gone as much as anyone, but delaying the report by 24 hours will not prevent his supporters from doing everything they can to mitigate the allegations
It received the papers mid afternoon and it will take time for officials to review it and prepare for publication. It makes total sense it would be done for tomorrow - it's another manufactured grievance where Boris will claim there was an attempt to muzzle him or some such shit.
I suspect the arguments are so bad that the best argument within it is that they didn't publish it instantly....
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Was struck by this line from the Washington Post...
"Xi’s visit shows sides being taken, with China, Russia and Iran lining up against the United States, Britain and other NATO allies..."
Whether its because or despite of Brexit, a left leaning American newspaper instinctively separates Britain as a leader apart from the rest of NATO.
If you see two entities walking closely together, it's often a human and a dog. Then one has to consider who is holding the lead - the owner or the poodle. UK is dependent on the US in major areas such as Trident.
So what does that make everyone else? Little shits that are left behind?
Out of interest, how many PB Tories think the Tories will win the next GE? Of the top of my head MarqueeMark does, and I think MaxPB seems to believe they have a chance now. Dunno about HYUFD.
I'm not sure I think the Tories will win it, although I think if Labour goes somewhat lower and has to start answering questions about who they will govern with, then the exit poll may surprise on the upside for the Tories. After Brexit/Covid/Ukraine, the last thing the country will relish is a period of political turmoil under a rainbow coalition. (Caveat that if the SNP end up imploding, with people dragged to court in orange jump-suits - then some of the potency of that goes away.)
WAY Off Topic - Am looking for more up-to-date database cruncher than my rather-elderly version of Access. Preferably free to download and reasonably user friendly?
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
He is 29. Benzema 35, Lewandowski 34 have if anything improved post 30. It isn't far off a fair price for the buying club, perhaps £80-85m is a workable deal for all.
Delta seems more plausible although Tories probably a little on the high side
Against that the budget has held up & they have done well in the latest banking crisis
I wouldn’t be massively surprised to see a 43/32 Lab/Con split at the next GE - i.e pretty much 2019 in reverse.
Interestingly electoral calculus gives that as a Lab majority of circa 86 so pretty much the same seat result but reversed, too. Clearly that could be boosted by SNPMeltdown
Opinium's Swingback Anticipating poll has the score at 44-29 right now. A couple of points more movement if things are genuinely looking better by election day?
Out of interest, how many PB Tories think the Tories will win the next GE? Of the top of my head MarqueeMark does, and I think MaxPB seems to believe they have a chance now. Dunno about HYUFD.
My prediction remains 2010 in reverse, hung parliament but Labour largest party.
Obviously I hope for a Conservative majority however
Out of interest, how many PB Tories think the Tories will win the next GE? Of the top of my head MarqueeMark does, and I think MaxPB seems to believe they have a chance now. Dunno about HYUFD.
I can't see it after how far behind the Tories have fallen. They will make some of that gap up but not enough.
An apparent inflation rate over 20%. For significant parts of the country, life is becoming increasingly precarious.
Cost of living: 'I never thought I'd be sofa-surfing at 74' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-64983317 ...The letting agency has seen average rents increase from £989 per calendar month in January 2022, to £1,241 this January, yet there is no let-up in demand...
Housing: if you own outright in this country you have reached the promised land. If you have a mortgage then you keep everything crossed that you don't get laid off - or that your wages don't fall so low that you can no longer afford to service it. If you rent then, unless you're lucky enough to be in social housing with a good provider, you are up the proverbial without a paddle.
That septuagenarian who's sofa surfing is the harbinger of many millions in decades to come - have nots who couldn't afford to buy will be working til they drop to service extortionate rents, before ending up in hostels or sleeping rough in their 70s and 80s. A wholly avoidable humanitarian crisis, deliberately generated by Government policy.
If that does happen then there will be (eventually) a left-wing government that turns property rights on its head and probably drives capital flight out of the country and a broader economic collapse.
The next government must must must do something about the affordability of property.
Most Conservative councils in the Home counties have produced Local Plans allowing for thousands more new houses to be developed.
The main opposition to new housing comes from Residents' Associations, Independents and the Liberal Democrats not the Conservatives. See Chesham and Amersham and this ultra Nimby LD councillor
Stepping past the cherrypicking of an individual councillor (because you can find examples in every party), let's take a look.
First, the entire "Conservative councils... have produced Local Plans allowing for thousands more new houses to be developed." Well, yes. The housing targets issued aren't up to the councils; they're imposed. And if you don't make a Local Plan to meet them, then it's open season for development, anyway. We've got one here, in the terribly NIMBY Vale of White Horse DC.
So let's compare figures. I've been to the ONS for numbers of dwellings over time. They've got 2012 to 2021. Over that time, the number of dwellings in England has gone from 23,109,561 to 24,871,916, an increase o 7.6%
In that time, Epping Forest has gone from 54,700 to 57,186 dwellings, an increase of 4.5%. Whilst Vale of White Horse has gone from 51,396 to 61,088, an increase of 18.9%. We've gone from quite a bit behind to quite a bit ahead.
In fact, out of 307 Local Authorities in England in the ONS table, we're third best in terms of housing completions over that time. (Number 1 is a bit skewed stats-wise, because City of London has so few dwellings anyway, but they went from 5,531 to 7,305. Number 2 is Tower Hamlets, which beat us by 0.7%)
We also have over 6 years land supply in hand, having issued approvals for more than 5,000 more to be built.
Such NIMBYs we are.
Albeit after Gove's recent statements, central government is largely shifting housing targets back to local councils anyway.
Conservative controlled Epping Forest has just approved an extra 11,000 new homes in the district under its Local Plan despite the local Liberal Democrats combining with some Independents and voting against the new homes
Serious Trump question - what exactly is he being indicted for tommorrow? I know it is to do with Stormy Daniels - but what exactly is illegal???
Buying off a witness. In this country it would be conspiring to obstruct the course of justice.
Ok - thanks. I was wondering. I am sure he will wriggle off on some expensive legal technicality, as he will on the election fraud and insurrection. My money is on the New York tax fraud.
Dorries in the cabinet was another one of those awesome Brexit dividends.
Wouldn't have happened if your side had just accepted the result.
Don’t be that dense.
Don't be that touchy.
The argument that nothing that's happened since Brexit is the fault of either those who voted for it, or the governments that have been in power since, is a pretty dire one.
It's also not the argument that Endillion made...
Saying that a government appointment by a Brexit PM is the responsibility of those who voted for neither thing is pretty close to it.
Otherwise what exactly is Endillion's point ?
A Remain leaving MPs fought to stop Brexit (eg voting May's Deal down) B That led to Parliamentary gridlock C Which couldn't be resolved by normal means D Which meant Johnson got to be PM E And appointed a Brexiteer-dominated Cabinet (including Dorries)
If A) hadn't happened, then neither would E). Those responsible for A who thought they were being oh-so-clever also have to take responsibility for E.
That's a chain of events not of responsibility.
The difference being what, exactly? If you're too stupid to see the obvious consequences of your actions, you aren't responsible? If I shoot myself playing Russian Roulette, can I avoid responsibility because it's the bullet's fault?
Both sides decided compromise was out and went for winner-takes-all. It was obvious at the time (and much commented on here) that one side was going to look like geniuses and the other was going to get a nasty shock.
Nadine Dorries in the cabinet was the obvious consequence of voting against Mrs May's Brexit deal? Now that IS what you call superforecasting! I quite rate myself on this sort of thing but you are different gravy.
Voting against May's Deal meant either No Deal or No Brexit (this was very obvious at the time). Dorries in Cabinet is the sort of negative side effect that became much more likely to happen due to No Deal being put onto the table by those who wanted No Brexit.
Frankly. it was one of the least worst possible side effects of such an irresponsible course of action.
Parliament should have passed May's deal. We can agree on that. I said so at the time.
As an expert psephologist, I can conclusively and definitively declare that one, or both, of the above are utterly wrong.
Which one is utterly wrong on the labour share?
You (and others) apparently believe in RNJesus...
If the other figures - particularly for a major party - are so out of sync, then it throws the results for one or the other (or both) results out. IMO.
If you're saying that one vote share (Lab, in this case) is correct, then you're saying all the other vote shares are incorrect enough to exactly match the 'true' value. And that's... unlikely?
As it happens, I'd argue the PeoplePolling result is more likely to be nearer the truth.
Serious Trump question - what exactly is he being indicted for tommorrow? I know it is to do with Stormy Daniels - but what exactly is illegal???
Buying off a witness. In this country it would be conspiring to obstruct the course of justice.
Ok - thanks. I was wondering. I am sure he will wriggle off on some expensive legal technicality, as he will on the election fraud and insurrection. My money is on the New York tax fraud.
It is for buying off a witness but my analogy with conspiracy to obstruct was way off. Sorry.
Out of interest, how many PB Tories think the Tories will win the next GE? Of the top of my head MarqueeMark does, and I think MaxPB seems to believe they have a chance now. Dunno about HYUFD.
I can't see it after how far behind the Tories have fallen. They will make some of that gap up but not enough.
Small Labour majority if what I'm expecting.
Is that including or not including Labour picking up seats in Scotland? I don't think Labour will win a landslide, but I do think the SNP implosion will give them enough seats in Scotland to get them over the line.
An apparent inflation rate over 20%. For significant parts of the country, life is becoming increasingly precarious.
Cost of living: 'I never thought I'd be sofa-surfing at 74' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-64983317 ...The letting agency has seen average rents increase from £989 per calendar month in January 2022, to £1,241 this January, yet there is no let-up in demand...
Housing: if you own outright in this country you have reached the promised land. If you have a mortgage then you keep everything crossed that you don't get laid off - or that your wages don't fall so low that you can no longer afford to service it. If you rent then, unless you're lucky enough to be in social housing with a good provider, you are up the proverbial without a paddle.
That septuagenarian who's sofa surfing is the harbinger of many millions in decades to come - have nots who couldn't afford to buy will be working til they drop to service extortionate rents, before ending up in hostels or sleeping rough in their 70s and 80s. A wholly avoidable humanitarian crisis, deliberately generated by Government policy.
If that does happen then there will be (eventually) a left-wing government that turns property rights on its head and probably drives capital flight out of the country and a broader economic collapse.
The next government must must must do something about the affordability of property.
Most Conservative councils in the Home counties have produced Local Plans allowing for thousands more new houses to be developed.
The main opposition to new housing comes from Residents' Associations, Independents and the Liberal Democrats not the Conservatives. See Chesham and Amersham and this ultra Nimby LD councillor
Stepping past the cherrypicking of an individual councillor (because you can find examples in every party), let's take a look.
First, the entire "Conservative councils... have produced Local Plans allowing for thousands more new houses to be developed." Well, yes. The housing targets issued aren't up to the councils; they're imposed. And if you don't make a Local Plan to meet them, then it's open season for development, anyway. We've got one here, in the terribly NIMBY Vale of White Horse DC.
So let's compare figures. I've been to the ONS for numbers of dwellings over time. They've got 2012 to 2021. Over that time, the number of dwellings in England has gone from 23,109,561 to 24,871,916, an increase o 7.6%
In that time, Epping Forest has gone from 54,700 to 57,186 dwellings, an increase of 4.5%. Whilst Vale of White Horse has gone from 51,396 to 61,088, an increase of 18.9%. We've gone from quite a bit behind to quite a bit ahead.
In fact, out of 307 Local Authorities in England in the ONS table, we're third best in terms of housing completions over that time. (Number 1 is a bit skewed stats-wise, because City of London has so few dwellings anyway, but they went from 5,531 to 7,305. Number 2 is Tower Hamlets, which beat us by 0.7%)
We also have over 6 years land supply in hand, having issued approvals for more than 5,000 more to be built.
Such NIMBYs we are.
Albeit after Gove's recent statements, central government is largely shifting housing targets back to local councils anyway.
Conservative controlled Epping Forest has just approved an extra 11,000 new homes in the district under its Local Plan despite the local Liberal Democrats combining with some Independents and voting against the new homes
Isn't a better way to read the data that ruling groups on planning authorities pass local plans (however reluctantly) and opposition groups (whatever colour) go NIMBY because there are votes in it?
Strangest thing I have seen today. They drive amongst us.
Recalling her "traumatic experience", Jeena Panesar said she lost control of her car in thick fog on a country road, in Swadlincote, Derbyshire, in January.
The 19-year-old said the car skidded, hit a tree and flipped for 50m (164ft), coming to a stop on its roof.
She said doctors told her the claw clip contributed to her serious head injury.
The second-year forensic psychology student, at the University of Derby, said she was returning home from a secondary school placement at about 15:00 GMT on 24 January when the crash happened.
Student has now launched safety advice. "Don't wear hairclips whilst driving"
Nothing about don't drive your car in such a way that you lose control of it, drive into a tree and roll it for 50m like Bond in Casino Royale. Such is the future of forensic psychology. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-64966149
As an expert psephologist, I can conclusively and definitively declare that one, or both, of the above are utterly wrong.
Which one is utterly wrong on the labour share?
I have to say, not that I want the Tories to win, but I would laugh heartily if a poll showed them in the lead, especially after all the shite they have had poured on them/poured on themselves.. and most especially because the left would go ballistic...
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Macron needs to win this.
I have to say having had the situation explained to me by my wife this afternoon I'm more sympathetic to the strikers than I was before. What Macron is doing is raising the retirement age and minimum worked years. Before the changes a person needed 42 years of work to qualify for a full state pension and the earliest they could do so was at the age of 62. France doesn't have a significant private pension system so extending the number of years to qualify to 43 and raising the age by 2 years means that a person will now probably work an extra year but still qualify for the same amount of state pension. The actual retirement age in France is 67 like it is here and people have got until they reach 67 to make 42 (now 43) years worth of work year contributions.
I think the age probably does need to rise but the facts aren't as clear cut as they initially seemed, most French people retire at 67 just as most British people do.
Interesting thread on Bakhmut. More questions than predictions.
Thread on Bakhmut. Before talking about the tactical situation, it is important to put it in the strategic context. Ukraine conducted successful offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson after heavy Russian military attrition during the Battle of the Donbas left its lines vulnerable. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1637880591898095618
Strangest thing I have seen today. They drive amongst us.
Recalling her "traumatic experience", Jeena Panesar said she lost control of her car in thick fog on a country road, in Swadlincote, Derbyshire, in January.
The 19-year-old said the car skidded, hit a tree and flipped for 50m (164ft), coming to a stop on its roof.
She said doctors told her the claw clip contributed to her serious head injury.
The second-year forensic psychology student, at the University of Derby, said she was returning home from a secondary school placement at about 15:00 GMT on 24 January when the crash happened.
Student has now launched safety advice. "Don't wear hairclips whilst driving"
Nothing about don't drive your car in such a way that you lose control of it, drive into a tree and roll it for 50m like Bond in Casino Royale. Such is the future of forensic psychology. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-64966149
Hey, I went to the UoD for a time, and I've never worn a hair clip! Although I could wear one on my chest hair (#tmi).
A tip that might be more useful: don't wear high heels whilst driving. I don't know this from experience, obvs,
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Macron’s government has survived the first of two confidence votes - 278 voted no confidence and 287 votes were needed to pass. The second motion currently being voted on but not likely to be any change.
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Macron needs to win this.
I think the opposite
Why?
Is people living longer a good thing? If it is a good thing, how can the pension system cope with greater numbers of people living long past the pension age? If it is a bad thing, the answer is obvious. And bad...
Macron's government survives a no confidence vote over his pension reforms. 278 voted in favour, just short of the 287 needed, with Macron saved by the centre right Les Republicains voting with his En Marche party to defeat the Melenchon leftist block, the Greens and Le Pen's far right block who had combined to support the no confidence vote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65014336
Interesting thread on Bakhmut. More questions than predictions.
Thread on Bakhmut. Before talking about the tactical situation, it is important to put it in the strategic context. Ukraine conducted successful offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson after heavy Russian military attrition during the Battle of the Donbas left its lines vulnerable. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1637880591898095618
IMO there's one great question in this war atm: which side has most reserves at the moment for a push? If one side or the other has a much greater number of reserves, there's going to be an autumn-2022 style movement. If not, then we are looking at more-or-less stalemate for the foreseeable. And I have no idea which side has the most reserves in equipment and men.
The data tables are as always informative. The 2019 Conservative vote splits 57% Conservative, 16% Labour, 15% Don't Know and 8% Reform. The 2019 Conservative Don't Knows account for 43% of all the DKs.
With the DKs removed, the overall Labour lead is 21 but among men it's 16 and among women 26. Among those aged 65 and over, a 47 point Conservative lead has been wiped out so a 23.5% swing among older voters.
The England only VI is Labour 49%, Conservative 27%, Liberal Democrat 12%, Green 6%, Reform 5%. From 2019, that's a swing of 17.5% from Conservative to Labour and a 10% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.
The 238th most marginal Conservative set falls on these numbers suggesting a Conservative Parliamentary party post-election of around 130 MPs.
Do Manchester United really need Harry Kane when they have Wout Weghorst?
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
Why on earth would you pay £100m for a player that is approaching the end of their career. Whatever you pay in a transfer fee is going to be a cost you will never recover.
He is 29. Benzema 35, Lewandowski 34 have if anything improved post 30. It isn't far off a fair price for the buying club, perhaps £80-85m is a workable deal for all.
Also not a player who relies on pace, so should stay at the top longer. For instance, Michael Owen’s significant knee injury destroyed his greatest asset.
It is not actually that surprising, I suspect many of RefUK's current supporters voted for Hague in 2001 while Rishi is still holding on to a few voters who voted for Blair or LD in 2001
Strangest thing I have seen today. They drive amongst us.
Recalling her "traumatic experience", Jeena Panesar said she lost control of her car in thick fog on a country road, in Swadlincote, Derbyshire, in January.
The 19-year-old said the car skidded, hit a tree and flipped for 50m (164ft), coming to a stop on its roof.
She said doctors told her the claw clip contributed to her serious head injury.
The second-year forensic psychology student, at the University of Derby, said she was returning home from a secondary school placement at about 15:00 GMT on 24 January when the crash happened.
Student has now launched safety advice. "Don't wear hairclips whilst driving"
Nothing about don't drive your car in such a way that you lose control of it, drive into a tree and roll it for 50m like Bond in Casino Royale. Such is the future of forensic psychology. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-64966149
Hey, I went to the UoD for a time, and I've never worn a hair clip! Although I could wear one on my chest hair (#tmi).
A tip that might be more useful: don't wear high heels whilst driving. I don't know this from experience, obvs,
Reading local coverage, another tip might be: don't drive down country roads at 50mph when it's foggy.
The data tables are as always informative. The 2019 Conservative vote splits 57% Conservative, 16% Labour, 15% Don't Know and 8% Reform. The 2019 Conservative Don't Knows account for 43% of all the DKs.
With the DKs removed, the overall Labour lead is 21 but among men it's 16 and among women 26. Among those aged 65 and over, a 47 point Conservative lead has been wiped out so a 23.5% swing among older voters.
The England only VI is Labour 49%, Conservative 27%, Liberal Democrat 12%, Green 6%, Reform 5%. From 2019, that's a swing of 17.5% from Conservative to Labour and a 10% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.
The 238th most marginal Conservative set falls on these numbers suggesting a Conservative Parliamentary party post-election of around 130 MPs.
Comments
https://mobile.twitter.com/friedout_kombie/status/1637619351611400192/photo/1
Eg WW2 wouldn't have happened if Hitler had been accepted to art school in 1908. Even if this were true it wouldn't be correct to assign any responsibility to the admissions tutor at that art school for WW2.
For 'blame' you have to keep things simple and direct. Who did the bad thing - in this case putting Nadine Dorries in the cabinet - and what were their motives for doing so? Were their motives benign and therefore a mitigation?
Answers: 'Boris Johnson' ... 'to take the piss' ... 'no and no'.
I put this down to a) the fickleness of Tories generally, and b) the fact that it's just dawning on them that the Budget was poor. The polls with the lowest Tory share are picking up on the fact that the only immediate beneficiaries were the top 1% or so of earners with ridiculously huge pension pots. Everybody else? A bit more help with child care in a couple of years and a whole load of fiscal drag during higher inflation - that's your lot.
One other thought. There's scant evidence that the brilliant small boats policy has moved the polls in the Tories' favour a jot. Well done, British voters.
The Tories should replace Sunak with a lawyer.
Step forward Suella Braverman.
Not long to go to the Locals to get some real votes counted.
SKS fans please explain
LAB: 45% (-5)
CON: 35% (+8)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
via @DeltapollUK
Alternatively people polling Sunak fans please explain
https://youtu.be/ROxvT8KKdFw
@AlastairMeeks
·
32m
Pollsters seem to be in complete disarray trying to work out what's going on with the Conservatives. Labour's polling position seems to be generally agreed upon.
Personally thing you are making way too much re: this particular choice of words. But drop the "leader" bit and we pretty much concur.
(Although this is a very short term complaint - less than 12 hours ago we were discussing the implosion of the western world's financial system.)
We spent five years doing that between 2010 and 2015, apart from a brief foray into tax on pasties. I remember the brief frisson of excitement at 10.30 when the Sun's yougove came out and confirmed nothing had changed since yesterday. Oh, for politics to be that boring again.
Nothing that he has done so far would be enough to change the Tories fate at the next election... but I suspect there are quite a few out there like us who are silently and rather grudgingly impressed with Rishi, especially after trilogy of disaster that was May > Johnson > Truss.
So all these 20%+ Labour polls and even 11% lead seen today has a gap based on something that just cannot happen, the final result will have lower labour than every single one of these polls.
I don’t think the locals will tell us anything about how GE will go, we have seen parties thrashed a year to go and go on to defend majorities.
Where one firm today says Tory’s 20 and another had them on 35, we can use this as a starting point to see how they herd as the election day gets closer. Will the eve of election polls from these two pollsters have a 15% difference in Con %?
I won't be voting for his party though, and it is a bit like Forbes appealing outside the SNP. Popularity with voters who won't vote for you can be a bit useless.
https://twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1635749256869957675?t=vOZnlBGLNygMTfEfVjnNPA&s=19
(Presumably, part of wha't going on here is the big unknown being how many grumpy Conservative-inclined voters will eventually trudge back into the Conservative fold, however grumpily. If the Conservative canvas records are any good, they will be the people Conservative canvassers are talking to most, which might give an impression that quite a few voters are going that way... more than actually are.)
Which seeing as how he got virtually all of the Republican-conservative vote in the March municipal election, is NOT helpful in trying to win over predominately Democratic swing voters in the Windy City.
Tottenham Hotspur would want £100 million in one up-front payment to consider selling Harry Kane this summer.
The England captain will enter the final year of his contract at the end of this season and Tottenham will demand such a large fee to deter Manchester United, who have placed Kane, 29, on a shortlist of striker targets. Clubs usually pay transfer fees in instalments to preserve their budget.
Tottenham do not want to sell the forward to a domestic rival and rejected an offer from Manchester City in 2021 worth a guaranteed £75 million, rising to £100 million, when Kane still had three years on his deal.
United believe it will take a bid of £100 million to open talks but Spurs, who say they have never put a price tag on Kane, know United will not want to be involved in lengthy and complicated negotiations because it could hinder their plans to reshape the attack for next season. United also have bad memories of dealing with Tottenham when they signed Dimitar Berbatov in 2008, which contributed to them not pursuing a move for the former Spurs centre back Toby Alderweireld in 2018.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/harry-kane-transfer-tottenham-hotspur-fnkbrp8bg
I don't know how to break it to you but most lawyers are not similar to you and SKS..
I'm actually only thinking back as far as Thatcher.
My first memory of politics is the 1983 general election - specifically seeing Michael Foot's wife being knocked down by a low-hanging tree in an open top bus (?).
Such immense market power encourages executives not to take risks and innovate, but rather to consolidate their dominance by acquiring smaller competitors. Amazon, Meta and Google now account for two-thirds of all online-advertising revenues, which now represent the majority of all ad sales. These oligopolies also seem poised to dominate emerging technologies, from cloud services and underwater fibre-optic cables to AI."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/03/16/the-rich-are-eating-themselves/
@GeneralBoles
·
12m
My sources are telling me the Privileges Committee are unable to publish Johnson's evidence as he appears to have submitted 78 pages of a badly researched Shakespeare biography by mistake.....more as I get it
You need to appeal to the voters in the corridor of uncertainty.
Against that the budget has held up & they have done well in the latest banking crisis
Means he gets his pension reforms through. But remains to be seen how bad the protests will get.
Frankly. it was one of the least worst possible side effects of such an irresponsible course of action.
The last thing they want is 48 hrs of the fat lying oafs arse licking friends in the media attempting to beatify him .
Interestingly electoral calculus gives that as a Lab majority of circa 86 so pretty much the same seat result but reversed, too. Clearly that could be boosted by SNPMeltdown
Dunno about HYUFD.
Any suggestions?
Obviously I hope for a Conservative majority however
Small Labour majority if what I'm expecting.
Conservative controlled Epping Forest has just approved an extra 11,000 new homes in the district under its Local Plan despite the local Liberal Democrats combining with some Independents and voting against the new homes
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/19/us/politics/trump-investigations.html
And are we certain he’ll be inducted tomorrow ?
That would require taking something Tump says as true.
If the other figures - particularly for a major party - are so out of sync, then it throws the results for one or the other (or both) results out. IMO.
If you're saying that one vote share (Lab, in this case) is correct, then you're saying all the other vote shares are incorrect enough to exactly match the 'true' value. And that's... unlikely?
As it happens, I'd argue the PeoplePolling result is more likely to be nearer the truth.
Strangest thing I have seen today. They drive amongst us.
Recalling her "traumatic experience", Jeena Panesar said she lost control of her car in thick fog on a country road, in Swadlincote, Derbyshire, in January.
The 19-year-old said the car skidded, hit a tree and flipped for 50m (164ft), coming to a stop on its roof.
She said doctors told her the claw clip contributed to her serious head injury.
The second-year forensic psychology student, at the University of Derby, said she was returning home from a secondary school placement at about 15:00 GMT on 24 January when the crash happened.
Student has now launched safety advice. "Don't wear hairclips whilst driving"
Nothing about don't drive your car in such a way that you lose control of it, drive into a tree and roll it for 50m like Bond in Casino Royale. Such is the future of forensic psychology.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-64966149
I think the age probably does need to rise but the facts aren't as clear cut as they initially seemed, most French people retire at 67 just as most British people do.
Thread on Bakhmut. Before talking about the tactical situation, it is important to put it in the strategic context. Ukraine conducted successful offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson after heavy Russian military attrition during the Battle of the Donbas left its lines vulnerable.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1637880591898095618
A tip that might be more useful: don't wear high heels whilst driving. I don't know this from experience, obvs,
Is people living longer a good thing? If it is a good thing, how can the pension system cope with greater numbers of people living long past the pension age? If it is a bad thing, the answer is obvious. And bad...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65014336
However the world is full of NDAs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/65012754
https://twitter.com/NewVoiceUkraine/status/1637857171340656640
(Apologies to @Anabobazina and @TOPPING).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpGcEf2yCok
After the curiosities that are People Polling and Deltapoll, Redfield & Wilton shows more stability with a 47-26 Labour lead.
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-19-march-2023/
The data tables are as always informative. The 2019 Conservative vote splits 57% Conservative, 16% Labour, 15% Don't Know and 8% Reform. The 2019 Conservative Don't Knows account for 43% of all the DKs.
With the DKs removed, the overall Labour lead is 21 but among men it's 16 and among women 26. Among those aged 65 and over, a 47 point Conservative lead has been wiped out so a 23.5% swing among older voters.
The England only VI is Labour 49%, Conservative 27%, Liberal Democrat 12%, Green 6%, Reform 5%. From 2019, that's a swing of 17.5% from Conservative to Labour and a 10% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.
The 238th most marginal Conservative set falls on these numbers suggesting a Conservative Parliamentary party post-election of around 130 MPs.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/20/ann-widdecombe-joins-reform-uk-party-aims-obliterate-tories/
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1637790845708500996
https://www.ukip.org/crusty-wieners
Swingback, baby, swingback.