Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Why I’m betting that LAB won’t get a majority – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,017
edited May 2023 in General
imageWhy I’m betting that LAB won’t get a majority – politicalbetting.com

Firstly there is the question of how a majority is defined. This is from Smarkets:

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,830
    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,925
    A brave call. One thing: the Tories did not do better than their national polling; they performed in line with it. The BBC NEV had them towards the bottom of their current range; the Sky PNS towards the top. Both had them in the 20s.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,186
    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    I might bet on them not getting the majority, it seems worth a punt, but I think they will manage it.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,055
    SKS fans, please exclaim.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    Like Mike I was dubious about Labour winning a majority but I'm experiencing rare self doubt now.

    1) The Red Rose is going to be flower of Scotland if the SNP don't stop being a shit show

    2) Last week confirmed the anyone but the Tories tactical voting coalition is back

    My back of the fag packet calculations say Labour could win a majority with a 6-7% national lead.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    edited May 2023
    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,418
    The "lots of seats to pick up" thing matters more if you think elections are won on the ground war, the doorstop to letterbox individual interactions with voters. The more elections are won by air war, the less it's an issue.

    Is there any research on how much difference party targetting makes for the big two? Does piling big guns into a seat improve the swing much? How many counterexamples are there- people like Stephen Twigg, who really didn't expect to get anywhere against Portillo.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    I wonder how relevant the starting point for Labour is. I know incumbency matters and history says it’s hard to make up so much ground in one go, but the circumstances of the 2019 election were quite unusual.

    I do think Scotland is very important, both as a source of seats for Labour and in turn reducing the fear in England and Wales that the SNP could end up in power at Westminster.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,937
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    They need for Starmer to not do anything stupid and throw it away. It is worth remembering that it was only a few months before the election that Cameron was on course for an overall majority. In a few weeks at the end of 2009 he sliumped from 15-18% leads down to 5-10% leads.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yeah, been known for years/decades.

    It's a strange thing, the British army marched troops down Dublin in 2003 for the funeral of Ian Malone but nobody made a big thing about it.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658
    OGH has been pushing this line for over a year surely?

    All credit to him if he turns out to be right, as he may well do, but at the moment it feels like a moderate Labour majority is the most likely outcome imho.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    Sounds like it was a bit of a dog's breakfast from the beginning.

    Dominic Raab's plan for a British Bill of Rights will now be shelved according to @matt_dathan
    : https://thetimes.co.uk/article/dominic-raabs-bill-of-rights-will-be-scrapped-for-a-third-time-nqqfl3sq7

    Not a huge surprise - it was never popular with other ministers or the legal profession. Blow for Raab who's been thinking about this project for years.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1655522035068444672
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,850

    SKS fans, please exclaim.

    Mike is a shrewd judge SKS will blow a 38 point lead and will never be PM

    (SKSWNBPM)
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,925

    Like Mike I was dubious about Labour winning a majority but I'm experiencing rare self doubt now.

    1) The Red Rose is going to be flower of Scotland if the SNP don't stop being a shit show

    2) Last week confirmed the anyone but the Tories tactical voting coalition is back

    My back of the fag packet calculations say Labour could win a majority with a 6-7% national lead.

    Yep, I think a Labour majority is now more likely than I did. The scale of the anti-Tory voting was huge in the locals. If that carries over to a GE, it is bound to favour Labour most because Labour is second to the Tories in most constituencies.

    SeanF’s 310 looks a fair number overall, but I would have said before that was a top end possibility. Now I’d make it a 50%+ chance, with a majority a 20% chance.

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,365
    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yes. The presence in Irish airspace, on occasion, of U.K. military aircraft in connection with “escorting” Russian aircraft, was always a bit of a giveaway. The agreement has been verbally confirm a number of times over the years, off the record.

    Ireland chose not to have an airforce, so it was kind of inevitable that something like this would be done.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,959

    SKS fans, please exclaim.

    Mike is a shrewd judge SKS will blow a 38 point lead and will never be PM

    (SKSWNBPM)
    I think Starmer probably will be PM after the next election. But like OGH, I think it is likely he will fall short of a majority.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    They need for Starmer to not do anything stupid and throw it away. It is worth remembering that it was only a few months before the election that Cameron was on course for an overall majority. In a few weeks at the end of 2009 he slumped from 15-18% leads down to 5-10% leads.
    That is a very good point. We (ok I) have focused on wether this is a 1992 or 1997 election but perhaps it's a reverse 2010?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    edited May 2023

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yeah, been known for years/decades.

    It's a strange thing, the British army marched troops down Dublin in 2003 for the funeral of Ian Malone but nobody made a big thing about it.
    It is funny how things that happened before or even went on for ages without issue become bigger later, to the point people might refuse to believe they could have happened.

    Reminds me of when South Park did some episodes with the plot point of not being able to show images of the Prophet Muhammed (and indeed the network did not allow them to at the end), pointed out by characters that they had done just that years earlier and apparently no one had cared.
  • Options
    maxhmaxh Posts: 825

    OGH has been pushing this line for over a year surely?

    All credit to him if he turns out to be right, as he may well do, but at the moment it feels like a moderate Labour majority is the most likely outcome imho.

    Also, I’m sorry to report to OGH and others that I have had a bet on NOM for a while and my political betting is utterly awful. So a majority is probably nailed on.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,959
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    Wait.

    Labour has slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    They need for Starmer to not do anything stupid and throw it away. It is worth remembering that it was only a few months before the election that Cameron was on course for an overall majority. In a few weeks at the end of 2009 he sliumped from 15-18% leads down to 5-10% leads.
    Before my time on PB, but my feelings at the time were that the expenses scandal hurt the Tories more than it hurt Labour.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yes. The presence in Irish airspace, on occasion, of U.K. military aircraft in connection with “escorting” Russian aircraft, was always a bit of a giveaway. The agreement has been verbally confirm a number of times over the years, off the record.

    Ireland chose not to have an airforce, so it was kind of inevitable that something like this would be done.
    Maybe the 'new' thing is revelation that concerns have been raised about it over the years. They are richer now, I suppose they could do it themselves if they really wanted.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,186
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    Wait.

    Labour has slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010?
    He started from 198, Labour from 202.

    Yes, yes, I know, boundary changes mean we have notional figures but crudely they are just the other side of the critical 200 mark.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,734
    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    It's been spoken of here: @Dura_Ace pointed out that straying into RoI airspace is very sensitive for the RAF, and when I was doing the reading for the UK-as-URK article I noticed that Irish airspace is weird
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,994

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yeah, been known for years/decades.

    It's a strange thing, the British army marched troops down Dublin in 2003 for the funeral of Ian Malone but nobody made a big thing about it.
    British aircraft do need explicit permission to enter 26 counties airspace. We were given blood curdling warnings about it at Valley (second only to the warnings we got about Israeli airspace in the Eastern Med) presumably because it generates a fantastic amount of work for somebody. There was a hell of a stink the time a Tornado did an emergency diversion into Shannon. The crew were hurriedly sent back to the UK in hastily purchased and ill fitting civvies. The Irish were threatening to post the Tornado back one piece at a time until they were somehow mollified.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    They need for Starmer to not do anything stupid and throw it away. It is worth remembering that it was only a few months before the election that Cameron was on course for an overall majority. In a few weeks at the end of 2009 he sliumped from 15-18% leads down to 5-10% leads.
    Before my time on PB, but my feelings at the time were that the expenses scandal hurt the Tories more than it hurt Labour.

    Well, Duck Man Viggers, Wood Man Steen, and Moat Man Hogg (now holder of a life peerage) were all Tories, so maybe they stuck in the consciousness more.

    Though honestly it was the pettier (and attempted) claims that felt more damaging
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,937
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    They need for Starmer to not do anything stupid and throw it away. It is worth remembering that it was only a few months before the election that Cameron was on course for an overall majority. In a few weeks at the end of 2009 he sliumped from 15-18% leads down to 5-10% leads.
    Before my time on PB, but my feelings at the time were that the expenses scandal hurt the Tories more than it hurt Labour.

    I don't believe that was the cause at all. Those revelations were 6 months before the slump in Conservative poll ratings. Indeed for a few months after the Telegraph revelations the Tory poll ratings continued to rise.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    Wait.

    Labour has slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010?
    That's right. Labour are on 202, versus 198 for Cameron before the election in 2010.

    (196 versus 193 if you want to ignore the 'lost whip' seats.)
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,263
    That’s a bold call by OGH, which I would have considered, prior to the SNP implosion in Scotland.

    But with Scotland poised to return a phalanx of extra Labour MPs and the LibDems ready to clear a path between Chichester and Leamington Spa, Labour’s chances of a majority are starting to look pretty good.

    With even supposedly well-informed PB’ers like Heathener in the Tory/LD seat of Newton Abbot thinking that voting Labour is the right thing to do, tactical voting may not work out quite as well as some folks are hoping, especially with new boundaries and Labour’s unwillingness to countenance anything other than a majority win.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    Damn monarchs.

    Good horse action though.

    Emmanuel Macron's motorcade making its way up an oddly vacant Champs-Élysées. The commentator gives the reason: police have cleared the entire area to avoid the disruption of protests.

    https://twitter.com/frasermatthew/status/1655504935260151809
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881
    Labour are starting further behind a majority, then Cameron was in 2010, so it’s a huge task.

    Most importantly, I don’t think the majority can be achieved purely from Tory gains, the vast majority (sic) of the 326-seat permutations require a lot of gains in Scotland.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,077
    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,937
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.

    Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.

    They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.

    Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
    Wait.

    Labour has slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010?
    Yes. The Tories had 193 seats at the time of the 2010 GE. They had lost 5 seats since the previous election. Labour currently have 196 seats
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,263
    ..
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    edited May 2023
    IanB2 said:

    ..

    Some of those include +1 seat, but it still counts!

    Would be helpful if it shaded where there were no elections, to see ones which were up which no gains were made in.
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,435
    So if you assume around 25 gains outside England, that leaves 100 gains in England to get a majority.

    What are Labour targets 90 to 105 and how did they do in the locals?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,735
    Sandpit said:

    Labour are starting further behind a majority, then Cameron was in 2010, so it’s a huge task.

    Most importantly, I don’t think the majority can be achieved purely from Tory gains, the vast majority (sic) of the 326-seat permutations require a lot of gains in Scotland.

    SNP vote efficiency is hyper volatile.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,263
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ..

    Some of those include +1 seat, but it still counts!

    Would be helpful if it shaded where there were no elections, to see ones which were up which no gains were made in.
    I think the white are no elections and the grey is no gains?
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ..

    Some of those include +1 seat, but it still counts!

    Would be helpful if it shaded where there were no elections, to see ones which were up which no gains were made in.
    The bits in white had no elections, the bits in grey did.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    pigeon said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ..

    Some of those include +1 seat, but it still counts!

    Would be helpful if it shaded where there were no elections, to see ones which were up which no gains were made in.
    The bits in white had no elections, the bits in grey did.
    Thought that might be so, but couldn't remember which areas had gone so wasn't sure. Cheers.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    On Conservative 2005 v Labour 2019, look at this table:

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/TLG2.png

    The Labour vote is much more concentrated in its safe seats meaning the swing required to gain equivalent seats gained by the Tories in 2010 are a few points higher.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,331
    edited May 2023
    Having a lot of seats to win matters mainly if there's a significant incumbency bonus, and that's reduced, though not eliminated, by boundary changes. If you're 10% ahead, it doesn't really matter what you were last time, except insofar as people remember what they did last time and revert to it out of habit or caution, and I'm not sure that most fairly apolitical people even recall what they did before.

    Nor is it actually correct that the Tories did much better in the local elections than current polling. They got the equivalent of 26%, which is actually worse. The seat loss was even larger, because of the spread of tactical voting. So the apparently comforting lead of "only" 9 points is misleading - what we've just seen is the combination of

    (a) very low Tory vote share and
    (b) lots of tactical voting.

    If that's repeated, and the LibDems largely focus on their targets and don't repeat the "Only we can win" stuff in Con-Lab marginals, then a Labour majority looks likely.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    Lots of dampening of expectations lately. Sensible expectation management, or overly terrified Western public opinion is fragile and will break if Ukraine is not marching through Donetsk in 3 months.

    Czech President Pavel said he warned Zelensky & PM Shmyhal against rushing Ukraine's counteroffensive "before they are fully prepared."

    "It will be extremely harmful to Ukraine if this counteroffensive fails, because they will not have another chance, at least not this year."

    https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1655499883611029504?cxt=HHwWgICwhe-XwvktAAAA
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658
    tlg86 said:

    On Conservative 2005 v Labour 2019, look at this table:

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/TLG2.png

    The Labour vote is much more concentrated in its safe seats meaning the swing required to gain equivalent seats gained by the Tories in 2010 are a few points higher.

    That's only the seats won, shirley? Doesn't say anything about the target seats.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,955

    So if you assume around 25 gains outside England, that leaves 100 gains in England to get a majority.

    What are Labour targets 90 to 105 and how did they do in the locals?

    Well.
    Here's an ordered list of Labour target seats.

    https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    Old boundaries mind.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,301
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
    I suppose the US could claim it was paying for much of our nuke defence in the 1980s. Apart from amongst the diehard Thatcherite Atlanticists, I don't remember it earning them a huge amount of gratitude.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,830
    I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,365
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yes. The presence in Irish airspace, on occasion, of U.K. military aircraft in connection with “escorting” Russian aircraft, was always a bit of a giveaway. The agreement has been verbally confirm a number of times over the years, off the record.

    Ireland chose not to have an airforce, so it was kind of inevitable that something like this would be done.
    Maybe the 'new' thing is revelation that concerns have been raised about it over the years. They are richer now, I suppose they could do it themselves if they really wanted.
    The Irish military have been trying to make a case for fighter jets. The problem is that it would be very, very expensive relative to the existing Irish defence budget.

    Not just for purchase, but training, maintenance etc.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
    I suppose the US could claim it was paying for much of our nuke defence in the 1980s. Apart from amongst the diehard Thatcherite Atlanticists, I don't remember it earning them a huge amount of gratitude.
    And of course if they asked for some gratitude over it that would only make people even less grateful. I guess people don't like to be reminded of their debts (moral or otherwise).
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,365
    kle4 said:

    Lots of dampening of expectations lately. Sensible expectation management, or overly terrified Western public opinion is fragile and will break if Ukraine is not marching through Donetsk in 3 months.

    Czech President Pavel said he warned Zelensky & PM Shmyhal against rushing Ukraine's counteroffensive "before they are fully prepared."

    "It will be extremely harmful to Ukraine if this counteroffensive fails, because they will not have another chance, at least not this year."

    https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1655499883611029504?cxt=HHwWgICwhe-XwvktAAAA

    Sounds to me like taking credit for stating the bleedin’ obvious.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,830

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
    I suppose the US could claim it was paying for much of our nuke defence in the 1980s. Apart from amongst the diehard Thatcherite Atlanticists, I don't remember it earning them a huge amount of gratitude.
    OTOH, I’d say it played a big part in Labour’s 1983 and 1987 defeats.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,077
    kle4 said:

    Lots of dampening of expectations lately. Sensible expectation management, or overly terrified Western public opinion is fragile and will break if Ukraine is not marching through Donetsk in 3 months.

    Czech President Pavel said he warned Zelensky & PM Shmyhal against rushing Ukraine's counteroffensive "before they are fully prepared."

    "It will be extremely harmful to Ukraine if this counteroffensive fails, because they will not have another chance, at least not this year."

    https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1655499883611029504?cxt=HHwWgICwhe-XwvktAAAA

    This counter offensive seems, to me, to be the last big move of the war. If it succeeds, anything is possible, if it fails, then neither side is capable of “winning” and indeed any attack probably makes things worse for the attacker. Zugzwang in chess terms

    At that point, there will be a sad armistice and a semi-permanent division of Ukraine, I suspect

    Of course, the Ukes might still win with this attack
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561
    Labour on 310 odd and Lib Dems on 30-60 would be my guess. An excellent proposition for PR.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,959
    Sean_F said:

    I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.

    The LDs on 12-14%, you think?

    That makes the majority (or lack thereof) depend largely on the level of tactical voting.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,850
    dixiedean said:

    So if you assume around 25 gains outside England, that leaves 100 gains in England to get a majority.

    What are Labour targets 90 to 105 and how did they do in the locals?

    Well.
    Here's an ordered list of Labour target seats.

    https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    Old boundaries mind.
    I think they took NE Derbyshire at 151 but not Peterboro at 27?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yes. The presence in Irish airspace, on occasion, of U.K. military aircraft in connection with “escorting” Russian aircraft, was always a bit of a giveaway. The agreement has been verbally confirm a number of times over the years, off the record.

    Ireland chose not to have an airforce, so it was kind of inevitable that something like this would be done.
    Maybe the 'new' thing is revelation that concerns have been raised about it over the years. They are richer now, I suppose they could do it themselves if they really wanted.
    The Irish military have been trying to make a case for fighter jets. The problem is that it would be very, very expensive relative to the existing Irish defence budget.

    Not just for purchase, but training, maintenance etc.
    A military making the case for the shiniest new toys they can? Unusual behaviour certainly. Maybe they'd be interested in a new Aircraft carrier, only slightly used, that we could offer them.

    Sure, no jets to use with it but from what I gather we couldn't really put it to see or fly off it anyway ourselves.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,077
    edited May 2023

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
    I suppose the US could claim it was paying for much of our nuke defence in the 1980s. Apart from amongst the diehard Thatcherite Atlanticists, I don't remember it earning them a huge amount of gratitude.
    Good point. And as Americans get relatively poorer and weaker - vis a vis China etc - I can see why the idea they are paying for Europeans to freeload off US defence spending becomes, to Trump voters, quite offensive
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,594
    My team are hopless. It is supposed to be Fulham on the beach not us.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,973
    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    Bah. Did that loads when I was a kid. Great fun.

    Even rode side-pillion in a 3CX on a few journeys along roads. Again, fun.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    Today’s the day Everton avoid relegation.

    I feel it in my waters.

    Leicester, eesh.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,077

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Yes. The presence in Irish airspace, on occasion, of U.K. military aircraft in connection with “escorting” Russian aircraft, was always a bit of a giveaway. The agreement has been verbally confirm a number of times over the years, off the record.

    Ireland chose not to have an airforce, so it was kind of inevitable that something like this would be done.
    Maybe the 'new' thing is revelation that concerns have been raised about it over the years. They are richer now, I suppose they could do it themselves if they really wanted.
    The Irish military have been trying to make a case for fighter jets. The problem is that it would be very, very expensive relative to the existing Irish defence budget.

    Not just for purchase, but training, maintenance etc.
    Ireland spends a grand total of 0.26% of its GDP on defence. Even as they rely entirely on NATO, especially the UK and USA

    They keep gloating about how rich they are, the parasitical tax-haven fucks, well then it’s time for them to stump up some cash or get tae fuck
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    Sandpit said:

    Labour are starting further behind a majority, then Cameron was in 2010, so it’s a huge task.

    Most importantly, I don’t think the majority can be achieved purely from Tory gains, the vast majority (sic) of the 326-seat permutations require a lot of gains in Scotland.

    SNP vote efficiency is hyper volatile.
    On the SNP, a rather...unexpected line of attack today from their dear friend Wings when seeking to criticise their supposed lack of effectiveness of SNP MPs.

    And why didn’t they manage [preventing Scotland being dragged out of the EU, or extracting concessions at least]? Because they were so terrified of being seen to vote with the Tories on anything – even if it was saving Scotland and the UK from an even worse Brexit – that they didn’t even TRY to do a deal. Which told Labour that even if there is a hung Parliament next year, they can call the SNP’s bluff and shout “1979!” again and it’ll work.

    https://wingsoverscotland.com/sing-us-a-new-one/
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,365

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Actually, it is perfectly possible to this legally and safely.

    Source - a relative arranged just such an activity.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    On topic, this is why a Labour majority shouldn’t be ruled out.



    https://twitter.com/p_surridge/status/1655542082583289857?s=46
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,280
    Good afternoon

    It seems we will be having this discussion daily for the next 520 days approx

    Who said a week (7 days) is a long time in politics?
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,301
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known.

    Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.

    The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/

    Are the Irish actually complaining that we pay for their air defence - and much of their army and naval defence?

    Grrrrr
    I suppose the US could claim it was paying for much of our nuke defence in the 1980s. Apart from amongst the diehard Thatcherite Atlanticists, I don't remember it earning them a huge amount of gratitude.
    OTOH, I’d say it played a big part in Labour’s 1983 and 1987 defeats.
    Labour's problem was that it wasn't just the US nukes they wanted to scrap.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,263
    Sean_F said:

    I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.

    Which probably won't be enough
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/29/stella-creasy-targeted-by-troll-who-tried-to-have-her-children-removed-report
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    Social Services.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,280

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Actually, it is perfectly possible to this legally and safely.

    Source - a relative arranged just such an activity.
    Actually as a little lad in the 1940's the green keeper at the local golf club that abutted our garden regularly put me in his cab as he cut the fairways

    It is a lovely memory
  • Options
    Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,503
    tig86 said "The Labour vote is much more concentrated in its safe seats meaning the swing required to gain equivalent seats gained by the Tories in 2010 are a few points higher."

    Thanks for that info. In some US states, for example, Pennsylvania, the Democratic vote is similarly concentrated. And I have been wondering whether something similar was true in Britain.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189

    tlg86 said:

    On Conservative 2005 v Labour 2019, look at this table:

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/TLG2.png

    The Labour vote is much more concentrated in its safe seats meaning the swing required to gain equivalent seats gained by the Tories in 2010 are a few points higher.

    That's only the seats won, shirley? Doesn't say anything about the target seats.
    Tories 2010:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/targets/p_con.stm

    Target Seat 80: Halifax, swing required was 4.4%.

    Labour 2024:

    https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    Target seat 80 Worcester, swing required is 6.6%.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,830
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.

    The LDs on 12-14%, you think?

    That makes the majority (or lack thereof) depend largely on the level of tactical voting.
    That sounds about right.

    Unlike some others, I’m expecting growth to be reasonable in 2023/24/25, and wage rises to be running well ahead of inflation by the Autumn.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,263
    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561
    IanB2 said:

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
    Austerity: how to jack up the national debt and still have crumbling public services. It genuinely staggers me this has been allowed to happen.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561
    Stephenson (Darlington) council election result:

    LAB: 48.9% (+18.1)
    CON: 40.8% (-4.8)
    GRN: 8.0% (-15.6)
    IND: 2.3% (+2.3)

    Labour GAIN from Conservative.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    What austerity?

    Government spending went up.

    Lest we forget Labour were also proposing austerity, bigger cuts than Thatcher is what Darling promised.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,365
    IanB2 said:

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
    It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.

    A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,734
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ..

    Some of those include +1 seat, but it still counts!

    Would be helpful if it shaded where there were no elections, to see ones which were up which no gains were made in.
    Do you know what would be really good here? A bar chart

    [ducks]
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    What austerity?

    Government spending went up.

    Lest we forget Labour were also proposing austerity, bigger cuts than Thatcher is what Darling promised.
    And criticised the Coalition for not achieving its planned level of spending cuts - in essence saying that the government cut too far and too fast, but also not fast enough.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    What austerity?

    Government spending went up.

    Lest we forget Labour were also proposing austerity, bigger cuts than Thatcher is what Darling promised.
    And they were wrong then.

    You've exactly confirmed my point. We gutted our public services, slashed spending on the council budget etc and yet our national debt has never been higher and our public services have never been worse.

    All for what?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    edited May 2023

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    What austerity?

    Government spending went up.

    Lest we forget Labour were also proposing austerity, bigger cuts than Thatcher is what Darling promised.
    And longer, more generous support for covid, and for energy bills…
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561

    IanB2 said:

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
    It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.

    A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
    We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,378
    Dialup said:

    Dialup said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.



    I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
    I know.

    I am duty bound to report this.
    Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
    The Tories gutted it.

    I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
    What austerity?

    Government spending went up.

    Lest we forget Labour were also proposing austerity, bigger cuts than Thatcher is what Darling promised.
    And they were wrong then.

    You've exactly confirmed my point. We gutted our public services, slashed spending on the council budget etc and yet our national debt has never been higher and our public services have never been worse.

    All for what?
    To avoid a default.

    Then you really would have austerity.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881

    Sandpit said:

    Labour are starting further behind a majority, then Cameron was in 2010, so it’s a huge task.

    Most importantly, I don’t think the majority can be achieved purely from Tory gains, the vast majority (sic) of the 326-seat permutations require a lot of gains in Scotland.

    SNP vote efficiency is hyper volatile.
    Yes, so the majority question almost entirely comes down to how volatile the SNP vote becomes in 18 months’ time.

    A Rutherglen by-election, could be a rather useful indicator over the summer.

    But if a week is a long time in politics, 18 months is an eternity in Scottish politics.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561

    To avoid a default.

    Then you really would have austerity.

    Do you honestly think the policy to gut our public services to the state they are in now whilst having our national debt at an all time high, actually "worked"?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189

    Today’s the day Everton avoid relegation.

    I feel it in my waters.

    Leicester, eesh.

    I reckon a win for Forest tonight and that might be enough for them. But I fear they might not win.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,830
    US Republicans argue high deficits don’t matter because tax cuts pay for themselves. The opposite argument seems to be that high deficits don’t matter because public spending pays for itself.

    In 2009/10 the deficit was 11% of GDP. Had the government kept it at that level indefinitely, I think the consequences would have been unpleasant.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,731
    Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.

    The best bits are behind the paywall.

    They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.

    I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.

    Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.

    It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.

    PB is smarter than these people.

    Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.

    I’ll start;

    1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
  • Options
    DialupDialup Posts: 561
    ping said:

    Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.

    The best bits are behind the paywall.

    They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.

    I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.

    Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.

    It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.

    PB is smarter than these people.

    Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.

    I’ll start;

    1. Section 28 and its political legacy.

    Matthew Goodwin, yawn.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    ping said:

    Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.

    The best bits are behind the paywall.

    They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.

    I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.

    Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.

    It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.

    PB is smarter than these people.

    Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.

    I’ll start;

    1. Section 28 and its political legacy.

    2. It's a cultural appeal which has some effectiveness, not something on which an entire campaign can rest.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,594
    tlg86 said:

    Today’s the day Everton avoid relegation.

    I feel it in my waters.

    Leicester, eesh.

    I reckon a win for Forest tonight and that might be enough for them. But I fear they might not win.
    Foxestalk not a very pleasant place to be right now.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,710
    Sean_F said:

    I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.

    That would require a fair number of people who have switched from Conservative to Labour, according to polls, to switch back again, I think? What's the basis for them doing that?
This discussion has been closed.