Categories
David Davis slams the voter ID requirement – politicalbetting.com
David Davis slams the voter ID requirement – politicalbetting.com
Former senior Tory and leadership contender, David Davis has become the latest to slam the new voting arrangements that come into effect at the May 4th local elections. Then all those turning up at the polling station to vote will be required to show an apporoved voter ID document.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
DON'T KNOWS - BEST PM:
Sunak 21
Starmer 8
(Rest not sure or refused)
Undecideds also almost four times more likely to trust Con/Sunak than Lab/Starmer to handle economy.
CON VOTERS - BEST PM:
Sunak 82
Starmer 3
LAB VOTERS - BEST PM:
Starmer 69
Sunak 3
So Sunak also outperforming Starmer amongst own party supporters.
It can only be viewed as "daft" in so far as it is so blatant that it gives the whole game away, and makes inevitable now that an incoming Lab or Lab-Lib government will have to prioritise a bill to change electoral law in its first term.
Q: Will economy improve or get worse over the next 12 months?
After Autumn Statement:
Improve 7
Get worse 68
Now:
Improve 17
Get worse 52
So IF in 12 months time people feel the economy has improved then lots of people are going to be surprised on the upside - which may (or may not!) feed into voting intention.
So it's not blatant at all.
The really interesting question is how much better they'd be doing if Truss had never been elected, and he'd won the original contest.
"Senior Tory strategists say that their own internal polling shows the same — that among undecided voters and what they describe as “soft” Labour supporters, Sunak significantly out-polls Starmer on who would make the best prime minister.
They put the percentage of the electorate which is up for grabs at between 30 and 40 per cent. They hope that, as the general election gets closer, this group will ultimately end up backing the Tories because of Sunak."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/undecided-millions-lean-towards-rishi-sunak-poll-suggests-wks2mdbc3
"This is backed up by — admittedly anecdotal — evidence from MPs, ministers and shadow ministers who have used the Easter recess to fan out across the country, campaigning before the elections next month. They say that from talking to people on the doorstep Labour’s current 18 point poll lead is an overestimation of the party’s true support and that much of that apparent endorsement is “soft”.
One shadow minister said: “The polls simply aren’t a reflection of what I’m seeing on the ground when I go out canvassing. There is simply no way that we are twenty points ahead — ten or twelve at the most.”
We are heading to a hung parliament.
“It is a very consistent message we hear that people don’t see Starmer as a viable change candidate. They don’t see him as a proper leader but as someone who moans from the sidelines.”
I have a very strong and personal interest in cockblocking Labour.
Starmer did that.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f8b032ce-dae5-11ed-80bc-e358583c5d62?shareToken=e703831682b24d733d9499e72d43fb3b
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f1adc8b8-db00-11ed-89ad-19e3cfc05db4?shareToken=f74e6e7ba8be6b4a1d7d07f668350adf
Surely Starmer didn't stay in one ..
The whole legislation is a blatant attempt at vote-rigging, anyone with any sense or honesty knows this.
There has been no attempt to show that personation in polling stations is a problem. Followed by no attempt to make reforms with cross-party support. Followed by rejection by the tories of sensible amendments. It all sets a terrible precedent.
Looking at this from the perspective of the Labour party it is an enormous achievement. It looked totally impossible when he took over, the party seemed to be on the cusp of extinction.
Looking at the Labour party, no one in it stands out as a viable 'change' candidate. They would need to reconcile the needs of two contradictory groups; the metropolitian social justice warriors and the red wall. How do you do that? The mind boggles. Starmer manages to do it.
It may well be that his fate is to be a 'Kinnock' figure, but history doesn't repeat itself exactly. I'd guess that it could well be a hung parliament, but that would still be a historic achievement for the Labour party, given its starting point in 2019.
More technocratic management of decline from Sunak, whilst his mates extract what little value is left from the public purse to feather their nest. All our big problems remain unsolved.
The corruption and the incompetence of the Johnson Truss years goes completely unpunished, so the Tory right begin to dream again of mad schemes. As Sunak stumbles mid term, they’re ready again to grab the reigns and unleash their craziness.
Meanwhile, the bruised opposition swings back to the unelectable and the fresh air of democratic renewal is further away than ever.
Somehow, the Tories have to lose.
Or for Brexit.
Starmer has a window of opportunity to seal the deal with the electorate and it begins to look like he fluffed it.
Perhaps this is another of those areas where we just don’t understand America and @Nigelb is right that this will play very well back home.
...
the decision was made by the King on advice from the Government
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/14/coronets-robes-peers-aristocracy-banned-king-coronation/ (£££)
The plight of dukes unable to wear the coronation robes their families have stored for generations and not worn since 1953 might not make the next Labour campaign poster but does call into question what the coronation is for, if not for OTT pageantry. After all, Charles is already King.
And they have engineered the electoral system so a win is more likely.
If the Tories lose 50 seats, they are out. Kinnock gained 42 in 1992, so Starmer only needs to do slightly better to be in Number 10.
So even in the unlikely event that we can’t, the point would be moot.
The problem for the Tories is that lots of their voters have moved into the undecided column, and some have moved straight to Labour, while Labour voters, by and large, still support Labour. So, of course, these Undecideds will still have a somewhat positive view of Sunak: that’s why they’re in this category.
I wonder how many peers had new ones made or the old ones refurbished in the last few months?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronation-robes-banned-king-charles-29716823
'Viscount Torrington, joint chairman of the Hereditary Peerage Association, who has not been invited to the Coronation, said: “It’’s a great shame. Ironically the coronation robes are in a way less gaudy than the parliamentary robes, and I thought the idea was to make the ceremony less gaudy, so coronation robes might have been better.”'
BUT
"Some crimson robes will allowed to be donned by sitting members of the House of Lords, but these are parliamentary cloaks, traditionally worn at the State opening of Parliament every year.
Less lavish than coronation robes, they do not include coronets, swords, court shoes, breeches or an under-jacket."
Surely they have learned from the last time they opened Pandora’s box and sent us down this path.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6d420fde-dafc-11ed-89ad-19e3cfc05db4?shareToken=6b63a73eff8694bb7fe3fa4dca42637e
Reading the whole thing, there doesn't seem to be a complete reported VI. They mention 16% Don't Know, 18% Conservative, but there's no Labour figure. It does read a bit like trying to build bricks of a story out of a smallish amount of straw.
And for all the gap has closed, the big picture is still not that favourable for the blue team;
As a former Tory minister pointed out, Johnson’s landslide win was not based on a huge surge of new Conservative voters from the 2017 election but of Labour voters staying at home or switching their
support towards the Liberal Democrats...
“All Labour need to do is get their 2017 support to turn up and vote and we’ll be back to a hung parliament,” the former minister said. “It is not enough for us to hold on to our 2019 vote — we need former Labour voters who didn’t like Corbyn not to vote for Starmer.”
And a question for Conservatives looking forward to a Hung Parliament. It may give you emotional pleasure stopping a Labour majority. But do you really think a Lib-Lab arrangement, let alone a Lib-Lab-SNP one, will govern in a way that's more agreeable to you?
Really?
So find your next Blair, instead of fobbing us off with left wing loons or untrusted mealy-mouthed options who would impose the same old tired and broken offering for the economy.
And I've made plenty of criticisms of my own party policy over the years. To the extent I have criticised its usually because they've overspent on the wrong things and underspent on the right things, whilst not being creative enough in both lowering and broadening the tax base.
On topic, David Davis is a mad narcissist but like the blind squirrel, he does occasionally find a nut. I’m amused by the folk here who don’t see any sort of self-interest by the Tories in implementing voter ID. Johnson installed a culture of government-through-optics, aimed only at winning (ideally to ransack the state for personal gain). That culture, as we see with the small boats posturing, remains to a degree.
Heck, it didn’t even stop the tuition fees debacle, which should have been an absolute red line in *any* negotiations.
How does stopping people rent out their second homes as a holiday let help anyone in this situation? Surely it would work against the interests of tourism (which is 'vital to keep the community going') and the economy as a whole.
I once bought a property in a village (in another country) and rented it out as a holiday home, the first one in the village to do this. The house cost next to nothing because the main factory had closed down and would not reopen despite multiple attempts and houses were falling down, being abandoned, and the place wasn't being maintained by the authorities, it had a wild west / end of the world feel to it.
The hostility I got from some people in the village was immense because the only fate that they would accept is for the government to pour vast amounts of money in to the village to enable the factory to reopen so the 'old days could be recreated'. I had police investigations etc trying to close me down.
10 years later half the village was rented out as holiday homes, the place had smartened up and being maintained, the pub had reopened along with several new cafe's and businesses in the town, and property prices had quadrupled, benefitting the local people and saving many of them from financial ruin.
In all this time, and despite a favourable regulatory / tax regime and rising demand; I never made any money from the holiday rentals business, it only just about broke even. Even looking back through the accounts, there was no point in doing this, it caused massive stress at times dealing with impossible customers thousands of miles away.
And then, of course, the Cons only went and installed their own dull technocrat to run the country.
Interesting to see that Rishi is pushing the "the economy is back" line. So if and when this message takes hold, the strikes are settled, inflation moderates, then it is likely that people will want a leader with bit of charisma. Not too much, we know that way madness lies, but a bit.
Starmer has none.
Mr. JohnL, aye. If robes aren't worn for the coronation one might ask what the point of them is.
Mr. Jonathan, somehow, with consistent high double digit leads, Labour must win the next election? I think the spectre of 1992 might be a little overblown.
As I have reported back from the doorsteps, there is no love for Labour/Starmer out there. There has been a lot of WTAF???? about the Tories under Boris, then Truss. People are still wary of this RIshi Sunak government, but far less so than they were 6 months ago. Once inflation and then interest rates decline, once the strikes end, once the cost of living and energy prices stop delivering horrible shocks to domestic budgets, there will be a palpable sense of relief.
And Rishi will benefit.
And Labour concern for their prospects will mean some of them propose frankly daft options.
It does seem sereal that in the course of a few weeks we have moved from an extinction election for the conserovatives to even Sunak beating all odds and holding off labour
I would suggest it is labour's to lose, but my regret is the party failed to listen to Sunak's warning about Truss which proved prescient
Of course it would be a political disaster for labour supporters, but personally I would be content to see a Sunak led government post GE24
It won't need too many of us to keep the Cons in power or a Lab OM at bay.
As you were.
If that is the case, does Sunak resign as Tory leader or stay on? Will he be able to? Has the Truss/Johnson tendency in the Conservative party been beaten or is it just biding its time?
I do love it when the nobs get pissy. The mask slips.
And I say that as someone who was very suspicious of the Conservatives.
And good morning, everybody. I came on here today expecting to see loads of tips for the Grand National.
Jess Phillips, meanwhile, would rip the premiership away from Rishi and give us all a great ride while she did so. No idea of her politics, that said.
https://twitter.com/michaellcrick/status/1646980975342272513?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
Can we say the same of Sunak post 2024 ?
Examination of 5th and 6th century skeletons:
> bonal growths suggesting incessant squatting to do grinding and hard manual labour in the fields
> poor bone density, suggesting malnourishment
> severe and agonising tooth decay due to hard grit and grain in poorly ground and baked bread, the mainstay of their diet
> evidence of chronic parasite infections
> arthritis and other joint diseases endemic
> most fail to reach full adult human height
Infant mortality at least 50% and estimated that only 28% of males made it to the age of 35. Even worse for women due to the hazards of childbirth and blood loss. And most children had stunted growth due to malnourishment, and wouldn't reach their full height until well into their 20s, if at all.
Grim.
It’s an interesting question - I would suspect that, if beaten, Sunak would step down. He still has a long career ahead of him, and being a king-across-the-water would actually give him a decent chance of returning as leader, this time with a veteran’s lustre. He may have even got better at politics.
God knows what manner of loon could end up installed as leader if he does. Sir Edward Leigh, maybe - the gammons’ gammon, leading a charge of the aggrieved pensioners of the right. Johnson himself can’t be ruled out, though he actually has a decent chance of losing his seat.
And wrt your second point the world is changing. I don't expect the tumbrils to be rolled up to Belvoir castle any time soon but if the story is correct then it marks the fact that KCIII gets this.
* @Charles mode on* David Rutland will be ok.
Edit: I mean Charles of PB, not Charles Granby
Indeed one such home owner expressed anger in a letter to a local butcher but is out of touch with local opinion
https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2023-04-08/second-home-owners-refuse-to-use-welsh-businesses-over-higher-taxes
Partisan posters are not in themselves a problem, we all have our own axes to grind, take HYUFD, he has a strictly defined political position, but if he so desires he can read an opinion poll in either direction and he doesn't indulge in schoolboy taunts to his opposite number posters.
What a great header though. A genuine concern, which should worry all democrats. An issue that looks like it might suppress voting like never before in our lifetime, and a few posts in, and we arrive at "we're going to win, you're not" with little reasoned evidence and certainly no caveats or balance as to why that might not happen.
As a member of the "herd" and as I haven't had an "off-topic" for a while, I thought I would indulge myself and give this post a whirl. To work!
And thinking of posters here, the long-term Conservative members/activists who wobbled over late BoJo and Truss are back on board,but I'm not seeing any shift amongst those who decided "time for a change" earlier than that. If anything, there's a hardening of sentiment there.
Yes, you can make a technical justification for why Old People's Bus Passes are valid and Student passes aren't. But it's a technical justification, not a reason. If you must have a barrier to voting, it ought to try to be roughly equally high for everyone, which this scam isn't.
Be blooming funny if the bus pass thing fails because Conservative areas don't have any buses to use the passes on, though.
I have to say that I haven't been on holiday in Wales for decades because all this is incredibly off-putting.
In the end it is no fun going to a place where everyone seems to hate you, however beautiful it is. In my experience the hate came from a small minority and there was also a lot of respect, curiosity and support which kept me going; particularly after I started writing newspaper columns explaining about the need for investment in these 'left behind' villages. But it was a lot of hard work and very far from profitable.
Thankfully that number is shrinking, quite rapidly.
And anyone in a position to be indignant, as you posit, would likely be in a position to bring criminal charges.
He could end up like Major in 1992. Beholden to a fringe element. That’s my expectation if he wins. Starmer less so as he will have delivered a govt for a party of opposition for many years.
I fear the eco terrorists may win today.
Starmer has failed to tell a story of how he wants to change the country and he's not convincing as a steady reliable hand on the tiller either. It's not enough to be a vacuum and wait for the government to cock-up.
If Starmer does fail to become PM after the next election, after everything that has happened, the failure will be entirely his.
Tory freedoms. 😊
It’s worth remembering that even in 1997 the Tory press was running stories that Don’t Knows could decide the outcome.
You need to give your supporters hope. Sunak has undoubtedly given some to his party. Right now, though, I just don’t see a different election outcome to the one I’ve been predicting for a couple of years: a Labour minority government. If anything, Scotland coming into play tilts things further towards a small Labour majority.
I'm reminded back when I watched the papers review on Sky. A youth commented on Thatcher the Milk Snatcher. The two other men, being older, replied they were glad the milk went as it was either warm and horrid or frozen solid. The youth backpedalled and said it was before his time.
Interesting, but it's important history is as accurate as possible so that correct lessons can be drawn from it. The departure of the Romans didn't lead to a rural idyll, but economic, social, and military collapse, with a nose-diving population, famine, war, and disease.
Honestly, how anyone intelligent of any political persuasion can look at this government and think, yep let’s have some more of that, just makes me sad.