I get this... I've factored in SNP equalising voteshare in Scotland at 34% a piece, and the Tories roughly holding their share there due to SNP collapse.
UK-wide: an increase in the Greens to 5.5%, LDs uptick to 14%, Reform a non-event to 2.5%, and Labour on 40% with Tories on 37%.
Result:
Labour 317 Cons 273 LD 19 SNP 19 Greens 1 Plaid 3 Others 18
Probably Labour minority with LD S&C. Seems plausible.
In that scenario there is no way the SNP will ever vote with the Tories to bring down the Labour minority government. My guess is that Labour will end up lower than you have and the SNP higher, but the basic principle will remain the same if the SNP lose seats and vote share.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
I suspect the LDs have learned their lesson about precipitating early general elections just as much as they have learned about going into coalition.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
Weird how R&W now have the Labour lead as being smaller than Opinium do. Who would have thought that would happen?
The R&W Reform number is lower - and probably a lot more realistic.
It'll depend how much profile RefUK get in the election. They need to clearly position themselves as continuity UKIP/Brexit. If they get the Farage endorsement, they'll poll up to 10%; if they're relying on Lozzo and Cosplay Calvin their ceiling is more 4-5%.
Jesus Christ – what a ludicrous niagara of overanalysis for a midterm poll that is Con +2. If one appears in the next ten that is MOE in the other direction it will be widely ignored.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
Six months ago we were in the frenzy of "Truss has to go - surely???"
Four days later, she did.
Politically, it seems a different world to where we are today.
It does. The sense is of the Cons under Sunak creeping back into contention. But, god, I really hope not. Not for my sake, or Labour's sake, or even the country's sake, but for the sake of our democracy. Come the election the Cons will have been in power for 14 years. It MUST be Time For a Change. Only reason to stick with them would be if they've delivered bigtime in government or the Labour alternative is pisspoor or scary.
Have they delivered bigtime? Well let's see. The economy has underperformed on their watch, most things have got worse, nothing has got better; and they have recently inflicted upon us just about the most divisive shambolic Brexit possible, plus back-to-back PM's who were utterly and palpably unfit for office. So that's a No. It's truly eccentric to conclude otherwise.
And Labour? Ok, nothing special, but nothing to frighten the horses either. Camped in the centre ground, solid front bench team, will have some policies, and in Keir "No Tony Blair" Starmer have a leader who is thoughtful, competent and in no way a dick or an embarrassment.
In these circumstances if the Conservatives are given yet another term it will be the public saying, "yeah yeah whatever, the Tories govern Britain, that's just how it is." The electorate will be failing in their civic duty and us democracy lovers might as well pack up and go home. As for me, I'd probably tear up my Labour membership card and hurl myself into street politics instead.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
However, I think this is part of the same reason why left-of-centre and liberal voters, such as myself, will solidify behind him, than late Blairism. The result could be a narrow Labour majority , I thik.
It is time for change and Sunak isn't change.
"Time for a change" is seriously depleted in its effect when the Tories have changed from Boris and Truss to somebody solidly getting on with the job - versus Captain Tedium.
By the time of the election, inflation is going to be down as a huge % of what it was - on Rishi's watch. Interest rates similarly. Recession avoided - by Rishi. A lot of people are srtill well disposed towards Rishi because of the Covid handouts. There could well be a mood to let him carry on doing what he's doing a while longer.
Versus what from Labour? I mean - what? What is there case to move all the pieces on the board again, after Covid and Ukraine? Stability is as much of a draw as change in 2024/5.
Jesus Christ – what a ludicrous niagara of overanalysis for a midterm poll that is Con +2. If one appears in the next ten that is MOE in the other direction it will be widely ignored.
Get a life.
You do realise this is politicalbetting.com?
By definition, no one on here has a life, and churning out ludicrous niagaras of overanalysis of midterm polls is WHAT WE LIVE FOR
You might as well go on ArsenalSupporters.com and complain about the obsession with the Arsenal midfield
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
Six months ago we were in the frenzy of "Truss has to go - surely???"
Four days later, she did.
Politically, it seems a different world to where we are today.
It does. The sense is of the Cons under Sunak creeping back into contention. But, god, I really hope not. Not for my sake, or Labour's sake, or even the country's sake, but for the sake of our democracy. Come the election the Cons will have been in power for 14 years. It MUST be Time For a Change. Only reason to stick with them would be if they've delivered bigtime in government or the Labour alternative is pisspoor or scary.
"Pisspoor" is a pretty accurate description of Sir Keir and his attempts to win by default, though.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
I suspect the LDs have learned their lesson about precipitating early general elections just as much as they have learned about going into coalition.
Although I think there are a few important differences there. A Lib Dem pact would be just the fig-leaf many Labour politicians need to do this, whereas the Tories never supported PR that they agreed and then reneged to hold a proper referendum on.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
Jesus Christ – what a ludicrous niagara of overanalysis for a midterm poll that is Con +2. If one appears in the next ten that is MOE in the other direction it will be widely ignored.
Get a life.
Ha. ha - this R&W does seem to be getting a lot more attention than yesterday's Opimium or the Omnisis from last week! The natural order of things politically in England is that the Tories win and Labour lose, so the tendency will always be to look for signs that this is going to happen again.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
That's a weird take on Sunak. I can see several reasons to criticise him, but "entirely inauthentic"?!
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
I'm not being deliberately contrary but my experience is the opposite. Kind of, anyway.
In the Boris years I'd found Sunak reasonably credible and, not being actively a liability, a kind of refreshing rock of integrity and competence in an otherwise rotten party. Now he just seems politically inept and wildly out of his depth, and his Ed-Miliband-via-ChatGPT approach to pubic speaking is quite cringy.
By contrast, boring Sir Keith seems more on the ball and capable as time has gone on (though he needs to do summat about his weird hair).
I'm not saying I'm right about either of them - I just don't think either have fully settled their essence into the public consciousness.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
How do you define "Authentic" ?
Surely both Starmer and Sunak are acting according to their backgrounds; just in different directions?
Both present an image that people from relatively poor backgrounds can be immensely successful in very different fields. Why is one more 'authentic' than the other?
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
How do you define "Authentic" ?
Surely both Starmer and Sunak are acting according to their backgrounds; just in different directions?
Both present an image that people from relatively poor backgrounds can be immensely successful in very different fields. Why is one more 'authentic' than the other?
Who knows. It's just how I respond. Sunak seems to me to be trying too hard. But, of course, it is just a personal reaction that is doubtless also influenced by my political bias. I will obviously give Starmer more time and more benefit of the doubt than I will Sunak because I am an instinctive Labour supporter, as well as being a party member.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
How do you define "Authentic" ?
Surely both Starmer and Sunak are acting according to their backgrounds; just in different directions?
Both present an image that people from relatively poor backgrounds can be immensely successful in very different fields. Why is one more 'authentic' than the other?
Starmer suddenly wrapping himself in the Union Jack and conveniently forgetting that, not only did he vote for Remain, he was the leader of the campaign to cancel the Brexit vote and have another "people's vote", is FAR FAR more inauthentic than anything Sunak has done
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
I doubt it will be resounding, but on balance I think it will be a No.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
The debates (if Starmer doesn’t find a way to dodge them, as I would advise him to do) will not help Labour this time around. Sunak does ok speaking off the cuff, and Starmer does not. Davey will be an empty suit, but the Greens could have fun even if not in the room.
Jesus Christ – what a ludicrous niagara of overanalysis for a midterm poll that is Con +2. If one appears in the next ten that is MOE in the other direction it will be widely ignored.
Get a life.
Why do you always come across as so impatient and intolerant?
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
I doubt it will be resounding, but on balance I think it will be a No.
In political terms the next GE is a long way away
Just think how quick Johnson eventually went, then Truss, and as for Sturgeon's utterly unpredictable political demise even to the point she is being asked to resign her seat by some on her own side
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
I doubt it will be resounding, but on balance I think it will be a No.
"Look at your bank balance, your mortgage payments, your energy bills and your weekly shop. Look at how a small number, most of whom happen to be donors to and friends, relatives and colleagues of the Tories, have all got richer over this time, while everyone else has got worse off. Look at NHS waiting times, the shortages of teachers, police and other essential services. Look at the failure - after 13 years in power - to create an immigration system that is anywhere near fit for purpose. Look at the failure of HS2 and the 'Levelling Up'."
Labours attack lines are manifold. The trick will be finding the right ones to focus on. Brass-in-pocket would be my bet.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
If Sunak can articulate a convincing vision for people to vote Conservative, like "a property owning democracy" was in the 80s, or "Get Brexit done" in 2019, Labour will be in trouble.
Maybe he will, but, fortunately for Labour, he doesn't seem to be a visionary. Or even slightly inspiring.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
And the next question will be "who has the solutions to make the next five years better than the last five years"?
Hung parliament, minority Labour administration with Lib Dem support still a reasonable possibility, methinks ; though I think somewhere between a narrow overall Labour majority , and all the way up to the fifties, is the more likely.
Ed Davey nailed on as Deputy PM after the next election.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
And the next question will be "who has the solutions to make the next five years better than the last five years"?
And the answer will be: "let's try the other lot".
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
And the next question will be "who has the solutions to make the next five years better than the last five years"?
That is the key and it seems labour want to ignore the consequence's of covid and the war in Ukraine and its effects not just on the economy, but most everything we depend on
You cannot close the country down for two years, (longer if Starmer had his way) and not see the NHS, Education, Courts and most everything adversely affected with a financial cost that will last for a very long time
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
I doubt it will be resounding, but on balance I think it will be a No.
"Look at your bank balance, your mortgage payments, your energy bills and your weekly shop. Look at how a small number, most of whom happen to be donors to and friends, relatives and colleagues of the Tories, have all got richer over this time, while everyone else has got worse off. Look at NHS waiting times, the shortages of teachers, police and other essential services. Look at the failure - after 13 years in power - to create an immigration system that is anywhere near fit for purpose. Look at the failure of HS2 and the 'Levelling Up'."
Labours attack lines are manifold. The trick will be finding the right ones to focus on. Brass-in-pocket would be my bet.
Yep. Very hard to deny that the economy has both made everything a lot more expensive than it was and reduced the spare cash people have to spend.
Tories undoubtedly want to contest the election on the economy improving - a tax cut, hope for inflation coming down. But even if they do come down a touch we still suffer from the impacts so far.
"We broke it, you can't trust the other lot as they will break it" isn't much of a sell. But then again, if Labour are pushed off the deep end by the left and start promising to spend tokens on daft stuff, who knows where it could go...
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
I doubt it will be resounding, but on balance I think it will be a No.
In political terms the next GE is a long way away
Just think how quick Johnson eventually went, then Truss, and as for Sturgeon's utterly unpredictable political demise even to the point she is being asked to resign her seat by some on her own side
Sure, but if a side is reliant on the unforeseeable, and extreme, scenarios, that is a pretty good indicator of the probable state of play.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
Why inauthentic? - he seems exactly like a number people I’ve met of somewhat similar background. Moderate origin, meteoric rise through the City etc.
In fact I would say that he seems completely OK with being himself. Bit like Cameron in that respect.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
And the next question will be "who has the solutions to make the next five years better than the last five years"?
True. But if the answer is 'neither', then the fresher side may come out on top by default.
Hung parliament, minority Labour administration with Lib Dem support still a reasonable possibility, methinks ; though I think somewhere between a narrow overall Labour majority , and all the way up to the fifties, is the more likely.
Lab/LD would be an optimal result for me.
I feel in the last week or so that the election campaign has started.
It's going to get tight as the Tories are over the worst of the end Boris/Truss era. And they will start polling better than they deserve.
SKS may have to risk trying to win rather than trying to not lose. Sunak intends to win this if he can.
It's going to be an 18 month long Grand National, with fallers and injuries.
I've always been on the more pessimistic end of the spectrum for 2024. I don't buy mid term polls at all and felt remarkable that Labour were even in with a shout given 2019.
Starmer's challenge was worsened by going up 2-0 at half time, faced with the impossible task to hold that lead for two years. Human psychology means that the gap will narrow and 2-2 entering the election campaign is likely IMO.
That said, my gut is that Labour will come out ahead in the end. It will be unthinkable for the Tories to be rewarded with another term given what they have done and the devastating consequences for the country if that goes unpunished by the electorate.
Labour would probably be better off replacing Starmer with Yvette Cooper a few months before the election. But it won't happen because only the Tories get rid of leaders they think won't win elections.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
The debates (if Starmer doesn’t find a way to dodge them, as I would advise him to do) will not help Labour this time around. Sunak does ok speaking off the cuff, and Starmer does not. Davey will be an empty suit, but the Greens could have fun even if not in the room.
One for thing certain is that Labour will be very eager for Yousaf to be invited. Him looking useless and irrelevant will be very helpful for SLAB.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
Why inauthentic? - he seems exactly like a number people I’ve met of somewhat similar background. Moderate origin, meteoric rise through the City etc.
In fact I would say that he seems completely OK with being himself. Bit like Cameron in that respect.
Cameron was seen in some ways as not being ok with being himself, and being self conscious about his poshness - as a contrast to Boris who could play it up but still come across as relatable somehow.
What would GE2024 be as a very approximate reversal of GE2017 with a slight handicap?
I'm think Labour 41% and Conservative 37%. Maybe a little bit of tactical voting on top, but not extensively so.
Imagine 2017 (C-40 / L-38) but with three changes:
(1) The SNP down to the 35% mark in Scotland, with the major beneficiary being the Labour Party, but with the Conservatives and LDs also benefitting somewhat.
(2) The LDs on 12% (as in 2019), rather than the 7.4% they got in 2017.
(3) A modest return of tactical voting.
What would that give us? Con 305, Lab 305, SNP 25, LD 18?
I don't think that's an impossible outcome. Indeed, it's perfectly possible.
But it also makes it clear how significant the hill is for the Conservatives. Even if they pass the Labour Party, and get back to the levels of 2017, then the decline of the SNP, the LDs doing somewhat better and a bit of tactical voting, means they are struggling to get much above 300.
On the other hand: the decline of the SNP (and the fact the LDs will be lucky to get past 20 seats) makes it a hell of a lot easier for someone (anyone) to get a majority.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
Wow. And not in a good way, amazed the CAA think that makes things as clear to the pax as they should be. So many different voices, accents, and background noises too, ESL or hard of-hearing pax will find that really difficult to listen and understand.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
They may notice there isn't a One Nation Tory party standing. SKS is the nearest thing.
He really isn't mate.
I can't change your mind or your vote, but I think you're misguided and that you're going to be bitterly disappointed.
Maybe. But it is essential that the Tories have a spell in opposition to work out what they are for, and no other government is in prospect. Lab/LD outcome would be best.
Lab majority would be better the lib dems should never be allowed to play with adult toys we can let them have the "my little governement" set aimed at the 4 year olds
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Jesus Christ – what a ludicrous niagara of overanalysis for a midterm poll that is Con +2. If one appears in the next ten that is MOE in the other direction it will be widely ignored.
Get a life.
The campaign has started; PB has noticed. That's the next 18 months sorted. Those who don't like it can always watch Gardener's World.
Con 37% Lab 36% Lib 15% (with SNP leading Labour 38% to 32% in Scotland)
CON 296 (30 Short) LAB 282 LD 18 SNP 30
I suspect that would result in a second GE in very short order. I can't see the SNP supporting Labour without the commitment to a new Independence vote and I can't see Starmer agreeing to that. I could of course be wrong on both those assumptions but I think a second GE would be the most likely outcome.
Would an offer of introducing proportional representation at Westminster win support from not just the LDs but also the SNP?
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
They may notice there isn't a One Nation Tory party standing. SKS is the nearest thing.
He really isn't mate.
I can't change your mind or your vote, but I think you're misguided and that you're going to be bitterly disappointed.
Maybe. But it is essential that the Tories have a spell in opposition to work out what they are for, and no other government is in prospect. Lab/LD outcome would be best.
It's very, very hard to come back from opposition once you're in it.
The biggest thing the Tories need to work through is how they, firstly, get over and stop talking about Brexit all the time (actually, I think this is now sort of happening anyway - and that's down to Sunak) and secondly how they appeal to a wider voter base than their core older voters, which is checkmating them at present electorally into a smaller and smaller box.
That may require a coherent intellectual reboot but, if it does, I'd prefer it from a high base and a narrow defeat, with seats in the 270s or 280s, rather than a massive one that takes over a decade to come back from - I'd only want the Tories out of power for a few years.
Hung parliament, minority Labour administration with Lib Dem support still a reasonable possibility, methinks ; though I think somewhere between a narrow overall Labour majority , and all the way up to the fifties, is the more likely.
Ed Davey nailed on as Deputy PM after the next election.
Davey was a member of Cameron's cabinet. I wonder how many Liberals have served in the cabinets of both a Labour and Conservative PM. A first?
Interestingly, yet another R&W poll with a Labour subsample lead in Scotland. Has anyone considered the possibility Labour could win 20+ seats in Scotland yet still ultimately lose the election?
Labour will pile up votes in their city centre heartlands, the Tories will be squeaky-bum efficient at saving seats with tiny majorities. Is my guess....
My guess is that if Starmer doesn't appeal in the marginals he doesn't get the marginals, and that's exactly what happens.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Think that all you like but people wont vote for a return to Fom
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
Why inauthentic? - he seems exactly like a number people I’ve met of somewhat similar background. Moderate origin, meteoric rise through the City etc.
In fact I would say that he seems completely OK with being himself. Bit like Cameron in that respect.
Cameron was seen in some ways as not being ok with being himself, and being self conscious about his poshness - as a contrast to Boris who could play it up but still come across as relatable somehow.
I don’t think so - which is why the Quatro attack ad bounced off. And the chameleon one.
Have had one of those days with this client. After three months of every-increasing intensity in the planning stage, they have signed off on this business transformation project I have succeeded in persuading them they need to do.
My services, and career-best fees, are going to be heavily used.
Of course once the euphoria dissipates (and my head usually plays the opening to "Rock and Roll" by Led Zeppelin in celebration to big wins), the horror sets in that we actually have to build and deliver this thing.
None of it is rocket science. But with this company it feels like my cat-herding skills will be tested to destruction.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
That's a weird take on Sunak. I can see several reasons to criticise him, but "entirely inauthentic"?!
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
I think he' s quite a poor campaigner and speaker; he comes over as if he's been asked to come into a primary school and enthuse an audience of five year olds about road safety.
First, best wishes to OGH and family and I hope he will be back among us soon.
Redfield & Wilton has given the Conservative inclined on here a boost - some seem to think the re-election of the Conservatives under Sunak an inevitability or perhaps just a preference. I'd note the move in this poll has been from Reform to the Conservatives and while this is the highest Conservative number in an R&W poll this year it's also the lowest Reform score.
Into the data itself and some interesting nuggets - among women the Labour lead is only 8 points and 20% of the women sampled are Don't Knows compared with 11% of men. The 65+ age group splits 39-26 to the Tories. The 2019 Conservative GE vote splits 63% Conservative, 15% Don't Know and 13% Labour (that's the lowest figure I can remember and down from nearer 20% a few weeks back). What we're seeing, I think, are two moves - one from Don't Know back to Loyal and the other from Labour to Don't Know. The proportion going to Reform has also fallen away.
Taking out the DKs and it's 46-31 to the Conservatives among the over 65s (at the December 2019 election, it was 64-17 so that's still a 16% swing among this key demographic. The 2019 Conservative vote excluding the DKs splits 75% Conservative, 16% Labour and 6% Reform.
My favourite R&W sub-samples are the England numbers - this week the VI is Labour 44%, Conservative 35%, Liberal Democrat 11%, Green 5% and Reform 5%. The swing from Conservative to Labour is now just 11% compared with much higher numbers we were seeing earlier in the year.
The Blue Wall polling last week was better for the Conservatives - the next Red Wall polling should be informative.
Con 37% Lab 36% Lib 15% (with SNP leading Labour 38% to 32% in Scotland)
CON 296 (30 Short) LAB 282 LD 18 SNP 30
Electoral Calculus?
If the LDs are +3 and the Conservatives -7 points, then I think the LDs will do slightly better than that:
Hazel Grove, for example, has the LDs 10 points behind, but with a big Labour vote to squeeze.
I'd be very surprised if both Hazel Grove and Cheadle didn't go LD.
Hazel Grove will be very interesting.
Notionally, boundary changes make it a safer Conservative seat, because the LDs are nowhere in Stockport, and Hazel Groves gains about one-sixth of that seat.
However: Stockport saw the Labour Party outpoll the Conservatives 2:1. That means there is a big pile of potential tactical switchers for the LDs to mine. In theory the seat becomes harder for the LDs, but in reality, I think it becomes easier. (There are more *potential* LD voters in Stockport, than there in Hazel Grove, where they have converted most of them already._
I get this... I've factored in SNP equalising voteshare in Scotland at 34% a piece, and the Tories roughly holding their share there due to SNP collapse.
UK-wide: an increase in the Greens to 5.5%, LDs uptick to 14%, Reform a non-event to 2.5%, and Labour on 40% with Tories on 37%.
Result:
Labour 317 Cons 273 LD 19 SNP 19 Greens 1 Plaid 3 Others 18
Probably Labour minority with LD S&C. Seems plausible.
In that scenario there is no way the SNP will ever vote with the Tories to bring down the Labour minority government. My guess is that Labour will end up lower than you have and the SNP higher, but the basic principle will remain the same if the SNP lose seats and vote share.
Yes, I agree. One other factor to consider too, is how Starmer can isolate his ultra left-wing in such a scenario. Corbynites haven't disappeared wholesale.
Just like the Tories and the ultras in the ERG he will have his own party management challenges here, and will be managing an internal coalition as well as potentially an external one.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
They may notice there isn't a One Nation Tory party standing. SKS is the nearest thing.
He really isn't mate.
I can't change your mind or your vote, but I think you're misguided and that you're going to be bitterly disappointed.
Maybe. But it is essential that the Tories have a spell in opposition to work out what they are for, and no other government is in prospect. Lab/LD outcome would be best.
It's very, very hard to come back from opposition once you're in it.
The biggest thing the Tories need to work through is how they, firstly, get over and stop talking about Brexit all the time (actually, I think this is now sort of happening anyway - and that's down to Sunak) and secondly how they appeal to a wider voter base than their core older voters, which is checkmating them at present electorally into a smaller and smaller box.
That may require a coherent intellectual reboot but, if it does, I'd prefer it from a high base and a narrow defeat, with seats in the 270s or 280s, rather than a massive one that takes over a decade to come back from - I'd only want the Tories out of power for a few years.
If the Tories do lose power, they will need Sunak to stay on as leader. The risk if he doesn't is that there seems to be no viable replacement for him on the sensible side of the party.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
If Sunak can articulate a convincing vision for people to vote Conservative, like "a property owning democracy" was in the 80s, or "Get Brexit done" in 2019, Labour will be in trouble.
Maybe he will, but, fortunately for Labour, he doesn't seem to be a visionary. Or even slightly inspiring.
Mebbe. But the stuff on maths is distinctive and gives a suggestion of where he wants to make a difference. Has Starmer come up with anything similar? Can't think of anything offhand TBH.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Think that all you like but people wont vote for a return to Fom
Starmer is not going to offer wage deflation in low end jobs, if he wins back the Red Wall.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is outnumbered.
That the younger generation doesn’t see the link between FoM and the unaffordabililty of housing, is one of the mysteries of modern politics.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
However, I think this is part of the same reason why left-of-centre and liberal voters, such as myself, will solidify behind him, than late Blairism. The result could be a narrow Labour majority , I thik.
It is time for change and Sunak isn't change.
"Time for a change" is seriously depleted in its effect when the Tories have changed from Boris and Truss to somebody solidly getting on with the job - versus Captain Tedium.
By the time of the election, inflation is going to be down as a huge % of what it was - on Rishi's watch. Interest rates similarly. Recession avoided - by Rishi. A lot of people are srtill well disposed towards Rishi because of the Covid handouts. There could well be a mood to let him carry on doing what he's doing a while longer.
Versus what from Labour? I mean - what? What is there case to move all the pieces on the board again, after Covid and Ukraine? Stability is as much of a draw as change in 2024/5.
I think voters want the right man/woman for the job.
"Time for a change" resonates when they already think they haven't got it - it lags rather than leads.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Think that all you like but people wont vote for a return to Fom
Starmer is not going to offer wage deflation in low end jobs, if he wins back the Red Wall.
Precisely only lib dems think its popular. I would be all for single market without FoM
Just a very unscientific observation. I live in one of the safest Conservative seats in the country, and within that I live in one of the safest Conservative wards in the constituency. In thirty years I have never seen a poster at election time, except in 2005 when I astonished neighbours and put one up for the Lib Dems in the glory days of Kennedy and the aftermath of Iraq. I have never had a leaflet or a knock on the door.
We have borough council elections and I have had non-stop leaflets and messages from our Conservative candidate (who, to be fair, is a thoroughly good chap). None of them mention Conservative party and no pictures of Rishi.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
That's a weird take on Sunak. I can see several reasons to criticise him, but "entirely inauthentic"?!
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
My only real criticisms of Sunak are the wear he wears his wealth and the fact he's still developing his political ear, and seems more comfortable with analysis and problem-solving.
But, I think he's bright enough to learn fast on the job and he seems to be a genuinely nice guy.
I'd be quite happy for Labour to win (the Tories have gone on FAR too long, and need a spell in Opposition), the one thing holding me back is, indeed, Starmer himself
The idea of him waffling at me for five years. Jeez. And he's knocking on, and looks it. He's not a fount of youthful energy and new ideas. He is The DULLNESS
The DULLNESS was an advantage when faced with Truss, and, to an extent, Boris
But Sunak is also quite DULL without being so horribly DULL, and Sunak has a mild likeability, and - also, crucially - a modest sense of energy. Optimism. Ambition
Hmm
Sunak will need an awful lot of luck - inflation plunging, some sudden growth as China reopens, unexepcted seats from the SNP, maybe a few gaffes by Labour - to get near a "win", but I no longer see it as entirely impossible. Just highly unlikely
You should try living in Scotland. What we give for a bit of dullness, some basic administration and an end to ludicrous squirrels.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
At the end of the day, it's not going to come down to what people think of Sunak or Starmer; both are grey technocrats - competent, articulate, boring.
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
And the next question will be "who has the solutions to make the next five years better than the last five years"?
And the answer will be: "let's try the other lot".
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Not only that but FoM makes it harder to plan for services from water to schools to doctors....how many are coming in the next few years....who knows as we can't say no....lets remember when we were told only about 13000 eastern europeans would come back in 2002/2003. Frankly civil service estimates aren't worth anything more than a piece of paper to wipe your arse with. They certainly have no relation to reality
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
Why inauthentic? - he seems exactly like a number people I’ve met of somewhat similar background. Moderate origin, meteoric rise through the City etc.
In fact I would say that he seems completely OK with being himself. Bit like Cameron in that respect.
Cameron was seen in some ways as not being ok with being himself, and being self conscious about his poshness - as a contrast to Boris who could play it up but still come across as relatable somehow.
I don’t think so - which is why the Quatro attack ad bounced off. And the chameleon one.
The Quattro attack ad didn't work because people liked Gene Hunt (and, my own opinion, plenty of people liked the 80s a lot more than Labour politicians seem to realise, so the prospect of going back to it is not the horror scenario it is for Labour activists). It took mere hours for the Tories to turn it around into a positive ad.
The chameleon tag is one I'm not sure ever really works - the Tories are testing out something like it now by pointing out how Starmer changes position, basically that he will say anything in order to win.
Thing is, I don't think voters give two sh*ts about consistency, and if they like what you are saying, just like you, or dislike the other side enough, then having said something different previously will be way down their list of concerns. It's politicians who get mad about lack of consistency. Yes, attacks like that are about trust - he is a chameleon/not who he seems, he is changing his position etc, you can't rely on him - but I think it's pretty weak.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Think that all you like but people wont vote for a return to Fom
Starmer is not going to offer wage deflation in low end jobs, if he wins back the Red Wall.
Precisely only lib dems think its popular. I would be all for single market without FoM
It might be what you think but I'm pretty sure Dvey isn't going to argue for a referendum on anything as a "price" for joining with Labour (and it won't be a 2010-15 Coalition under any circumstances).
It always helps Conservatives to "lump in" the LDs with Labour - perhaps Sunak should be thinking what he could offer the LDs for supporting the continuation of a minority Conservative Government.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Not only that but FoM makes it harder to plan for services from water to schools to doctors....how many are coming in the next few years....who knows as we can't say no....lets remember when we were told only about 13000 eastern europeans would come back in 2002/2003. Frankly civil service estimates aren't worth anything more than a piece of paper to wipe your arse with. They certainly have no relation to reality
Don't forget the world of comparative living standards of 2003, or even 2016, is very different from what it will be in the late 2020's, around the time we may be rejoining the single market. Poland and Slovenia are forecast to surpass the UK on various living standard measures by the end of the decade, for instance.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
That's a weird take on Sunak. I can see several reasons to criticise him, but "entirely inauthentic"?!
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
I think he' s quite a poor campaigner and speaker; he comes over as if he's been asked to come into a primary school and enthuse an audience of five year olds about road safety.
Although Sunak isn't that charismatic.... He is eons ahead of Starmer who is like a block.of wood.
But on today's R&W Starmer is a long way ahead of Sunak on net favourability and a point ahead on best PM.
Sunak grows on you tho. The more you see him, the more you think: Eh, he's OK, sounds smart, looks dapper, seems capable, works hard
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
If it were presidential, like the Tory contest was, that would definitely be a cause for concern for Labour. I see Starmer, at worse, as a slight drag on Labour and Sunak as the only thing the Tories have going for them. And I don't think he is compelling enough to make that much of a difference. I feel he is entirely inauthentic, but I would say that, I guess.
That's a weird take on Sunak. I can see several reasons to criticise him, but "entirely inauthentic"?!
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
I think he' s quite a poor campaigner and speaker; he comes over as if he's been asked to come into a primary school and enthuse an audience of five year olds about road safety.
Actually I think that's part of his appeal. I remember someone on PB saying he came across like a Blue Peter presenter. It's not necessarily a bad look.
I'm beginning to think that Rishi may prevent a Labour landslide and be able to stay on as LOTO. However a change of Govt is nailed on. Boris and Liz did far too much damage for the Tories to have a chance of winning.
If the LibDems have any sense, in the event of a hung parliament, they'll demand a referendum on single market membership in exchange for support, and not let themselves be bamboozled.
Which is a total waste of time because a) it will lose probably when it is brought to the fore that means fom and b) even if it wins it is not within the governement of the uk's purview to do it the eu would have to agree to us rejoining the single market and they likely won't
The deal would be single market/free movement back again. I think it would win.
Think that all you like but people wont vote for a return to Fom
Starmer is not going to offer wage deflation in low end jobs, if he wins back the Red Wall.
Precisely only lib dems think its popular. I would be all for single market without FoM
It might be what you think but I'm pretty sure Dvey isn't going to argue for a referendum on anything as a "price" for joining with Labour (and it won't be a 2010-15 Coalition under any circumstances).
It always helps Conservatives to "lump in" the LDs with Labour - perhaps Sunak should be thinking what he could offer the LDs for supporting the continuation of a minority Conservative Government.
I am not a tory supporter however, I was merely point out to oracle a referendum on SM plus fom is largely going to be waste of time. First you have to win it which I don't think you will if FoM is involved, second if you win it you have to get the EU to agree and I don't think they will
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Simple answer - because younger voters, like older voters, are stupid.
Longer answer - because even if it is true peoples' political views are a complex and contradictory hodgepotch and they may not believe it, they may not prioritise it over some other issue more central to their identity, or they may not see the connection between different beliefs.
I had a drink with a lady friend who has come to loathe the Tories in recent months, and was a definite potential switcher to Starmer
She has switched back to the Tories. Because she likes Sunak. "He just looks like he can get things done"
You also have things the like the Robert Colville article in The Sunday Times which pointed out, correctly, IMHO, that Starmer is actually quite left-wing, who adopts positions as flags of convenience, and nothing really like Blair.
I can't see many Conservative voters not noticing that as they finally come to cast their ballots.
However, I think this is part of the same reason why left-of-centre and liberal voters, such as myself, will solidify behind him, than late Blairism. The result could be a narrow Labour majority , I thik.
It is time for change and Sunak isn't change.
"Time for a change" is seriously depleted in its effect when the Tories have changed from Boris and Truss to somebody solidly getting on with the job - versus Captain Tedium.
By the time of the election, inflation is going to be down as a huge % of what it was - on Rishi's watch. Interest rates similarly. Recession avoided - by Rishi. A lot of people are srtill well disposed towards Rishi because of the Covid handouts. There could well be a mood to let him carry on doing what he's doing a while longer.
Versus what from Labour? I mean - what? What is there case to move all the pieces on the board again, after Covid and Ukraine? Stability is as much of a draw as change in 2024/5.
Basically it's Conservative Government in perpetuity, then?
Before the nonsense of Johnson and Truss there was a school of thought on here the Conservatives would win in 2024 but would suffer a heavy defeat in 2029 as after nearly two decades the mood of "time for a change" would be irresistible.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
1) Because like most people they deal with policies one at a time, which allows everyone to have beliefs which when put together are unicorns. (Like low taxes and excellent public services).
2) Because the complexity of the interlocking facts which give rise to chunks of reality, even little chunks, are mindblowingly incomprehensible.
3) Because people are bad at linking the individual and the collective effects of things.
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Simple answer - because younger voters, like older voters, are stupid.
Longer answer - because even if it is true peoples' political views are a complex and contradictory hodgepotch and they may not believe it, they may not prioritise it over some other issue more central to their identity, or they may not see the connection between different beliefs.
The way I tend to look at it is the people who had more experience of the EU and experience of pre EU voted in on the 74 referendum then having experienced the EU went hell no....people who knew nothing but the EU and no experience of life outside decided to suck at mummys teat for safety
Most of the under 50's would vote for a return of FoM, and their views aren't changing with age, from what I've read of the polls, so it's just a question of how long you leave it until the Hard-Brexiter generation is even more clearly outnumbered. Maybe three or four years, at most.
Does anyone understand why younger voters support policies that will inevitably make it more difficult to afford to buy a property? Because the more people there are in the country the more expensive house prices will be, due to supply and demand.
Not only that but FoM makes it harder to plan for services from water to schools to doctors....how many are coming in the next few years....who knows as we can't say no....lets remember when we were told only about 13000 eastern europeans would come back in 2002/2003. Frankly civil service estimates aren't worth anything more than a piece of paper to wipe your arse with. They certainly have no relation to reality
Ah, so that's why planning for schools and doctors has been so stunningly successful since Brexit.
Comments
Get a life.
Starmer is the opposite. The more you listen to him the more boring he is, the less likeable, the more vacuous, and devoid of ideas
It probably won't matter in an election when the public is urgently yearning for change, but it is a factor to be considered when the GE campaign will expose both men a lot
Remember Sunak did unexpectedly well against Truss when it came to the actual votes, after the hustings and the exposure. She was expected to absolutely walk it, she did not
Have they delivered bigtime? Well let's see. The economy has underperformed on their watch, most things have got worse, nothing has got better; and they have recently inflicted upon us just about the most divisive shambolic Brexit possible, plus back-to-back PM's who were utterly and palpably unfit for office. So that's a No. It's truly eccentric to conclude otherwise.
And Labour? Ok, nothing special, but nothing to frighten the horses either. Camped in the centre ground, solid front bench team, will have some policies, and in Keir "No Tony Blair" Starmer have a leader who is thoughtful, competent and in no way a dick or an embarrassment.
In these circumstances if the Conservatives are given yet another term it will be the public saying, "yeah yeah whatever, the Tories govern Britain, that's just how it is." The electorate will be failing in their civic duty and us democracy lovers might as well pack up and go home. As for me, I'd probably tear up my Labour membership card and hurl myself into street politics instead.
By the time of the election, inflation is going to be down as a huge % of what it was - on Rishi's watch. Interest rates similarly. Recession avoided - by Rishi. A lot of people are srtill well disposed towards Rishi because of the Covid handouts. There could well be a mood to let him carry on doing what he's doing a while longer.
Versus what from Labour? I mean - what? What is there case to move all the pieces on the board again, after Covid and Ukraine? Stability is as much of a draw as change in 2024/5.
By definition, no one on here has a life, and churning out ludicrous niagaras of overanalysis of midterm polls is WHAT WE LIVE FOR
You might as well go on ArsenalSupporters.com and complain about the obsession with the Arsenal midfield
Time For A Change shouldn't be enough.
He comes across as exactly what he is, the lucky, clever, hard working son of very ambitious immigrants who put him into one of the best schools in the world, and who then went on to be a successful merchant banker (and who married very well). That's exactly what he is, and what he comes across as, and he doesn't try to hide it
In what way does he try to disguise this? He doesn't put on a fake mockney accent like Blair, he doesn't fake-ruffle his hair like Boris, he doesn't pretend to be a massive UKIPy Brexity patriot like Starmer
He's actually one of THE more authentic PMs we've had in recent years
Anyway, I shouldnae worry, Labour are still gonna win
In the Boris years I'd found Sunak reasonably credible and, not being actively a liability, a kind of refreshing rock of integrity and competence in an otherwise rotten party. Now he just seems politically inept and wildly out of his depth, and his Ed-Miliband-via-ChatGPT approach to pubic speaking is quite cringy.
By contrast, boring Sir Keith seems more on the ball and capable as time has gone on (though he needs to do summat about his weird hair).
I'm not saying I'm right about either of them - I just don't think either have fully settled their essence into the public consciousness.
Rishi Sunak's approval rating is -7%, his highest net approval rating since 3 January.
Rishi Sunak Approval Rating (16 April): Disapprove: 38% (-2) Approve: 31% (-1) Net: -7% (+1)
Keir Starmer's approval rating is +6%.
Keir Starmer Approval Rating (16 April): Approve: 35% (-3) Disapprove: 29% (-1) Net: +6% (-2)
Starmer leads Sunak by 1%.
At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (16 April)
Keir Starmer 37% (-2) Rishi Sunak 36% (-1)
Surely both Starmer and Sunak are acting according to their backgrounds; just in different directions?
Both present an image that people from relatively poor backgrounds can be immensely successful in very different fields. Why is one more 'authentic' than the other?
https://onemileatatime.com/news/british-airways-safety-video/
Come the general election people will ask themselves: do I feel better off, does the country feel in better shape, than five years ago?
And the answer is going to be a resounding 'No'.
Just think how quick Johnson eventually went, then Truss, and as for Sturgeon's utterly unpredictable political demise even to the point she is being asked to resign her seat by some on her own side
Thanks.
Labours attack lines are manifold. The trick will be finding the right ones to focus on. Brass-in-pocket would be my bet.
Maybe he will, but, fortunately for Labour, he doesn't seem to be a visionary. Or even slightly inspiring.
You cannot close the country down for two years, (longer if Starmer had his way) and not see the NHS, Education, Courts and most everything adversely affected with a financial cost that will last for a very long time
Tories undoubtedly want to contest the election on the economy improving - a tax cut, hope for inflation coming down. But even if they do come down a touch we still suffer from the impacts so far.
"We broke it, you can't trust the other lot as they will break it" isn't much of a sell. But then again, if Labour are pushed off the deep end by the left and start promising to spend tokens on daft stuff, who knows where it could go...
In fact I would say that he seems completely OK with being himself. Bit like Cameron in that respect.
My personal favourite safety video, which everyone always watches. https://youtube.com/watch?v=gjlaH6oSMCU&pp
The biggest thing the Tories need to work through is how they, firstly, get over and stop talking about Brexit all the time (actually, I think this is now sort of happening anyway - and that's down to Sunak) and secondly how they appeal to a wider voter base than their core older voters, which is checkmating them at present electorally into a smaller and smaller box.
That may require a coherent intellectual reboot but, if it does, I'd prefer it from a high base and a narrow defeat, with seats in the 270s or 280s, rather than a massive one that takes over a decade to come back from - I'd only want the Tories out of power for a few years.
In other words, he either wins or he doesn't.
First, best wishes to OGH and family and I hope he will be back among us soon.
Redfield & Wilton has given the Conservative inclined on here a boost - some seem to think the re-election of the Conservatives under Sunak an inevitability or perhaps just a preference. I'd note the move in this poll has been from Reform to the Conservatives and while this is the highest Conservative number in an R&W poll this year it's also the lowest Reform score.
Into the data itself and some interesting nuggets - among women the Labour lead is only 8 points and 20% of the women sampled are Don't Knows compared with 11% of men. The 65+ age group splits 39-26 to the Tories. The 2019 Conservative GE vote splits 63% Conservative, 15% Don't Know and 13% Labour (that's the lowest figure I can remember and down from nearer 20% a few weeks back). What we're seeing, I think, are two moves - one from Don't Know back to Loyal and the other from Labour to Don't Know. The proportion going to Reform has also fallen away.
Taking out the DKs and it's 46-31 to the Conservatives among the over 65s (at the December 2019 election, it was 64-17 so that's still a 16% swing among this key demographic. The 2019 Conservative vote excluding the DKs splits 75% Conservative, 16% Labour and 6% Reform.
My favourite R&W sub-samples are the England numbers - this week the VI is Labour 44%, Conservative 35%, Liberal Democrat 11%, Green 5% and Reform 5%. The swing from Conservative to Labour is now just 11% compared with much higher numbers we were seeing earlier in the year.
The Blue Wall polling last week was better for the Conservatives - the next Red Wall polling should be informative.
Notionally, boundary changes make it a safer Conservative seat, because the LDs are nowhere in Stockport, and Hazel Groves gains about one-sixth of that seat.
However: Stockport saw the Labour Party outpoll the Conservatives 2:1. That means there is a big pile of potential tactical switchers for the LDs to mine. In theory the seat becomes harder for the LDs, but in reality, I think it becomes easier. (There are more *potential* LD voters in Stockport, than there in Hazel Grove, where they have converted most of them already._
Just like the Tories and the ultras in the ERG he will have his own party management challenges here, and will be managing an internal coalition as well as potentially an external one.
"Time for a change" resonates when they already think they haven't got it - it lags rather than leads.
I would be all for single market without FoM
I live in one of the safest Conservative seats in the country, and within that I live in one of the safest Conservative wards in the constituency. In thirty years I have never seen a poster at election time, except in 2005 when I astonished neighbours and put one up for the Lib Dems in the glory days of Kennedy and the aftermath of Iraq. I have never had a leaflet or a knock on the door.
We have borough council elections and I have had non-stop leaflets and messages from our Conservative candidate (who, to be fair, is a thoroughly good chap). None of them mention Conservative party and no pictures of Rishi.
But, I think he's bright enough to learn fast on the job and he seems to be a genuinely nice guy.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-poster-turns-cameron-into-a-cult-hero-1935428.html
The chameleon tag is one I'm not sure ever really works - the Tories are testing out something like it now by pointing out how Starmer changes position, basically that he will say anything in order to win.
Thing is, I don't think voters give two sh*ts about consistency, and if they like what you are saying, just like you, or dislike the other side enough, then having said something different previously will be way down their list of concerns. It's politicians who get mad about lack of consistency. Yes, attacks like that are about trust - he is a chameleon/not who he seems, he is changing his position etc, you can't rely on him - but I think it's pretty weak.
It always helps Conservatives to "lump in" the LDs with Labour - perhaps Sunak should be thinking what he could offer the LDs for supporting the continuation of a minority Conservative Government.
I'm beginning to think that Rishi may prevent a Labour landslide and be able to stay on as LOTO. However a change of Govt is nailed on. Boris and Liz did far too much damage for the Tories to have a chance of winning.
Longer answer - because even if it is true peoples' political views are a complex and contradictory hodgepotch and they may not believe it, they may not prioritise it over some other issue more central to their identity, or they may not see the connection between different beliefs.
Before the nonsense of Johnson and Truss there was a school of thought on here the Conservatives would win in 2024 but would suffer a heavy defeat in 2029 as after nearly two decades the mood of "time for a change" would be irresistible.
Do you think that?
2) Because the complexity of the interlocking facts which give rise to chunks of reality, even little chunks, are mindblowingly incomprehensible.
3) Because people are bad at linking the individual and the collective effects of things.
4) Because they are young.